Market Forecast


To accurately project the market forecast, some history must be understood as well as current events shaping the future of light aviation.  Also, a good understanding of the used aircraft market must be factored in.  The downturn of the industry may be observed in the historical numbers tracked by the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA) and reported in their yearly publications. Then the upturn can be analyzed but not according to what many industry pundits parrot for the established manufacturers.

The bottom line is:

Year Units Shipped Companies Reporting Factory Net Billings
1994 928 13 $2,357,100,000
1995 1077 13 $2,841,900,000
1996 1115 13 $3,126,500,000
1997 1549 12 $4,674,300,000
1998 2200 12 $5,873,900,000
1999 2504 13 $7,935,309,000
2000 2816 15 $8,558,372,390

Now if you would believe the industry pundits, the following article describes the reason for this growth:

Aircraft Production Doubles Following Liability Reform

In the five years since the enactment of the General Aviation Revitalization Act, aircraft production has doubled and more than 25,000 new jobs have been created, according to a report to Congress and the president by the GAMA. Other measures of the act's success include a 150% increase in research and development funding by GA companies, a rebound in the number of student starts and a doubling of exports of GA aircraft, the association said. Signed into law on August 17, 1994, the act included an 18-year limit on manufacturer's liability for general aviation aircraft.

NBAA 1999, Atlanta, Ga. 

Follow this link to see yearly reports and statistics from the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA).

 1996 Shipments - 1997 Shipments - 1998 Shipments - 1999 Shipments - 2000 Shipments


Now let's look at things differently.

First, let's look at the actual reported 1999 shipments.

They were:






Now this is an increase of only 305 units over 1998 or a 13.7% increase.  Where's the big change due to the liability issue?  How have prices dropped due to the liability insurance savings?  What accounted for the increases the years before?

Yet Net Billings are up.  They were $5,873,900,000 in 1998 and were around $7,935,309,000 in 1999.  But there is a statistical anomoly here. Boeing started delivering their BBJ during the last quarter of 1998.  Taking their figures out of 1998 yields $5,646,400,000 in 1998 and the new 1999 numbers yield $6,894,934,000 for a statistically adjusted increase of 15.08% in billings, and removing Boeing's 29 units, a 12.4% increase in units delivered.  (The billings increase would have been even worse had Boeing been left in.)  It should now be possible for one to doubt that product liability was the reason for the increase or the increase would have continued at the large rate of 1997.

Now we need to eliminate the jets and turboprops.  The economy has fueled a significant rise in jet orders which will eventually lead to an increase in production.  Just increasing aircraft unit production by 1 or 2 units is a very difficult thing involving many new employees and shifts in manpower as all aircraft are basically hand built.  Aviation production numbers will never justify Detroit style automated tooling.  Cessna only built 775 single engine piston aircraft in 1998 and those were over 5 or 6 models so it's impossible to justify automated tooling.  Most of the manufacturers were below 100 units.

The real reason for the initial large increase in unit production was Cessna.  To satisfy their commitment to Senator Kassenbaum for helping to get the Statute of Repose enacted, they promised to start up production of their single-engine aircraft line again.  They have kept their promise but why and at what cost?  Looking at Cessna's single engine production yields:

Year Piston Type Number Total Piston Total All Types Jet Units % Piston increase % Jet Increase
1996   0   229 229    
1997 172 287          
  182 73 360 612 252   10.04%
1998 172 358          
  172s 64          
  182 338          
  T206 3          
  206 12 775 1072 297 215% 17.85%
1999 172 180          
  172s 272          
  182 248          
  T206 120          
  206 79 899 1202 303 16% 1.02% increase
2000 172 150          
  172S 340          
  182 267          
  206 53          
  T206 102 912 1256 344 4.3% 13.5%

So the reason for the doubling in production from 1995 through 1998 was the 775 units produced by Cessna and the steady 10 - 20% increase due to the economy.  But why has the growth of Cessna's single engine aircraft slowed to below the average industry growth?  Cessna's piston production is now down to a 4.3% growth.  In 2000 the industry unit growth was 12.4%.  And why did their jet production drop to just a mere 1.02% increase in 1999 when they had a backlog of orders?

Model Equipped Price Speed Useful Load Price/knot Price/lb
172 $163,500 122 857 $1,340 $190
172s $176,300 124 893 $1,421 $197
182 $240,300 140 1228 $1,716 $195
206 $323,300 143 1400 $2,260 $230
T206 $360,000 165 1308 $2,181 $275

Now let's compare the above to some of Cessna's competition:

New Piper Warrior III $158,500 115 913 $1,378 $173
New Piper Archer III $199,900 128 847 $1,561 $236
Cirrus SR20 $200,200 160 950 $1,251 $210
Lancair Columbia 300 $299,700 190 1190 $1,577 $252

The above are all fixed gear, fairly basic aircraft.  You can see why Cessna will have trouble with it's competition who have new designs and are perceived as state-of-the-art by the flying public (Lancair and Cirrus).  You can also see why Piper (slow designs) doesn't sell many of their aircraft.

Now we shall compare the Meyers 200D to relevant competition.  The following aircraft are all complex (retractable gear) high performance singles with long track records.

Make/Model Equipped Price Speed Useful Load Price/knot Price/lb
Mooney Eagle $354,600 180 1006 $1,970 $352
Mooney Ovation II $413,900 194 1143 $2,133 $362
Mooney Bravo $459,000 195 1100 $2,353 $417
Commander 114B $402,475 156 1158 $2,579 $347
Bonanza A36 $524,000 176 1132 $2,977 $462
New Piper Arrow $256,665 137 967 $1,873 $265
New Piper Saratoga $398,900 162 1212 $2,456 $311
Trinidad TB-20 $347,490 150 1282 $2,316 $271
Meyers 200D $299,000 200 1250 $1,495 $239

The price/performance comparisons are strongly in favor of the 200D.  In fact, the 200D compares very favorably to the simple aircraft in the Cessna competition comparison.

As one can see, Cessna's pricing has put their aircraft into the range of the real performers.  Note that all of Cessna's examples are non-retractable gear (read simple) aircraft while their ratios come close to the complex top-line retractable singles.  Also note the stiff competition they now face from other entry level simple aircraft.  Management believes Cessna's growth will now be in line with the general economic conditions and may even fall off slightly.  It remains to be seen if Cessna will even continue production efforts as they need to divert manpower for their jet production to keep up with un-filled orders.

But industry experts believe that the savings to Cessna under the Statute of Repose is in the ten's of billions of dollars.  So how much does it cost to try to build light aircraft for a while, anyway.

Now let's look at the real market conditions brewing and see who is going to fill the void.  The following article gives an indication of what will be here in 2 - 3 years and the quantity of aircraft that will need to be produced.

The following article appeared in Aviation International News//Online


NASA’s Agate paves a brave new ‘highway in the sky’

by Paul Lowe

NASA’s Langley Research Center is confidently predicting that by about mid-2001, an FAA certifiable system for general aviation aircraft will provide pilots with guidance from a virtual "highway in the sky (HITS)." In fact, NASA wants to have several HITS-equipped aircraft on display at Oshkosh that summer.

As an example of how Agate (Advanced General Aviation Transport Experiments) is progressing, earlier this year NASA selected a seven-member industry team to share equally the cost of developing the HITS concept. The agency wants to have at least one aircraft with the HITS system installed and operating at Oshkosh in 2000, as well displays of actual HITS-equipped instrument panels from all of the other major Agate members and as many retrofit companies as possible.

The HITS team members are Avidyne of Lexington, Mass.; AvroTec of Portland, Ore.; Lancair of Redmond, Ore.; Raytheon Aircraft of Wichita; Rockwell Collins of Cedar Rapids, Iowa; Seagull Technologies of Los Gatos, Calif.; and AlliedSignal of Olathe, Kans. They will contribute approximately $3 million and NASA will add about the same amount.

AvroTec was named as team lead and Avidyne as technical project manager to complete hardware and software development that will include a multi-function display (MFD) of position navigation, terrain map, weather and air traffic information. In addition, digital datalink radios will send and receive flight data, and a solid-state attitude and heading reference system (AHRS) will replace gyroscopes.

The highway in the sky is drawn on what is described as a "highly intuitive," low-cost flat panel display (FPD). According to NASA, the FPD and MFD will provide intuitive situational awareness and enough information for a pilot to perform safely with a reduced workload in nearly all weather conditions.

Hank Jarrett, deputy manager of NASA’s general aviation program office, recalled that at last year’s Oshkosh show, a recent graduate of Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University’s flight school was able to figure out on her own the workings of a prototype HITS–with a PFD and a MFD–installed in a Raytheon Beech Bonanza. The goal is to make the cockpit intuitive to the so-called "latent" market, the "people who probably right now don’t even know they are interested in flying."

Agate as Sales Tool

NASA is using the five-year-old Agate program as a sales tool for the general public, particularly business people such as doctors and lawyers, and, indeed, anybody who has a need for transportation and who is not being served well by the automobile. One of NASA’s objectives is to increase the speed of travel from portal-to-destination by four times the speed of highways, with access to such transportation available to 25 percent of the rural communities within ten years and to 90 percent within 25 years.

Jarrett pointed out that the average speed of the automobile from portal-to-portal has steadily declined since it reached its peak in the 1970s, and the average speed of airliners also is going down steadily. He related that on the last trip he made to NASA Lewis (now Glenn) Research Center in Cleveland from Langley via commercial airlines, the average speed from his home to his hotel in Cleveland worked out to 27.5 mph. "I’ve got a racing bike at home that’s faster than that," Jarrett noted.

While he conceded that his ridiculously low speed was caused in part by engine troubles on two different airplanes and a layover in Pittsburgh, Jarrett argued that NASA is finding that the airlines are consistently delivering a lower average speed from point to point than would general aviation airplanes. Even a current GA airplane that cruises at about 160 kt can achieve higher doorstep-to-destination speeds than airliners that actually cruise at much greater speeds (300 to 600 kt) for hub-spoke routings. When NASA talks about doorstep-to-destination travel at four times the speed of highways, it is referencing GA airplanes powered by new propulsion systems that would travel at about 250 kt.

Normally, airline portal-to-portal average speeds run between 100 and 200 mph. Bruce Holmes, NASA’s general aviation program office manager, has tracked his travel and found that on most trips under about 1,200 nmi, the current crop of GA airplanes beats airline times almost every time. "When you start putting in the General Aviation Propulsion [GAP is a parallel program for development of revolutionary engines] systems, with the higher speeds and the near all-weather capability of a Lancair or Cirrus," Jarrett predicted, "you’re going to beat those times. And when the Williams International [FJX] engine comes on line, you are going to be able to go coast-to-coast faster than the airlines can go."

The Agate alliance, which is a consortium of more than 70 members from industry, universities, FAA and other government agencies, was created in 1994 by NASA to develop "affordable" new technology–as well as industry standards and certification methods–or airframe, cockpit, flight training systems and airspace infrastructure for next-generation, single-pilot, four- to six-seat, near all-weather light airplanes.

Certifiability a Goal

NASA is working closely with FAA to ensure that HITS will be certifiable, and it is promoting the HITS package along with a parallel private pilot/instrument rating training program that is accomplished in half the calendar time, study time and cost than at present. Developed in concert with Embry-Riddle, the Agate pilot training program graduated its first student in the integrated curriculum–which teaches VFR and instrument proficiency simultaneously–in 25 percent less total time and calendar time.

Jarrett emphasized that 50 percent of the training goal was realized with that first student learning in a "normal" Cessna 182 without the Agate technology. "So training alone got us halfway to our goal," he added.

"If you teach the person how to operate the whole system at once," he asserted, "they are not as afraid of it. If you learn to fly instruments from your first lesson, there’s no mystery and there’s no fear involved in it. There is respect for weather conditions, but there is no need to have fear."

Under the HITS contract awarded by NASA, Avidyne will design the HITS software using technology that will replace the current round "steam gauge" mechanical instrumentation with large digital displays. These digital displays will have an "open systems" architecture that will integrate today’s instrumentation but will be upgradable to incorporate future technologies.

AvroTec will develop the high-performance computing and display hardware–building from its FlightMonitor line of MFDs–to meet demands of a highly graphical, intuitive HITS guidance system. AvroTec will also be responsible for system integration.

The competitively bid contract assigns the following responsibilities:

• Avidyne and AvroTec are jointly to define the HITS system architecture, systems requirements and overall system certification efforts.

• Avidyne, as technical project manager for the HITS project, will complete software requirements and complete all software development of the HITS system.

• AvroTec, as team lead, is in charge of hardware development and management of the overall program.

• Raytheon and Lancair are to address aircraft integration and certification issues. Lancair intends to integrate and certify the HITS avionics systems into production aircraft.

• Rockwell Collins, Seagull Technology and AlliedSignal will provide enabling technologies in the areas of HITS display symbology and AHRS, as well as avionics databus components.

Assuming that the "Agate dream" comes true in 2001, said Jarrett, and the airplanes are there, the training is available and the infrastructure is being built–"the beauty of this infrastructure is that we don’t have to lay a lot of concrete to do it"–everybody will be able to fly point-to-point to the 5,000-plus GA-available airports in the country rather than the few hub-and-spoke airports that airlines use.

Jarrett pointed out that a pilot’s multi-function display is going to show all traffic around him, just as if he has his own personal air traffic controller–only it is electronic. Meanwhile, the primary flight display will tell the pilot that it has looked at the 100 airplanes out there, and the only ones he needs to worry about are the ones on closing paths.

"On your PFD, it actually brings them up and highlights them," Jarrett said, "and it tells you, ‘Here’s traffic; this guy is on a crossing path for you, he doesn’t appear to have the slightest idea of your being here, avoid him.’ If he’s an Agate-equipped aircraft also, both of you will be getting a flash and the two computers can even interrogate and decide who goes first and who goes second. This is one of the keys to operating in minimum conditions on an Agate airport."

Obviously, to deliver the four-fold increase in portal-to-portal speed, there has to be transportation available to the departure airport and from the destination airport. And since not everyone will be able to afford to own his or her own aircraft, or even fly enough to justify ownership, NASA envisions other ancillary businesses as part of Agate, HITS and the Agate airport, otherwise known as the Small Aircraft Transportation System (SATS).

NetJets Involved

Undoubtedly, that is one of the reasons NetJets is now actively participating in the Agate undertakings. Although NASA is loath to set a target price for a next-generation aircraft, it envisions a large market for rental airplanes and some type of ground transportation, perhaps arranged while airborne and changed as needed.

A certified rental pilot would put a credit card in a slot in the aircraft, and while doing a walkaround, a laptop computer or CD would load the flight plan into the aircraft, maybe arrange the instrument panel to the pilot’s individual preference, set radio frequencies, obtain clearances, file the flight plan and advise the pilot the aircraft is ready for engine start.

"Everything we do is driven by cost," emphasized Jarrett. "General aviation can’t survive with half-million-dollar GA airplanes. Our price metric is to get the cost of an IFR-equipped, fully capable, 200-mph general aviation aircraft down to the cost of a high-end luxury car." When pressed by Aviation International News, he mentioned a figure of $100,000. "We don’t like using dollar amounts," he admitted, "because somebody will come back ten years from now and say, ‘You said this much and why isn’t it this much? We may not meet that $100,000 minimum, but I think we’re going to."

Again, assuming the GAP program is a full success, he said, and Teledyne Continental comes out with its turbocharged, two-cycle, compression-ignition engine ("We don’t use the term diesel too much in aircraft"), which has half the parts and half the cost of current engines and is running on the test stand, that goal does not seem insurmountable.

In addition, following an RTCA Task Force report on the need for a cheaper, faster, better way to certify avionics, FAA agreed to allow certification to a reliability standard of ten to the minus six (one failure in a million hours) rather than the air transport standard of ten to the minus nine (one failure in a billion hours). "[Cost-wise], the difference between ten to the minus six and ten to the minus nine is huge," noted Jarrett, self-professed maintenance nut who is rebuilding the post-World War II Taylorcraft prototype. "So instead of having to have million-dollar avionics, we end up with thousands-of-dollars avionics and maybe eventually hundreds."

Another cost-saving advance is a materials processes handbook that has been accepted by FAA, which allows builders to treat composite materials for certification purposes as they have been treating aluminum for decades.

And with NASA boldly predicting that by 2007 the GA industry will be cranking out 10,000 aircraft per year, and 20,000 annually within 25 years or less ("I don’t see any reason we can’t reach that"), economies of scale also are expected to come into play.

Jarrett revealed that when Agate was unveiled at Oshkosh in 1994, there wasn’t a single multi-function display for sale in the U.S. Last year at Oshkosh, there were more than 200 different versions. "This stuff is real," he emphasized. "We’ve transitioned in Agate from the era of paper and plans and looking to the future. When we went into the second half of Agate, we started having products. We’ve got two new certified aircraft out of member companies–the first two new aircraft certified in more than a decade-and-a-half–the Cirrus and the Lancair. We have multi-function displays that can be bought and put in–certified–in darn near any aircraft you want to name."

Both Continental and Williams have completed initial runs on their GAP engines and are into endurance testing. "We hope to have at Oshkosh this year a Williams engine and a Teledyne Continental engine that have run," Jarrett said.

Meanwhile, the concept of an Agate airport has been designated a Small Aircraft Transportation System (SATS) airport, with the State of Virginia offering Manassas Regional as the first candidate for installation of the necessary ground infrastructure.

"SATS may in fact be a misnaming," conceded Peter McHugh, FAA technical projects lead for SATS infrastructure. "The ‘A’ implies that any speed increase will come only from the aircraft segment of travel. But it is really a multi-modal system–that is portal-to-destination–and it talks about really exploiting the tremendous new bandwidth capabilities for information dissemination that makes all of this possible."

Although SATS evolves out of Agate, he said, the four-fold increase in speed does not come from the vehicle so much as it does from smart planning and point-to-point routing. "The follow-on program to that effort, which exploits the positive things done by Agate, is SATS," according to McHugh. "We have at least eight states that are committed to bringing money to the table to do local infrastructure planning within the states."

He said that SATS will depend on a highway-in-the-sky sort of approach–random paths through the sky and a display in the aircraft that will be intuitive for the operator and present a highway sort of appearance–so that as long as the pilot remains on the highway, the SATS operation will have accommodated other traffic, terrain and severe weather. "And the highway will actually end at rollout," McHugh explained.

The ground-based components needed for SATS will first be tested at Langley, then installed at other airports, creating a sort of test range. NASA is looking at placing such equipment at its facility at Wallops Island, Va., the FAA Tech Center in Atlantic City, Manassas and perhaps Blacksburg, Va.

The presentation slide below illustrates exactly what NASA expects in terms of various factors that a SATS qualified aircraft should possess:

A Comparison of Value Added Parameters

In the Configuration State of the Art section from the SATS Conference, Dr. Jan Roskam, Professor of Aerospace Engineering, University of Kansas, sets forth the following proposition:

Now let's compare the Meyers 200D using this same type of rationale but substituting payload for cabin volume.  Payload is a better indicator of what can actually be carried as there is no standardized method used by the various manufacturers for determining cabin volume.

Aircraft Speed Payload VAP Price/VAP Ranking Sales/Orders
Bonanza A36 176 1132 199232 $2.63 18 57
Cessna 172 122 857 104554 $1.56 6 180
Cessna 172s 124 893 110732 $1.59 7 272
Cessna 182 140 1228 171920 $1.40 4 248
Cessna 206 143 1400 200200 $1.61 8 79
Cessna T206 165 1308 215820 $1.67 9 120
Cirrus SR20 160 950 152000 $1.32 2 420
Commander 114B 156 1158 180648 $2.23 17 5
Lancair Columbia 300 190 1190 226100 $1.33 3 350
Meyers 200D 200 1250 250000 $1.20 1  
Mooney Bravo 195 1100 214500 $2.14 16 25
Mooney Eagle 180 1006 181080 $1.96 14 41
Mooney Ovation II 194 1143 221742 $1.87 12 28
New Piper Archer III 128 847 108416 $1.84 11 96
New Piper Arrow 137 967 132479 $1.94 13 5
New Piper Saratoga 162 1212 196344 $2.03 15 29
New Piper Warrior III 115 913 104995 $1.51 5 21
Trinidad TB-20 150 1282 192300 $1.81 10 No data

Looking at the Meyers 200D's speed and weight to cost comparisons, one can see that they are clearly better than any other aircraft available today, definitely below the other advanced competition.  Taking both ratios into consideration, the 200D actually falls below the Cessna 172s and 182 in performance for the dollar.  Cessna sold 520 of those two aircraft last year.  

Notice how the sales or orders track the price/VAP numbers almost directly.  There are very few statistical anomalies, the most noteworthy being the Bonanza A36 which is dead last yet shows strong sales.  This is an indication of the recognized fact that Beech (Raytheon) is considered as having the best marketing department in the aviation industry with the strongest dealer network, most owned by the factory.  The other noteworthy anomaly is the New Piper Warrior III which should show more sales but sells poorly.  This may be due to the fact that it is absolutely the slowest aircraft of the bunch.

Let's look at the top few:

Aircraft Ranking Sales/Orders
Meyers 200D 1  
Cirrus SR20 2 420
Lancair Columbia 300 3 350
Cessna 182 4 248
New Piper Warrior III 5 21
Cessna 172 6 180

So clearly, no matter what criteria may be used to purchase an aircraft, the market has someway figured out the best value per dollar and it fits Dr. Roskam's theories as outlined in the above Value Added Parameter (VAP) model as presented to NASA.

The demand for the 200D should be well over 120 aircraft per year and may reach into the hundreds as the new display technology comes into general use.  The above comparisons show that the demand could be several hundred aircraft per year based on value/dollar.

And don't forget to factor in the used market.  Currently, there are a lot of aircraft that change hands in the $250,000 - $300,000 range because there is no suitable new aircraft which offers a good performance to price ratio available.  When a 200 knot new aircraft comes into production for under $300,000 these used buyers will have another alternative.

An interesting assumption may be made at this point.  The price of the Meyers 200D could actually be increased to $330,000 and still be a close #1 to the Cirrus SR20.  While it is not the intention of management to do so, there is room for adjustment if required and still retain the industry leading position.

The Existing Market

The FAA and GAMA predict a 14,300 increase in the single engine piston GA fleet over the next ten years.  To see the GAMA Forecast, Click Here.  This increase does not count the approximately 10% attrition rate as GAMA reports the average age of the single piston fleet is 29 years.  As more singles are produced that rate should diminish but it will probably be around for at least ten years.  Ten percent is about 14,000 aircraft per year so adding them together yields about 28,000 new aircraft need to be produced over ten years, or 2,800 single engine piston aircraft per year.  A 120 aircraft per year production rate equals a 4.28% market penetration for an aircraft that is clearly superior in price and performance among a very limited number of competitors.

The SATS Market

The Meyers 200D fits most all of the SATS criteria for a small aircraft and with the addition of the soon to be certified AGATE Highway in the Sky avionics (to download and run a HITS demo, Click Here) and maybe with the addition of a different (less expensive) powerplant, will fit them all.  In fact, the 200D is the closest aircraft to meeting all of the SATS requirements currently in existence.  For a detailed discussion of the exact SATS criteria and how it applies to the Meyers 200D, Click Here.

According to the above article, NASA projects that there may be a demand for the production of up to 25,000 SATS aircraft annually.  These are small aircraft, not the large biz-jets which have to use the same runways as current commercial airliners, able to take advantage of the 5,000 new SATS airports that are available but currently not being used by the air carriers due to their runway lengths being too short.  The total yearly demand, allowing for attrition, could be over 35,000 units.  If Meyers Aircraft could get a 10% market share (not difficult as there are not many players with SATS quality aircraft) that would equal 3,500 units per year or 292 units per month.  This market share is not unrealistic based on the comparison chart above given the Meyers 200D's #1 ranking.  These production rates are in the very high end luxury car range, but still not even close to being as high as the Mercedes, Lexus, BMW, Lincoln or Cadillac production rates.

If the reader doubts the feasibility of the NASA projected production numbers, one might be advised to consider the statement made at the end of the following slide:

Why would Toyota and possibly Honda even consider getting into the light aircraft production business unless there exists the possibility of large production unit numbers?

And on March 7, 1999, there appeared in AvWeb, an article about some silicone valley giants who are attempting to produce a six-place, twin-jet, aluminum aircraft to SATS criteria with an initial funding of $60M and a projected cost of $300M.  The project is even endorsed by Bill Gates.  To see a copy of the article, Click Here.  Why would these multi-millionaires spend this kind of money if the market wasn't going to exist?

However, even with existing production technology, a run through the DAPCA IV model at these rates would yield a possible cost for the 200D of around $164,000 per aircraft even with today's engines and avionics.  Using AGATE goals for piston engines and avionics and SATS production rates could yield a retail selling price of around $104,000!  This price almost exactly tracks the SATS anticipated price stated in the above article.  The efficiencies of scale are exactly what keeps driving computer prices down and works for every manufactured product.  It could even work for aircraft.  Imagine that.

HOME - SATS and Meyers - Return to Current Initiatives



Paul M. Whetstone, President


Meyers Aircraft Company, Copyright © October 1999. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part of any text, photograph or illustration without written permission from Meyers Aircraft Company is strictly prohibited. Disclaimer: The information presented herein is believed to be accurate and at times expresses the opinions of management. Meyers Aircraft Company assumes no responsibility for its unauthorized use. To report problems or missing links, contact