The Changing World GA Scene

Nowhere has this decision been more difficult to admit than in the United States. Yet the American conviction is strongest that the future of General Aviation lies – not with reversals of policy by Cessna, Piper or Beech (whoever owns them) – but with the innovative and simplistic aircraft emerging from the kitplane industry.

Everyone must surely be aware of the absolute decimation of the US lightplane industry wrought, very largely, by litigation under product liability legislation which in many cases bordered on the insane. Manufacturers were consequently forced to carry insurance against horrendous judgements involving millions of dollars and the cost of buying such insurance soon rose to uneconomic levels.

As well, long established manufacturers, like Cessna, Piper and Beech, were forced to carry additional (and very costly) policies to cover every aircraft their companies had ever produced. This was because US liability laws placed no time factor on claims against particular products so Piper, for example, could be sued in the 90’s over an alleged failing in one of their products built in the 50’s.

The immediate response by the “Big Three” to a number of amazingly costly legal actions against them, was to abandon completely the manufacture of small, single engined aircraft. The logic was that, if it were to cost of dollars per aircraft produced to insure against future litigation such cost could be absorbed into the sales price of (say) a Citation twinjet or a King Air. Applied to a Cessna 152 or a Piper Cherokee, however, the insurance premium came out costing the company more dollars than the aircraft took to produce.

Most of us have been aware of this aspect of the decline of the American lightplane industry. But there is far more to it than that.

A number of individuals and syndicates made brave attempts to rescue some of the products. Best known of these was the enormously costly efforts of millionaire aviation enthusiast Stewart Millar to save the Piper line from oblivion beneath the judge’s gavel. That effort broke Millar’s spirit as well as his bank account; and almost weekly “rescue packages” including strong interest by a major French manufacturer have all baulked at the financial albatross of liability protection.

And while the battles of the Giants have been going on there have been a number of smaller companies which have been progressively reintroducing earlier types – the most recent examples being the former Commander 114, and the former Bellanca Citabria/Decathalon. However, these companies are, in the main, selling only outside the USA (in the hope of avoiding litigation in American courts), or are building to special order – in which the customer virtually becomes a partner (on paper) in the manufacturing company and thus is unlikely to sue himself.

Praiseworthy though these schemes may be, nobody in the US General Aviation industry seriously believes they hold the key to the reincarnation of a viable General Aviation manufacturing industry in the USA

But what a growing number of Americans are now acknowledging is that the ground base for a viable industry is already well established and growing stronger daily. An industry in which just two companies have each delivered more airplanes in the past year than Cessna and Beech have delivered in the past 24 months!

This is, of course, the kitbuilt and homebuilt industries, which almost daily see new designs which outperform the onetime market leaders of the “traditional” manufacturers. Llke the four place retractable which exceeds 300 knots in level flight . . . a two place STOL which gets airborne in just 21 metres . . . a heavy hauler with a Useful Load to Gross ratio matched only by the C-5A . . . a two place low wing trigear trainer which cruises at 130kts, lands at 43kts and is aerobatic. The list goes on . . .

As in the 1930s, when American dominance of the lightplane field was spawned, developments such as these are coming from small, independent, innovative companies, currently not “big” enough to capture the attention of predatory litigation lawyers.

In recent years several of the more successful kitplane manufacturers have sold out as their companies grew to the point where they risked becoming a target for litigation. Others have relocated to Canada, where legislation provides greater company protection. Those which have remained are continuing to land business in domestic and foreign markets (one company recently accepted a single order for 56 aircraft from South America).

What these companies have proved, by putting their collective necks on the block, is that there is a vast market crying out for simple systems, basic aerial transportation in addition to specialised high performance aircraft. This is a simple fact which Wichita somehow seemed unable to come to terms with, in its headlong dash for the large corporation dollars.

Australia has seen many attempts over the past 60 years or so to found an indigenous aircraft design and manufacturing industry but our small domestic market and low capital base has always corrupted this back to the building of other countries’ aircraft under licence – invariably low volume high unit cost military aircraft.

Now, however the scales are tipping in favor of simple aircraft, of a type this country can build on a viable basis, providing the major proportion of manufacturing is devoted to exports. Australian companys of courage and vision are taking up the challenge, resulting in several highly innovative and practical lightplanes now rolling from assembly lines – small though those lines may be.

Initially, most of these local designs will find their way into the hands of private owners and the operators of so called “ultralight” flight schools, but the second or third generation of these designs – particularly those qualifying for the newly introduced JAR-VLA certification – will begin appearing in increasing numbers on the flight lines of General Aviation flight schools and aero clubs. Here they will have an immediate impact on the cost of learning to fly and the cost of maintaining a fleet. The changeover will not be dramatically rapid, for many flight schools must extract value for money outlaid from their existing fleets prior to any replacement. But as Cessna 150s and 172s are pensioned off, their replacements will most probably come from the new generation VLA class.

This is already happening in the USA The writer knows of one Northern California flight school that has replaced 32 of its 35 aircraft fleet with 35 year old Piper J-3 Cubs and Aeronca Champs for which flight rates are less than half those it once charged for its Cessna 152s. As a result aircraft are booked out eight weeks in advance and the operator is in the black strongly again for the first time in a decade.

The rise of the ultralight movement has proved there are large numbers of would-be aircraft owners out there seeking low cost, simple airplanes. This continues to be true even in the current economic conditions.

Thus, for the first time, emerging Australian manufacturers have a domestic base for sales while they establish their organisations, and develop the special skills required for series production of aircraft of any class.

In addition, close foreign markets are opening up in SE Asia and the Pacific Basin which previously were the exclusive province of the major US manufacturers. Of course, foreign competition exists and must be met by the locals. But at least Australia is at the forefront of the “new wave” of VLAs and in some cases the local product is considerably more advanced than it<J overseas competitors.

Much more, however, remains to be done by the Federal authorities to smooth the path for local aircraft developers and manufacturers. To date the latter have been severely handicapped by offical policies rooted in the forties and a reticence on the part of the bureaucracy to be innovative in dealing with problems exclusively aeronautical. This is not to say help has not been given. But there is strong evidence that many areas of both State and Federal Government are totally unaware (due to lack of prior experience) of the unique needs of aircraft development companies.

Providing Federal and State governments and their bureaucratic arms can come to understand the critical difference between catching the aeronautical boat and missing it, then the future of an indigenous Australian lightplane industry is bright.

If not, a surviving handful of small struggling companies will remain as small struggling companies while the majority of Australian pilots fly foreign aircraft.

In succeeding issues we will be examining this growing industry in greater detail including reporting on the specific Australian VLA types under developrnent. Don’t miss it!