To Glass or Not To Glass...

Being a happy DA40 owner myself, I wholeheartedly recommend the all-glass
Diamond Star. It's faster than the 182, very forgiving, and it provides
unsurpassed visibility. And don't forget -- plastic is the future of GA,
don't bother yourself with tin cans if you can afford a composite airplane.

-- City Dweller


wrote in message
...
I'm starting the process of shopping for an airplane.
I'm thinking of buying one in 2 to 3 months.

I want a cross country plane that can carry 2 people
and baggage/camping gear, and sometimes 4 people with light baggage.

As a computer geek I'm very enamoured with the new glass cockpits,
and I'm in the process of getting checkout in a new G1000 182.

I'm currently thinking about a 1 or 2 year old G1000 182 or G1000 DA40.

Any comments from people that have lived with the new glass for awhile?
I've been doing a lot of resarch on the web and keep seeing comments
about reliability, software glitches etc....
See:http://www.da40g1000.com/

For the price of flying new Glass, one could buy an older airframe, add
new engine, prop, avionics, interior and paint and have $100K left over.

I'm also fighting the twin/single dilema, I'm not sure I fly enough
(50 to 100hrs a year) to be really current in a twin, but
One of my standard flights is to go up the coast from San Diego
CRQ-AVX-SBA avoiding LA class B and traffic.

This is 100 miles over water and doing this in a single allways makes me
feel queasy.

As a result I've also thought about getting a older barron, or 310 and
putting in new engines, props and avionics, still probably cheaper than a
new "Glass" bird. The only downside is that sightseeing low and slow
along the
coast is not as much fun at 150K as it is at 75K
I'm only a little conflicted on requirements, If I had infinite $ I'd own
two
planes.... a breezy and a light jet ;-


Any thoughts from the peanut gallery....

Paul

wrote:

I want to be able to go out to the airport on a whim.
I'm tired of flying tired old minimally maintained planes.
I want to be able to stay for an extra day without out having schedule problems.
For proficiency sake I want to fly the same plane, not "whats availible today"

This sounds familiar. Same issues we all have to deal with when
renting, huh?


The coastal flight you mentioned by San Diego shouldn't be an issue in
a single assuming you're at the appropriate altitude to reach land in a
power-off glide.
Take a look at the map, AVX is an island well off the coast.
You will spend more than 1/2 the flight beyond gliding distance.

I'm in Connecticut and don't have any Left Coast maps : )

Another poster mentioned the OurPlane fractional ownership deal.
Another similar shared ownership company is AirShares. IIRC they only
fly Cirrus SR-22s. That might be the best compromise for you.

wrote:


Any thoughts from the peanut gallery....

Paul


Are you married to the concept of Factory Built/Certified airframes only?

There is a whole nother world (Experimental Amatuer Built) out there
with panels that can rival the new glass. An RV-10 might be right up
your alley, and you can even get someone to "help" you build it. Or buy
one thats flying. A Velocity might meet your mission too. Lancair 4/P..

The kit has been on the market a little over a year, and I saw TWO that
were complete, flying, nice panels, with For Sale signs on them, and
their appearance was certainly not "amatuer built".

One that has been flying for a while (several hundred hours) carries
much more weight/status with me than one that is "almost complete but
not yet flown".

Dave

Robert M. Gary schrieb:

I'm not aware of twins that are being offered with G1000 systems.

http://www.diamondair.com/aircraft/d...ate/index.html

Stefan wrote:
Robert M. Gary schrieb:

I'm not aware of twins that are being offered with G1000 systems.

http://www.diamondair.com/aircraft/d...ate/index.html

Include the G58 Baron on that list. Only if you have $1.2 million to
spend...

"City Dweller" wrote:

Being a happy DA40 owner myself, I wholeheartedly recommend the all-glass
Diamond Star. It's faster than the 182, very forgiving, and it provides
unsurpassed visibility.

Nice airplane but not much of a traveling machine.

Back when I was having new airplane delusions I considered the DA40, but the
range and payload were too poor to make it a player.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

Why not think about fractional ownership.. You'll get all the tech
stuff without the upfront costs. Check out OURPLANE they have a range
of choices (182, cirrus etc etc..)

Just a thought but I know I would lean that way if I was thinking of
flying a new bird...

Good luck


I've looked very seriously at a new OurPlane SR22.
In talking to others I've come to the conclusion that 8 people sharing one plane is about 4 too many.

There is a brand new SR22 comming to CRQ any day now.
The only nearby OurPlane is a SR22 at MYF, when I asked the representative
if I could look at the schedule for the MYF SR22 he got very evasive and said things like "that
particular SR22 is used more than any other in the fleet", "its very busy", "its not represenative"
etc.. etc..
I've also talked to several pilots that were OurPlane or Airshares users in other areas
and only about 50% said they would do it again, and the biggest complaint was scheduling.



Paul

Are you married to the concept of Factory Built/Certified airframes only?

There is a whole nother world (Experimental Amatuer Built) out there
with panels that can rival the new glass. An RV-10 might be right up
your alley, and you can even get someone to "help" you build it. Or buy
one thats flying. A Velocity might meet your mission too. Lancair 4/P..

The kit has been on the market a little over a year, and I saw TWO that
were complete, flying, nice panels, with For Sale signs on them, and
their appearance was certainly not "amatuer built".

One that has been flying for a while (several hundred hours) carries
much more weight/status with me than one that is "almost complete but
not yet flown".


I have seriously considered the RV10 and maybe the Lancair ES.
The Lancair 4P is cool... but the safety record of the Lancair 4P is somewhat poor....
The airplane is probably too hot for the pilots, my self included.
It was damm hard to type that ;-)

I have my A/P (not my IA) so an experimental means I could do my own annuals.
I don't have the time for an RV10 project and I'm a bit wary about bying
one already built. I'm also a bit leary of the uncertified avionics being put
in a lot of experimentals.

Any advice or experience from the group in this area?

Paul

But doesn't it tie you up to your home base? With a rental you have the
option to do some flying far from home without having to ferry your
aircraft all the way there and back. It would be more of a concern for
a smaller single, of course.

Andrey

Robert M. Gary wrote:
Only in terms of price. In every other way owning is better.

-Robert


Kingfish wrote:
wrote:
Mr Peanut weighing in he

At 50-100 hours/year you'd be better off renting.

"Andrey Serbinenko" wrote in message
...
But doesn't it tie you up to your home base? With a rental you have the
option to do some flying far from home without having to ferry your
aircraft all the way there and back. It would be more of a concern for
a smaller single, of course.

How does owning an airplane remove that option?