Looking for starter plane

[Jimbob]

Hi all.

I'm a current student looking for suggestions on a plane purchase in
the next year. I will be going in on one with a buddy who is also a
student.

We are looking for a fixed gear, tricycle, two door, preferably low
wing. I would like a performance level near a Cherokee 140/150
(160HP). Most of the flying will be within two hours distance (one
way). One of the uses this plane will have is getting us to one of our
customers about 140 miles away. (3.5 hours by car, approx 1:15 by
C-140) If we have this level of speed, I think we can make a business
case for the plane.

I woiuld expect no more than 2 passengers, however, I think we could
survive with a two seater tandem. Our home runway is about 2835 ft
with trees on both ends. I'd like to spend around $40K. (or less)

A Cherokee would be ideal, BUT I am concerned about the single door.
I think this would turn off a lot of potential passengers. A canopy
wouldn't be out of the question, but the Grumman I saw looked a little
underpowered. I am concerned about the Beech cost of ownership.

Am I on a snipe hunt?

Jim

[A Lieberman]

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 05:13:03 GMT, Jimbob wrote:

> I woiuld expect no more than 2 passengers, however, I think we could
> survive with a two seater tandem. Our home runway is about 2835 ft
> with trees on both ends. I'd like to spend around $40K. (or less)

Jim,

I bought a Beech Sundowner for 38K, and overhauled the engine for 13.5K.
Not exactly in your price range, but something to consider. I don't think
there are any other "older" low wings outside a Beech that have two doors.

Sundowner is designed for creature comfort, not speed. I plan 110 knots on
my cross countrys. I have am based in MBO (Madison, MS), and flew as far
as Daytona Beach, and Myrtle Beach with no problems.

The plane outflies my bladder :-), so I don't have to worry about VFR or
IFR fuel reserves.

Allen

[Dude]

"Jimbob" > wrote in message
...
> Hi all.
>
> I'm a current student looking for suggestions on a plane purchase in
> the next year. I will be going in on one with a buddy who is also a
> student.
>
> We are looking for a fixed gear, tricycle, two door, preferably low
> wing. I would like a performance level near a Cherokee 140/150
> (160HP). Most of the flying will be within two hours distance (one
> way). One of the uses this plane will have is getting us to one of our
> customers about 140 miles away. (3.5 hours by car, approx 1:15 by
> C-140) If we have this level of speed, I think we can make a business
> case for the plane.
>
> I woiuld expect no more than 2 passengers, however, I think we could
> survive with a two seater tandem. Our home runway is about 2835 ft
> with trees on both ends. I'd like to spend around $40K. (or less)
>
> A Cherokee would be ideal, BUT I am concerned about the single door.
> I think this would turn off a lot of potential passengers. A canopy
> wouldn't be out of the question, but the Grumman I saw looked a little
> underpowered. I am concerned about the Beech cost of ownership.
>
> Am I on a snipe hunt?
>
> Jim
>
>

Jim,

Forget the price of the plane. Not because you are on a snipe hunt, just
that it isn't all that relevant.

What's more relevant is:

1. How much can you invest up front (for purchase or down payment).
2. How much can you afford to spend to operate the plane per year (direct
hourly + fixed + nasty annual).
3. How many hours per year, and other mssion information such as distance,
IFR capability, pilot capability, passengers, speed, range, load, etc.

This is my new mantra. I have seen too many people squander months and even
years away making a decision. Worse, I recently worked with a friend who
simply bought the wrong plane, and is now seeing the cost of upgrading. He
runs a company and highly values his family time. Buying all over again is
not making him that happy.

I have not worked out yet which order is best to figure out before you start
fudging. Part of the problem is that many folks are not really good at
answering number 3.

Now, unfortunately for my latest theory, you have suggested a plane that is
one of the best values in GA. It is cheap to own, and honest. So, if it
meets your mission, go buy the nicest one you can find. Get a good IFR
panel too, and don't be afraid to step up to a bigger Piper, 172, or Tiger
to get a good IFR panel. If the plane is for business then you will be
needing IFR.

There is a tandem plane called the Varga Kuchina(sp?) that meets your needs,
but parts are not always available so it is not the best for business use.
A Van's could work better for you as well if you want to go Tandem, but that
brings in all the experimental issues.

At any rate, I find that about 50% of people just do not want to fly in
small planes anyway. I wouldn't worry about the door.

[Paul kgyy]

There are a lot of Cherokees flying, and they are honest airplanes for
a reasonable price. There is a superb support group (Cherokee Pilots
Assn) and parts are readily available plus it's not hard to find
mechanics that know how to maintain them.

Do your ownership homework, though - check out insurance cost, cost of
annual (then double it) at your local A&P. Aviation Consumer has
buyers guides. Remember that it's always cheaper to purchase what you
need rather than buy low and upgrade.

[houstondan]

expanding the question a bit...i'm also shopping and have some good
ideas what i want but don't really have the cash to buy AND fly. seems
like one or the other at the moment but:

i seem to see light ga aircraft, just above the sport class, going up
in price at a fairly strong rate.

any guesses on what's really happening with that market???


dan

[Dude]

"houstondan" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> expanding the question a bit...i'm also shopping and have some good
> ideas what i want but don't really have the cash to buy AND fly. seems
> like one or the other at the moment but:
>
> i seem to see light ga aircraft, just above the sport class, going up
> in price at a fairly strong rate.
>
> any guesses on what's really happening with that market???
>
>
> dan


There was a dip over the past couple years due to the economy. Now that the
world did not end, the market is recovering, (or it could just be a small
upside in an overall trend?). The 150's and 152's are still a bit
depressed. If you want one, I can tell you where to find them. I know of
many for sale not advertised (flight schools are mostly switching to 172's
for primary trainers because more and more students are just too big for the
150's). Not bad planes if you are willing to do a little of your own
maintenance and fly them right.

[[email protected]]

On 21-Mar-2005, "Paul kgyy" > wrote:

> There are a lot of Cherokees flying, and they are honest airplanes for
> a reasonable price. There is a superb support group (Cherokee Pilots
> Assn) and parts are readily available plus it's not hard to find
> mechanics that know how to maintain them.


These threads -- new pilots asking for advice on a "first" airplane -- crop
up every once in a while. And every time, a bunch of folks pipe up with
recommendations for Cherokee 140s. There Is a reason for this. The C-140
is a very capable airplane that can be purchased and maintained at
relatively low cost, with good parts availability. They are easy and fun to
fly, and work very well for IFR training and touring. Not as roomy as a
Cessna 172, but just about as fast and with considerably longer range
(particularly when IFR with just 2 aboard). In fact, it's a very good
touring airplane for 2 people, but will carry 4 in a pinch. Yes, the single
door is a drawback, but that can be said of 33- and 35- series Bonanzas (and
even Cessna 310s) as well. In practice, it seems to be not that much of an
issue.

I owned a 1968 C-140 for a number of years and flew it on trips both long
and short, VFR and IFR, with very few problems. Just a solid, honest
airplane that gives good value.

--
-Elliott Drucker

[Blanche]

>On 21-Mar-2005, "Paul kgyy" > wrote:
>
>> There are a lot of Cherokees flying, and they are honest airplanes for
>> a reasonable price. There is a superb support group (Cherokee Pilots
>> Assn) and parts are readily available plus it's not hard to find
>> mechanics that know how to maintain them.

I've got a '69 180. Whenever anyone asks about it, I describe it as
a flying Buick.

Everyone knows how to fix it.
Parts are reasily available.
Good IFR platform.
Good VFR and IFR learning aircraft
Unless you do something *really* stupid, you'll live thru almost
landing (intended or otherwise)
It's not a sportscar, not really spiffy
Most of the one-time ADs have already been taken care of.

Sounds just like a Buick.

On the other hand, to a non-pilot, owning *any* airplane is impressive!

[Jimbob]

Thanks for the input all.

I think after weighing all the factors, the Cherokee line is the most
logical choice. I think it fits all my requirements for range, speed,
wing location and economy. The only thing is the door. And that's
really only cosmetic and conveinence. Thus, it should be bottom of my
list.


Jim



On 22 Mar 2005 04:48:05 GMT, Blanche > wrote:

>>On 21-Mar-2005, "Paul kgyy" > wrote:
>>
>>> There are a lot of Cherokees flying, and they are honest airplanes for
>>> a reasonable price. There is a superb support group (Cherokee Pilots
>>> Assn) and parts are readily available plus it's not hard to find
>>> mechanics that know how to maintain them.
>
>I've got a '69 180. Whenever anyone asks about it, I describe it as
>a flying Buick.
>
>Everyone knows how to fix it.
>Parts are reasily available.
>Good IFR platform.
>Good VFR and IFR learning aircraft
>Unless you do something *really* stupid, you'll live thru almost
>landing (intended or otherwise)
>It's not a sportscar, not really spiffy
>Most of the one-time ADs have already been taken care of.
>
>Sounds just like a Buick.
>
>On the other hand, to a non-pilot, owning *any* airplane is impressive!

[[email protected]]

Jimbob > wrote:
: Thanks for the input all.

: I think after weighing all the factors, the Cherokee line is the most
: logical choice. I think it fits all my requirements for range, speed,
: wing location and economy. The only thing is the door. And that's
: really only cosmetic and conveinence. Thus, it should be bottom of my
: list.

I'll pipe(r) in and support the Cherokee Buick argument. It's not sexy, but
it gets the job done for about the minimum of cost possible on a ceritifed plane. The
-140's can handle 2 people with 50 gal (5-6 hours!), or three fairly well with your
2-hour range. Everyone knows them and can work on them. They're not stellar
climbers, but 2800' should be comfortable with a reasonable 2-person load.

The single door is a slight drawback, but it's not really that bad. If you
don't like the idea of climbing in first, you could just let the other guy sit in the
left seat and you fly right. If you really want 2-doors, other ones you may want to
consider would be the Piper Tomahawak (understand their scare tactics and AD's), and
the Grumman line (Yankee 2-place, Cheetah 4-place).

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[Blanche]

In article >,
Jimbob > wrote:
>Thanks for the input all.
>
>I think after weighing all the factors, the Cherokee line is the most
>logical choice. I think it fits all my requirements for range, speed,
>wing location and economy. The only thing is the door. And that's
>really only cosmetic and conveinence. Thus, it should be bottom of my
>list.

Jim:

My cherokee has one installed door and a second emergency door. You
should see what a 3 D cell steel flashlight does to the pilot's
window....Instant Door! Plus you have the advantage of a great
emergency landing light.

The other advantage of the low-wing (and please, let's not get into
the religious discussion again...) is that you can see the runway
at all times in the pattern. But remember that someone in a high-wing
may be below you, so you'll both be invisible to each other.

[Brian Sponcil]

I've owned a 140 and a 151 and loved them both.

That said I must say that the door was my single biggest complaint. Not only
was it a hassle to pile 3-4 people in and out but the years of passengers
grabbing the door as they pull themselves out and set themselves in leaves
most of them ill-fitting at best and quite drafty in the winter. My wife
constantly (only in the winter mind you - she reads this stuff) complained
about the cold air coming through the door so I'd have to turn the heat to
shoe melting temperatures to combat it.

FWIW, if I were to get back into the market for a starter plane I'd have to
give the 172 a serious look. All of the positives that can be said for the
cherokees (easy to maintain, cheap to insure, every mechanic has worked on
them, yada yada yada) can also be said for the skyhawk. Performance is
roughly the same and you get a 2nd door, albeit likely for a higher cost.

Just my $.02

-Brian
Iowa City, IA

"Jimbob" > wrote in message
...
> Thanks for the input all.
>
> I think after weighing all the factors, the Cherokee line is the most
> logical choice. I think it fits all my requirements for range, speed,
> wing location and economy. The only thing is the door. And that's
> really only cosmetic and conveinence. Thus, it should be bottom of my
> list.

[Ben Hallert]

Great thread, I'm in the same mode right now and I'd like to run
another option past y'all.

I've been training in a PA-28-161 and I'm taking my checkride next
week. At the same time, I'm moving to a town that has no Pipers for
rent (Cessna only). I like the low wing planes, and I really want to
buy my own for my upcoming IFR training.

I can scrounge together around $20-25K out of pocket and I hate to
finance things. Since I'm an extremely low-time pilot, I don't want to
go flying with my family until I've got more practice. I've put this
together, made some cost of ownership calculations, and here's what I'm
thinking of:

Piper Tomahawk w/ IFR stack. I've seen nice looking, low time aircraft
listed in places for the 20-25 range. Here's what I get:

1. Full ownership, no financing.
2. IFR capable in the indicated pricerange.
3. Enough usable space to carry me and an instructor (I'm 250, leaving
about 160 to for a fully fueled plane).
4. Low wing
5. Low cost of ownership.

I'd love to buy a Cherokee 140, but they seem to be consistently about
10K higher. If I save up until I can afford one flat out, then that's
a bunch of time where I'm not flying. It seems that it might be a
better bet for me to get something that'll fulfill all of my needs for
the next 100 or so hours (I can always rent a Cessna for the occasional
flight I need more seats if I really decide I want to) while I build
some time and become a better pilot/get instrument rated. Finally,
I've read up a lot about the spin troubles, so my eyes are open.

Does this sound like a well reasoned approach? Am I missing anything
big? I know some of you might suggest 'go ahead and finance the
difference', but that's something I REALLY don't want to do. I'm
confident that I could get my money back out of the PA-38 when I'm
ready to upgrade to a Cherokee, and this seems like the difference
between flying and dreaming.

I want to go into this with my eyes open. Comments?

[Dave Butler]

Ben Hallert wrote:

> I can scrounge together around $20-25K out of pocket and I hate to
> finance things. Since I'm an extremely low-time pilot, I don't want to
> go flying with my family until I've got more practice. I've put this
> together, made some cost of ownership calculations, and here's what I'm
> thinking of:
>
> Piper Tomahawk w/ IFR stack. I've seen nice looking, low time aircraft
> listed in places for the 20-25 range. Here's what I get:
>
> 1. Full ownership, no financing.
> 2. IFR capable in the indicated pricerange.
> 3. Enough usable space to carry me and an instructor (I'm 250, leaving
> about 160 to for a fully fueled plane).
> 4. Low wing
> 5. Low cost of ownership.

If $20-25K is what you have available, that's not enough to buy a plane with a
$20-25K purchase price. Take a look through the various threads here about
buying a first plane. There's one thing everyone here agrees on, and that is
that you don't want to blow your whole wad on the purchase. The cost of
operating and maintaining an airplane is widely variable and unpredictable. You
need to be ready for a multi-thousand dollar surpsise at any time. Doesn't
matter how good your pre-buy inspection was.

Nevertheless, I hope you go ahead and do it, join the rest of us in self-induced
poverty. :-)

Dave

[Dude]

"Ben Hallert" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Great thread, I'm in the same mode right now and I'd like to run
> another option past y'all.
>
> I've been training in a PA-28-161 and I'm taking my checkride next
> week. At the same time, I'm moving to a town that has no Pipers for
> rent (Cessna only). I like the low wing planes, and I really want to
> buy my own for my upcoming IFR training.
>
> I can scrounge together around $20-25K out of pocket and I hate to
> finance things. Since I'm an extremely low-time pilot, I don't want to
> go flying with my family until I've got more practice. I've put this
> together, made some cost of ownership calculations, and here's what I'm
> thinking of:
>
> Piper Tomahawk w/ IFR stack. I've seen nice looking, low time aircraft
> listed in places for the 20-25 range. Here's what I get:
>
> 1. Full ownership, no financing.
> 2. IFR capable in the indicated pricerange.
> 3. Enough usable space to carry me and an instructor (I'm 250, leaving
> about 160 to for a fully fueled plane).
> 4. Low wing
> 5. Low cost of ownership.
>
> I'd love to buy a Cherokee 140, but they seem to be consistently about
> 10K higher. If I save up until I can afford one flat out, then that's
> a bunch of time where I'm not flying. It seems that it might be a
> better bet for me to get something that'll fulfill all of my needs for
> the next 100 or so hours (I can always rent a Cessna for the occasional
> flight I need more seats if I really decide I want to) while I build
> some time and become a better pilot/get instrument rated. Finally,
> I've read up a lot about the spin troubles, so my eyes are open.
>
> Does this sound like a well reasoned approach? Am I missing anything
> big? I know some of you might suggest 'go ahead and finance the
> difference', but that's something I REALLY don't want to do. I'm
> confident that I could get my money back out of the PA-38 when I'm
> ready to upgrade to a Cherokee, and this seems like the difference
> between flying and dreaming.
>
> I want to go into this with my eyes open. Comments?

Ben,

I am with you on the finance thing, but I got over it. Here's why.

Most things that people pay interest on, they shouldn't. That's because
they would often save money and make a wiser choice by buying cash. If you
can't afford the luxury of a new car, then buying a used one is likely a
better choice. They are pretty much disposable items in the end. As far as
furniture and other items go, you are likely upside down in them as soon as
you start making payments - and the rates are usually stupid.

Houses are different, the cost of buying and selling is just too much.
Buying a house with over 20% down that you can afford to pay for is usually
a wise decision so long as you buy right, and expect to live there for 5
plus years. Often, renting and saving will not get you there, and in the
meantime, the house you wanted has likely appreciated. I have made money on
every home I have owned. I don't mean I sold it for more than I paid, I mean
that the check at closing was more than my down payment and ALL my payments
combined (this is not usual, but we have had a good run).

Now, for airplanes. You can buy an older plane and usually get back most of
the money you spend to buy it. What you are out is anything you put into it
to to bring it up to standard, fuel, maintenance, engine time, insurance,
and INTEREST. Yes, you can avoid INTEREST. But, planes are like houses more
than like cars or other items.

Better to have INTEREST on a plane that is the right plane for you, than all
the other payments with a lesser plane.

If you do the math, you will see that your costs look more like UPGRADES,
MAINTENANCE, FUEL, PRINCIPAL, and interest (note the small letters).

You need a cash reserve or risk grounding due to finance which means that
the bills get higher as the plane rots. Buying and selling low end planes
is fun for some people, but most would rather buy more plane now, and avoid
the transaction risks, costs and hassles.

Bottom line, unless you can find a plane thats just like you want it and pay
cash (and still have a few thousand in reserve), you are better off
borrowing money to finance it. It will give you a much better value in the
end.










>

[Vaughn]

"Dude" > wrote in message
...
>
> Most things that people pay interest on, they shouldn't. That's because they
> would often save money and make a wiser choice by buying cash. If you can't
> afford the luxury of a new car, then buying a used one is likely a better
> choice.

I did that most of my life, and that is why I can now afford the luxury of
a new one every now and then. l compromize by using a healthy down payment and
maximum 36-month financing.

>They are pretty much disposable items in the end. As far as furniture and
>other items go, you are likely upside down in them as soon as you start making
>payments - and the rates are usually stupid.

I agree.
>
> Houses are different, the cost of buying and selling is just too much. Buying
> a house with over 20% down that you can afford to pay for is usually a wise
> decision so long as you buy right, and expect to live there for 5 plus years.
> Often, renting and saving will not get you there, and in the meantime, the
> house you wanted has likely appreciated.

Bingo! In my county, the average home went up 36% last year. In that type
of market ther is no way to "save" yourself into a house. You just have to
somehow get up a down payment and then jump on that elevator.

> Now, for airplanes. You can buy an older plane and usually get back most of
> the money you spend to buy it. What you are out is anything you put into it
> to to bring it up to standard, fuel, maintenance, engine time, insurance, and
> INTEREST. Yes, you can avoid INTEREST. But, planes are like houses more than
> like cars or other items.

Save money; rent.


Vaughn

[Dude]

>
> Save money; rent.
>
>
> Vaughn

Ya, I heard the old saw the other day:

If it flies, floats, or f(ornicates) its cheaper to rent.

Normally, I laugh and agree, but this time I couldn't think that there was
something wrong with that advice. Then it came to me. In all three cases,
what the guy who rented it last did to it may kill you!

Is it worth the savings?

[911]

"Dude" > wrote in message
...
> >
>> Save money; rent.
>>
>>
>> Vaughn
>
> Ya, I heard the old saw the other day:
>
> If it flies, floats, or f(ornicates) its cheaper to rent.
>
> Normally, I laugh and agree, but this time I couldn't think that there was
> something wrong with that advice. Then it came to me. In all three
> cases, what the guy who rented it last did to it may kill you!
>
> Is it worth the savings?
>

No that's the truth!!! Well stated!!!!

[Vaughn]

"Dude" > wrote in message
...
> >
>> Save money; rent.
>>
>>
>> Vaughn
>
> Ya, I heard the old saw the other day:
>
> If it flies, floats, or f(ornicates) its cheaper to rent.
>
> Normally, I laugh and agree, but this time I couldn't think that there was
> something wrong with that advice. Then it came to me. In all three cases,
> what the guy who rented it last did to it may kill you!

Of course, that is also true (albeit to a lesser extent) when you buy any
used aircraft. Even a good prebuy can't catch everything that has been done to
the plane over the last several decades. Also, nasty things have been known to
happen to parked, unwatched, airplanes; though a good preflight will catch most
of them.

>
> Is it worth the savings?

So far

Vaughn


>
>

[Dude]

>>
>> Is it worth the savings?
>
> So far
>
> Vaughn
>


LOL! Enjoy it while it lasts :)

[Ben Hallert]

Thanks for the replies!

An update:

It turns out that I can actually scrounge up about 30-35K. Before this
conversation, I might have automatically upgraded my sights to a
Cherokee, but the decision bears some thought.

Having extra cash in hand to cover unanticipated costs in the
beginning/whenever sounds like a good idea.

I understand the financing logic, and I use the same advice on the
properties I own (if I saved up until I could buy them outright, I'd
never buy them, and it'd be a bad investment of capital that could be
doing other things, etc), but I still have a hard time applying the
same model to airplanes. Sure, I'd love to have a Piper Cherokee four
seater with an IFR stack, in panel GPS, seat warmers, etc.... but I
_really_ hate debt load for 'doodads' (I'm sure some people in the
group will pick up on where I'm coming from based on that).

I've spent the last few years getting rid of soft debt (credit cards,
car payments, etc) and replacing them with capital debt (like my house,
investment properties, etc) and the number of actual payments I make
per month is down to the basics. It's not just the interest that gets
me, it's also the safety factor. I've been folding everything around
the concept of being self-sustaining in case I lose my job/medical
problems/economic downturn etc. Right now, if I stopped working for
the company I work for, I could still cover my bills and downshift to
an economy mode using my passive income. It wouldn't be great, but I'd
survive. I don't necessarilly think that WILL happen, but I'm working
real hard to avoid having monthly expenses that would push me into the
red in that contingency, and the payments on a nice plane fall into
that category. If I can buy a plane outright, I don't leave my little
financial safety zone.

I know, it sounds crazy. In another time, I might be the guy who
builds a big bomb shelter in the back yard, but for now.... I wanna
fly without having a 'car payment'.

I'm going to go pick up a copy of 'Buying and owning your own airplane'
(http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0813801761/qid=1111771395/sr=8-3/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/102-7233400-0649760?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)
and do some worksheets.

[Dude]

Sounds like you have it all well though out. Hope your deal works out
great, and you have a lot of safe flying fun!





"Ben Hallert" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Thanks for the replies!
>
> An update:
>
> It turns out that I can actually scrounge up about 30-35K. Before this
> conversation, I might have automatically upgraded my sights to a
> Cherokee, but the decision bears some thought.
>
> Having extra cash in hand to cover unanticipated costs in the
> beginning/whenever sounds like a good idea.
>
> I understand the financing logic, and I use the same advice on the
> properties I own (if I saved up until I could buy them outright, I'd
> never buy them, and it'd be a bad investment of capital that could be
> doing other things, etc), but I still have a hard time applying the
> same model to airplanes. Sure, I'd love to have a Piper Cherokee four
> seater with an IFR stack, in panel GPS, seat warmers, etc.... but I
> _really_ hate debt load for 'doodads' (I'm sure some people in the
> group will pick up on where I'm coming from based on that).
>
> I've spent the last few years getting rid of soft debt (credit cards,
> car payments, etc) and replacing them with capital debt (like my house,
> investment properties, etc) and the number of actual payments I make
> per month is down to the basics. It's not just the interest that gets
> me, it's also the safety factor. I've been folding everything around
> the concept of being self-sustaining in case I lose my job/medical
> problems/economic downturn etc. Right now, if I stopped working for
> the company I work for, I could still cover my bills and downshift to
> an economy mode using my passive income. It wouldn't be great, but I'd
> survive. I don't necessarilly think that WILL happen, but I'm working
> real hard to avoid having monthly expenses that would push me into the
> red in that contingency, and the payments on a nice plane fall into
> that category. If I can buy a plane outright, I don't leave my little
> financial safety zone.
>
> I know, it sounds crazy. In another time, I might be the guy who
> builds a big bomb shelter in the back yard, but for now.... I wanna
> fly without having a 'car payment'.
>
> I'm going to go pick up a copy of 'Buying and owning your own airplane'
> (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0813801761/qid=1111771395/sr=8-3/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i1_xgl14/102-7233400-0649760?v=glance&s=books&n=507846)
> and do some worksheets.
>

[[email protected]]

Brian Sponcil > wrote:
: them, yada yada yada) can also be said for the skyhawk. Performance is
: roughly the same and you get a 2nd door, albeit likely for a higher cost.

True... at the time I was looking (about 3 years ago), it was an $8-10K
premium for a comparable 172 vs. -140's.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[TripFarmer]

Get in a partnership.


In article <1111699141.693875@sj-nntpcache-3>, says...
>
>Ben Hallert wrote:
>
>> I can scrounge together around $20-25K out of pocket and I hate to
>> finance things. Since I'm an extremely low-time pilot, I don't want to
>> go flying with my family until I've got more practice. I've put this
>> together, made some cost of ownership calculations, and here's what I'm
>> thinking of:
>>
>> Piper Tomahawk w/ IFR stack. I've seen nice looking, low time aircraft
>> listed in places for the 20-25 range. Here's what I get:
>>
>> 1. Full ownership, no financing.
>> 2. IFR capable in the indicated pricerange.
>> 3. Enough usable space to carry me and an instructor (I'm 250, leaving
>> about 160 to for a fully fueled plane).
>> 4. Low wing
>> 5. Low cost of ownership.
>
>If $20-25K is what you have available, that's not enough to buy a plane with a
>$20-25K purchase price. Take a look through the various threads here about
>buying a first plane. There's one thing everyone here agrees on, and that is
>that you don't want to blow your whole wad on the purchase. The cost of
>operating and maintaining an airplane is widely variable and unpredictable. You
>need to be ready for a multi-thousand dollar surpsise at any time. Doesn't
>matter how good your pre-buy inspection was.
>
>Nevertheless, I hope you go ahead and do it, join the rest of us in self-induced
>
>poverty. :-)
>
>Dave

[Ben Hallert]

I would love to get into a partnership, in fact, thanks for the
reminder! I'm moving to Eugene/Springfield, OR, and while there aren't
that many flyers here, I've read that I might luck out if I post some
notes down at the local fields.

Heck, I just want my own plane, but I'd be dumb to forget about
partnerships.

Thanks!

[[email protected]]

Ben Hallert > wrote:
: rent (Cessna only). I like the low wing planes, and I really want to
: buy my own for my upcoming IFR training.

: Piper Tomahawk w/ IFR stack. I've seen nice looking, low time aircraft
: listed in places for the 20-25 range. Here's what I get:

: 1. Full ownership, no financing.
: 2. IFR capable in the indicated pricerange.
: 3. Enough usable space to carry me and an instructor (I'm 250, leaving
: about 160 to for a fully fueled plane).
: 4. Low wing
: 5. Low cost of ownership.

I would just like to add that this sounds like a fairly reasonable plan,
especially since you've got a little more to burn than the 20-25 you initially stated.
I think it's worth saying that there's a completely different set of rules that apply
to a plane purchased for obtaining and IFR rating, vs. one that's used for IFR travel.
The former can be effectively done with a ratted out Cessna 150 or a PA-38 with an
AI/DG and one VOR/ILS. In many ways it's better to train it something like that
because it's slower so you can learn easier, and minimal equipment really makes you
work hard and become proficient on minimal equipment. About 80% of the airwork of the
rating is minimizing brainpower keeping the shiny side up while you juggle and add
other tasks.... all perfectly doable in a minimally-equipped trainer. If you're just
finishing your PPSEL, you'll want to do lots of VFR flying as well, so it'll get lots
of use just learning the ropes there.

The latter probably shouldn't be comfortably done without a little more
equipment redundancy, high-level of maintainance, and a bigger engine up front.
You're most likely talking a few hundred hours before you'll be ready for that,
anyway. By that time, a Cherokee is a minimal "step-up," and you may be looking more
for an Arrow-class plane to go places.

Anyway, I wouldn't get too involved in getting a cherry IFR Traumahawk for
training. You don't need that much until you really want to *use* it... then you'll
want to have some more options if things go down the crapper. My opinion, of
course... but consider that just the database updates for an IFR-certified GPS are
nominally $600-$1200/year (depending on the model). That's about as much as the
*insurance* on my bird.... for training you don't *need* that.

-Cory
--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[[email protected]]

Picking a nit here... but a "C-140" is common vernacular for a Cessna
140. A high-wing, two-seater taildragger from days of yore when
aviation was still magical and electric starters were just barely
beginning to be viewed as not for sissies anymore. Referring to a
Cherokee 140 as a C-140 is horribly incorrect.

Having said that, a Cherokee 140 is indeed a fine first airplane for a
new pilot. They do tend to be more affordable to purchase and maintain
than a C-172, and if you only consider the two front seats, a Cherokee
140 actually has more room than the Cessna 172. Its front seat area is
wider and you have noticeably better shoulder room between the pilot
and co-pilot seats. The back seats are a different story. A C-172 back
seat is rather uncomfortably cramped and can hold an adult but a
Cherokee 140's back seat just simply sucks, usually an adult has to sit
sideways to keep his knees out of his chest. I've flown hundreds of
hours in both, but if I'm solo or only have one pax, then I'd rather
fly the Cherokee any day. The single door of a Cherokee has never been
a "turn-off" for any of my passengers yet. The Cherokee usually is a
tiny bit faster than a C-172 of same horsepower, and when solo and full
of fuel, the Cherokee has much greater range. The only time I'd rather
be in the C-172 would be if I have a real engine-out and am forced to
land in a tight space. The Skyhawk can land much slower and shorter
than a Cherokee can.

[[email protected]]

wrote:
: Picking a nit here... but a "C-140" is common vernacular for a Cessna
: 140. A high-wing, two-seater taildragger from days of yore when
: aviation was still magical and electric starters were just barely
: beginning to be viewed as not for sissies anymore. Referring to a
: Cherokee 140 as a C-140 is horribly incorrect.

I agree... I had to reread a number of posts to figure out what they were
saying. A C-140 is a 2-place, tailwheel Cessna. A -140 when one's already talking
about Cherokees might be OK, otherwise, it's a PA28-140.

: be in the C-172 would be if I have a real engine-out and am forced to
: land in a tight space. The Skyhawk can land much slower and shorter
: than a Cherokee can.

Legendary Hershey-bar, "brick" glide ratio. It sure does stall nicely,
though... :) It also seems to load very nonlinearly. Basically, it seems to fly the
same as you load it up until a point, and then won't climb anymore.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

[Jon Kraus]

I don't know what GPS you're talking about but the database updates for
our Garmin 430 are only around 300 bucks per year..

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
'79 Mooney 201

< snip>
> course... but consider that just the database updates for an IFR-certified GPS are
> nominally $600-$1200/year (depending on the model). That's about as much as the
> *insurance* on my bird.... for training you don't *need* that.