Would ~ 500 planes depress the U.S. used aircraft market?

IF this happened as described... (implemented fully), it would be a
buyers market.. and there would be a small niche for qualified ferry
pilots running the "plane pipeline"

Dave

Peter wrote:
As posted here already, the UK government is proposing evicting its
foreign registered GA aircraft:

http://tinyurl.com/ar229

Most of these are N-reg, and many would end up on the U.S. market,
within a short time of each other. To retain worldwide IFR privileges
the pilots would have to do the European IR and my view is that most
would not find the time to work through the ground school. They would
thus lose their European IFR privileges and many would sell up.

If this action does succeed, other European countries are likely to
follow in a wholesale eviction of mainly US-registered aircraft.

I just wonder what would happen to the used aircraft market, if it saw
the arrival of that many aeroplanes; a mixture of piston singles and
twins, turboprops and some jets. Most would not be old Pipers and
Cessnas.

In rec.aviation.owning Peter wrote:
As posted here already, the UK government is proposing evicting its
foreign registered GA aircraft:

http://tinyurl.com/ar229

Most of these are N-reg, and many would end up on the U.S. market,
within a short time of each other. To retain worldwide IFR privileges
the pilots would have to do the European IR and my view is that most
would not find the time to work through the ground school. They would
thus lose their European IFR privileges and many would sell up.

If this action does succeed, other European countries are likely to
follow in a wholesale eviction of mainly US-registered aircraft.

I just wonder what would happen to the used aircraft market, if it saw
the arrival of that many aeroplanes; a mixture of piston singles and
twins, turboprops and some jets. Most would not be old Pipers and
Cessnas.

There are 2262 piston single engine aircraft listed for sale on
controller.com alone right now.

Throw in all the other listings, discard the duplicates, and that's a
lot of airplanes for sale.

Unless the majority had some commonality, e.g. a lot of 182s over a
narrow year range, I doubt it would make much difference and then
only over that range.

But then again, I could be wrong, and as I'm airplane shopping I wouldn't
be adverse to prices falling for a while.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote)
[snip]
But then again, I could be wrong, and as I'm airplane shopping I wouldn't
be adverse to prices falling for a while.


Sorry if I missed the thread, but what kind of plane are you hunting for?

What are some of your parameters:
(...If you don't mind)

Costs?
Seats?
Speed / Fuel sipping
High wing / Low wing
Cool factor...?
Single? - Twin?
Turbine :-)

Where are you going to be flying your new plane?

Thanks.


Montblack

In rec.aviation.owning Montblack wrote:
wrote)
[snip]
But then again, I could be wrong, and as I'm airplane shopping I wouldn't
be adverse to prices falling for a while.


Sorry if I missed the thread, but what kind of plane are you hunting for?

Understandable since this is actually my first public mention of it.

What are some of your parameters:
(...If you don't mind)

Costs?
Seats?
Speed / Fuel sipping
High wing / Low wing
Cool factor...?
Single? - Twin?
Turbine :-)

Where are you going to be flying your new plane?

Thanks.


Montblack

OK, here goes:

I'd rather spend money on flying than insurance, maintenance, and recurrent
training and I'd rather sit home in front of the fireplace with an
adult beverage when the weather is nasty, so a simple, fixed gear, single
engine. I'm waffling about a constant speed prop.

I'd like to keep it under $100k and will probably keep it for decades
unless I win the Lotto or lose my medical.

99% of my flying will be two people and small baggage on trips within
about 200 nm, so a 2 place airplane would be suitable.

I don't have the time to build a homebuilt.

On the rare occasion I would have more than two people, I can rent a 182.

Unfortunately, I'm not a FAA standard person, so 152s are out.

I don't have any preference on high versus low wing, but I do find the
Piper single door a pain in the butt.

The location would be the Southwest to places where the density altitude
can easily get to 8000+ feet, so horsepower is a concideration.

Older airframes don't bother me much but old avionics does.

Possible candidates a

172, marginal in horsepower
182, sucks a lot of gas for the application and is constant speed
Tiger
Sundowner, a bit on the slow side, but comfy
177, can be high maintenance from what I've read and constant speed
Archer, Piper single door
172 PennYan 180 conversion, not a lot around
Symphony 160, most of the used ones I've found are at TBO

The planes highest on my list are the Symphony and the 172N or later
followed by the Archer.

One plus to the Symphoney is it eliminates all the "friends" coming out
of the woodwork with 200 lb of baggage looking for a ride to Vegas.

A high time, but not quite all the way to TBO 172 that I could drop the
PennYan conversion into during the winter nasties is a thought.

But, if I hit the Lotto, it will be 2 SkyMasters; one to fly and one
to keep in the shop.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mooney M20C. You can get a good one for around $50-$60K. Burns less gas
than a 182 to go faster. An M20C will have a useful load around 1000lbs
(but remember you don't need to carry as much gas as a 182).

-Robert

wrote:
I'd rather spend money on flying than insurance, maintenance, and recurrent
training and I'd rather sit home in front of the fireplace with an
adult beverage when the weather is nasty, so a simple, fixed gear, single
engine. I'm waffling about a constant speed prop.


I totally agree. I just got into a Grumman AA5B Tiger with a partner.
I found it to be in a nice "sweet spot" for it's ability to haul real
people and baggage at a decent speed yet still be a non-complex
non-high-performance fixed-pitch fixed-gear airplane.

Oops. So much for that thread.

-R

("Robert M. Gary" wrote)
Mooney M20C. You can get a good one for around $50-$60K. Burns less gas
than a 182 to go faster. An M20C will have a useful load around 1000lbs
(but remember you don't need to carry as much gas as a 182).


He might not fit? How tight is an M20C if you're ...big?

Unfortunately, I'm not a FAA standard person, so 152s are out.

FWIW, I've heard very good things about Cardinals - though some people don't
like them. It seems like getting the 'right one' is important with the 177 -
and I don't know what combination that is. I do know they have an active
owner's group.

http://www.cardinalflyers.com/

http://www.aya.org/
Grumman owners seem to have a good group also.

Good luck!


Montblack

wrote:

I'd like to keep it under $100k and will probably keep it for decades
unless I win the Lotto or lose my medical.

99% of my flying will be two people and small baggage on trips within
about 200 nm, so a 2 place airplane would be suitable.

Unfortunately, I'm not a FAA standard person, so 152s are out.

You might look into a new Maule M-4. They've set it up with just 2 seats for
insurance purposes, but it's got 180 hp and can haul. You might find it a bit
slow, and it's got conventional gear, but it's a nice aircraft. With a
fixed-pitch prop, it's $96K.

http://www.mauleairinc.com/Maule_News/m_4_180v.html

It comes with this standard equipment -
http://www.mauleairinc.com/____Stand...equipment.html

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

Montblack wrote:

FWIW, I've heard very good things about Cardinals - though some people
don't like them. It seems like getting the 'right one' is important with
the 177 - and I don't know what combination that is.

Basically, get one with the 180hp engine (later than 1968).

They're a tiny bit faster than a 160hp 172 and carry about 16 pounds less.
Better access, better visibility, and arguably prettier.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

I'm 6"4' and 230lbs and find the Mooney to be great. You really HAVE to
be a tall person to fly a Mooney because the rudders are VERY distant
from the seat.