It’s important to understand that liability not the economy killed most airplane manufacturers back in the ‘80’s. You can run any company without proper funding and when the liability laws changed and scared investors away that was the end to a lot of companies.

I think Gerald and I basically agree, we just view the market from two very different perspectives.

When he says only a couple of hundred airplanes are built in a year, I assume he means piston twins, because Cirrus alone builds twice that, in fact Cirrus will probably top 500 aircraft this year. That’s over 40 airplanes a month!

Textron is probably in the 160 - 180 range, I'd guess the same for Embraer.

Gulfstream supposedly builds 100 airplanes a year, which blows my mind.

Pilatus builds 150 airplanes a year and the list goes on. All of the new aircraft models save a few are sold out till late 2023 / early 2024. Pilatus PC-12NGX… 2025.

GA isn’t dying. It’s just changing.

Like many shift changes, there is never one catalyst for disruption. Liability insurance was certainly a factor. The aging out of the Greatest Generation who fueled GA in the 50’s and 60’s is a factor. The Greatest Generation’s inability to pass on the magic of flight to their offspring in off-setting numbers is a factor. The significant switch from affordable light planes that a somewhat higher than average disposable income family could afford to new airplanes that are out of grasp for all but those in the highest income brackets is a factor. The change and diversity of choice in the way we spend our leisure time is a factor. The increasing regulation and complexity of flying is a factor. The aging pilot population is a factor. I could go on, but you get the point. Is GA dying? No, but it is forever changed and the halcyon days of the 60’s and 70’s are gone forever. I for one, am glad that airplanes were so well made back in the day that I can afford to own one that I could never afford new. Appreciation for those who maintain our legacy planes and the companies that provide us with awesome upgrade paths with their incredible avionics and STC’s give me confidence that my 1968 Baron will outlive this mere mortal.

Ryan
If you are going to quote someone at least get it right?
Jim said that not me.

Not really. I personally prefer two engines. When flown by an experienced pilot, they are significantly safer.

“A survey conducted by Aviation Consumer says the Cessna 414 twin-engine has a fairly low fatal accident rate (boasting 0.8 fatal accidents for each 100,000 hours of flight time”.

“Our estimate of the overall accident rate for Cessna 182s-all models and some 13,500 airplanes registered in the U.S.-comes to 6.8/100,000 overall and 1.5/100,000 fatal. About 27 percent of all the 182 accidents we examined were fatal, versus 45 percent for the Cirrus.

For the single engine plane with a parachute:
“The NTSB pegs the fatal rate at 0.98, while AOPA's Nall Report places it at 0.80. The overall worldwide accident rate for Cirrus from day one is 3.5/100,000 compared to Nall's recent 4.92 for GA in general.“

“According to FAA estimates, Bonanza/Debonair aircraft flew approxi- mately 20.2 million hours during the years 1983-1999. There were 1,143 accidents during that time, which averages out to 6.72 accidents per 100,000 hours for the Beech 35 model and 4.65 for the Beech 33/35”.

Approximately 800 new GA planes a year is not enough to sustain GA as we know it. Over a 20 year period that’s only about 16,000 new planes. That’s not even enough to keep 100 fuel below 10 dollars?
GA will change, it will be smaller with fewer airports, services and shops. Most of the legacy fleet will be junk, only the good ones will survive.

That is sobering, but we also went through a period when almost ZERO general aviation aircraft were being sold… nearly 40 years ago. We survived.

Not really. I personally prefer two engines. When flown by and experienced pilot, they are significantly safer.

“A survey conducted by Aviation Consumer says the Cessna 414 twin-engine has a fairly low fatal accident rate (boasting 0.8 fatal accidents for each 100,000 hours of flight time”.

“Our estimate of the overall accident rate for Cessna 182s-all models and some 13,500 airplanes registered in the U.S.-comes to 6.8/100,000 overall and 1.5/100,000 fatal. About 27 percent of all the 182 accidents we examined were fatal, versus 45 percent for the Cirrus.

For the single engine plane with a parachute:
“The NTSB pegs the fatal rate at 0.98, while AOPA's Nall Report places it at 0.80. The overall worldwide accident rate for Cirrus from day one is 3.5/100,000 compared to Nall's recent 4.92 for GA in general.“

“According to FAA estimates, Bonanza/Debonair aircraft flew approxi- mately 20.2 million hours during the years 1983-1999. There were 1,143 accidents during that time, which averages out to 6.72 accidents per 100,000 hours for the Beech 35 model and 4.65 for the Beech 33/35”.

Jim do you fly a 337P sky master?

Gerald, it’s a lot more than 800 airplanes.

Plus, for the most part we aren’t replacing airplanes, we’re adding to the fleet.

Just the few manufacturers I mentioned are well over 1000 airplanes a year… and I didn’t mention Bombardier or Socata or Piper or Kodiak or Dassault or a host of other companies.

I’m not saying this is the heyday of aircraft manufacturing, that was definitely late 70’s early 80’s but back then they were building a fleet, most of what they built never before existed.

We are building thousands of new airplanes each year and the numbers are increasing, and will really jump now with the order backlog we have. There are simply more buyers than airplanes.

This is the most often cited reason but it is way down the list. A huge number of airplanes were built in the 70s, demand collapsed, fewer units were produced, apparent prices went up (cost of a Skylane in ounces of gold is actually a bit cheaper today). Buying power shifted to the top over the last 40+ years making the price significantly outpace inflation, in addition to insufficient numbers to lower real costs as happened with cars.

Chip it’s not thousands per year?
In their annual aerospace forecast, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) estimates that the U.S. general aviation aircraft fleet will grow from 205,870 aircraft in 2021 to 208,790 aircraft by 2041. This is equal to an average annual rate of growth (CAGR) of 0.07%.

In 20 years that’s only 3,000 aircraft?

Gerald, your first statistic is saying the fleet will grow by that many, aircraft are crashing and being scrapped daily, so you have to build more than are being lost.

Your second source is closer but still low, they probably use GAMI as their source and not all manufacturers report to GAMI. Plus, their numbers are only certified airplanes, you have to add in kits as well.

I know it gets complicated and good info is hard to find, but trust me, it’s thousands… probably in the 3-4000 per year range.

By the way, my Textron number is way low, that’s only turbines. They probably build 200 172’s a year.

http://www.fi-aeroweb.com/General-Aviation.html#Fleet

For 2020, most recent #'s I found, looks like 877 SEP. During the height of the pandemic too so I would think that had an effect.