Cessna 152

[Jay]

I'm taking my PPL and trying to locate a
decent/depedable 152 to purchase rather than
keep renting.Also how many hours on the
TTAF time is too many before problems arise.
It seems most flight schools are selling
around 9k-10k hours?
Any 152 sellers out there?
Thanks Jay
Nashville TN


*** Sent via http://www.automationtools.com ***
Add a newsgroup interface to your website today.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Jay wrote:
>
> I'm taking my PPL and trying to locate a decent/depedable 152 to purchase
> rather than keep renting.

Try Vicky of Vermont. She's high, but has a good rep. Also get "plugged in" to
the community at your local airport. The best deals don't get advertised much
(if at all). Hang around the airport and listen to hangar tales a bit. Let
people know you're looking. I would probably be flying a Bonanza now if I had
done that when I got my PPC.

> Also how many hours on the TTAF time is too many before problems arise.

You can keep one of these planes going about forever, but you will find that
other people will be reluctant to buy a plane with more than about 6,000 hours
on it. That means that it may take you a while to sell it when the time comes.
Keep an eye on the ads for these high-time school planes you're looking at and
see how long it takes them to get rid of it. Sooner or later, you'll be in the
same boat.

> It seems most flight schools are selling around 9k-10k hours?

I would avoid one being sold by a flight school unless it has a mid-time engine
and has required little engine work during the last run. Schools usually keep
a spare engine so they can do a fast engine swap when they hit TBO. If they
decide to sell the plane at TBO and have a lemon engine, that's the one that'll
wind up in your plane.

You can expect to put a few thousand into a school plane for cosmetic stuff,
and the avionics will probably be functional antiques, but the prices are
usually discounted accordingly.

George Patterson
If you're not part of the solution, you can make a lot of money prolonging
the problem.

[Doug]

1. Join AOPA and learn about their escrow purchase agreement and title
services for airplane purchasers. Aircraft do not have titles, they
have "bill of sale" that records legal ownership trail.

2. Subscribe to Trade a Plane. Ads are online also www.tradeaplane.com

3. Find a potential aircraft, the closer the better in TAP or
elsewhere.

4. Call the owner, get the information on the plane, if the price
seems right (there is a appraiser in TAP online that gives asking
price in TAP, usually the actual price will be a little lower), call a
mechanic at the airport where the plane is and tell him you will need
him to do a compression test and spend an hour looking at the
logbooks. Don't get into a "prebuy", just two hours to look the plane
and books over.

5. Fly (rent) or drive to the airport, meet the owner, make sure he IS
the owner, (get a xerox of his drivers license), and look at the
registration of the plane. Check all the paint, seats, interior,
lights, radios and appearance of the plane.

6. Go for a flight with the owner or an instructor and see if the
gyros, radios, and everything else works. Check to see the plane flies
straight, and flies well, and everything works (or if it doesn't note
it). Call ATC and see if the transponder is working (get flight
following). Most radios or gyros either work, or they don't work. Note
anything that doesn't work.

7. If all is OK so far, take the plane to the mechanic, have him do a
compresson test and cut open the oil filter and look at the logbooks.
If it fails to have goood compression in ALL cylinders, then you have
an engine rebuild to look at. Unless you want a project, skip this
plane and keep looking. Any damage history not properly repaired would
probably disqualify the plane. Old planes aren't perfect, and if you
want perfect, you will have to pay for it. Yes there are pristine
airplanes out there, but not 30 year old pristine ones. But the plane
should be airworthy with an engine making good compressions, no
misrepaired damage, and you should know if anything doesn't work.

8. If all is ok, call AOPA and do a title search on the plane. Find
out if there are any liens (loan related) on the plane.

9. If you insist on a prebuy or an annual, this is probably the place
to do it.

10. If all is still ok, negotiate an agreed on price, fill out the
purchase agreement making sure you address dates of delivery, method
of delivery, and everything else you can think of. Send the deposit to
AOPA escrow services, NOT to the owner.

11. Call AOPA and Avemco and other insurance companies and get
insurance quote.

12. Take delivery of the plane, instruct AOPA to wire the deposit to
the owner, wire the balance to the owner, call your insurance agent
and activate your insurance.

13. If you are not checked out in this type of aircraft, or even if
you are, your best insurance is to get a qualified instructor to fly
with you. Make sure you are legally qualified and competent in the
plane before you solo. Don't let the excitement of a new plane get in
the way of safe, competent pilot technique. The first few hours in
your new plane are high risk. Take some precautions to keep things
safe. Get some instruction, even if it's only an hour or two.

14. Fly the plane and enjoy!

[dave]

Don't buy a 150!!!
Get something a little larger, faster and carries more people.
The 150 is only a trainer and doesn't have much functionality.
Just my $0.02 worth.

Dave

Doug wrote:
> 1. Join AOPA and learn about their escrow purchase agreement and title
> services for airplane purchasers. Aircraft do not have titles, they
> have "bill of sale" that records legal ownership trail.
>
> 2. Subscribe to Trade a Plane. Ads are online also www.tradeaplane.com
>
> 3. Find a potential aircraft, the closer the better in TAP or
> elsewhere.
>
> 4. Call the owner, get the information on the plane, if the price
> seems right (there is a appraiser in TAP online that gives asking
> price in TAP, usually the actual price will be a little lower), call a
> mechanic at the airport where the plane is and tell him you will need
> him to do a compression test and spend an hour looking at the
> logbooks. Don't get into a "prebuy", just two hours to look the plane
> and books over.
>
> 5. Fly (rent) or drive to the airport, meet the owner, make sure he IS
> the owner, (get a xerox of his drivers license), and look at the
> registration of the plane. Check all the paint, seats, interior,
> lights, radios and appearance of the plane.
>
> 6. Go for a flight with the owner or an instructor and see if the
> gyros, radios, and everything else works. Check to see the plane flies
> straight, and flies well, and everything works (or if it doesn't note
> it). Call ATC and see if the transponder is working (get flight
> following). Most radios or gyros either work, or they don't work. Note
> anything that doesn't work.
>
> 7. If all is OK so far, take the plane to the mechanic, have him do a
> compresson test and cut open the oil filter and look at the logbooks.
> If it fails to have goood compression in ALL cylinders, then you have
> an engine rebuild to look at. Unless you want a project, skip this
> plane and keep looking. Any damage history not properly repaired would
> probably disqualify the plane. Old planes aren't perfect, and if you
> want perfect, you will have to pay for it. Yes there are pristine
> airplanes out there, but not 30 year old pristine ones. But the plane
> should be airworthy with an engine making good compressions, no
> misrepaired damage, and you should know if anything doesn't work.
>
> 8. If all is ok, call AOPA and do a title search on the plane. Find
> out if there are any liens (loan related) on the plane.
>
> 9. If you insist on a prebuy or an annual, this is probably the place
> to do it.
>
> 10. If all is still ok, negotiate an agreed on price, fill out the
> purchase agreement making sure you address dates of delivery, method
> of delivery, and everything else you can think of. Send the deposit to
> AOPA escrow services, NOT to the owner.
>
> 11. Call AOPA and Avemco and other insurance companies and get
> insurance quote.
>
> 12. Take delivery of the plane, instruct AOPA to wire the deposit to
> the owner, wire the balance to the owner, call your insurance agent
> and activate your insurance.
>
> 13. If you are not checked out in this type of aircraft, or even if
> you are, your best insurance is to get a qualified instructor to fly
> with you. Make sure you are legally qualified and competent in the
> plane before you solo. Don't let the excitement of a new plane get in
> the way of safe, competent pilot technique. The first few hours in
> your new plane are high risk. Take some precautions to keep things
> safe. Get some instruction, even if it's only an hour or two.
>
> 14. Fly the plane and enjoy!

[[email protected]]

Jay > wrote:
: I'm taking my PPL and trying to locate a
: decent/depedable 152 to purchase rather than
: keep renting.

I understand the desire to buy a plane for instruction. I didn't
do that, and ended up spending a fair bit more money on my license than I
needed. A Cessna-152 or 150 makes a great trainer and is probably what
you are used to flying, but you should consider what you plan on using it
for when you finish your license. If you're like me, you think you'll be
happy with something to bop around the pattern.... which gets boring
surprisingly quickly. I was (fortunately) swayed into buying a Cherokee
instead. It's just as cheap to maintain (fixed gear/prop, common
engine/airframe), negligibly more expensive to operate (you don't have to
fly at 75%, you know), and can be had for slightly more than a Cessna 152.
If you can do cargas, a Cessna-150 or Cherokee-140 runs great on it
for cheap. When you're done with your license, you can pack two people in
it with baggage and fuel, or three with less and go somewhere.

The Cessnas seem to carry a bit more market value for a roughly
equivalent airplane. They all fly the same, however.

Hope that helps a bit... just what worked out for me and a few of
my pilot buddies.

-Cory
--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

[Eric Ulmer]

Jay > wrote in message >...
> I'm taking my PPL and trying to locate a
> decent/depedable 152 to purchase rather than
> keep renting.Also how many hours on the
> TTAF time is too many before problems arise.
> It seems most flight schools are selling
> around 9k-10k hours?
> Any 152 sellers out there?
> Thanks Jay
> Nashville TN
>
>
> *** Sent via http://www.automationtools.com ***
> Add a newsgroup interface to your website today.

What's your bracketed expense range you can afford to pay, Jay?

A Cessna 150 or 152 is really of limited value other than for weekend
jaunts and local flights/training. If you have any fattys or bigguns
in your family, you'll be disappointed in its performance in the
summertime and likely be flying close to gross all the time. If the
airplane is really just for yourself and the ocassional passenger, the
C152 is a good deal.

It's a horrible one if you want to carry any non-pilot types more than
100 miles.

If you can find a C175 with a solid airframe, there are some
attractive options which allow you to basically get a C182 equiv
performance for a C172 price...

I'd Examine the 220 Franklin and the 180 Lyc conversions, in that
order.

C175s are horribly undervalued in todays marketplace, and I'd hunt for
one with a runout engine and crappy paint.
(You always need a hot paintjob to go with a hot engine)

Check out some examples:
http://www.geocities.com/greatpunkin170b/
http://www.eaa1000.av.org/progsumm/feb96/franklin.htm
http://franklinengines.com/cessna.cfm
http://www.hangar9aeroworks.com/108TweedieF-220.html
http://www.taildraggers.com/PersonalWebPage.aspx?jeff
http://www.taildraggers.com/old/airplanes/Cessna170/jmfr220.html
http://franklinengines.com/

I was researching this for awhile, but came across a Bonanza for a
steal so I never chased this dream. I kinda wish I would have though
because the Bonanza is a blood sucking slug living inside my wallet.

[[email protected]]

Eric Ulmer > wrote:
: If you can find a C175 with a solid airframe, there are some
: attractive options which allow you to basically get a C182 equiv
: performance for a C172 price...

: I'd Examine the 220 Franklin and the 180 Lyc conversions, in that
: order.

: C175s are horribly undervalued in todays marketplace, and I'd hunt for
: one with a runout engine and crappy paint.
: (You always need a hot paintjob to go with a hot engine)

True... I looked into C-175's before. The GO-300 is too weird for
words (read: expensive and cantankerous). An O-360 conversion would make
for a really great plane. Trouble is if they've been converted, they're
priced much higher, and if they haven't it's quite expensive to upgrade.
If you can find one, however, they *are* undervalued for the amount of
airplane you get

-Cory

--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

[Ed Haywood]

We all go through the "dang, I want to buy an airplane" phase while getting
our PPL. But buying a C152 is like marrying the first girl you kiss. It
seems like a good idea at the time.

Get your PPL and try a few other models of aircraft. Figure out what kind
of flying you like to do before you buy. If you buy a 152, odds are you'll
outgrow it quickly.

Also, don't make the assumption that you save money by owning. As a rule of
thumb, you must fly about 200 hours a year to make owning more cost
effective than renting.


> I'm taking my PPL and trying to locate a
> decent/depedable 152 to purchase rather than
> keep renting.

[[email protected]]

: Also, don't make the assumption that you save money by owning. As a rule of
: thumb, you must fly about 200 hours a year to make owning more cost
: effective than renting.

That seems a bit high to me. Trouble with "rules of thumb" is
that nothing in aviation makes any sense. If you're the kind of guy who
doesn't like to or have time to work on it, then annuals can be very
expensive. If you find a good mechanic who'll work with you, it doesn't
have to be that much. Biggest trouble is finding a mechanic that knows
what he's doing, and isn't a, "Let's replace that and see if it fixes the
problem."

These are probably reasonable numbers for the biggest things,
(assuming you can buy it outright. If you have you finance, add that in
too):

Insurance: $1200 for student pilot in C-152
Annual: $500-$3000 for the first year or two... depends on how much is
broken, and how much work you do yourself.
Tiedown: $30-$75/mo ($360-$900)/yr. Depends on where you are. Hangars
can be more
Fuel: 6 gal/hr ... $8-20 gal/hr depending on 100LL or cargas, etc.

Those add to between $2000-$5000/yr, depending on how you go, and
how lucky you are on parts, etc. Divided by 100 hrs/yr (still quite a bit
of flying), that's $20-$50/hr indirect costs. Add the $8-$20 for fuel,
and on the low end it's cheaper than renting, and on the high end it's the
same. At least around here you can rent a 152 for $65/hr.

Obviously, for a 152, the indirect costs are disproportionately
more expensive than the direct operating costs. Yet another reason for a
bit more plane. Step up to a Cherokee 140, and the only thing that goes
up is the initial price by $5-10k, and fuel from 6 gal/hr to 6-9 gal/hr
(depending on how you're flying it).

Hope that helps
-Cory

--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

[Ed Haywood]

> wrote in message
...
> : Also, don't make the assumption that you save money by owning. As a
rule of
> : thumb, you must fly about 200 hours a year to make owning more cost
> : effective than renting.
>
> That seems a bit high to me. Trouble with "rules of thumb" is
> that nothing in aviation makes any sense.

Well, I would agree with you that rules of thumb are not always correct.

Granted, the C152 is easier to operate cheaply than most airplanes. You
make a good point: by helping with annuals, running mogas, and keeping it
tied down instead of hangared, you can get the breakeven cost of ownership
down. Self-insuring the hull would help too.

But ... you're basing all your cost estimates on "best case". You don't
consider the opportunity cost of money, and you don't run a rebuild fund.
Also, don't discount the possibility of major maintenance problems or minor
accidents.

That's the thing about ownership. There is the hidden cost of "risk". If
an expensive problem happens, there's nobody to absorb the cost but you.

Don't get me wrong. Owning is great on many levels. But if saving $$ is
your only criteria, think twice and look at the worst case as well as the
best case. Run some spreadsheets and vary the estimates to see what it does
to your hourly cost. That 200 hour rule of thumb was made up by guys with a
lot more experience than me.

If it flies, floats, or flirts, rent it.

[Steve Robertson]

Plane ownership is the way to go. It's ready to go when you are. It's calling
you to go flying. You know the thing is in proper repair. However, you will
NEVER be able to financially justify buying over renting. Don't even try.

Here's a little unsolicited advice from somebody who has owned planes for the
last 20 years (C-150, Cherokee 140, C-model Bonanza, another C-150,
Musketeer)... When it comes to fixed gear, fixed prop metal airplanes,
maintenance will cost you about the same whether it's 2-seat or 4-seat.
Insurance and gasoline will be more on the 4-seat, but repairs will be the same
as a 2-seat. So you might want to consider widening your search a bit when
looking for a plane. Also, if you like C-152, consider that you will likely get
more plane for the money with a C-150 or a Piper Tomahawk.

Having said that, don't let anybody tell you that you won't like owning a C-152.
If that's what you want, then go for it! Yes, you may get tired of it in a few
years. So what if you do? You will be able to sell it for probably more than you
bought it (as long as it's well-maintained.) Then you can buy whatever else
stikes your fancy.

Best regards,

Steve Robertson
N4732J 1967 Beechcraft A23-24 Musketeer Super III

Ed Haywood wrote:

> > wrote in message
> ...
> > : Also, don't make the assumption that you save money by owning. As a
> rule of
> > : thumb, you must fly about 200 hours a year to make owning more cost
> > : effective than renting.
> >
> > That seems a bit high to me. Trouble with "rules of thumb" is
> > that nothing in aviation makes any sense.
>
> Well, I would agree with you that rules of thumb are not always correct.
>
> Granted, the C152 is easier to operate cheaply than most airplanes. You
> make a good point: by helping with annuals, running mogas, and keeping it
> tied down instead of hangared, you can get the breakeven cost of ownership
> down. Self-insuring the hull would help too.
>
> But ... you're basing all your cost estimates on "best case". You don't
> consider the opportunity cost of money, and you don't run a rebuild fund.
> Also, don't discount the possibility of major maintenance problems or minor
> accidents.
>
> That's the thing about ownership. There is the hidden cost of "risk". If
> an expensive problem happens, there's nobody to absorb the cost but you.
>
> Don't get me wrong. Owning is great on many levels. But if saving $$ is
> your only criteria, think twice and look at the worst case as well as the
> best case. Run some spreadsheets and vary the estimates to see what it does
> to your hourly cost. That 200 hour rule of thumb was made up by guys with a
> lot more experience than me.
>
> If it flies, floats, or flirts, rent it.

[[email protected]]

Ed Haywood > wrote:
: But ... you're basing all your cost estimates on "best case". You don't
: consider the opportunity cost of money, and you don't run a rebuild fund.
: Also, don't discount the possibility of major maintenance problems or minor
: accidents.

That's what I was trying to get at with the wide variations of
things like annuals, etc. If you do a good prebuy, there shouldn't be
that much that's *really* expensive on a 152. Even a new jug or top
overhaul is less than $2k if you do the work. I did intend to put in an
engine overhaul fund, but forgot. If you buy a runout, you can sell a
runout, though. Also many shades of grey on an "overhaul" and what it
costs.

: That's the thing about ownership. There is the hidden cost of "risk". If
: an expensive problem happens, there's nobody to absorb the cost but you.

Very true. Along with the risk goes risk and financial
management, though. There are *huge* shades of grey on what's considered
airworthy. If you want to run your plane really cheaply, you can do so...
just have to shop around for a mechanic and/or get your hands dirty.
Things really only get out of control when you either do something stupid
(so the insurance should cover it), or have a mechanic that is too anal
(so find another mechanic).


-Cory
--
************************************************** ***********************
* The prime directive of Linux: *
* - learn what you don't know, *
* - teach what you do. *
* (Just my 20 USm$) *
************************************************** ***********************

[PaulaJay1]

In article >, "Ed Haywood"
> writes:

>if it flies, floats, or flirts, rent it.
>

Seeing the problem with this advice came from my mother many years ago. "Don't
pick that up, you don't know where it's been."

It's hard to beat the mind set that goes with knowing who landed the plane last
time, and that no one has flown it in the last two weeks that I coundn't get
out. I think that the breakeven number of hours is more like 75 or 100 when
this intangable is taken into account.

Chuck

[Ron Natalie]

"Ed Haywood" > wrote in message m...
>
> If it flies, floats, or flirts, rent it.
>
Margy's line is that if it has tires or testicles, it's going to be trouble.

[Ed Haywood]

>
> It's hard to beat the mind set that goes with knowing who landed the plane
last
> time, and that no one has flown it in the last two weeks that I coundn't
get
> out. I think that the breakeven number of hours is more like 75 or 100
when
> this intangable is taken into account.

Couldn't agree more. That's why I recently bought into a Decathlon
partnership with another guy. Didn't like wondering if the renter before me
had pulled 8G's. And I wanted the plane to be mine whenever I needed it,
not when the FBO could squeeze me in.

But before I did so, I did a hard cost effectiveness analysis with no
consideration for "intangibles". That way I went into it with my eyes open,
without any delusions of "saving money by owning."

Besides, everyone's intangibles are different, and the value we put on them
is subjective. To you, the most important thing may be comfort with the
maintenance history of your bird. To someone else, the most important thing
may be low hassle convenience, the ability to just hop in and fly it. A
third guy might get his jollies from only flying aircraft that he built
himself. We're all different, so there's no sense trying to build that into
a cost comparison method. Better to do the math, then decide whether the
cost is worth it to you.

[Russell Kent]

Ron Natalie wrote:

> Margy's line is that if it has tires or testicles, it's going to be trouble.

Which begs the question: does she really have enough exerience with either group to be able to make so broad
a generalization? :-)

Russell Kent

[Ron Natalie]

"Russell Kent" > wrote in message ...
> Ron Natalie wrote:
>
> > Margy's line is that if it has tires or testicles, it's going to be trouble.
>
> Which begs the question: does she really have enough exerience with either group to be able to make so broad
> a generalization? :-)
>
Well, she's had a whole slew of cars, a motorscooter, two husbands and one airplane.

[Russell Kent]

Ron Natalie wrote:

> "Russell Kent" > wrote in message ...
> > Ron Natalie wrote:
> >
> > > Margy's line is that if it has tires or testicles, it's going to be trouble.
> >
> > Which begs the question: does she really have enough exerience with either group to be able to make so broad
> > a generalization? :-)
> >
> Well, she's had a whole slew of cars, a motorscooter, two husbands and one airplane.

Two seems a rather skimpy sample, but then I suppose you wouldn't really want her to renew the sampling... :-)

Russell Kent

[Margy Natalie]

He could buy me another airplane :-)

Russell Kent wrote:

> Ron Natalie wrote:
>
> > "Russell Kent" > wrote in message ...
> > > Ron Natalie wrote:
> > >
> > > > Margy's line is that if it has tires or testicles, it's going to be trouble.
> > >
> > > Which begs the question: does she really have enough exerience with either group to be able to make so broad
> > > a generalization? :-)
> > >
> > Well, she's had a whole slew of cars, a motorscooter, two husbands and one airplane.
>
> Two seems a rather skimpy sample, but then I suppose you wouldn't really want her to renew the sampling... :-)
>
> Russell Kent

[G.R. Patterson III]

Russell Kent wrote:
>
> Two seems a rather skimpy sample, but then I suppose you wouldn't really want her to renew the sampling... :-)

Well, that's two *husbands*. That doesn't count the guys she thought weren't
worth keeping.

George Patterson
If you're not part of the solution, you can make a lot of money prolonging
the problem.

[Tom S.]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Russell Kent wrote:
> >
> > Two seems a rather skimpy sample, but then I suppose you wouldn't really
want her to renew the sampling... :-)
>
> Well, that's two *husbands*. That doesn't count the guys she thought
weren't
> worth keeping.
>
> George Patterson

George, you are definitely the "master of the analogy" :~)

[Ron Natalie]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message ...
>
>
> Russell Kent wrote:
> >
> > Two seems a rather skimpy sample, but then I suppose you wouldn't really want her to renew the sampling... :-)
>
> Well, that's two *husbands*. That doesn't count the guys she thought weren't
> worth keeping.
>
Some are more trouble than others.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Ron Natalie wrote:
>
> Some are more trouble than others.

Yeah, but you're the keeper as far as she's concerned.

George Patterson
If you're not part of the solution, you can make a lot of money prolonging
the problem.

[Montblack]

("G.R. Patterson III" wrote)
> Yeah, but you're the keeper as far as she's concerned.


Yeah, until she decides to trade up again ..... <g>

(That should keep our boy Ron on his best behavior for a little while
longer)

--
Montblack