In the fall of 2015, I wrote about four Light-Sport Aircraft (LSA) you could buy for under $96,000. For many pilots, this price point seemed to strike a melodious chord. Unless you are flying for work purposes, you may prefer to spend only a modest amount to enjoy the view from on high.
In this column, I’ll show you a few examples of how you can take the cost of ownership way down … well below $50,000, even below $20,000. Yes, this is for brand-new, fully built aircraft, though kit versions are available to address an interest in greater personalization.
Strap on your goggles, and let’s look at a few of aviation’s most affordable options. This is not intended to be a comprehensive review of all possible choices, other worthy aircraft are also available.
Aviation’s Best Bargain? Aerolite 103
Many find it hard to believe three things: First, that you can buy a ready-to-fly airplane for well under $20,000; second, that the airplane will be fully-equipped with features you want and flying in the way most will find enjoyable; and third, that any business selling a ready-to-fly aircraft at such prices can genuinely function as a profitable enterprise.
The answers are that, yes, they truly can sell you an airplane for $16,000 (and yes, all the parts come with it including the powerplant). That airplane has most of the equipment and capabilities that a recreational pilot wants. Finally, U-Fly-It, the builder of the 2016 Aerolite 103, may not be getting rich, but with careful management, the business earns a profit.
“Well, this is just some ultralight,” some might say. Yes, it is. So?
Approximately 400 Aerolite 103s are flying and U-Fly-It is working at capacity to keep up with growing demand.
Preferring not to expand its facility at DeLand, Florida airport, the company maxes out at around 50 aircraft a year. Demand has remained strong and growing since proprietor Dennis Carley bought the business from original designer Terry Raber in 2013.
The FAA refers to flying machines like Aerolite 103 as an “ultralight vehicle,” not an “airplane.” This yields exceptional freedom.
No aircraft registration is required. No pilot certificate or medical are needed.
FAR Part 103 allows U-Fly-It to sell in ready-to-fly form so long as it meets the definitions of such vehicles, which Aerolite 103 does.
Yet Aerolite is equipped with electric starting, flaps, instruments, yoke and rudder pedals, a forward cowling, enough fuel (5 gallons) to fly for a couple hours, sturdy tricycle gear with nosewheel steering, brakes, four-point seat belts, and basic instrumentation. Most models are sold with a whole airframe emergency parachute at additional cost.
To provide speedier delivery and allow some owners to increase weight for other features or different engines, U-Fly-It is underway to offer a kit version.
The Pioneering CGS Hawk
One of the more storied brands in light aviation is the CGS Hawk. Nearly 2,000 Hawk aircraft have been sold and a significant share of those birds continue to give their pilots a reason to love flying.
The Hawk was originally developed by Chuck Slusarczyk, a former NASA tech with experience certifying the Scheutzow helicopter. He was also a developer of early hang gliders, so his skill set was able to yield an airworthy yet very modestly-priced series of models. Chuck refined the design over nearly 30 years, however, a few years back he headed into retirement and another man took over.
Alabama businessman Danny Dezauch recently resold the business to Terry Short, a Lake Wales, Florida, aviation entrepreneur who has promised to support the Hawk fleet and continue production, starting with a few of the several kit models Slusarczyk once created.
In 2008 Slusarczyk earned Special Light-Sport Aircraft approval for one of the Hawk varieties, which he offered for $39,995. As he is just taking over, Short has not yet fully determined how to address demand.
He’ll start serving the many Hawks in the field with spare parts and services, but by summer 2016, he expects to be producing Hawk kits and they will carry very reasonable price tags.
Although Short may need to get renewed FAA approval because he is a new manufacturer of the Hawk, he can sell kits. The effort to return to fully built Special Light-Sport Aircraft is a reasonable task given the long and successful history of the design. It qualifies as a sub-87 knot (100 mph) LSA for which all demands are somewhat more forgiving.
M-Squared’s Low-Cost SLSA
Celebrating its 20th year in business in 2016, M-Squared Aircraft has built more than 500 land and sea planes from its base in St. Elmo, Alabama. Founder Paul Mather has more than 40 years experience in the light aircraft space.
In 2008 M-Squared earned Special Light-Sport Aircraft approval for its Breese 2 DS aircraft, the first of this type of light airplane to win such acceptance by FAA.
While numerous high-tech LSA can run well past $150,000 M-Squared’s simple but dependable aircraft have retailed for less than $40,000. Even with the potent Rotax 912, the same engine that propels a large majority of the LSA fleet, Breese 2 DS sells for less the $50,000, ready to fly.
Besides designing and building aircraft, Mather acts as a Designated Airworthiness Representative (DAR), a civilian position with special FAA training and delegated authority to perform airworthiness inspections for amateur-built kit aircraft, Experimental LSA and Special LSA. SLSA are factory manufactured aircraft.
Instead of giving SLSA producers production certificates, the FAA relies on people like Mather to go inspect every Special LSA before awarding an airworthiness certificate. These skills help assure buyers of M-Squared’s aircraft that the company’s aircraft positively meet the standards mandated by FAA.
M-Squared can offer amateur-built kits but because it has earned Special LSA acceptance by the FAA, the company can also offer Experimental LSA (one must precede the other). ELSA are bolt-for-bolt copies of the SLSA that an owner assembles. Once complete, the owner is free to make changes on his or her own.
Quicksilver Remains a Value
Anyone who has paid attention to well-engineered, field-proven, and highly affordable aircraft probably knows the Quicksilver brand. This icon of light aviation has delivered more complete kit aircraft than any other producer. More than 15,000 were sold since the early 1980s.
However, last fall many Quicksilver enthusiasts read that the California-based manufacturer was suffering from too-high overhead and onerous costs of doing business in the western state. Company owners sought others to assist their continued production.
I promised not to let the news slip out prematurely, but I am very pleased to announce here for the first time that the Quicksilver line is about to get a renewed lease on life.
“Contracts have been agreed and signed,” said a principal in the talks and Quicksilver appears posed to relocate its production facility to the opposite coast.
When the time is right, I will chronicle this major transformation (permitted under FAA rules regarding Special LSA and FAA-approved kits).
Until then, know you will soon have one more choice for a desirable but very low cost airplane sure to deliver smiles in the skies as it has done for decades.
Affordable aviation is alive and well, even at prices below the average cost of a new automobile. That has to be a great way to encourage more flying and a way for new students to experience the activity so many of us love.
Zenith…. The flying Brick…Pull the power and watch how they glide like a greased log. All the special design features built in ..The truth according to Chris Heintz. NOT. Ugliest plane in the air.
Honestly, the people in the comments here need to stop being so snobby. Ultralights are real planes, not flying lawn chairs, especially the wooden frame and dacron coating ones that are homebuilt. Those planes continue the traditions of the early 1900’s and serve a role in preserving history and the fathers of aviation. They also take an extremely long time to build, sometimes literally thousands of hours.
As for the ones mentioned in the article, they are pretty much powered hang-gliders, and no one should be shunned for flying them just because they cost less. It is extremely affordable to get up in the air in one of those by building a kit plane like a Mini Max 1030, which requires no license to fly. These planes typically cost less than $10,000, and I would like to see you try and get a used Cessna for less.
Used Cessnas are also another good way to get into the air, for around $20,000, and that is what you would buy if you wanted to fly with other people in the same plane. This is the type of plane that a middle class family would buy, and the one you would use to actually get places, although don’t underestimate ultralights, which can have a range of 50 or so nautical miles. But it would be nice if the FAA changed the specifications to a larger gallon tank to increase flight time.
Are there nothing but Cessna people on here
PA 22’s are plentiful and much cheaper
Wow, some bitter GA guys here. I spent around 10k just for training to be a pilot and after the 2008 crash I was done financially. I never got my license and barely paid off my pilot finance. I solo’d and did some cross countries but that was it.
The ONLY hope I have of getting back in the air is an ultra lite. I also ride a harley sportster because they are cheap and well built. I can’t afford a road king and turns out, this sporty is fun as all get out.
i bet the same is true of these ulta lights. Maybe they aren’t all weather or all season but I bet they are a blast to fly and get more flying time than 172’s.
By the way, the Aerolite 103 is an honest airplane that performs better than advertised. It’s place in this article is well deserved.
You want to get more young people into GA?
Forget the old 152s nobody young wants to look at steam gauges while flying in an airplane older than them…
Allow the “LSAs” to fly to their full potential…as desired:
1. Faster than 120kts, all of them are capable of it
2. With retracts, as desired, because they look cool
3. Controllable pitch propeller for a wider speed range
4. More option of powerplants not limited to piston engines such as emerging electric motors or small gas turbines…
Keeping a “category” with limited performance just so anyone can fly without a medical limits the true potential of what is possible with light aircraft.
Even if the requirement does not go away…third class medicals are not that onerous, especially if people who are young and relatively healthy…the kind of people we want to attract.
Agree with most of that, but portable GPS and tablets may eliminate the need for more expensive glass panels. When the steam gauges die, replace with newer electronics.
But the main problem is still the price! LSA’s came in with the promise of fully functional planes in the $80-$100k range. Most of the decent ones are in the $120-$150k range. And then we’re back to the same Catch 22 – not enough sales to drop the prices; not cheap enough to increase the sales #’s.
I want to FLY, not drive some aluminum cocoon through the sky at 250 knots, staring at computerized maps, and a flight director. Those of us with ultralights, have re-invented the 1920’s flying with road maps, and for those of us doing serious cross country, 200 miles in a day, a current sectional. I am solid middle class retired Army, yet I can afford several different ultralight replica’s each modeling a different classic aircraft. The one that was the most expensive, was 6,500 dollars.
And your family can drive the 200 miles to meet you at the beach… See the response to Buzz. VERY few people will spend the $7-$12k for training just to have “fun” flying. It needs to be an affordable, fun way for a family to travel to attract more pilots.
That is not the case, Cory, my sweetie pie is also an Ultralight Pilot, and we fly formation with each other. My my brother was also priced out of the GA market, and has now joined the ranks of ultralight pilots.
These aren’t planes, they are toys, and pretty expensive ones at that. Guess you gotta pay over $50,000.00 for doors….The state of aviation in the US is pathetic, soon enough all the rich old pilots will die off and there will be NO GA in the US anymore….guess that’s just the way the government(and airlines apparently) want it.
I have found that the ercoupe provides all the fun of an open cockpit experience (closed cockpit, if desired) while limiting the cost of obtaining a pilot certificate, cost of the plane itself–usually @ mid twenty thousand $ with an average fuel burn of 5 gph. Lightsport certification @ $5000 and approximately $1000/yr for an annual, allows this certified airplane to fill a niche that the expensive kits cannot. Stall speed @ 55 mph and a cruise @ 90 to 100 mph, makes this plane a legitimate alternative.
I’ve been wondering what’s going to happen to all those expensive planes sitting in thousands of hangars around the country, their owners either too old or too uninterested to fly them anymore. These are expensive, capable airplanes and if there’s nobody around to buy them when the estate gets sold, I guess the majority of them are just going to deteriorate and eventually disappear.
Regarding those flying lawn chairs – those two-cycle engines and kite-like behavior in the wind doom those things to only calm, sunny days. That gets boring quickly.
If someone wants a plane, get a real plane. Those things are dangerous if their very narrow limitations are exceeded and as for those chain saw motors . . . they use a lot of gas, require re-building frequently, are touchy and finicky. There’s real aircraft out there for less than what these things cost. My main issue with them is how they handle in wind. They’re dangerous as hell in wind. And wind is what flying is all about.
That bush thing somebody posted a link to looks like it might be flyable – better than the lawn chairs anyway.
I happen to OWN three of those “Flying Lawn Chairs” that you speak about. They are NOT powered by “Chain Saw Motors”, they are powered by opposed two cylinder, (the FAA weight rule), FOUR stroke, surplus GPU engines designed and built by Continental for the Army. I have two motor gliders that are powered by them, and they soar just FINE. As for the third ultralight, it is a full scale Part 103 legal replica of the Aeronca C-2. I power it with a half VW engine of 900 c.c.’s, that makes 45 horsepower. It may fly slower than my GA registered 1940 Taylorcraft BC-65, but I love flying it, when I’m not taking my wife up flying in the same plane with me. She fly’s Ultralights too.
Misleading title.
Agreed, it should say:
Paid shill talks about how “affordable” flying lawn chairs with deadly motors are…..
Honestly, anyone who takes the OP seriously(his rep is pretty pathetic) has several screws loose, lol.
Articles like this about these toys are the problem with GA. We need a real, 4 seat airplane for under $50k. We need to stop hyping all the new bells and whistles in the $500k planes out there and push the fact that there are thousands of 172’s, PA28’s, Tiger’s and even some 182’s out there that are excellent flying machines for under $50k. They just don’t have computers built in.
What we should be hyping is that it has been proven that these reliable airplanes are just as safe – even with steam gauges – as any of the new, fancy, flying computers out there. The numbers don’t lie. And, with iPads and hand-held GPS’s, they’re just as capable as the newer planes.
There’s a market for the planes shown here. There’s also a market for dirt bikes and dune buggies. But the real market we need to tap is the middle class family who wants a fun, efficient way to travel moderate distances without the hassle of traffic or the TSA. And we don’t even need a new product – just a change in attitude about what is already out there.
I do also find it hard to believe that Piper or Cessna could not produce a brand new PA28 or c172, with the same instrumentation found in the 70’s era planes, for under $100k or even under $70k.
They can, but bigger$, bigger profit
Seems shortsighted. One reason the pilot population is getting older is the expense. You have to be established and financially stable, if not independently wealthy, to buy a new plane today. If we want more, young, long term pilots in GA they have to be able to afford a practical plane. Companies should be focused on quartering the prices and quadrupling the sales. In the end, with more pilots seeking upgrades etc. they should benefit as would all of the companies involved with GA (parts suppliers, pilot supplies etc.).
I’m with you, Cory. Articles like this are self-serving. Those aren’t airplanes … not by a LONG shot. Do they use aerodynamics to get aloft, you bet … just like your dune buggy and dirt bikes use the earth for traction purposes. Beyond that, they’re useless and relatively expensive toys. I own both a C172 and a PA28 and would be lucky to get $50K for both of ’em on the used airplane market. So to buy a light sport something with an enclosed fuselage and reasonable steam gauges is gonna cost more than $100K. I don’t think so. If the new medical rules pass, machines like this will litter the sides of runways. If the medical rules don’t pass, THIS long term pilot will just hang up the headsets and buy a new Corvette … for less money.
Well Larry, all you hard core GA guys will never know what your missing then! True seat of the pants flying! So much more fun than any C172 or PA28. Maybe you should try it before bashing it. 🙂
Buzz
Buzz, you miss the point. I’m sure this kind of flying is a ton of fun. But that’s what it is – a fun, recreational activity akin to dirt biking, snowmobiling etc. When people think about getting their private pilot license – and spending $7K-$12K to do so – most are thinking of the places they’ll go an the freedom of taking their families in their own plane. When they hear it’ll cost more than their house to buy a plane, they bow out. So, yes, there are some great flying machines out there for under $50k. But they’re not the entry level planes that will encourage more people to get their ticket and join the GA population.
Well said, Cory. I am with you 100%. I sold my 172, and am just in a flying club. I hope to continue flying, but the medical is an issue these days.
I am not interested in an ultralight for local flights. I know they would be fun. However, I want a small plane capable of traveling in.
2 words. Product Liability.
Years ago I did a study and the two seat trainers of the 50s, 60s, and early 70s cost about 70-80% of an engineer’s starting salary. I used an engineer as a reference because I’m an engineer, but you could use any other profession. The entry level 4 seaters cost 130-160%. Engineers typically start around $60k, so two seaters should be around $50k and four seaters around $90k. Why isn’t this so?
First, the pilot population is shrinking dramatically. The number of pilots between the ages of 30-50 was huge half of a century ago, but is very small today. Fewer pilots means fewer wanting a new airplane which means lower production. Lower production rates means lower efficiency and higher cost.
Second, lower production rates means each of the subcomponents have lower production also resulting in much higher costs, and less money available for research and development and thus significant improvements. This explains why most of the certified parts, especially engines, have advanced little in the past half century.
Third, many of the costs associated with aircraft and part production are fixed. FAA certification, quality assurance, and liability insurance are somewhat fixed costs. So when the rate goes down, the cost per part goes way up. This increases the airplane and part costs described above.
Fourth, after WWII, the new airplanes were dramatically better than the pre-war aircraft giving incentive to buy new. Today, the opposite is true.
Fifth, the features expected today are dramatically more than a half century ago. Back then, the low cost entry airplanes I described above generally had no electrical system, no radios, and very basic VFR instruments. Today, people expect nice interiors, electric start, moving map, transponders, radios, etc. Further increasing cost.
So if we went back to extremely simple aircraft, miraculously increased the young/rich/growing pilot population by 10x, increased the production rate by 10x, simplified certification requirements and means of compliance back to the ways of the 60s, and got rid of liability concerns, we could probably get back to the cost structures of half of a century ago.
You hit the catch 22 on the head. There aren’t enough pilots to create the demand to bring the prices down. There price is too high to attract more pilots. The question is, who blinks first. I would argue that it has to be the manufacturers who drop their prices to attract more first time customers and trust that, in the long run, these customers will continue to upgrade etc. It’s obviously not that simple and there are a ton of variables that go into lowering the prices. But, if it doesn’t happen, I just don’t see how GA survives as anything but a hobby for the super rich. I just hate articles like this that purport to say, “Look, you CAN actually own a new plane on a middle class income!” Technically, true; practically, false.
The BushCat by SkyReach is also a very affordable aircraft. www.bushcatusa.com
That Is NOT a Quicksilver GT 500 in the picture. Its a Sport II. Very different plane
You are right! It has been corrected. Thank you.
i own a 150, but went to Ifly co…and the owner on a Sunday opened up for me…wow….and what a great craft and gentleman
That’s not a Quicksilver GT500, that is a MXL-2.
Look for a second hand one…you may get it st a fairly good price
I am a retired pro pilot that wants to follow the ELSA & SLSA developments and expect to become an owner in the near future. Thank you.
The title was a bit misleading but overall a good read. I’d prefer to wait and save for a regular old C172 or C150, or go for a Zenith.
I agree Jonathan. I was expecting something with a hard shell. My first airplane was a 1958 C-172 with 1100 hrs left on the engine ready to fly for 19k. Similar today for around 26k. I’d rather wait and save.