The Cessna 162
- Thread starter Cessnaflyer
- Start date
jrh
Well-Known Member
Cool...they took a C-140, made it a little slicker, stuck a nosewheel on it, and called it good!
Ok, maybe not, but that was my first thought when I saw the windows and engine.
I think it looks cool, but I don't know if it's "$100k cool" if you know what I mean.
It's hard for me to get excited about any of these LSAs going for more than $50k. The used market still has a lot of nice aircraft for $50k that are a lot more capable than any LSA out there if you can stand to fly something a little less shiny.
But 10 or 15 years from now when LSAs start hitting the used market...then it might be very cool to get one. Overall, I'm still happy to see them getting mass produced. The more planes in the skies, the better!
Ok, maybe not, but that was my first thought when I saw the windows and engine.
I think it looks cool, but I don't know if it's "$100k cool" if you know what I mean.
It's hard for me to get excited about any of these LSAs going for more than $50k. The used market still has a lot of nice aircraft for $50k that are a lot more capable than any LSA out there if you can stand to fly something a little less shiny.
But 10 or 15 years from now when LSAs start hitting the used market...then it might be very cool to get one. Overall, I'm still happy to see them getting mass produced. The more planes in the skies, the better!
NJA_Capt
Well-Known Member
I grew up on Cessnas and have had one in our family for over 30 years (C120, 150, 170). I have defended them in the Highwing v Low-wing debate. And I forgave the conversion to "nosewheel" airplanes. I cannot defend this aircraft.
They overpaid the marketing company that came up with the LAME name too....Skycatcher. Are you kidding me?
I do not like the styling (it looks like a Symphony knock off), Most definitely not "ground breaking" as it is hyped.
The factory paint scheme is horrible.
I give a thumbs up to a stick v a yoke.........NORMALLY. They put a stick grip on a center mounted push-rod?!?!?!:banghead:
I must say that there are very few things I like about it. I have no trouble with the panel. Building a C152 remake out of composite would have looked better.
Cessna would be better off buying the rights to produce some of the homebuilt aircraft out there like done with the Glastar.
Hmmm.....What all metal homebuilt with tailwheel and nosewheel versions and costs less than 70K could they produce?
http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv-7int.htm
They overpaid the marketing company that came up with the LAME name too....Skycatcher. Are you kidding me?
I do not like the styling (it looks like a Symphony knock off), Most definitely not "ground breaking" as it is hyped.
The factory paint scheme is horrible.
I give a thumbs up to a stick v a yoke.........NORMALLY. They put a stick grip on a center mounted push-rod?!?!?!:banghead:
I must say that there are very few things I like about it. I have no trouble with the panel. Building a C152 remake out of composite would have looked better.
Cessna would be better off buying the rights to produce some of the homebuilt aircraft out there like done with the Glastar.
Hmmm.....What all metal homebuilt with tailwheel and nosewheel versions and costs less than 70K could they produce?
http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv-7int.htm
deadstick
Well-Known Member
Ok, let me take a swing at some of these points...
1) LSA vs Standard -- the Standard would require Part 23(?) compliance and that = heavy airplane = no LSA. Just look at the empty weights of the 172P and the 172R/S.
2) Dual purpose -- with navs and strobes (night VFR), it's a PPL trainer. A goal is to get a new primary trainer that will rent for less than $100/hr. You cannot make money with at $254,500 primary trainer. Many people cannot afford to get their PPL at cost of over $150/hr. It's a shame they didn't stick with the Rotax.
3) Stick vs Yoke -- the stick is the lightest flight control system that doesn't require computers
However, I'd like to see the mechanism because it looks like a yoke set-up without the yoke.
4) Cessna support -- how about the viability of Symphony spares down the road...?
5) IFR Trainer = Skyhawk. I don't believe the DA20 is allowed to go IMC, either. It look like it has GPS, only, too.
1) LSA vs Standard -- the Standard would require Part 23(?) compliance and that = heavy airplane = no LSA. Just look at the empty weights of the 172P and the 172R/S.
2) Dual purpose -- with navs and strobes (night VFR), it's a PPL trainer. A goal is to get a new primary trainer that will rent for less than $100/hr. You cannot make money with at $254,500 primary trainer. Many people cannot afford to get their PPL at cost of over $150/hr. It's a shame they didn't stick with the Rotax.
3) Stick vs Yoke -- the stick is the lightest flight control system that doesn't require computers
However, I'd like to see the mechanism because it looks like a yoke set-up without the yoke.4) Cessna support -- how about the viability of Symphony spares down the road...?
5) IFR Trainer = Skyhawk. I don't believe the DA20 is allowed to go IMC, either. It look like it has GPS, only, too.
Tram
Well-Known Member
Hmmm.....What all metal homebuilt with tailwheel and nosewheel versions and costs less than 70K could they produce?
http://www.vansaircraft.com/public/rv-7int.htm
Now Gentlemen, please, everyone pay very close attention..
What we have here is a guy who simply knows what he is talking about..
You could buy an RV6 or a 7.. or an 8, or a 9 or even a 10 for the price of that SkyWizard..
Screaming_Emu
Well-Known Member
glass cockpit+VFR only aircraft=waste of money
tonyw
Well-Known Member
Yeah, it will bring some attention to the sport rating. But if I were going to buy a LSA, it wouldn't be this one. I mean, you've got so many cooler looking models that cost less so.....
Champcar
Well-Known Member
Except that it is lighter and most likely cheaper than steam gauges.
TheOneMarine
Well-Known Member
Maybe I overlooked something, but how much HP does this thing have?
mhcasey
Well-Known Member
:drool:
jrh
Well-Known Member
Continental O200 engine = 100 hp
NickH
Uber Driver
Goonie
Never say die
Guys...guys...guys
What most of yall dont relize is who secretly runs the flight schools.
Insurance companies and finacial institutions.
I have seen way cooler aircraft out there for the money but there's no way in hell an insurance company is going to insure the RV I just built in my garage for flight training.
Insurance companies love high wing, fixed gear, Cessnas.
Remember there's only TWO insurance companies in the world that insure training aircraft. It's pretty much a monopoly.
Cessna has some ofthe best financing for aircraft. Them and Harley-Davidson Most of these cool little LSA companies dont have financing available so you have to deal with private lendors. Its a pain in the ass.
0% down if you're a CPC.
Cessnas product and warranty are unmatched by any general aviation company....by far. For the first 2 years anything that breaks is replaced.
Parts and support for their product are endless. Hell, you dont even know if these other companies are going to be around in two years.
I promise I dont work for Cessna
What most of yall dont relize is who secretly runs the flight schools.
Insurance companies and finacial institutions.
I have seen way cooler aircraft out there for the money but there's no way in hell an insurance company is going to insure the RV I just built in my garage for flight training.
Insurance companies love high wing, fixed gear, Cessnas.
Remember there's only TWO insurance companies in the world that insure training aircraft. It's pretty much a monopoly.
Cessna has some ofthe best financing for aircraft. Them and Harley-Davidson
Most of these cool little LSA companies dont have financing available so you have to deal with private lendors. Its a pain in the ass.0% down if you're a CPC.
Cessnas product and warranty are unmatched by any general aviation company....by far. For the first 2 years anything that breaks is replaced.
Parts and support for their product are endless. Hell, you dont even know if these other companies are going to be around in two years.
I promise I dont work for Cessna
There are performance limitations to LSA (like max speed and gross weight). If the basic plane is designed to meet those limits, it would probably be horribly uncompetitive in the Standard category without a lot re-engineering.
Tram
Well-Known Member
I have seen way cooler aircraft out there for the money but there's no way in hell an insurance company is going to insure the RV I just built in my garage for flight training.
*Snip*
I promise I dont work for Cessna
All of that still doesn't make the SkyBug any less over priced...
You could spend $10K (a VERY high estimate) on your private ticket spend another $1K (again, another high estimate) on a tail wheel sign off and buy a cherry RV for $80K...
Total investment of $91K and you have 10 times the aircraft at your disposal..
NickH
Uber Driver
2008 base pricing is $280K for the 172. Thats $80K for the airplane and $200K for the lawyers. The SkyScratcher has a smaller lawyer bill.