Light airplane for 130 mile commute......

From an A&P's point of view, both the 172 and Cherokee 180 are about as easy on the maintenance budget as they come. Just have a thorough pre-buy done so you get a good one.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Bunch of money and hassle to save half an hour. Possible to move closer to work?
Click to expand...

That was my thought.

At 115-120kts, by the time you add up pre-post flight time you aren't going to save much time at all over driving. And if you have a headwind, even worse.

I think to make what you want to do practically worth it, you need to get something that does 145+ knots, like the short body Mooney you mentioned. Otherwise, just drive.

If you do go for fixed gear, I'd go for the Tiger. It's about 10 knots faster then the Archer and the 172 is slower then both. Maybe look at an Archer with some speed mods. I wouldn't even bother looking at 172s. Great plane, but every knot counts with what you are trying to do.
 
Last edited:
I knew an airline captain who commuted from his farm near Gettysburg pa. To BWI. He used a Cessna 180 but they are expensive.....
But so very nice!
 
ClimbnSink said:
Bunch of money and hassle to save half an hour. Possible to move closer to work?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree, moving would be the best option, but we like where we live and the only reason to move is the commute. We've been here 26 years.

It's not really about the time, it's about the drive. It's 6+ hours of pure misery each week (and getting worse), before and after 10+ hour work days. I've been doing it for 13 years this August.

I commuted on commercial airplanes for 10 years before that to various places around the country. The drive sucks, but it's still far better than that.

If I could set the cruise control and drive for 3 hours, it would be a no brainer, but that is simply not possible, even if there were an interstate to drive on. I live in the rolling road block State, particularly within 60 miles or so of MCO. Throw in texters in every other car, and the entire drive to work is like playing real life Pole Position. I'm tired of it.

An airplane would take the edge off.

We have been planning to move when my son graduates HS next year.

I wouldn't even be considering not moving, but there's talk of an FLL domicile in the next few years, which is an easy 1:20 drive from here. This will be a stop gap measure. If the FLL domicile doesn't come to fruition in the next 2-3 years, then we'll move.
 
Last edited:
Not sure where you guys are getting your time estimates - but it will be 2 hours for him door to door regardless of whether he flies 115ktas or 125 or 135 tas. . . . its about the same amount of time in the real world . . .

In my experience at 160ktas in my Comanche if I move along, not rushing and not dawdling, from the time I take off until the time I land its about 30 min from POC to CMA [65nm] which equates to an average speed of 130kts regardless of my 160kt speed and that only improves about 10kts on average for a longer trip. . . .

He'll average about 100kts over the ground regardless of whether he has a Skyhawk, Archer, etc with a 180hp airplane. So 130nm gives him 1hr 20 min or so. Taking into account getting to the airplane, getting it ready for departure, flying, landing and then getting to where he needs to be will about 2 hours all told.

Sure beats 3 hours on the road and 4 when the sun birds are clogging the roads . . . yes, in summer it will be hot aloft during the day and sometimes challenging weather wise given summer storms - I think that an airline pilot can handle the decision making process there -

To the OP: ask your employer if they'd let you park next to one of their hangars - often they will let you park near the maintenance hangars - then your task becomes getting from there to the main terminal. . . .

If you ask nicely you might find one of the FBO managers will cut you an industry deal to let you park your airplane on a corner of their ramp and they'll discount you some fuel and get a ride over and back . . . unless you want to park a beater up there to get from employee parking to wherever - the problem with flying is the 'last mile' . . . .
 
Last edited:
comanchepilot said:
Not sure where you guys are getting your time estimates - but it will be 2 hours for him door to door regardless of whether he flies 115ktas or 125 or 135 tas. . . . its about the same amount of time in the real world . . .

In my experience at 160ktas in my Comanche if I move along, not rushing and not dawdling, from the time I take off until the time I land its about 30 min from POC to CMA [65nm] which equates to an average speed of 130kts regardless of my 160kt speed and that only improves about 10kts on average for a longer trip. . . .

He'll average about 100kts over the ground regardless of whether he has a Skyhawk, Archer, etc with a 180hp airplane. So 130nm gives him 1hr 20 min or so. Taking into account getting to the airplane, getting it ready for departure, flying, landing and then getting to where he needs to be will about 2 hours all told.
Click to expand...


Thanks! That's about what I figured.

Sure beats 3 hours on the road and 4 when the sun birds are clogging the roads . . . yes, in summer it will be hot aloft during the day and sometimes challenging weather wise given summer storms - I think that an airline pilot can handle the decision making process there -
Click to expand...

Yup......

The good thing is that I am typically going north before the CBs start popping and come home long after they're done. They usually wait until I depart MCO to start up, and by then, I've got good WX radar, controllers that know what they're doing and an airplane that can get around them quickly.

In 13 years, I've hit maybe 3 t storms on the drive to work and driven home in the rain twice. The bigger issue will be fog, coming home late at night in the winter time. No Cat IIIA approaches at APF or IMM ;) , so I'll plan on driving or spending the night up in MCO and coming home the next day when that's an issue. Driving in that sucks too, but not as bad as driving home in the daytime during Geriatric Bumper Car/Road Block season.

To the OP: ask your employer if they'd let you park next to one of their hangars - often they will let you park near the maintenance hangars - then your task becomes getting from there to the main terminal. . . .

If you ask nicely you might find one of the FBO managers will cut you an industry deal to let you park your airplane on a corner of their ramp and they'll discount you some fuel and get a ride over and back . . . unless you want to park a beater up there to get from employee parking to wherever - the problem with flying is the 'last mile' . . . .
Click to expand...


The Hangar idea would be awesome, but we don't have any in MCO. All of the line mx is done on the ramp, and I'm pretty sure that wouldn't work too well. There would likely be some SIDA issues, but the point is moot, since they're not gonna let me do it anyway. Maybe the Jet Blue folks would let me park over at their hangar? ;)

I'll definitely explore the other avenues though. Parking at MCO would simplify things, time wise and I wouldn't need to leave a car up there. Worse case scenario is that it's a $20 cab ride or so to get to the terminal. Having been one in a past life, I speak (rusty) "line boy", so I could probably work $omething out with them, if it's not too busy.

One of the Chief Pilots in MDW used to park his 310 at the company hangars there, but I'm not gonna commute to MDW from APF in an Archer! ;)
 
Last edited:
docmirror said:
Tasty. Elec gear, but otherwise spot on. I'm a Bonanza man, but this is suh-weet.
Click to expand...

That is a nice looking airplane! If I were closer to buying, i would definitely check it out.........

The guy's got a killer GTO too........ :D
 
comanchepilot said:
Not sure where you guys are getting your time estimates - but it will be 2 hours for him door to door regardless of whether he flies 115ktas or 125 or 135 tas. . . . its about the same amount of time in the real world . . .

In my experience at 160ktas in my Comanche if I move along, not rushing and not dawdling, from the time I take off until the time I land its about 30 min from POC to CMA [65nm] which equates to an average speed of 130kts regardless of my 160kt speed and that only improves about 10kts on average for a longer trip. . . .

He'll average about 100kts over the ground regardless of whether he has a Skyhawk, Archer, etc with a 180hp airplane. So 130nm gives him 1hr 20 min or so. Taking into account getting to the airplane, getting it ready for departure, flying, landing and then getting to where he needs to be will about 2 hours all told.
Click to expand...

I'm not really getting what you are saying.

How does a faster plane that is going faster not equal getting there faster? And how will he average 100kts over the ground in any 180hp aircraft if one 180hp aircraft goes 20kts faster, on average, leaned (i.e. Skyhawk vs. Tiger)?
 
Bonchie said:
I'm not really getting what you are saying.

How does a faster plane that is going faster not equal getting there faster? And how will he average 100kts over the ground in any 180hp aircraft if one 180hp aircraft goes 20kts faster, on average, leaned (i.e. Skyhawk vs. Tiger)?
Click to expand...

There's about an 8-10 minute difference between 120 and 140 kts (0 wind, direct) on that leg.

The question becomes at what point is the added complexity worth the few minutes difference?

Hey, I'm a pilot, and love things that go fast, but I need to be "practical" here. Well, as practical as I can be buying an airplane to eliminate the bulk of a 360 mile roundtrip drive every week. ;)
 
Slipkid65 said:
Thanks for the quick replies!

I'm thinking somewhere around 800-1000 lb useful would be perfect. 2-3 adults and overnight bags for flights under 3 hours. The farthest I see myself flying the thing would be APF-TLH, and that would only be for another year or so when my daughter graduates, unless my son goes to FSU. Beyond that I'll go airline.
Click to expand...

Those useful load numbers got my attention. If you are talking about empty tanks, the archer and C172 and similar should be fine, but if you need that load with tanks full, I'd lean towards your C182. But at $50k, you'll be looking at a well-used model--not necessarily bad, if engine and airframe check out!
 
As I read through these responses, I'm starting to think Mooney, as well. He needs a good useful load, too, so I'm dubious about C150s.

Question for those who own: what are maintenance costs like in short body Mooneys as compared to an F33? I'd think the F33 would be 10 or so knots faster.

Bonchie said:
That was my thought.

At 115-120kts, by the time you add up pre-post flight time you aren't going to save much time at all over driving. And if you have a headwind, even worse.

I think to make what you want to do practically worth it, you need to get something that does 145+ knots, like the short body Mooney you mentioned. Otherwise, just drive.

If you do go for fixed gear, I'd go for the Tiger. It's about 10 knots faster then the Archer and the 172 is slower then both. Maybe look at an Archer with some speed mods. I wouldn't even bother looking at 172s. Great plane, but every knot counts with what you are trying to do.
Click to expand...
 
My annuals run me less than $1000, owner assisted, plus whatever parts/repairs are needed. Insurance is ~$1100. An E/F/J will be a little more due to fuel injection vs. carburetor. My C is all electric. My biggest gripe is the price of tires & tubes! Just put on my second nose tire, and replaced the mains once in almost seven years and 550+ hours.

The most important thing is to get one in sound mechanical shape, that has been used regularly and taken care of. Otherwi$e, you ju$t may find that owner$hip is expen$ive.

Can't vouch for F33 speed, but my C runs an honest 140 knots on 9 gph ROP; E's are the fastest [same engine as F/J, but ~250 lbs lighter due to shorter fuselage], and may run 155 on 8½ gph LOP. F/J tend to run 150-ish on 9-10 gph LOP. Any LOP speed will be significantly faster with also higher fuel flow--how fast do you want to go? :yes:

Due to the proposed budget, we will ignore the really fast Mooneys [Eagle, Acclaim, Missile, Rocket, Ovation, etc.]. And yes, the factory is in production and planes are being finished and test flown.
 
Last edited:
spiderweb said:
Those useful load numbers got my attention. If you are talking about empty tanks, the archer and C172 and similar should be fine, but if you need that load with tanks full, I'd lean towards your C182. But at $50k, you'll be looking at a well-used model--not necessarily bad, if engine and airframe check out!
Click to expand...

I'm not stuck on those numbers, just trying to ballpark it a bit.

Honestly, I don't see me going more than 300 miles in the thing too often, if ever. Beyond that, I'll fly commercial.

Other than commuting, and flight training for my son, the only regular thing I see us doing is heading over to F45 or SUA (both under an hour) 3 or 4 times per year to see my folks and in laws. Maybe a trip down to EYW every so often. On these trips, it would be my wife and myself, occasionally one or possibly both of the (grown) kids. I'll rarely need full tanks for anything I'm gonna do.

I want to pay cash for the initial airplane purchase. I've spent the last 5 year or so eliminating most of my debt, and don't want to deal with loans, hence the $50k number. I can afford the operating costs without any issues, plus, having an easier way to work will allow me to work extra, without having to do the dreaded drive.
 
Real quick, here's a nice and simple Skyhawk available near you, with a couple of simple upgrades. Seems like it might serve the mission and price, reasonably. http://www.controller.com/listingsd...-SKYHAWK/1979-CESSNA-172N-SKYHAWK/1313753.htm

With the powerflow STC, you might be able to cruise at 120.

Slipkid65 said:
I'm not stuck on those numbers, just trying to ballpark it a bit.

Honestly, I don't see me going more than 300 miles in the thing too often, if ever. Beyond that, I'll fly commercial.

Other than commuting, and flight training for my son, the only regular thing I see us doing is heading over to F45 or SUA (both under an hour) 3 or 4 times per year to see my folks and in laws. Maybe a trip down to EYW every so often. On these trips, it would be my wife and myself, occasionally one or possibly both of the (grown) kids. I'll rarely need full tanks for anything I'm gonna do.

I want to pay cash for the initial airplane purchase. I've spent the last 5 year or so eliminating most of my debt, and don't want to deal with loans, hence the $50k number. I can afford the operating costs without any issues, plus, having an easier way to work will allow me to work extra, without having to do the dreaded drive.
Click to expand...
 
Hank S said:
My annuals run me less than $1000, owner assisted, plus whatever parts/repairs are needed. Insurance is ~$1100. An E/F/J will be a little more due to fuel injection vs. carburetor. My C is all electric. My biggest gripe is the price of tires & tubes! Just put on my second nose tire, and replaced the mains once in almost seven years and 550+ hours.

The most important thing is to get one in sound mechanical shape, that has been used regularly and taken care of. Otherwi$e, you ju$t may find that owner$hip is expen$ive.

Can't vouch for F33 speed, but my C runs an honest 140 knots on 9 gph ROP; E's are the fastest [same engine as F/J, but ~250 lbs lighter due to shorter fuselage], and may run 155 on 8½ gph LOP. F/J tend to run 150-ish on 9-10 gph LOP. Any LOP speed will be significantly faster with also higher fuel flow--how fast do you want to go? :yes:

Due to the proposed budget, we will ignore the really fast Mooneys [Eagle, Acclaim, Missile, Rocket, Ovation, etc.]. And yes, the factory is in production and planes are being finished and test flown.
Click to expand...

Hank, THANKS for these numbers. The C is what I keep coming back to in the Mooney stable.

Have you run into any fuel tank issues with the Mooney?

I need to do some homework re: IAs in my area. I've got about 6 years of experience wrenching on various GA airplanes from 152s up to the size of a Twin Otter and Metroliner as an apprentice when I was in HS and college. I would love to get into an "owner assist" kind of deal for mx and annuals.

I've only worked on one Mooney back in the day, and all I really remember (it was 30 years ago!) is it being a tight squeeze, even for simple stuff like oil changes.
 
spiderweb said:
Real quick, here's a nice and simple Skyhawk available near you, with a couple of simple upgrades. Seems like it might serve the mission and price, reasonably. http://www.controller.com/listingsd...-SKYHAWK/1979-CESSNA-172N-SKYHAWK/1313753.htm

With the powerflow STC, you might be able to cruise at 120.
Click to expand...

That looks pretty good, except for the paint. You think they'd knock about $10k off for pain and suffering? ;)

I'm not quite ready to buy yet......

FWIW, a buddy of mine has a line on a very clean late '70's Warrior up in PA. He knows the airplane and has instructed the owner for the last few years in it. It's nicely equipped, recently repainted, new interior with around 1700 hours on the engine. He's asking $35k for a quick sale. If I was ready for it, I'd probably snag that one. I've been thinking of snagging it anyway, but don't have the rest of my ducks in a row re: storage down here yet. Plus, I'm not sure I really want to do it...... ;)
 
Last edited:
There are tricks for changing the oil. I'll send you a powerpoint that I made for a fellow owner after I find it; the joys of moving!

I've been told that a C-model Mooney is the best bang for the buck. Sure, E's are faster and F/J has more back seat leg room and cargo space; R's have significantly longer interiors, and larger, faster, thirstier engines. Bravos fly high and fast, drink LOTS of fuel and eat lots of runway, enough to avoid my home field [3001' with tall trees at both ends]. But I would love a Missile anyway.

I've only not landed at home once, at night, with a 60-70º left crosswind in the teens gusting into the 20s when I had about 150 hours total. I diverted 4nm to the Class D and took the [now closed] crosswind runway with better wind alignment; found out later it was also only 3000' long, but I had a lot of it left when I turned off. My wife drove over and picked me up.

Yes, I had to reseal my tanks in 2010, I think. Cost was around $7000, but I knew when I bought the plane that it had a slow leak. Some of the sealant was still original, from 1970. Wet Wingologists at FXE did the work, and I've not lost a single drop since then. If you have lots of patience and a good relationship with your A&P, you can do it yourself; it pays to have long, skinny girl arms, mirrors, solvent and lots of formica trim pieces to scrape by hand and not damage the aluminum.

P.S.--re your username, Mooneys slip very nicely. :D
 
Last edited:
Bonchie said:
I'm not really getting what you are saying.

How does a faster plane that is going faster not equal getting there faster? And how will he average 100kts over the ground in any 180hp aircraft if one 180hp aircraft goes 20kts faster, on average, leaned (i.e. Skyhawk vs. Tiger)?
Click to expand...

This is pretty simple . . . if you have a 160kt airplane you are not going 160kts the whole way. . . . assuming he climbs to 4000/5000' to get above the fog and the bumps etc - a 180hp airplane may see 600/700 fpm up which puts you are about 7 minutes in the climb at 80ktas. A 10kt head wind slows you to 70kts ground speed for 7 minutes or so which means you are only 7 miles from the airport you left. you have 124 nm to go - at 120ktas or so - you end up with 110kts on average because you rarely see a tailwind that adds more than 5 knots or so and headwinds average 10. You can disagree with me but thats the facts in a couple thousand hours of flying. . . maybe I'm unlucky.

So at 110kt GS it takes 1hr 7 min to go 124nm - add 7 for the climb and its 1hr 14min - with a 5 kt tail wind its down to 1 hr 5 min. So you average 111 its over the ground climbing to 4000 / 5000 both ways. Add ground time at both locations and you are down to 100kts average. . . . add vectoring time around MCO if he gets there during a push . . . and time gets added. Anyone who has flown for any period of years in and around airports with airline and jet traffic knows the drill . . .
 
comanchepilot said:
This is pretty simple . . . if you have a 160kt airplane you are not going 160kts the whole way. . . . assuming he climbs to 4000/5000' to get above the fog and the bumps etc - a 180hp airplane may see 600/700 fpm up which puts you are about 7 minutes in the climb at 80ktas. A 10kt head wind slows you to 70kts ground speed for 7 minutes or so which means you are only 7 miles from the airport you left. you have 124 nm to go - at 120ktas or so - you end up with 110kts on average because you rarely see a tailwind that adds more than 5 knots or so and headwinds average 10. You can disagree with me but thats the facts in a couple thousand hours of flying. . . maybe I'm unlucky.

So at 110kt GS it takes 1hr 7 min to go 124nm - add 7 for the climb and its 1hr 14min - with a 5 kt tail wind its down to 1 hr 5 min. So you average 111 its over the ground climbing to 4000 / 5000 both ways. Add ground time at both locations and you are down to 100kts average. . . . add vectoring time around MCO if he gets there during a push . . . and time gets added. Anyone who has flown for any period of years in and around airports with airline and jet traffic knows the drill . . .
Click to expand...

NOT FAIR!!

You forgot the speed he picked up in the descent! If you subtract for the climb, you must add for the descent. Surely your Comanche accelerates at 500 fpm? My little Mooney will run right at 170 mph indicated when descending at 500 fpm, whether I'm coming down from 3000 msl or 10,000 msl. Ground speed will flirt with and sometimes pass 200 knots depending on the wind.

There's no need to reduce throttle when descending, that's your payback for the slow climb. I descend at cruise MP, the only way to maintain decent block speeds.
 
comanchepilot said:
This is pretty simple . . . if you have a 160kt airplane you are not going 160kts the whole way. . . . assuming he climbs to 4000/5000' to get above the fog and the bumps etc - a 180hp airplane may see 600/700 fpm up which puts you are about 7 minutes in the climb at 80ktas. A 10kt head wind slows you to 70kts ground speed for 7 minutes or so which means you are only 7 miles from the airport you left. you have 124 nm to go - at 120ktas or so - you end up with 110kts on average because you rarely see a tailwind that adds more than 5 knots or so and headwinds average 10. You can disagree with me but thats the facts in a couple thousand hours of flying. . . maybe I'm unlucky.

So at 110kt GS it takes 1hr 7 min to go 124nm - add 7 for the climb and its 1hr 14min - with a 5 kt tail wind its down to 1 hr 5 min. So you average 111 its over the ground climbing to 4000 / 5000 both ways. Add ground time at both locations and you are down to 100kts average. . . . add vectoring time around MCO if he gets there during a push . . . and time gets added. Anyone who has flown for any period of years in and around airports with airline and jet traffic knows the drill . . .
Click to expand...

You mean I can't climb, cruise and descend at 320kts in these things? :D
 
Slipkid65 said:
There's about an 8-10 minute difference between 120 and 140 kts (0 wind, direct) on that leg.

The question becomes at what point is the added complexity worth the few minutes difference?

Hey, I'm a pilot, and love things that go fast, but I need to be "practical" here. Well, as practical as I can be buying an airplane to eliminate the bulk of a 360 mile roundtrip drive every week. ;)
Click to expand...

There is very little real world difference between 120kts [C180/Skyhawk] and 138kts [182/AA5] since you will rarely to never find zero wind and will end up getting vectors all over the place going into MCO negating the additional speed completely. Basically because once you are in the terminal area [inside 20 miles] you are going to slow down when you are in the vectors cause there is no reason to go fast and burn lots of gas to go nowhere. Then they will ask you to keep the speed up on final after giving you 30nm of vectors.

The difference between 120ktas and 138ktas over 130nm is 1.1 MINUTES. Yep - you save a whole 67 seconds - do you think you can tell that difference when operating an aircraft into a Class B environment? Thats silly to even worry about.

Buy the easy, cheap to maintain 120kt Cherokee 180, save $8k over the initial purchase price of that to a Skyhawk - and install ADS-B for your 430 or 530 - it will come in handy over the next few years
 
Last edited:
Hank S said:
NOT FAIR!!

You forgot the speed he picked up in the descent! If you subtract for the climb, you must add for the descent. Surely your Comanche accelerates at 500 fpm? My little Mooney will run right at 170 mph indicated when descending at 500 fpm, whether I'm coming down from 3000 msl or 10,000 msl. Ground speed will flirt with and sometimes pass 200 knots depending on the wind.

There's no need to reduce throttle when descending, that's your payback for the slow climb. I descend at cruise MP, the only way to maintain decent block speeds.
Click to expand...

If I speed up in my descent from 140kias to 165kias [yellow line] over the course of a 6000 foot descent I save, wait for it, 1 minute and 9 seconds. I don't worry about decent block speeds - but the problem in the Comanche is slowing down then - so under your scenario I need to start slowing down 5 miles out or more in order to reach my gear speed . . . which is why I only gain 1 minute and 9 seconds . . . . and I really hesitate to be zipping along at 140 kts in the pattern at a GA airport - you are going to have to slow down because you will be tearing up the arse of some weekend pilot who is on an 80kt five mile final cause they fly once a month whether than need to or not . . .
 
Last edited:
comanchepilot said:
There is very little real world difference between 120kts [C180/Skyhawk] and 138kts [182/AA5] since you will rarely to never find zero wind and will end up getting vectors all over the place going into MCO negating the additional speed completely. Basically because once you are in the terminal area [inside 20 miles] you are going to slow down when you are in the vectors cause there is no reason to go fast and burn lots of gas to go nowhere. Then they will ask you to keep the speed up on final after giving you 30nm of vectors.
Click to expand...

LOL... You've definitely spent some time in post Marion Blakey Class B airspace!

One of the reasons I am seriously considering KISM instead of KMCO is that you can sneak in under the Class B below 3K. The 25 minute drive from KISM to KMCO could easily be eaten up when landing south at KMCO.

The difference between 120ktas and 138ktas over 130nm is 1.1 MINUTES. Yep - you save a whole 67 seconds - do you think you can tell that difference when operating an aircraft into a Class B environment? Thats silly to even worry about.

Buy the easy, cheap to maintain 120kt Cherokee 180, save $8k over the initial purchase price and install ADS-B for your 430 or 530 - it will come in handy over the next few years
Click to expand...

This is what I keep coming back to........
 
Last edited:
i would not do ISM - it just adds another 45 min to the trip - near DISNEY of all places - you are gonna need to cruise the Irlo Bronson Memorial Highway with the RV's, the grandparents, and Bert and Ethel from Marion, Ohio on vacay with the 2.3 brats in their 'new' 1994 Chrysler minivan. To quote a famous Obama Administration spokesman, Dude, that ain't gonna work.

You fly 90% of the way there - and then land at Kissimmee of all places. Fight your way to the tollway, pay a toll to drive a beater you park up there to the employee parking lot to take the shuttle to the terminal. . . . 90 min later you hit TSA. After landing, securing the airplane, getting in the car, to the Irlo Bronson, to the tollway to the employee lot out by Kissimmee right? hahahaha
 
Slipkid65 said:
Hi folks!

I am in the market for an airplane to commute roughly 30-40 times per year, between Naples, FL and Orlando. Depending on where I can find hangar space (KAPF, KIMM maybe KMKY), it'll be roughly 110 to 130 NMs via air.

I've been doing the 180 mile (each way) drive for almost 13 years, and between the increasing population and general dumbing down of society, I am well over the thrill of near death every 3-4 days, not to mention I can save about an hour, even if I use KISM vs. KMCO. I've got 15 years left before retirement, and the thought of doing this drive for the better part of 30 years total has got me looking at airplanes!

In addition to the commute, the airplane would likely be used to travel across the state to see relatives a few times per year, and to provide a training platform for my 17 y.o. son.

I'm an ATP and have been flying for over 30 years (well over 20k hours), but haven't been in command of a SEL airplane in over 25, and have only gone for rides with others a handful of times in that time (mostly a friend's T-34).

As much as I'd like a complex single like a Bonanza, Mooney, Comanche etc., I'm thinking that something with gear down and welded, and a fixed pitch prop/O-360 would serve me well (Cherokee 180, 172/180, AA-5 etc) are the most likely candidates. IFR equipped is also a must.

I've flown all of these in the past, as well as worked on them in MX back in the early to mid '80's (no A&P though..... something I truly regret not pursuing when I was doing it every day!) I feel that they'd offer the most bang for the buck for both the commute, overall cost and resale.

In the 30+ years I've been flying, I've only seriously considered buying an airplane once, while I was building time. I've been out of the GA world a long time, and have just begun to research buying and owning one, so ANY advice from you folks would be greatly appreciated!
Click to expand...


AA1 series.. taildragger conversion... Fast. light.. cheap.. or get an RV and equip it for IFR..

Make the commute in under an hour.
 
comanchepilot said:
i would not do ISM - it just adds another 45 min to the trip - near DISNEY of all places - you are gonna need to cruise the Irlo Bronson Memorial Highway with the RV's, the grandparents, and Bert and Ethel from Marion, Ohio on vacay with the 2.3 brats in their 'new' 1994 Chrysler minivan. To quote a famous Obama Administration spokesman, Dude, that ain't gonna work.

You fly 90% of the way there - and then land at Kissimmee of all places. Fight your way to the tollway, pay a toll to drive a beater you park up there to the employee parking lot to take the shuttle to the terminal. . . . 90 min later you hit TSA. After landing, securing the airplane, getting in the car, to the Irlo Bronson, to the tollway to the employee lot out by Kissimmee right? hahahaha
Click to expand...

That pretty much describes my current drive, only it's the entire 180 miles......


John Young to 417 to boggy creek rd. Easy Peasy..... 25 minutes to the south lot, 10 minutes from there to tsA. I don't do the "prison" (employee) lot anymore...... ;)
 
Last edited:
comanchepilot said:
Hey Slipkid . . . .

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=70241

$40k - under budget, 145kts, 430. MFD . . . . I'm thinking you might want to buy early.
Click to expand...

Yep, he's a good guy. The B's all had their wooden tails converted to metal in the 70's, so it's basicly a C-model with slightly lower gross and no PC system. He's done tank work, though, as B's were 48 gallons and C's are 52, but he manages 54½.

For power, though, I pull back the throttle until the MP needle moves, to get out of the auto-enrich at WOT, then set prop and lean away. I've managed 4.4 hours with 1+ left in the tanks. Great planes!
 
Slipkid65 said:
That pretty much describes my current drive, only it's the entire 180 miles......


John Young to 417 to boggy creek rd. Easy Peasy..... 25 minutes to the south lot, 10 minutes from there to tsA. I don't do the "prison" (employee) lot anymore...... ;)
Click to expand...

and with all that effort, the cost of parking, the gas and insurance for the car, the car itself, and the time value of money, the inevitable thunderstorms that will rain on you, and some pilots will complain about paying an extra $1 per gallon to an FBO at MCO for gas when they will take care of your airplane, have a nice place to wait out storms and pushes and drive you to and from the terminal . . .

When you add up the costs of landing at ISM and coming over and just flying into MCO - gotta be a wash.

If you manage to call someone in the tower and ask them when the absolute best time to arrive is between 6a and 8a, they can tell you - week day or weekend day. . . . and you can fit your flight to arrive in that window. You'll be talking to the same approach, tower and ground controllers every single time you arrive - you'll get to know each other and it will become a common place operation for everyone .
 
comanchepilot said:
and with all that effort, the cost of parking, the gas and insurance for the car, the car itself, and the time value of money, the inevitable thunderstorms that will rain on you, and some pilots will complain about paying an extra $1 per gallon to an FBO at MCO for gas when they will take care of your airplane, have a nice place to wait out storms and pushes and drive you to and from the terminal . . .

When you add up the costs of landing at ISM and coming over and just flying into MCO - gotta be a wash.

If you manage to call someone in the tower and ask them when the absolute best time to arrive is between 6a and 8a, they can tell you - week day or weekend day. . . . and you can fit your flight to arrive in that window. You'll be talking to the same approach, tower and ground controllers every single time you arrive - you'll get to know each other and it will become a common place operation for everyone .
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'll figure it out. I would prefer to use MCO.

Any idea what it would cost to park an airplane at MCO for 12 to 15 days per month?

FWIW, I've been based at MCO for 13 years and have been flying in and out of there for 25. I'm quite familiar with the place, just not from the GA POV.
 
Hank S said:
My little Mooney will run right at 170 mph indicated when descending at 500 fpm, whether I'm coming down from 3000 msl or 10,000 msl. Ground speed will flirt with and sometimes pass 200 knots depending on the wind.

There's no need to reduce throttle when descending, that's your payback for the slow climb. I descend at cruise MP, the only way to maintain decent block speeds.
Click to expand...

Indeed, I leave cruise power set on the 201 when I descend. I routinely see 180-185kts on the downhill. Yee ha!

As for the OP, I'd stick with PA28 or C172 in the 180hp variant. You will need occasional MX, and parts will be available and everyone knows how to work on it.

Oh, and welcome to POA!
 
even if it didn't save much time b/c of preflight, commute to airport, etc; I'd still elect to fly unless the costs were extremely lopsided and I couldn't afford it. IMO 4 hrs of flight and prep time is much easier than 4 hours of heavy car traffic.
 
comanchepilot said:
This is pretty simple . . . if you have a 160kt airplane you are not going 160kts the whole way. . . . assuming he climbs to 4000/5000' to get above the fog and the bumps etc - a 180hp airplane may see 600/700 fpm up which puts you are about 7 minutes in the climb at 80ktas. A 10kt head wind slows you to 70kts ground speed for 7 minutes or so which means you are only 7 miles from the airport you left. you have 124 nm to go - at 120ktas or so - you end up with 110kts on average because you rarely see a tailwind that adds more than 5 knots or so and headwinds average 10. You can disagree with me but thats the facts in a couple thousand hours of flying. . . maybe I'm unlucky.

So at 110kt GS it takes 1hr 7 min to go 124nm - add 7 for the climb and its 1hr 14min - with a 5 kt tail wind its down to 1 hr 5 min. So you average 111 its over the ground climbing to 4000 / 5000 both ways. Add ground time at both locations and you are down to 100kts average. . . . add vectoring time around MCO if he gets there during a push . . . and time gets added. Anyone who has flown for any period of years in and around airports with airline and jet traffic knows the drill . . .
Click to expand...

I get that, but not all 180hp planes cruise at 115kts in calm wind. A Tiger does 135kts on a calm wind day.

It's not going to average the same exact ground speed, all things considered, as a 172. Which is what you said.

Yes, there will be different delays in Class B for all planes, but all things considered one will make better time then the other.
 
Last edited:
Whatever you get i would make it a low wing just for parking in wind concerns. Nothing delays a commute like tying down. As for rates, negotiate your own deal since you'll be a regular. When i was in college i commuted to my weekend job at KMCI in my ercoupe and parked it under a wing of something waiting in the queue at the twa overhaul base.
 
Hank S said:
Yep, he's a good guy. The B's all had their wooden tails converted to metal in the 70's, so it's basicly a C-model with slightly lower gross and no PC system. He's done tank work, though, as B's were 48 gallons and C's are 52, but he manages 54½.

For power, though, I pull back the throttle until the MP needle moves, to get out of the auto-enrich at WOT, then set prop and lean away. I've managed 4.4 hours with 1+ left in the tanks. Great planes!
Click to expand...

Nit pick correction- M20Bs were always all metal airplanes. They never had any wood in them. Only the M20 and M20A were wood. The M20B is basically a heavier, lower useful load M20C. If useful load is not a big concern, the B can be a real value proposition.
 
There's been a lot of talk in this thread about speed and time, but not a lot about fuel consumption. The airplane commute is likely to cost you more in fuel than what you now pay in the car and I suspect the fuel prices at the airports you'll be using isn't all that cheap. For this reason I make the pitch for the fast plane simply because you can fly a fast plane slow and save gas.

I would go with either a Mooney, or if you really want to stay non complex, the Grumman Tiger. If you didn't have the occasional rear seat requirement, I thought the Liberty XL-2 suggestion was great. That plane was born to commute. Not sure if you can get one for $50k though...
 
JHW said:
Whatever you get i would make it a low wing just for parking in wind concerns. Nothing delays a commute like tying down. As for rates, negotiate your own deal since you'll be a regular. When i was in college i commuted to my weekend job at KMCI in my ercoupe and parked it under a wing of something waiting in the queue at the twa overhaul base.
Click to expand...

That takes maybe 5 minutes tops and just because it's a low wing doesn't preclude it from getting tied down.

Re your son... I am not an expert but would a Mooney being a complex and/or possibly high performance even be a good choice for a primary trainer? A Warrior/Archer/172 would be better for that I'd think.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top