The chief operating officer of Wasatch Aero LLC, a Utah-based startup, says he has more than 30 confirmed orders with an additional contract being drafted for 65 aircraft from a single flight school pending for its SD3T, a LSA category, turboprop aircraft powered with a Turbo Tech TP-R150 from France. Tucker Marriott said the flight school will use the turboprop aircraft for part of its course to give students some turbine time and better prepare them for the right seat of the airliners they hope to fly. But an accessible and affordable turbine for light aircraft will do more than make better FOs. With their durability and reliability, small turbines will challenge piston engines in the light aircraft market. “I think it’s going to revolutionize the GA industry,” said Marriott.
Marriott said Wasatch has a strong partnership with Spacek, a Czech based aerospace company that developed the SD1 and SD2 that are the basis for the SD3. There are about 300 Rotax-powered versions of the plane in Europe. Wasatch Aero will enter production of the SD3T turbine and its variants in January 2027 in its new 12,500-square-foot facility at Spanish Fork Airport, Utah. He said the vast majority of the parts and components are manufactured in the United States, thus making it a mechanics’ aircraft and increasing parts availability for operators.
The SD3 and its variants will be built to conform to the new Modernization of Special Airworthiness Certification (MOSAIC) standards that will take effect July 24. Wasatch Aero is targeting affordability and adaptability of its aircraft in the training environment with a price tag less than $450,000. The new rules eliminate highly restrictive engine, design, and weight limits on LSAs and instead impose an upper stall speed restriction of 61 knots with flaps. After July 24 any type of engine can be used in an LSA, and Wasatch says the Turbo Tech is a perfect fit. Marriott says this engine will enable training in a turbine aircraft for student pilots headed for the airlines, for a comparable cost to a Part 23 aircraft with an IO-360.
The engine at the heart of the project puts out 147 horsepower, burns about seven gallons an hour, and will give the trim little two-seater a 160-knot cruise speed with a payload of 660 pounds. The Turbo Tech has a 3,000 hour TBO with reduced maintenance intervals and requirements, thus reducing downtime. The combination of the reduction in fuel burn from a traditional IO-360, direct maintenance costs, and extended TBO offset the higher initial investment cost, he said.
Turbo Tech unveiled the engine in 2023 and is just wrapping up certification work in Europe. Wasatch Aero has locked all their 2027 production and can increase its purchase order. Assuming the purchase agreement with the flight school goes through, Wasatch is in discussions to increase aircraft production, thus increasing its engine order with Turbo Tech.
Additionally, Wasatch Aero has said it will be producing a version of the SD3 with a Rotax 914 iS engine that will deliver similar performance, consuming about four to five gallons an hour, and cost about $100,000 less than the turbine version.
Although training for the airlines is the primary focus of the LSA turbine, Marriott said he expects there will be a strong market for recreational pilots. He also sees it being used as a transition aircraft for those moving from high-performance piston singles to the big, powerful turbine singles now on the market. Wasatch Aero has set an initial production rate of four aircraft per month.
One of the goals of MOSAIC was to simplify the certification process to allow entrepreneurs to develop and manufacture new aircraft without crippling up-front costs. Marriott said there is no cadre of investors in the shadows calling the shots. “We financed it ourselves.” Wasatch Aero said the two-place will be joined by three new designs, including a four-place, in coming years. The Turbo Tech engine is scalable, and 250 horsepower and 400 horsepower versions are being developed.
I do not think that word means what they think it means…
More power to ’em IF they can pull this off but I doubt if many $450K airplanes will be found in recreational pilot’s hangars. Too bad turbines cost so much more than recips, too. Beyond that, I believe a guy in Ohio by the name of Jim Bede tried this idea over 50 years ago.
Bede never tried to develop a turboprop, AFAIK.
The Turbo Tech turbine is somewhat different than all other turbine engines, utilizing a heat-exchanger to get a lot more efficiency out of the engine at smaller sizes and lower thrust settings – enabling a lower fuel burn that approaches the rate of a small recip (…personally, I don’t believe the 7-gal/hr claim, but I’m sure it’s a lot closer to that than the burn rate of other small turbine/turboprop engines from the past).
The upside is that the engine should be more-reliable and lower-maintenance than a recip. The downside is that the heat-exchanger reportedly requires a lot of assembly/manfacturing labor and that puts a floor on the price of the engines. Still, with the skyrocketing cost of Continental and Lycoming engines over the last few years the gap is narrowing.
I think they should give me one of these airplanes for about 6 months or so for testing, just to make sure that their idea will work before they start letting students tear em up.
Jay – If they give one to me as well, we can guarantee them twice the flight hours in the same calendar time!
That should work fine NWade. Now that we’ve given public notice, I expect they’ll be calling us within a week or so. Let me know if they call you first.
A turbine with a prop is still a turbine !! You’re splitting hairs here …
Larry –
The BD-5 did not start out as a jet design. It started out intending to use a snowmobile engine. Jim Bede was in no way doing what the Wasatch Aero guys are doing.The turbine used for the BD-5J variant is a *very* different animal than the Turbo Tech system. An outboard motor on a boat is a reciprocating engine, and so is a V-12 engine in a Ferrari. Its not “splitting hairs” to say that they’re entirely different machines!The BD-5 airframe was not a successful light aircraft, as the “SD” series of airframes are, in this new venture). I say that as someone who’s built his own aircraft, who’s researched the BD-5 quite extensively, and who personally knows someone that flew a BD-5 on the airshow circuit in the 80’s and 90’s. [And if you don’t believe me, go search YouTube for clips of Burt Rutan talking about his time working for Jim Bede – its very insightful]Note that I make no claims about how good this new aircraft will be, or whether the business itself will be financially sustainable. But I’m glad to see someone trying to commercialize this new technology – because regardless of whether it is successful, it will help inform future aircraft designs, engines, and businesses.
Wade … I’ve been flying for over 55 years … I’m WELL aware of the entire BD-5 story! I’m also well aware of the Burt Rutan / Jim Bede history … I was at Edwards when he came back from Newton. In fact, And I know all about all the engines Bede used. I was there when Burt flew the VW powered VeriEze and was a principal in putting the Voyager around the world. I know ALL the stories. OH and I’m an A&P and have built airplanes. BUT … hey … thanks for the schooling.
I don’t care if this thing is a turboprop, a high bypass ratio turbine or a pure jet … it’s a turbine … period. Cold air goes in the front and hot air comes out the back (or side). This one just happens to have a prop on the front. It’s too expensive for all but flight schools, IF that.
Affordability is like beauty , it is totally subjective. The big difference between these guys and Bede is the certification path that they are following. It’s looking like they are going to be the first to use the new MOSAIC rules to the limit. Its going to be interesting to watch.
Wow, a turboprop with better SFC than a piston!! Incredible!! <– literallly.
A 180hp Lycoming O-360 burns about 10gph making 75% power, or 135hp. This turbine burns 3gph less while making 12hp more? Or is someone mixing max power with cruise fuel consumption?
Point to an aircraft or engine who’s performance numbers aren’t at least slightly exaggerated… 😛
For those interested, there have been a few good videos on the TurboTech system over the last couple of years:
Thanks NWade for the pointer. Their web site clarifies: Max power 141hp, and 5.0gph at 50% power, which lines up very nicely with my notional O-360.
If that’s true, and they CAN match the efficiency of a typical piston, it is a major improvement in turboprop efficiency and very worthwhile.
Again …my sincerest apologies to those who may have read (and endured) this rather long ‘rant’ elsewhere (and recently in this publication). But after having read so many response-posts in various other publications over the years on this ‘Subject’ …while some are seeing clearly, it seems that many (the majority?) still don’t (or just don’t want to) …’Get-it’.
‘Just ONE MORE TIME’ (with a couple ‘correction/edits’) …
MOSAIC …is gonna’ ‘SAVE’ General-Aviation ?!?
“BasicMed is the best thing to happen to general aviation in decades,” said then AOPA President and CEO Mark Baker
“The BasicMed rule will keep our pilots safe but will simplify our regulations and keep general aviation flying affordable,” then FAA’s Huerta said.
Robert Goyer, formally of ‘Flying’ magazine and ‘Plane and Pilot’ observed (in a most politically correct fashion) of the wonderful development: “The new rules are a lot more complicated than any of us would have wished for”.
EAA Chairman Jack Pelton on MOSAIC: “We are lowering the hurdles from a regulatory standpoint, and now if we can use regulatory to support that innovation, I think it’s going to be a home run for Recreational Aviation.”
Let’s have a look at the two ‘Grass-Roots’ ‘Non-Profit’ organizations, that are supposed to be representing the (now just about extinct) ‘Average Joe’ ‘GENERAL Aviation’ pilot that had the most hands in initiating, pushing and following through on these so-called “most significant legislative victory(s) for general aviation in decades.” (AOPA’s Mark Baker)
There’s just no way to ‘sugarcoat’ my response to this hogwash;
AOPA & EAA …currently headed by (appointed, NOT member voted) ex-Corporate CEO’s still drawing (absurd) CEO level wages from NON-PROFIT ‘Associations’ Average-Joe members, flown around in expensive, Turbine (Corporate) aircraft doing OUR? ‘Business’ at expensive-lush resorts, provided & paid for by said membership, who are shamelessly deluged by the Association and its ‘affiliates’ with weekly solicitations for ‘goods & services’, and have in fact, ironically, become one of the many active and willing participants in the demise of General Aviation …unfortunately, part of the problem …certainly NOT the solution.
We’re told this excess is justified, in fact required, so that we can have people “experienced” in the ways of Washington, (Corporate) lobbying and (Big) Business in order to have (OUR?) voices heard and issues addressed. (sound familiar?) When the perverted reality is that it’s just this type of mind-Set, this (USA?) ‘Corporate Mentality’ (pursuit of profit solely for its own sake) that’s been the primary contributor to the Graveyard Spiral General Aviation has been unable to recover from.
EAA’s Mr. Peltons last gig was with Cessna Aircraft Company, who like Piper, and others in the 50’s, 60’s & 70’s not only supported, but actually CREATED a market for ‘General Aviation’ …by providing aircraft, not only for the affluent, but airplanes that the ‘Average-Joe’, albeit with a little sacrifice, might actually be able-to afford …now gives us the $450,000+ venerable C172. A basic, simple, single-engine, 4-place, fixed gear/prop/low-HP ‘Light Airplane’. One whose basic airframe’s been around for well over half a century and R&D, tooling and most other initial development costs long since paid-for many times over, decades ago. Essentially a (very) old airframe design with a few tweaks, upgraded to some modern avionics (which SHOULD cost substantially less than their steam-gauge, analog counterparts)
If one follows (Aviation related) news, it’s been reported that the elite Business (Aviation) club was also experiencing a bit of drop in membership (revenues) a few years back.
By forgetting its core roots & the re-inventing of itself into a ‘profit-solely-for-its-own-sake’ business model, perhaps the General-Aviation INDUSTRY is now finally beginning to feel the effects of its shortsightedness, in painting itself into the very limited little corner it’s only now beginning to realize it’s in?
Appalling, the manner in which our ‘Industry’, in its present incarnation shamefully perpetuates the illusion it hasn’t (deliberately) mutated into something totally unrecognizable from its birth and existence for the better part of the last century. Now destined by design and careful maintenance to cater solely to an extremely small, ‘Elite’ and most affluent segment of our society. A perfectly constructed, self-perpetuating, insulated ‘bubble’, what was once a great, vibrant, with perpetual growth potential and mostly unique to the USA phenomena …’General Aviation’.
Deliberate spin, outright propaganda …or just plain denial?
Most of Europe and all of present day Asia have no (and really never had any) such thing as ‘General Aviation’ …solely because of the PROHIBITABLY EXPENSIVE costs. Their citizens have long been coming here to pursue that dream we’ve all taken for granted! (but even that may change …read: practically grind to a halt now that their draconian EASA Flight Crew licensing regs have kicked in)
Active participation in our wonderful world of ‘Flight’ here in the USA has always been on the (relatively) expensive side, but up until recently remained the best (and only) place on the planet to do so.
But! …let’s take a hard look at what ‘we’ (US GA) have allowed to happen: …In 1979/80, the peak of GA aircraft production, almost 17,000 piston airplanes rolled off the assembly lines with a US population of about 200 million. The average price of an airplane was 3-4 times that of a new luxury car …1/2 to 1 times the average price of a single-family home.
Ten years ago, in 2015, with a population of just over 320 million people, about 500 piston aircraft were being produced/delivered each year …and the average prices were now 2-3 times the (median) price of a (equally over-inflated) house!
First of all ‘General Aviation’ is doing just fine …never better in fact. That is if when you say “General Aviation” …you mean the 98 percent of GA which consist of ‘executive’ aircraft. Ninety eight (98) percent of the GA industry’s annual revenue now comes from Turbine aircraft (Bizjets and Turboprops)
According to GAMA Statistics; In 1979 there were over 13,000 piston singles produced and just over 2,800 twins, for a total dollar value of just over $1 billion in 1979 dollars …which is about $4.3 billion in today’s dollars.
Total ‘Turbine’ GA aircraft produced were 779 with a total value of $772 million in 1978 -79 dollars …which is about $3.4 billion in today’s money.
So the ‘little guy’ was THE major source of revenue for the GA industry as late as 1979 …not the business bigwigs . That says a lot about where we where and where we have come to. Of course back then the head of the company made maybe 15-20 times as much as the Joe on the shop floor …what is it today?
Let’s look at those numbers a little more closely; The average cost of that executive airplane (the turbine variety) was just under $1 million …about 4.3 million in today’s dollars. Today the average sticker price is $15+ million.
The average cost of a piston plane in 1979 was $58,000 (INCLUDING light/medium twins and all the high end singles) which is about $250,000 in today’s money. If we could separate the twins from the singles we would find the average piston single price would be closer to $90,000 …in today’s dollars.
Now what really bears notice is the fact that those 40+ some years ago, there were far less than 1,000 big spenders who could spend the equivalent of $15 million in today’s money for a Bizjet or Turboprop …but there were almost 17,000 little guys who could afford to buy a piston single or even a light twin …over 2,800 twins.
Who has gained and who has lost?
Well the ‘GA’ Industry is doing nicely. It has increased sales from $3+ billion a year in today’s dollars to well over $35 billion.
The big spenders also don’t seem to be doing too badly. There’s now almost 2,000 of them buying a new executive aircraft every year (over three times as many) …and paying more than three times as much on average for the airplane …an over tenfold increase in spending power by the big spenders.
Let’s just repeat that/get some perspective …AN OVER TENFOLD INCREASE IN SPENDING POWER.
At the same time (light) piston airplanes, which made up more than 60 percent of ‘General Aviation’ …60 PERCENT! …even as late as 1979, today make up just TWO lousy percent (2%) of sales by dollar.
Want to buy a new airplane Joe? …can you write a check for $500,000+?
What it all adds up to is that the rich have gotten much richer …while the middle class dream of airplane ownership is toast.
It’s not surprising that most if not all of our Industry publications are funded almost entirely by big spending ‘Business Aviation’ …and continues to deliberately confuse things by lumping us ‘little-guy’ aviators on life support in with the rest of ‘General-Aviation’.
PLEASE!! …it is time for some ‘HONESTY’!
And please forgive me, as I really don’t wish to sound sarcastic, but it’s just mind-boggling to a (simple minded?) guy like myself how casually, and with such cavalier so many ‘representatives’ of the Aviation Industry quote prices for production, the average ‘Light Sport’, or any other 2-4 place ‘Light Airplane’. What a perfectly reasonable price ($170-200K) to pay for a (new) ‘Light Sport’ airplane …or the $450+K for a ‘moderately tricked out Cessna 172′ …or the 1.2 mil!!?? for a Seneca, version 5 recently reviewed in AOPA Pilot, (another 55+ year old, basically unchanged airframe design) …I mean, what’s wrong with that …isn’t that just about right ?
…Why ain’t everybody buyin’ em ?!?
How can such sums for such airplanes ever be (reasonably) justified??
And we wonder why ‘Student-Pilot” drop-out rates are exceeding 75% …new pilot certification is half what it was 25 years ago?? Why (aircraft) rental rates have gotten beyond the reach of most would be Sunday Flyers?
What could possibly be causing this decline in our beloved activity?!? (‘Private/Recreational Aviation’)
In all other industries that are a factor in every other facet of our lives (save for our uniquely corrupt Health-Care ‘Industry’) …one that bears mention is the Financial Industry. Every product we buy has over 30% of its price, on average, built in for overhead that it took to bring that product to market. In some cases much higher (interest charges, brokerage fees, etc). Yet even with all that financial overhead, a lot of consumer products still deliver more for your inflation adjusted buck than they did 20 to 25 years ago. That’s a fact. Cars bought today, though also currently experiencing ‘hyper-inflation’ are far better value for the dollar, same with the lawn tractor, Big-screen TV, washing machine, etc.
The “Litigation” blamers (though the uncontrolled explosion of greed-laden ‘Product Liability’ lawsuits many ( manufacturers) have had to endure over the last few decades are the ONLY thing Cessna, Piper etc. can ‘legitimately’ claim to have been “victimized” by) …are a legitimate factor in the increase of Certificated Aircraft prices, to a relatively small degree. But they don’t ‘get it’ either …or are just being incredibly disingenuous.
And before you start ‘raving’ about the unique and “excessive regulatory” environment that aircraft manufacturers have to endure …they were ALL operating under those basically unchanged set of rules way back in the 70-80’s as well.
So what exactly did change?? …How prey-tell did they ever manage to produce, create and sustain that kind of a market back then?!?
…and even ‘profit’ from it!?
The only thing today that costs over five times as much as it did 40 years ago is a new airplane.
Talk all you want about the cost of hangars, fuel, insurance, maintenance etc. … a fact of life everywhere, but it’s new and AFFORDABLE products that drive an industry. And unfortunately, the personal ‘Recreational Airplane’ industry is finished because the average price of a new 4 place piston airplane is half a million+ dollars …which less than 2% of the population could ever afford/justify.
That’s strictly an ‘Industry’ issue. If the automotive industry wanted to build an airplane for $50-60K, do you think they couldn’t? …sure they could. And they’d sell who knows how many thousands at that price.
But does anyone really not believe that Cessna could manufacture, and sell a new 172 for $125-150K (or a 152 for $70-$80K) …and realize a ‘reasonable’ profit per unit??
Cessna, like Piper, Beechcraft and others decided, long ago, that Corporate (Turbine) aircraft is “where the ‘REAL’ monies at” (and an extremely lucrative amount of money at that) And the LSA (‘Industry’) which was supposed to be GA’s “savior” has, it seems, quickly succumbed to the disease …behold the Cub Crafters Carbon Cub. An even simpler TWO place, basic, fixed gear, fixed prop, low HP ‘LIGHT SPORT’ airplane with a basic avionics package for the bargain price of only 400K!
This is what has been/is still primarily responsible for the demise of ‘General Aviation’ …as those of us who numbered among what was generally perceived to make up its largest segment during the 60’s, 70’s and even into the early 90’s have been so fortunate to have been a part of.
The ‘Experimental’ ‘Industry’ has become equally infected …as to all of those available ‘Kits’ out there today. Realistically, even a modest, two place, fixed gear/prop with a basic IFR panel (that by reg, one actually can’t utilize for it’s purpose) 140+ kt airplane most often sports (pun intended) a finished price of close to 120K …many others almost twice that! But don’t forget …ya still have to ‘build’ (and maintain) it yourself!
The aircraft industry now looks at things differently; The ‘GA’ (BUSINESS) aircraft industry makes over $30 billion a year in revenue by selling close to 2,000 executive aircraft at an average price of $15+ million each. In order to make $30 billion in sales selling (little) airplanes, even at $100,000 + apiece, they would have to sell 300,000 small airplanes a year. That’s never going to happen. There simply aren’t 300,000 people who are interested in buying their own airplane each and every year …or have the extra $100,000 lying around to do so. So the numbers are woefully against the ‘rest of us’ …that is the reality.
We must all come to grips with the fact that ‘General Aviation’ is now solely ‘Business Aviation’ …NOT the little guys flying around for personal. training or ‘recreational’ purposes in Cessnas & Cherokees.
That is not what ‘General Aviation’ is anymore. ‘General Aviation’ (as we’ve known her until now) is all but dead in this country, just as it’s been in the rest of the world (where it never really existed to begin with) …having been replaced with ‘Business Aviation’.
…Long Live the King!
The ‘Aircraft Industry’ sure knows this …and that’s why they made the (rational?) choice that it is no longer worth it.
And those ‘Rule-Changes’ like ‘Basic-Med’ or even ‘MOSAIC’ that’s gonna’ simplify our regulations and keep flying ‘affordable’ …and help save ‘General Aviation’???
While I’m not so naive (or young and foolish) or unappreciative to not understand that it was (is?) the engine of ‘Capitalism’ that made ‘GENERAL’ Aviation attainable to most of the masses in the first place, and ‘Business Aviation’ was indeed a (if not ‘The’) very large and essential part of ‘General Aviation’ which fueled that engine …Unfortunately, it has become (painfully) obvious to me (and I suspect more than just a ‘vocal minority’ of our community) that the US Aviation ‘Industry’ …along with its publications and all of our ‘Alphabet-Associations’, and dare I postulate, even the EAA …all who’ve been a welcomed part of my life during my 50 year love affair with Aviation, have morphed into what indeed it seems ‘Corporate America’ has equally mutated into: ‘Business’ entities … whose SOLE purpose appears to be the pursuit of profit …SOLELY for its own sake …and the unlimited enrichment of their upper echelons.
Well …so that’s the problem. And now at least knowing what the problem is just maybe we can start looking for solutions. But the solution is not to just root for ‘Business Aviation’ …and bankroll their lobbying fights in rotten DC.
And yes …as has just become overwhelmingly apparent with our last few election fiascos, DC-Corruption is a very real truth. Unfortunately, it is exactly that kind of lobbying of (our) ‘Special Interest’ groups that is/has been exasperating the problem.
And the little guy (privately) flying around in piston airplanes is all but extinct already.
That’s why we hear the message all the time that what is good for ‘Business Aviation’ is good for the little guy. This has been a mantra at ‘Flying’ (magazine) publications for quite some time …even as the little guy aviator continues to wither away …while Bizav continues to grow and prosper.
In the mid 70’s, I struggled to put myself through school (let’s not even get started on the costs of a college degree these days!) and pay for my flight training (mostly through loans) to pursue a dream of being a Professional Pilot. Now 50 years later, after having been fortunate to have flown everything from parachutes to 747’s, this subject has been a particular heartbreak for me. As I seriously doubt I could succeed in that endeavor today …and wonder how any of today’s young(er) folks, or even us ‘older guys’ (of even ‘above-average’ means) ever could as well.
I’m afraid these (greedy) times we’re a livin’ and that EXPONENTIALLY accelerating rate of expense, will only serve to hasten the time when the final nails are driven. We’re rapidly destroying ‘General (Recreational) Aviation’ in this country …making it solely a ‘Rich Mans Sport’.
As to the reasons for its demise? Surely, if you’re (intellectually) honest with yourselves, (and you know who you are) you understand the point of this (lowly 1-cent-worth) comment.
If not, then …no offense …uplifting, hopeful enthusiasm notwithstanding, but with none of the cold, clear logical pragmatism so necessary to be a successful ‘PIC’ …you’re ‘rowing down that famous long river in Egypt’ …or are of that myopic mindset of those who have caused and /or are still actively involved in the death of General Aviation …perhaps in fact one of many active and willing participants in it …and unfortunately, part of the problem …certainly NOT the solution.
The final, irrefutable evidence is not that our illustrious ‘leaders’ of AOPA & EAA are congratulating themselves on the fact that they essentially failed at securing what has consistently been requested and proposed by (their?) memberships, despite their ‘input/participation’ in Rule-changes such as MOSAIC and Basic-Med. (in fairness, not really all their fault as anyone can, no matter what their background, ‘status’ or financial where-with-all can fail in that ‘Fiasco’ we call the US Government)
NO …they insult our intelligence (as well as their own) with ‘SPIN’ worthy of the best of what we’ve all been forced to endure from the Corporate-Congressional-Industrial-Complex over the last few decades …by trying to con us into believing how “great this will be” …what a difference it will make, when the 99% (no pun intended) of us who exist in the ‘real world’ know all too well to the contrary! It’s now all too evident that ‘They’ in essence have become and are no different than ‘Them’. But how devastatingly unfortunate for all of us that at the moment, they (AOPA & EAA) are the only game(s) in town.
During the last 40 years, we (as in ALL of us) have witnessed the greatest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind in this country (no …this IS NOT ‘Class Warfare’ talk here, just an honest, objective assessment of the data & facts) …and our beloved and nearly extinct ‘General Aviation’ has just simply been one of its many and most obvious casualties.
“Why”…the continuing/acceleration of Student-Pilot drop-outs …the rapidly decreasing pilot population? …the rapidly downward spiral of total logged hours? …a Pilot shortage?? …sluggish sales factors?? …continuing decline in attendance at Oshkosh? And now …a possible trend towards decreasing BIZAV sales!? (Oh My!)
Very …very, very sad indeed.
Again, apologies for the (long) rant folks. Just a lowly (half-century-long) Airline, Air-taxi, ‘Corporate’, Flight School and ‘Recreational’ General-Aviation flunky. Currently grounded (due to …you guessed it …Medical …’expense’ and regulation) aircraft owner.
So yea …you would be reasonable to conclude that the above was just the ‘ranting/raving’ and whining of a ‘disgruntled’, disappointed/ defeated …sad SOB.
Or, if you’re truly (intellectually) honest with yourselves….
(Again) Thanks for puttin’ up with me!
When people see a light at the end of a tunnel, some think it’s a way out, some think it’s a train. You can’t find out until you get to the light or the light gets to you.
I read a whole lot of concern; but I didn’t see any clear plan for fixing the issues or achieving any specific goals. Feel free to propose some!
I suppose there are several old adages that could be applied here.
The first comes from the Bible and it says that “The love of money is the root of all evil.”
The second is, “If you want to make a small fortune in aviation, then start with a large one and get out quick.”
The third would be the old joke about burying lawyers 12 feet deep instead of just 6 because down deep, they really are good people.
I tend to share your sentiments about the downhill trend in aviation, but I don’t think that aviation exists in a vacuum apart from the rest of society. With moral decline arriving first, all of society goes downhill together. My Dad was a pilot and an aircraft dealer back in the 1960’s and his standard statement back then was that you could always tell what the economy was going to do 6 months ahead of time just by looking at what aviation was doing. That was back in the day when could figure hourly aircraft operating costs by taking the price of fuel times 2.
Truly a sobering and insightful commentary that hits home for most of us CPB’s (Cheap Pilot Bastards) witnessing the demise of this activity. Under all this history there might be a pony…