Yeah I second the motion on the experimental market. I'm afraid it's a bust in its present condition though. I love the IDEA of the kind of change the experimental market can bring to General aviation, particularly when it comes to pushing new technologies and the potential for cost-savings and therefore expansion of access. However, the reality of it is that once you hit boots on the ground it leaves you just as priced out as if you just went through the certified route. It's not very motivating. 90K RV-7s? Seriously? Get out of town calling high five-fig price tags "affordable". That's just disconnected.
I'm going through my first annual on a C-150 I own and let me tell you, it just knocks the wind from my sails. I about dodged a bullet with this one; high time engine and leaking oil, it was a miracle I didn't need a cylinder or two replaced on the spot, so far only a complete set of spark plug wiring (which cost as much as a cylinder, GO FIGURE!) since it has flown with the original set since 1975...and that's what I can afford to chuck through the sky at 90 KTAS.....Jesus. At any rate, my point with this is that I love the A&P I'm working with, since I'm learning a lot from the guy, but every other word from his mouth was: "Faa certified" this, "you can't put that in the airplane" that, "you better have that STC paperwork bought if you wanna put mogas on it" this, "you can't tinker with your own airplane" that. So much as sneezing on the thing requires some fashion of a 337, logbook entry and the associated labor cost and middleman fee, at inflated "certified" parts cost that differ in no fashion from automotive parts. What he never picked up from my quiet absorption of his experience was the fact that such pontificating would more likely lead me to set the cotton-pickin' aluminum rat trap on fire and call it a day than continue to bleed money on a 40 year old wright flyer that I can't even legally customize to fit my flying needs.... And he would have one less differential source of income. How's that working out for ya? And I'm a young mil pilot and CFII, I'm the guy you want to stick around to push forth aviation to the younger generation, not the rich oil/natural gas tycoon with the G1000 equipped half a million dollar C-206 that's worth the performance of a 40K airplane, because he simply figures as long as he can afford it the hell with the rest of the country. Every time I land our jet at airshows for static display it just disheartens me to see that the bulk of the aviation sponsorship in there simply has no connection with the sea of kids that go up to the airplanes and want to learn more and possibly get into the business, either recreationally or professionally. And it all starts with this legal hassle and over-pricing associated with GA.
I tell myself 100 times a day my next aircraft (if there is one) will be an experimental, for all the parts cost-saving potential and legal freedoms it poses when juxtaposed to the certified route. But then I get hit with the $60-$100K 2-seater RVs and every other frankenstein cockpit arrangements and setups, indicative of a population more interested and enamored with simply building than actually flying the thing. Going down the price list to actually affordable options, you get no better performance and instrument standarization than my C-150, which puts me no better off. So that's a false economy right there. Capital cost is the biggest expenditure in owning, so whatever mx cost differential I'm able to insulate myself from by being able to legally put an autozone alternator in the thing gets washed out by the six figure price of entry. WTH?!
As to LSA, that's obviously a cornered market. You're NEVER going to get "affordable" through that route. Ever since the FAA implemented that little gem of a category I knew, from a CFII perspective (<-- I don't do that on a full time basis, I actually need to get paid in money, not touch and go's), that it wasn't going to be the affordable solution to the masses, as they touted it. Simply put, it allowed the market to tap into the high dollar coffers these about-to-lose-my-medical demographic were sitting on and would otherwise leave untapped. The guy who couldn't legally continue to bleed money into a "certified" mooney or bonanza can now continue do so on a glorified kite. Great job, FAA and AOPA..... And that's it. As such, you get 120K Skycatchers and way way overpriced RV-12s et al which cruise at the speed of smell, burning away holes in the sky never farther than 200nm from home in a day. Heck, I rather get a cheap boat (bowriders can be had for less than my rat trap high time-you-never-know-when-they-are-gonna-find-jimmy-hoffa-inside-my-engine-peeling-paint C-150) and get a sun tan while catching some eye candy, if I'm gonna cruise at boat speeds for my troubles. LSA is essentially a premium for staying in the air when you can't get a medical. That was not how they were advertising it for but that's exactly what it materialized into. It is NOT a conduit for lowering flying costs and pushing Lyco and TCM out of the business of keeping 50 year old spec engines dictating the landscape of recreational and instructional flying in the 21st century.
What do I consider affordable? 2 seater RV6/7 performance on 40K and RV-10 4 seater performance for 80K. Is that ever gonna happen? I don't think so. But flying kites for 100K is going to seal the fate of general aviation in this country once fuel prices prices out the marginal customers (you know the kind that have enough money to legally keep the thing ramp-check legal, but can't afford to crank the engine once). That or outright skirting the law and hope you never get ramp-checked. But what does that say about our claim of "freedom of aviation" when he smirk at Europe's GA? Disingenuous is what I call it.