Getting back in to flying and aircraft selection

Which of these drills would you like for me to program into the sim for our next session? Or do you want to bet that I can't? Sims are designed for use on slippery roads. I agree that upset training in an acro bird can be a valuable tool as well, but if rolling inverted and nose-down behind a 757 is what you want to see, I'll be happy to dial it up. As well as the shear on DL191.

nosehair said:
Regardless of what you ultimately decide to buy and fly, keep your analogy in mind: you won't be able to get that specific training in your high performance machine, so you will need to do some 'slippery road skidding' practice in a seperate machine. But don't skip it. That is the number one rerason most pilots show up on the NTSB reports - "Lack of stick and rudder skills immediately before uncontrolled impact".
Click to expand...
 
nosehair said:
That is the number one reason most pilots show up on the NTSB reports - "Lack of stick and rudder skills immediately before uncontrolled impact".
Click to expand...

I completely agree. I am planning to do substantial training beyond the usual in this area I just don't know what for sure, yet.
 
wabower said:
Which of these drills would you like for me to program into the sim for our next session? Or do you want to bet that I can't? Sims are designed for use on slippery roads. I agree that upset training in an acro bird can be a valuable tool as well, but if rolling inverted and nose-down behind a 757 is what you want to see, I'll be happy to dial it up. As well as the shear on DL191.
Click to expand...

This is sounding like too much fun. Got a Twin Cessna sim in the building?
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Ultimately, turbines are easier to fly. If you're going to go turbine, I'd agree there's no point in messing around with pistons. I like pistons because I'm weird, but also admit that I'd be going turbine if I won the lottery or sold to a Fortune 500.

It does sound nice to be conservative and move up slowly, but it has limited use. As an example, I spent 100 hours with a guy who was upgrading to a Navajo after 1000 hours of 172 time, mostly instructing. The guy was a good stick, but it was clear that the 172 time did almost nothing of use with respect to his ability to learn and fly the plane. If anything, there were a few bad habits of things that he could get away with in a 172 that would be very bad in the Navajo.
Click to expand...


DID you notice the student pilot trying to do the cessna landing on the navajo? :hairraise::hairraise:
 
Lets say you learn to fly on a king air. That is the only airplane you know how to fly. would it be harder or easier to learn in? You have no comparison to other planes whatsoever and thus you are oblivious to gauging difficulty. Add a pro pilot that will fly with you for the first couple of hundred hours on the planned0 business trips and you get utility, safety, and instruction out of those flights. However, I would buy a bonanza or smaller piston plane in addition to my turbo prop just for kicks when I want to go low and slow or play maverick.
 
cirrusmx said:
DID you notice the student pilot trying to do the cessna landing on the navajo? :hairraise::hairraise:
Click to expand...

Before me, he flew with another instructor, whose method of teaching was to assume you knew something until you did it wrong. So upon landing the Navajo the first time, he pulled the power back to idle from about 20 ft AGL at a slowish approach speed. Anyone with Navajo experience knows what happened next.

An observer in the back heard said instrctor yell "Oh man!" Followed half a second later by the sound of the plane slamming into the ground and a bunch of fillings hitting the floor.

My philosophy being different, I talked him through the finer points. He was eager to listen.
 
Yep. With differences training for almost anything you want.

QUOTE=Ted DuPuis;1126907]This is sounding like too much fun. Got a Twin Cessna sim in the building?[/QUOTE]
 
If you want to make it easy on a newb, start him in a Citation. Same speeds in the pattern, only two knobs. Great visibility, dog-simple systems, pro baseball players need not apply.

cirrusmx said:
Lets say you learn to fly on a king air. That is the only airplane you know how to fly. would it be harder or easier to learn in? You have no comparison to other planes whatsoever and thus you are oblivious to gauging difficulty. Add a pro pilot that will fly with you for the first couple of hundred hours on the planned0 business trips and you get utility, safety, and instruction out of those flights. However, I would buy a bonanza or smaller piston plane in addition to my turbo prop just for kicks when I want to go low and slow or play maverick.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Yep. With differences training for almost anything you want.

QUOTE=Ted DuPuis;1126907]This is sounding like too much fun. Got a Twin Cessna sim in the building?
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

I'm sold. We'll have to talk about setting something up. Summer's probably a good time for us to come down, at least the soonest. Need to buy an ice AC unit first, though.
 

I'm sold. We'll have to talk about setting something up. Summer's probably a good time for us to come down, at least the soonest. Need to buy an ice AC unit first, though.[/QUOTE]

Come on ted... buy? You need to make one! I'll give you some duct tape to get you started.

Making one of the Ice AC units is something i've wanted to do for awhile. Cooler, 12V blower fan, bilge pump and an automotive heater core are the main ingredients
 
Fine, "acquire" is a better word. ;)

Besides, I need a 24V setup for our rig.
 
From the latest AIN and consistent with what I'm seeing in this market segment.

The number of pre-owned business jets for sale has hovered around the 2,500 level over the past several years since climbing from about 1,600 before 2008, according to business aviation market information firm JetNet. While pre-owned business jet inventory is now receding as a percent of the in-service fleet, it is doing so only because of new aircraft entering service, the company said. In fact, JetNet’s latest market report, released today, indicates that pre-owned jet inventory fell 0.6 percentage points last month, to 13.3 percent, year-over-year.

But for-sale business jet inventory has remained nearly flat–2,537 at the end of last month versus 2,567 a year earlier. During this time the number of in-operation business jets climbed by 472 to 19,005, a figure that also accounts for 132 aircraft that were retired over the 12-month period. Meanwhile, the pre-owned business turboprop has “clearly moved into a seller’s market,” JetNet said. This inventory stood at 7.9 percent last month, down 1.5 percentage points from a year ago. And, unlike the business jet segment, the turboprop segment is experiencing a drop in the number of aircraft for sale, with inventory at 1,090 late last month–52 fewer aircraft than were on the block 60 days earlier.
 
Trimup said:
I haven't heard anybody say Conquests are cheaper than Kings just faster with more range. "Cheaper" is definitely not part of any description for a P180/II.
Click to expand...
The biggest issue with the Conquest is the requirement to almost totally dismantle and rebuild the wings every 5 years IIRC. I don't think anything like that applies to the KA line (yet).
 
JHW said:
I'm not so worried about the hours. I had little more than that when i went to sim school for the AN24 initial and was in a class that included a few 5K + hour guys. We all started equal by any measure that matters. That is to say, we all died in the sim on our first flight.

With limited hours of experience, you're better off having those hours in the airplane you're going to fly.
Click to expand...
Agreed as long as there's a structured plan to impart the knowledge typically gained though years and several thousand hours of making and surviving mistakes in more forgiving airplanes. Just flying the airplane around for a hundred hours sitting next to a CFI isn't necessarily going to do that. Nor will attendance at sim school where they mostly teach you how to manage the systems and system failures.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Before me, he flew with another instructor, whose method of teaching was to assume you knew something until you did it wrong.
Click to expand...
I hate that kind of "instruction". It always makes me think the instructor's real goal is to convince me he is much better than me and always will be.

My philosophy being different, I talked him through the finer points. He was eager to listen.
Click to expand...
I like that a lot better. Now if we started out with me trying to convince you that I already know everything, I could see how a little humble pie would be enlightening (assuming we didn't bend the airplane in the process) but if we can be honest with each other from the beginning and work out verbally ahead of time what's going to happen I know I'd learn a lot faster than by doing things wrong from the start and waiting for you to correct me.
 
Positive reinforcement is a wonderful thing. The soft-hands dog trainers figured out long ago that it's a lot better to "just pretend you're the dog and train him the way you'd like it" rather than the old way of doing it. Same works pretty well for people too.

gismo said:
I hate that kind of "instruction". It always makes me think the instructor's real goal is to convince me he is much better than me and always will be.

I like that a lot better. Now if we started out with me trying to convince you that I already know everything, I could see how a little humble pie would be enlightening (assuming we didn't bend the airplane in the process) but if we can be honest with each other from the beginning and work out verbally ahead of time what's going to happen I know I'd learn a lot faster than by doing things wrong from the start and waiting for you to correct me.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Positive reinforcement is a wonderful thing. The soft-hands dog trainers figured out long ago that it's a lot better to "just pretend you're the dog and train him the way you'd like it" rather than the old way of doing it. Same works pretty well for people too.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but this is a field I'm pretty well versed in. Skinner and a few other developed 'operant conditioning'. It's really effective. Maybe you've seen 'the Manchurian Candidate'? Remember the chimps used in the early NASA experiments? Blue bolts of electricity applied to the pads of the feet is a real motivator... :yesnod:
 
Delmar Smith won the national field trials with a Brit back when the pointers were supposed to be unbeatable. I worked with him many times and never saw a dog yelp or cower from anything that wasn't self inflicted.

It takes more patience than most trainers possess to convince a dog that "whoa means whoa" without thumping on them, but worth the effort when it's done.


docmirror said:
Sorry, but this is a field I'm pretty well versed in. Skinner and a few other developed 'operant conditioning'. It's really effective. Maybe you've seen 'the Manchurian Candidate'? Remember the chimps used in the early NASA experiments? Blue bolts of electricity applied to the pads of the feet is a real motivator... :yesnod:
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
"just pretend you're the dog and train him the way you'd like it"
Click to expand...

My dog would be a fatass because he prefers the method of training that involves lots of treats.

Dog training as I understand it does involve a lot of positive reinforcement. But the trick is starting them when they are puppies, short lessons with positive reinforcement instills them with a lifetime desire to pay attention and learn because they know it pleases you.
 
Last edited:
gismo said:
Agreed as long as there's a structured plan to impart the knowledge typically gained though years and several thousand hours of making and surviving mistakes in more forgiving airplanes. Just flying the airplane around for a hundred hours sitting next to a CFI isn't necessarily going to do that. Nor will attendance at sim school where they mostly teach you how to manage the systems and system failures.
Click to expand...

Part of it depends on your flying. If you're doing mission oriented flying and going out looking for challenging days that present good learning experiences, that definitely helps. Plus good conversation. When I'm in a plane with another pilot, typically we're talking about airplanes and I'm trying to impart wisdom. Most folks it makes a good discussion, some do their best to ignore it.

gismo said:
I hate that kind of "instruction". It always makes me think the instructor's real goal is to convince me he is much better than me and always will be.

I like that a lot better. Now if we started out with me trying to convince you that I already know everything, I could see how a little humble pie would be enlightening (assuming we didn't bend the airplane in the process) but if we can be honest with each other from the beginning and work out verbally ahead of time what's going to happen I know I'd learn a lot faster than by doing things wrong from the start and waiting for you to correct me.
Click to expand...

In this case, the guy needed no humble pie. One of my favorite things about flying with him was that he didn't have a giant ego. Glad you like my method better. :)

There are times that it makes sense to sit back and let the student realize what he did wrong. One person who I let fly the Aztec had a real problem with fuel management early on (specifically remembering to switch tanks), despite my reminders. So one night I decided I'll just let him run out of fuel on a trip that was about the exact length that the outers would last (all four tanks were mains).

I couldn't have timed it better. Just as we got over the airport about to turn downwind, the left tank ran dry. He switched tanks, and learned his lesson very well.
 
3 times a day for ~5 minutes starting at 7-8 weeks. Easy stuff, heel and whoa up and down the driveway or around the yard. Tape the leash to a stick for positive control and keep them headed in the right direction. Their attention span is even shorter than mine, so a few minutes is all they can handle.

dell30rb said:
My dog would be a fatass because he prefers the method of training that involves lots of treats.

Dog training as I understand it does involve a lot of positive reinforcement. But the trick is starting them when they are puppies, short lessons with positive reinforcement instills them with a lifetime desire to pay attention and learn because they know it pleases you.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
wabower said:
During the past 15 years there are periods when you could probably have done better than your estimates, and times when you might have done much worse. The used airplane market is much more volatile than most people think, which is why "staying power" is so important during down-turns.
Click to expand...

So if I buy nice examples of both a Super Decathlon and a Silver Eagle how hard do you think either would be to resell at some future point. Maybe I end up loving and keeping one or both maybe I don't. I am not cut out to be a renter at this point in my life. I don't want to have to ask for access, answer questions, sign forms, or give a damn about anybody else's schedule constraints. I am willing to pay a premium for this freedom but I want to put a number on it.
 
A super decathlon is pretty much the standard for an initial aerobatic trainer. I know of many in my area. It should not be a problem to sell a nice super decathlon.

I've never seen a silver-eagle and since they are conversions I'm guessing it will take longer to sell.
 
Problem with a Super Decathalon is you can't go anywhere with it. If you're interested in it for having a putz around fun plane, go for it. But if you want a plane that has practical uses prior to getting your King Air, the Silver Eagle is a much better choice.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Problem with a Super Decathalon is you can't go anywhere with it. If you're interested in it for having a putz around fun plane, go for it. But if you want a plane that has practical uses prior to getting your King Air, the Silver Eagle is a much better choice.
Click to expand...

That's by your standards.. they cruise about 125kts, hold enough fuel to fly for a few hours. The cockpit seals up nicely with adequate ventilation/cabin heat. Seats are comfortable with plenty of room. The constant speed prop means lower noise/vibration. You can get them with a 6 pack and IFR setup. (Most don't have this though)

I haven't flown one for hours on end but I have enough time in the D to understand flying it 2 hours wouldn't be a chore. The one I flew was relatively new. An older one might be a different story.

I just wouldn't call it a 'cant go anywhere' plane is all. No, don't buy it if you want to get a couple hours of instruction and then plan to use it for trips to visit grandma. But if you are looking for a solid all around tailwheel and aerobatic trainer (FUN), go for it. The other TW and aerobatic planes are far less comfortable and mild-mannered.
 
Last edited:
In today's market you'll probably be able to make a better buy on a D (compared to "book" or other FMV estimate" simply because there is no meaningful transportation value associated with it, nor is it a great acro plane for the serious players. Lots of fun to play with for a while and maybe do the Saturday breakfast runs, but that's about all. OTOH, the amount of purchase money at risk is so much different that you'd be likely to "spill more" during the ownership period of a SE than you're likely to lose on the sale of the D.

Trimup said:
So if I buy nice examples of both a Super Decathlon and a Silver Eagle how hard do you think either would be to resell at some future point. Maybe I end up loving and keeping one or both maybe I don't. I am not cut out to be a renter at this point in my life. I don't want to have to ask for access, answer questions, sign forms, or give a damn about anybody else's schedule constraints. I am willing to pay a premium for this freedom but I want to put a number on it.
Click to expand...
 
dell30rb said:
That's by your standards.. they cruise about 125kts, hold enough fuel to fly for a few hours. The cockpit seals up nicely with adequate ventilation/cabin heat. Seats are comfortable with plenty of room. The constant speed prop means lower noise/vibration. You can get them with a 6 pack and IFR setup. (Most don't have this though)

I haven't flown one for hours on end but I have enough time in the D to understand flying it 2 hours wouldn't be a chore. The one I flew was relatively new. An older one might be a different story.

I just wouldn't call it a 'cant go anywhere' plane is all. No, don't buy it if you want to get a couple hours of instruction and then plan to use it for trips to visit grandma. But if you are looking for a solid all around tailwheel and aerobatic trainer (FUN), go for it. The other TW and aerobatic planes are far less comfortable and mild-mannered.
Click to expand...

It does certainly depend on your definition and what you want.

Speed wise, put it on par with a 172 other than the tailwheel. That also isn't really a "go places" plane and doesn't have a huge amount of value for transition to where the OP is talking about going. And if most don't have IFR, that really leaves it out in the "go places" category. Yes, I know that Jesse goes places in his FlyBaby just fine, but it's a very different experience if you're thinking that you're taking trips that will be better suited in a King Air. I remember right after getting my instrument, I took my mom to Virginia in the Archer. She didn't enjoy it at all - especially needing to stop. In the Aztec and 310, much better plus non-stop - although she wishes they had stairs.

Now, if he wants to get a plane that's going to be a pure fun and stick-and-rudder plane, then absolutely, that's a good option.
 
knock on wood. you are selling your company, but you have not. I would not sing victory until i have the proceeds from the sale in the bank account. just saying
 
cirrusmx said:
knock on wood. you are selling your company, but you have not. I would not sing victory until i have the proceeds from the sale in the bank account. just saying
Click to expand...

I already have their money what I don't have until the sale closes is my freedom.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
It does certainly depend on your definition and what you want.

Speed wise, put it on par with a 172 other than the tailwheel. That also isn't really a "go places" plane and doesn't have a huge amount of value for transition to where the OP is talking about going. And if most don't have IFR, that really leaves it out in the "go places" category. Yes, I know that Jesse goes places in his FlyBaby just fine, but it's a very different experience if you're thinking that you're taking trips that will be better suited in a King Air. I remember right after getting my instrument, I took my mom to Virginia in the Archer. She didn't enjoy it at all - especially needing to stop. In the Aztec and 310, much better plus non-stop - although she wishes they had stairs.
Click to expand...

99% of passengers hate piston GA. We are all just too stubborn to admit it. I took a friend with us to Taos in our airplane. She had a good time, the flight was good, scenery was good, everything was good, no drama. It cost her nothing, zip, nada. This year she wants to go again, she started off by asking how long the drive is, if American goes anywhere close, etc. She decided to fly American Eagle (Ugh), rent a car for a week in Santa Fe, drive up herself, etc. It will probably cost her at least $800 vs. just riding with us.

Even though I have seen this many times before, it still feels like being slapped with the wet dish rag of reality.
 
Alexb2000 said:
99% of passengers hate piston GA. We are all just too stubborn to admit it. I took a friend with us to Taos in our airplane. She had a good time, the flight was good, scenery was good, everything was good, no drama. It cost her nothing, zip, nada. This year she wants to go again, she started off by asking how long the drive is, if American goes anywhere close, etc. She decided to fly American Eagle (Ugh), rent a car for a week in Santa Fe, drive up herself, etc. It will probably cost her at least $800 vs. just riding with us.

Even though I have seen this many times before, it still feels like being slapped with the wet dish rag of reality.
Click to expand...

Even worse and quite irrationally the majority of the public feels pretty negatively about any propeller driven aircraft no matter the source of power. The Piaggio p180II is arguably the finest turboprop executive aircraft yet constructed and I know of a company selling theirs and replacing it with a Citation purely because management doesn't want fly on a "prop plane".
 
Last edited:
Alexb2000 said:
99% of passengers hate piston GA. We are all just too stubborn to admit it. I took a friend with us to Taos in our airplane. She had a good time, the flight was good, scenery was good, everything was good, no drama. It cost her nothing, zip, nada. This year she wants to go again, she started off by asking how long the drive is, if American goes anywhere close, etc. She decided to fly American Eagle (Ugh), rent a car for a week in Santa Fe, drive up herself, etc. It will probably cost her at least $800 vs. just riding with us.

Even though I have seen this many times before, it still feels like being slapped with the wet dish rag of reality.
Click to expand...

I fly the same group of veterinarians up to middle of nowhere Canadia every year. At least I have, this year it might not happen. Anyway.

First year I used the Aztec. They wondered what the hell they were doing getting in this small plane with some hippie kid from the states with a French last name who didn't speak French (most of them are Quebec natives). While they mostly seemed to like it better than driving or the Dash trash, to say they "liked" it is being very nice, with the exception of one who was at least polite enough to not throw up.

Second year I used the Aztec, 310, and Navajo. The 310 was liked significantly better than the Aztec for its quieter cabin and improved heater after polling the passengers, who had flown both. Then I showed up in the Navajo, and we had a winner. Quieter, larger, more comfortable cabin. Everyone asked if they could use that the third year, but it cost too much to be practical. So 310 it was.

In charters, everyone liked the Navajo. While it's not a perfect solution, I think that the cabin class feel does make a noticed difference in passenger satisfaction. I've decided the only passengers whose satisfaction I care about are my wife and son - I don't fly charters anymore. The dogs never complained anyway, and the vets aren't getting a Navajo just because they like it better. Everyone else I can just hit pilot isolate. :D
 
Trimup said:
Even worse and quite irrationally the majority of the public feels pretty negatively about any propeller driven aircraft no matter the source of power. The Piaggio p180II is arguably the finest turboprop executive aircraft yet constructed and I know of a company selling theirs and replacing it with a Citation purely because management doesn't want fly on a "prop plane".
Click to expand...

I would sell a P180 to replace it with about anything that's not a P180. It has a lot of issues - KA200 or Citation definitely.

But its interior is really nice, I will admit.
 
Alexb2000 said:
99% of passengers hate piston GA. We are all just too stubborn to admit it. I took a friend with us to Taos in our airplane. She had a good time, the flight was good, scenery was good, everything was good, no drama. It cost her nothing, zip, nada. This year she wants to go again, she started off by asking how long the drive is, if American goes anywhere close, etc. She decided to fly American Eagle (Ugh), rent a car for a week in Santa Fe, drive up herself, etc. It will probably cost her at least $800 vs. just riding with us.

Even though I have seen this many times before, it still feels like being slapped with the wet dish rag of reality.
Click to expand...

I have the opposite problem. All of my passengers typically love flying with me, and everytime I sent out the mass "Im flying to the beach" text to my group of friends it's first come first serve because the plane fills up too fast. It make me still wish I had the fleet.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
In charters, everyone liked the Navajo. While it's not a perfect solution, I think that the cabin class feel does make a noticed difference in passenger satisfaction. I've decided the only passengers whose satisfaction I care about are my wife and son - I don't fly charters anymore. The dogs never complained anyway, and the vets aren't getting a Navajo just because they like it better. Everyone else I can just hit pilot isolate. :D
Click to expand...

Agreed cabin class helps.... A LOT!. Still the general public views an ERJ-145 as a teeny tiny puddle jumper. Only marginally better than a turbo prop. Anything smaller is just.... well.... suicidal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top