News from the Factory III

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: News from the Factory III

I don't know why everyone wants to see new taylorcrafts made again. There is not enough market to support production and a half dozen owners over the last 20 years have proven that fact. When we were a dealer in the mid 80's when the factory was in Lock Haven, we tried to tell them to concentrate on just parts and service the market already out there along with doing factory restorations when contracted instead of building airplanes. They did not listen then, and Harry didn't listen when I told him the same thing. Everyone is so mesmorized with building new airplanes, very few realize it will cost millions to build a handful of airplanes for a market that is already saturated. Overhead could be cut by 75% just concentrating on parts and a market that already exists for parts for 2500 aircraft in the field. I don't know if even that would be enough to support a business without diversifying some.

Mike

I think you hit it Mike. We must respond to the matrket, not our hearts. If we could get the legal RIGHT to build them we could make parts in a "distributed" manufacturing system where final inspection could be done at a central location (again, PARTS, not airplanes). Build the parts that are in demand as needed and paid for and don't expect to make any money, just keep us all flying and restore a plane once in a while. Once a full suite of parts is available you could package them up in a LSA kit for a homebuilt that was pretty much exactly the same as production (like the Cub guys have). The kit parts could be less expensiver since they wouldn't need to be "finished" parts and the final welds and detail manufacture would be up to the builder. That broadens your base a little more (and creatres a cadre of people who know how to finish the basic parts). If the market will support it you can then start real manufacturing with a base of parts suppliers and a good customer base to keep you in beans while the company grows.
The fun part would be doing the tooling design so a NEW Taylorcraft with the "little wider" and "little taller" and "better seats" and newer engine" ......
could be designed in while using the same basic tooling. There could be some REALLY nice homebuilt Taylorcrafts flying and that kind of business plan could actually work.
Remember the part at the front of this! You ARE NOT going to make money, at least not in the near future.
Hank

[stormman]

Re: News from the Factory III

When people ask me why i love that Jarrent guy i point out dozens of reasons in the daily discussion thread . But this time he really hit the nail on the head

[dedrekon]

Re: News from the Factory III

City to decide fate of Taylorcraft debt
By Chris Mahon — The Brownsville Herald
April 17, 2007 - 12:26AM
The city of Brownsville is poised to write off more than $120,000 in bad debt owed to the airport at today’s City Commission meeting. The bulk of that money — $111,760 — comes from one account: Taylorcraft Aviation LLC.

If the item passes, Brownsville taxpayers will be the biggest losers, since there will be a cash transfer from the city’s general fund to the airport, to make up for Taylorcraft’s year and a half of rent-free existence.

The move is provoking the ire of some airport board members, who say there was no discussion of the write-off at the last board meeting on April 12.

“Hell yeah (this should have been discussed),” said one board member, who asked to remain anonymous. “None of the financials were discussed at all.

“I do not want to be recognized with saying that I agreed with this write-off. I don’t think it’s the way business should be done here at the airport.”

Airport Director Larry Brown confirmed that the board members did not discuss the write-off. However, Airport Board President Charles Hamilton said that “the board has recommended several times that there be a timely write-off” of uncollectable debt.

Including the amount that may be written off today, uncollected debt at the airport is $258,279. Some of the tenants that owe money are major American companies: Budget Rent A Car owes $4,457 and has been sent three collection notices, while Continental Airlines owes $5,920. The Houston-based airline is on its second collection notice, according to city documents.

Other indebted entities to the city are, ironically, the city. The Department of Public Works owes $2,666 to the airport and has been sent three collection notices.

If the City Commission agrees to the write off, “the cash gets transferred to that (airport) fund.” said Finance Director Pete Gonzalez.

For taxpayers, that will mean approximately $120,000 less in the city’s general fund, which supports general government expenses, police and fire department budgets, infrastructure upgrades and other expenses.

Since this represents .15 percent of the $80 million general fund, Gonzalez didn’t foresee a tangible impact on the city’s operations. Nevertheless, “It would have been nice if we’d collected that amount.”

Taylorcraft was lured to the city by the Brownsville Economic Development Council nearly two years ago with no background check. The company billed itself as an airplane manufacturer, yet had no licenses to make airplanes, according to the Federal Aviation Administration. Additionally, it had no business license to operate in the state of Texas.

[jdoran]

Re: News from the Factory III

What would happen if the City decided the airport was too much trouble, too expensive, and the real estate was too valuable to remain an airport.

Could Harry have hit into a double play?

[SkyHigh]

Re: News from the Factory III

Coolness,


It seems to me that the Taylorcrafts greatest flaw is that it is too darn practical. It fails the coolness factor. A cub is inferior in almost every way however there are several companies currently reproducing them and others who are fighting to make parts. Mr. Taylor built a plane with the future in mind and made something that is easy to dismiss because of its high utility and superior performance. The garden variety cub just has loads of romance that our sensible Taylorcraft lacks. (however; It also is uncomfortable for people over 5'10".) I don't know how to solve this one.

SkyHigh

[VictorBravo]

Re: News from the Factory III

The garden variety cub just has loads of romance that our sensible Taylorcraft lacks. (however; It also is uncomfortable for people over 5'10".) I don't know how to solve this one.

SkyHigh

Counting myself as one, there are three or four good writers on this forum who could come up with a good set of written marketing materials, ad copy and ad concepts that would solve the problem you mention. It would take a little cleverness, some good old fashioned wordsmithing, and definitely some "out of the box" thinking. But it is far less of a challenge than you might think. I offered whatever abilities I have in this area to Harry Ingram in an e-mail some years ago and never got a reply. It appears he hired Jim Bede instead

Whoever is next on deck for owning the Taylorcraft company, you have a standing offer from me to do your copywriting at a very very reasonable cost.

[acbuilder]

Re: News from the Factory III

Lets just say there was a large or reasonable market for a new Taylorcraft production. It would have to be built in accordance with the older type certificate. That means no modifications to the main structure. In fact without utilizing the grandfathered type certificate the Taylorcraft could not be certified in todays FAA climate. Look at Legend Cub or even the Aviat Husky. Both are buit in accoradnce with previously issued type certificates and can not be modified by the manufacture for a wider or taller cabin etc.

The certification of light aircraft today is very complex and very hard to accomplish. You'll notice that there has not been any new type certification for single engine aircraft with retractable gear. Yes, there are newer models of older designs but nothing new. That is the result of a small change in the FAA TC requirement that the airframe be able to absorb a very high g load with crush zones that protect the occupant fron spinal compression in a near verticale drop. The fine print then says part of the energy absorbsion can be the landing gear if it is fixed in place. Without utilizing the fixed sprung gear all energy absorbtion and crush zones would have to be built internal and would result in a very large airframe. This is a simple example.

If you looked at the F-19 it would not meet current certification regs for at least ten different items just pertaining to firewall design. OK on paper it is easy to overcome the new certification requirements. However, you then need to build and test to the FAAs satisfaction all redesigns. Big dollars start going out the window at this point. Along with that the wonderful little Taylaorcraft we all love for its flight quality becomes heavier, costly and most importantly looses its handling qualities as it is "dumbed down" to meet the FAA current certification requirements.

Ok, now the discussion will be that the new FAA allowance for LSA gets us around all of that...not in my opinion...

All of the above would be in Walgreens perfect world. Don't even get me going on product liability.

[SkyHigh]

Re: News from the Factory III

Marketing:


My point is that side by side and yokes are not that attractive. People who are learning how to fly need that configuration but after the license is in the pocket tandem and sticks are far more romantic. It is no fun to be smashed next to someone either. Tandem also offers greater visibility.

Mr. Taylor built an airplane for the market at the time. Yokes and side by side seating were considered to be the future of modern aircraft and of course they are. The problem is that when people today are looking for a fabric taildragger they are looking for the old characteristics that signify the taildragger experience.

When people buy a Harley Davidson it is because it pops, shakes and sputters. They are not looking for a sleek and smooth modern machine. J-3 cubs are currently being built by two different companies with great success. I also believe that the old champ is being produced for the light sport market. Our beloved Taylorcraft doesn't fit int the old world or new. It is uncomfortable and lacks the things that people are looking for in a smaller taildragger. We all know that the Taylorcraft is superior in design and performance to anything else in its category, but if I had to choose between a brand new Taylorcraft and a new Cub it would be a hard decision but most likely I would go home in a yellow plane. I am afraid that most of the public would do the same as well.

The problems with the Taylorcraft can not be fixed with a marketing campaign.

SkyHigh

[M Towsley]

Re: News from the Factory III

Bill,

If you are not careful, you could market the price of our planes even higher, like the over-priced Cub! I've read and enjoyed your writing and I have no doubt you could increase the value of our planes with just the written word!!!
Obviously the Cub had a writer for marketing similar to you early on, hence why everyone thinks our planes, and every other small taildragger, are Cubs. (Especially my all olive drab tandem with engine cylinders sticking out of the cowl, they think it is a Piper L-4. You may experience this too, soon).

ACBuilder (No name given)

Don't hold me to this, but I thought the two 'new' Cub builders did alter width of cabin, etc. when building the 'new' Cubs. At least that was part of our conversation during Oshkosh with Legend folks over lunch. I'd have to research that a little more.

[alwaysoar]

Re: News from the Factory III

There have been a lot of suggestions, such as why don't a bunch of people get together and order a lot of struts and that will make it attractive for someone to build them, etc., but while that makes sense, that idea and all the ideas I've heard lack the one entity to make those things happen: leadership. The TOC and the Forum have people in them at the heart of Taylorcraft issues, but for whatever reason, they do not take the leadership or initiative or whatever else it takes to make struts or cowls or landing gears or any other hard-to-find part. I belong to the TOC and support it, but I can't see what it does except send out a newletter. It used to have a bungee tool for loan, but evidently someone ripped that off. Frankly, I really hope Harry is able to make and sell struts at a reasonable price. He's the only person I'm aware of that has any initiative at all in that direction.

[tim]

Re: News from the Factory III

you know i remember reading an artical about the comander some one put a bigger motor in it finaly but any way the thing with this is that comander aircraft and taylorcraft are like the same they kept comeing and going you know well in the artical it said that 50 people from there comander group paid for the rights and what no JUST SO THEY COULD MAKE PARTS!!!!! ther are planty of people in this group to pay the det and we can make parts

[ClipWing_T]

Re: News from the Factory III

The Legend Cub is NOT a stcok J-3 fuselage. It ia about 4 " wider .
And it is also heavier built than a J-3. They did have to do structural
testing to get it certified under the LSA requirements . The wings too.
All of us pilots from Sulphur Springs was there watching it's develpoment
and cheering them on. They have delivered over 90 airplanes !! The
Taylorcraft will never have the market the Cub type airplanes will.
Too bad Mr.Taylor wasn't 6' 4" . I love Taylorcrafts as much as
anyone but it is never going to be a business success.

[M Towsley]

Re: News from the Factory III

Clip-T (No name given)

I thought it was a different airplane than stock. They were a great bunch of guys to talk to. They have done well and I hope it continues for them.

[stormman]

Re: News from the Factory III

$15,000 a month for RENT? is it just me that's or does that sound like WAY
too much? RAPE comes to mind.
Struts ? Whatever happen to Owner Manufactured Parts ?
The city of Brownsville? DO NOT get me going on that ,as i'm feeling a little like " Imus in the Morning " here today, on that bunch of Yahoo's.
I would give you my 2 cents worth but the IRS has taken it already
The ELSA category is starting to look real good today.

[crispy critter]

Re: News from the Factory III

There have been a lot of suggestions, such as why don't a bunch of people get together and order a lot of struts and that will make it attractive for someone to build them, etc., but while that makes sense, that idea and all the ideas I've heard lack the one entity to make those things happen: leadership. The TOC and the Forum have people in them at the heart of Taylorcraft issues, but for whatever reason, they do not take the leadership or initiative or whatever else it takes to make struts or cowls or landing gears or any other hard-to-find part. I belong to the TOC and support it, but I can't see what it does except send out a newletter. It used to have a bungee tool for loan, but evidently someone ripped that off. Frankly, I really hope Harry is able to make and sell struts at a reasonable price. He's the only person I'm aware of that has any initiative at all in that direction.

Tribe,If we can get the stamps(molds)for cowls,nose bowls,etc. or the jigs for the struts and landing gear,I would personally be interested in making these parts and or any parts we can get the tools,dies,and jigs for. But we have to get the proper tools and we have to find out what it will take to get them. Now,I have stepped forward and offered myself to be a full time partner.....anyone else want to help with getting the tools,jigs,and funding?
If the group can help me finance the special tools needed from Taylorcraft I think I can do the rest. Or if they go for pennies on the dollar then I may be able to fund them myself but I need to know what's going on down there and if they can be bought from taylorcraft or if I can find them elsewhere....can anything be bought from them beside experimental parts which are locked inside the factory doors. Is there someone in Texas who can find out? I would love to make a go at it if I can get the tools to do it with. I don't want to build airplanes....just parts.Maybe later when we get enough parts put back on the self to fullfill the demand and show a profit,then maybe someone could use some of those parts to start assembling an airplane and do it one at a time. No deposits. No million dollar promisses. PARTS first,then airplanes one at a time on a first come,first serve basis.Each aircraft being inspected by the FAA and you don't have to worry about the certification to mass produce. I do have a couple of friends very high up in the FAA and I have talked to them about this. They are willing to help me with approvals on parts but they agree with what I just said.Taylorcraft is not popular enough to try and mass produce. They don't think it has anything to do with the design ,they think is it simply because they have been started and failed so many times that people are just not interested. We need parts so we can keep flying the t-crafts that are already here.....maybe after the parts demand is met, then maybe we can build a few more airplanes,but I am mostly interested in building parts.