Owning before obtaining a PP license

This is really going off topic, and the debate has been had but...


...

The SR22 is statistically safer than the 20, and both have been doing
better
since they started the factory training.

How is the sample size on this? I suspect that any 20 vs. 22 conjecture is
statistically on shaky ground.


My statement on the 20 vs. 22 number is based on incidents and fatalities
per 100k hours. The fleet of 20's may not have a million hours which seems
to be the least amount acceptable to the statistician types. Those who
refuse to accept the data generally want a different number. The pro Cirrus
crowd thinks you should ignore all the data before a certain number, and
ignore CFIT accidents. The Cessna Beech crowd want an ever growing history.
In other words, to compare to their planes you need 20 years of records and
will need 30 years in another ten, etc. etc.

There are lots of theories, but we
really do not know why they have faired so badly.

My unqualified conjecture is that aircraft performance has not been taken
sufficiently into account in our understanding of risk. The SR-22 delivers
speeds formerly available only to twins and the most complex singles with
the same number of knobs to twiddle as a 172. But a new SR-22 will nearly
double the cruise speed of a middle-aged 172.

I tend to think, again unqualified opinion, that the Cirrus has been
attracting a dangerous type of pilot. That is, someone with less
experience
but a lot of money who sees the high performance only as a benefit and is
lured by an illusion of low complexity.

I'd like to see an analysis of the SR-22 against other types where one
controls for pilot experience. In other words, how do 400-hour Cirrus
pilots
do compared to 400-hour A36 pilots? Give a less-experienced or current
pilot
the choice between flying an SR-22 and a Bonanza and he'll almost
certainly
choose the Cirrus. In fact the risk may be quite comparable.

Also, there's the notion, which I believe very strongly in, that the
parachute creates a false sense of security and entices pilots into trying
things that get them killed in ways the 'chute won't help. As the Lancair
fleet grows we'll see if this holds out, because they offer similar
performance and complexity.


I can't find anything wrong with your statements here, and I tend to agree.
However, the Brothers in Minnesota are still happy to sell an SR22 to anyone
willing to pay for the plane and the training.

Also, I tend to wonder whether speed brakes wouldn't be a great addition
to
the SR-22 that would actually make it safer to fly by making it easier for
the pilot to get rid of speed.


Again, I agree. Unfortunately, the Cirrus owners cry fowl at this heresy
because they say the plane is easy to land. I say its as slick as a Mooney,
and they are a great help in a Mooney.

Cirrus has reacted
reasonably well, with more training. We will likely know more in another
year or so.

Well, they had to do something--you can't sell a plane that no one will
insure and that's where Cirrus looked to be heading.

From what I've read the SR-22 rates seem to be converging towards those of
the 182, which casts some doubt on my performance-vs-complexity theory. Or
not. If this was a decisive factor it would seem straightforward enough to
incorporate it into the training. This would comport with what we've seen
between owner-flown turbine twins and light jets like the CJ1. The jet may
challenge you with a lot more altitude and cruise speed but it also offers
a
lot more tools to manage all that performance. We do know that with proper
training a pilot can operate very high performance aircraft with
relatively
few training hours.


Certainly. I wonder about judgement though. Also, there is something to be
said for having your first "OH S#*T" experience in something that is slower
and more stable (not to mention crash worthy). Though the numbers on the 22
were headed into the green, I have not seen anyone split out the stats to
show that they are doing that well. Better, but not in Cessna territory.

the Diamond's in which the passengers walked away virtually unharmed. I
hear that Lancair has looked at Diamond's success, and even hired away
employees from them to make the 400.

The kind of crashes that people have survived in Katanas are amazing.
Diamond talks a lot about the 20g cage structure and it seems to really
work.

-cwk.

What makes sense economically is to pound a rental plane into the runway
and after you attain your licence and then some - you buy an aircraft
that you look after.

Do you really want to practice landings in your own new Cirrus?

Tony
C-GICE

In article ,
"New Pilot" wrote:

Hello all,

Wanted to hear your advice about buying a brand-new plane even before
getting the PPL ticket.

Here is my situation: I am a businessman sitting on quite a bit of cash
being generated by my business, and I am also a student pilot, will probably
get my ticket by the next Summer. I am thinking about buying one of them
Cirri SR22.

Considering that the inflation in this country is picking up, and also that
there is quite a long waitlist for those Cirrus aircraft, would it make
sense for me to place an order now, and until I get my ticket and gain some
experience, to lease the plane back to my local FBO?

Does this make sense economically, or am I totally crazy? In general, how
good an investment are those brand-new airplanes, provided one can afford to
pay cash for them?

Thanks in advance,

A Newbie Pilot




--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

I agree.... I won't even do T & G's in my "new" '79 Mooney.... I'd much
rather pound the hell out of a rental 172 (at least try not to pound)
then and aircraft I am going to have to repair. Gosh that makes me sound
pretty insensitive doesn't it? JK


tony roberts wrote:

What makes sense economically is to pound a rental plane into the runway
and after you attain your licence and then some - you buy an aircraft
that you look after.

Do you really want to practice landings in your own new Cirrus?

Tony
C-GICE

In article ,
"New Pilot" wrote:


Hello all,

Wanted to hear your advice about buying a brand-new plane even before
getting the PPL ticket.

Here is my situation: I am a businessman sitting on quite a bit of cash
being generated by my business, and I am also a student pilot, will probably
get my ticket by the next Summer. I am thinking about buying one of them
Cirri SR22.

Considering that the inflation in this country is picking up, and also that
there is quite a long waitlist for those Cirrus aircraft, would it make
sense for me to place an order now, and until I get my ticket and gain some
experience, to lease the plane back to my local FBO?

Does this make sense economically, or am I totally crazy? In general, how
good an investment are those brand-new airplanes, provided one can afford to
pay cash for them?

Thanks in advance,

A Newbie Pilot

I am 52 yers old and bought a new 2004 Archer III in January with only
15 hours of time ...which was in a CEssna 172SP. Figured if I was
paying 120 per hour I might as well own.
Received my certificate in August and am working on my instrument. I
love the airplane and have enrolled in Pipers step up Program. I
sometimes do drool over a Beech A36, Saratoga, or maybe Cirrus(not
sure yet because of the insurance and reputation), but I am going to
try to be patient and let my experience match the plane. Good Luck !

Jon Kraus wrote in message .. .
I agree.... I won't even do T & G's in my "new" '79 Mooney.... I'd much
rather pound the hell out of a rental 172 (at least try not to pound)
then and aircraft I am going to have to repair. Gosh that makes me sound
pretty insensitive doesn't it? JK


tony roberts wrote:

What makes sense economically is to pound a rental plane into the runway
and after you attain your licence and then some - you buy an aircraft
that you look after.

Do you really want to practice landings in your own new Cirrus?

Tony
C-GICE

In article ,
"New Pilot" wrote:


Hello all,

Wanted to hear your advice about buying a brand-new plane even before
getting the PPL ticket.

Here is my situation: I am a businessman sitting on quite a bit of cash
being generated by my business, and I am also a student pilot, will probably
get my ticket by the next Summer. I am thinking about buying one of them
Cirri SR22.

Considering that the inflation in this country is picking up, and also that
there is quite a long waitlist for those Cirrus aircraft, would it make
sense for me to place an order now, and until I get my ticket and gain some
experience, to lease the plane back to my local FBO?

Does this make sense economically, or am I totally crazy? In general, how
good an investment are those brand-new airplanes, provided one can afford to
pay cash for them?

Thanks in advance,

A Newbie Pilot

.

I bought a J4 when I had three hours instruction. I soloed in it and
flew many hours as a student. You will not beat the system any way
you choose to fly. Private aviation is an extravagence. Business
aviation another story. If you can write it off in the business
great, otherwise open your wallet.
I definately would not buy a relative new design aircraft. After
owning a PA28 -140 for twenty years you would be surprised how the
AD's pop up and take more of your money. Buy a Mooney or fixed gear
Piper. Then move up when you get some experience.

George Hamilton wrote:
I bought a J4 when I had three hours instruction. I soloed in it and
flew many hours as a student. You will not beat the system any way
you choose to fly. Private aviation is an extravagence. Business
aviation another story. If you can write it off in the business

Define "extravagence" (please take this in the gentle manner it's offered,
the word is "extravagance", but brownie points for using the noun version
properly rather than "extravagant")

I live out in the Rocky Mountains. If I want a day of skiing, lift
tickets are $40-85 per day (yes, I could get a season pass but those
are to specific areas or groups of areas). Transportation, call it
100 miles each way (Vail is 100 sm from my front door) or at 25 mpg
in my car, 8 gallons or $16. Don't forget lunch. Let's be pragmatic.
If I'm spending over $100/day, another $5-10 for lunch isn't going
to be the deciding issue. I moved to Colorado to ski and used to
get in 50-60 days. No more - I took up flying when I quit skiing.
If I were skiing that much the $300-400 season ticket would be
the first thing to buy. But cheap season tickets didn't exist
when I was skiing like that, so it wasn't difficult to spend
$4000 (now it wouldbe $5K-6K) just on lift tickets in a season.

Wait! Forgot the gear (warm clothes, boots, skis or board). Not
that many people out here buy new gear every year. I've still got
my skis and bindings from 10 yrs ago (the "rock skis") and stuff
from 5 years ago. Guess it's time for new stuff. That'll probably
set me back about $450-750 (boots, skis & bindings).

Hm...my fixed costs per year for the cherokee are

Hangar $3000
Insurance $1000
Maint $1000
total 5000

Awfully similar to skiing....

And I get to fly to Sante Fe or Taos for lunch in nice weather and
be home in time for dinner. Or Devil's Tower AND Mt Rushmore in
one day with friends from the flatlands east of the Mississippi.
Or fly to Phoenix in less than 6 hours instead of the 2 days of
driving.

And I can carry nail clippers if I choose!

Extravagance is in the mind of the beholder. I have friends who are
diehard wind surfers -- any time of the year (wetsuits in the winter!).
Sitting on the wall in their garage are 3 boards and sails for each
of them!

Some people would consider stamp collecting, model railroading, or
gardening as extravagances. It's up to each person to decide on the
hobby of choice.

Hm...my fixed costs per year for the cherokee are

Hangar $3000
Insurance $1000
Maint $1000
total 5000

Awfully similar to skiing....

Blanche!
I'm moving over there

I spend more than $1000 maintenance on transponders, ADF's, VOR's and
ELT's, before I even start on 100 hour maintenance, and all of the snags
that I manage to find each year.
And all of that before I go for annual!

My fixed costs are more like:

Tiedown $650
Insurance $1700.00
Maintenance/Service - $3000.00
Annual - Sky is the limit
Stuck exhaust valve $650.00
No Mag Drop $1100.00
Upgrades $2500.00

and on. . . . and on . . . and on . . .

Tony

P.S. Thaks fo th english Leson -
i enjoyd that


Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

Ditto that.

-cwk. (172N)

I definately would not buy a relative new design aircraft. After
owning a PA28 -140 for twenty years you would be surprised how the
AD's pop up and take more of your money. Buy a Mooney or fixed gear
Piper. Then move up when you get some experience.

I have to disagree. The new Cessna's have had many times more AD's than
Cirrus, Lancair, and Diamond combined. People I know that have fleets are
not happy with Piper either.

"New Pilot" wrote in message
. ..
Hello all,

Wanted to hear your advice about buying a brand-new plane even before
getting the PPL ticket.

Here is my situation: I am a businessman sitting on quite a bit of cash
being generated by my business, and I am also a student pilot, will
probably
get my ticket by the next Summer. I am thinking about buying one of them
Cirri SR22.

You've probably heard the saying that "A fool and his money will soon have
more airplane than either can handle." You're probably not a fool but it's a
wise statement to heed nonetheless.

Does this make sense economically, or am I totally crazy? In general, how
good an investment are those brand-new airplanes, provided one can afford
to
pay cash for them?

There's only one kind of new asset that stands a good chance of appreciating
over time: a house. And that works only because they ain't makin' any more
land. If you want to preserve your equity buy a low-time plane that's 10-20
years old in good shape.

If you do buy a new plane with the intent to do a leaseback you want to buy
a common plane that everyone knows how to fly already. A new 172SP or 182
with the G1000 would be the queen of any rental fleet and would probably get
plenty of usage. Since it's under warranty you won't have to sweat
maintenance costs. Oh, and either of these would be very realistic planes to
learn to fly in and not get murdered on insurance. I'm usually very bearish
on leasebacks but this one could work.

-cwk.