The wife wants a new plane

[azure]

Hmmm. With the economy improving, airplane prices are likely going to be headed up. Is there any way you can swing owning the Cardinal without selling the 152? Or, is there any way you can make the 152 work for the next year?

The economy improving? This sounds like wishful thinking at best. With oil prices going up the way they have, I bet we'll all be out of aviation before the economy "improves" much more. Airplane prices are headed nowhere but down for the foreseeable future. I hope I'm wrong, since I'd love to be able to get back what I paid for my Cardinal when the time comes.

If option 1 works - Keep the 152, let your friends learn to fly in it, and use it when the Cardinal is down for mx or whatever. When you gain access to the Bo, and your friends have (hopefully) finished their Private certificates or at least gotten done with the learning-to-land phase, sell the 152 and bring your friends into co-ownership on the Cardinal.

I didn't notice before that the friends were going to be doing primary training in the new bird. I wouldn't let anyone learn to fly in a retract, certainly not a Cardinal or 182. Selling the 152 to the friends sounds like the best option, or else keep the 152.

 

[Henning]

I didn't notice before that the friends were going to be doing primary training in the new bird. I wouldn't let anyone learn to fly in a retract, certainly not a Cardinal or 182. Selling the 152 to the friends sounds like the best option, or else keep the 152.

I'd keep it and rent it out if there's nothing else in the area...

 

[Fearless Tower]

I'd keep it and rent it out if there's nothing else in the area...

That's a good point - if there are no other rentals in the area, you may be able to have the 152 pay for itself, or at least earn its keep while you try to sell it.

 

[Trapper John]

That's a good point - if there are no other rentals in the area, you may be able to have the 152 pay for itself, or at least earn its keep while you try to sell it.

While that may sound good, I'd really like to hear from the last person that did a leaseback or even some kind of revenue-neutral arrangement on a 152 (or any other fixed-gear single, for that matter) that actually came out whole at the end of the day. If the nearest rental is 45 minutes away, where is the A&P that can do the 100 hr inspections, fix the daily squaks and so on?

I think it's great to encourage people to learn to fly, but if the OP's 3 or 4 friends can't pool their cash and buy his 152, they probably don't have any business learning to fly in the first place.

 

[PilotAlan]

One word: Tiger
What you describe is exactly the Tiger's mission. Unfortunately, out here I have to deal with 8000ft density altitudes regularly, plus anyplace worth going is at least 2.5 hours flying time away (usually more). I am *very* wide in the shoulders, so my wife and I aren't comfortable in a Tiger for long trips.

It's just the quickest, more enjoyable certificated fixed gear plane around. If I lived at sea level, and was just a little smaller, I'd buy one tomorrow.

 

[wabower]

Depends on the runways you are using for comparison. Most of the grass strips in this part of the country are light-years better than the big-city airports in up-state New York.

To make things even more convoluted, I've been told that I'll have decent access to the Bonanza F33 that I mentioned in my original post in the future (maybe a year out) when the owner buys a PC-12. I figure a Cardinal is a good middle ground that will work great for when I don't have access to the Bonanza, but still need to head somewhere for the weekend with some luggage. Definitely not counting on having access to a Bonanza whenever I want at this point, but it is in the back of my mind.

Also, any issues with retracts on a grass strip that you wouldn't normally see on a hard surface?

 

[Tom-D]

Before I begin, let me first apologize since this is going to be a little long winded in order to explain my situation properly...hopefully you can make it to the bottom of the post.

As mentioned in my first post here, I'm a new Private Pilot, but I do currently own a Cessna 152 that I used for my PPL training as well as my checkride, and it's been great so far. I've been flying it as much as possible lately, in order to get all of the cross country PIC time required for my Instrument Rating.

That said, my wife finds it somewhat annoying that she can't take more stuff with her on our weekend trips, so we would both love to get a larger plane. The front-runner for me currently is a non-retract Cardinal.

While I don't have my high-performance/complex ratings yet, I do already have some time in a Bonanza F33 so I don't think it would take much more to get sign offs for those. My main reason for not wanting a Cardinal RG however, is really the extra expense for annual maintenance and insurance that I understand goes along with retractable gear.

The main use for our plane is to fly 100 nm to see her family, as well as 330 nm trips to Austin for pleasure. I imagine we'll be taking similar 100 to 300 nm trips to the beach and what not as time goes on. Currently I don't see us taking really long cross country trips into the mountains or anything like that, however...mostly just sea level flying.

This is all well and good, but my situation is a bit muddled by the fact that I've offered use of my current 152 to a couple of my good friends at cost, so they can attempt to get their Private Pilot's license as well. Whether or not they see this through remains to be seen. I have also asked them if they would be interested in going in together on a 4 seater and they have expressed some interest. The problem is that when I really consider that, I'm not sure if I want to have the hassles of owning a plane with other people, even though they are both good friends. I can conceivably afford to purchase a cheaper Cardinal ($50,000) by myself and do enjoy owning my current plane without having a partner involved.

So, (and I apologize again for being long-winded), what would you do in this situation? Here are a few options that I see:

• Offer to sell the 152 to your friends so they can use it for their training
• Sell the 152 and buy a Cardinal (or some other 4 seater) alone and let my friends use the Cardinal for their training
• Sell the 152 and purchase the Cardinal in a partnership with friends who may or may not see flight training through

Other options?

Oh, and in case you feel like suggesting options other than the Cardinal: I forgot to mention that I currently fly off of a private grass strip, but it's long (3000 ft), in good shape and trees aren't really a factor.

Don't make the mistake many low time pilots make, and buy the only aircraft that you have trained in.

fly as many different aircraft as you can, there are a lot of aircraft out there that may fit you better than the C-177.

many brokers will take your 150 in trade, tell your friends that they must make a decision . buy or walk.

 

[JesseD]

No kidding....I'm just basking in the current glory of finding a wife who let me buy one airplane!

I'm basking in the fact that the wife will trust me enough to fly us (and the kids / dogs) for business and pleasure. Buying the airplane is the icing on the cake.

 

[Ted]

Renting larger retractable gear airplane is not an easy task. Getting on a Bonanzas insurance cost me $6000 and required I get a commercial pilots certificate and a flight instructor certificate.

To be fair, though, that's not necessarily representative. One of my friends got checked out in an A36 in under 10 hours, just needed an IPC. That airplane you fly has the insurance company from hell.

Some students of mine who have an A36 have a much more reasonable policy. All in who you go with.

 

[jesse]

To be fair, though, that's not necessarily representative. One of my friends got checked out in an A36 in under 10 hours, just needed an IPC. That airplane you fly has the insurance company from hell.

Some students of mine who have an A36 have a much more reasonable policy. All in who you go with.

Either way that's still quite the requirement to rent the airplane for a one time trip. Basically unless you have some sweet flying club around, or know a lot of owners, you're going to have a hard time easily renting anything other than fixed gear 180 hp airplanes.

So if you see yourself needing the larger airplane on some missions well then you might need to buy that larger airplane. You can't just plan on renting it like you can a cargo van.

 

[Trapper John]

Where I am there just aren't any 6-seat retractables available to rent. I don't expect that situation to get any better over time.

I've always questioned the "buy an airplane that covers your needs 80% of the time" wisdom. First, what you need the other 20% of the time may not be available. Second, you're probably hauling a bunch of your family in a plane that you're not as familiar with and that may be more complex and/or higher performance than what you're used to. Might not be the safest thing in the world to do.

 

[Henning]

Where I am there just aren't any 6-seat retractables available to rent. I don't expect that situation to get any better over time.

I've always questioned the "buy an airplane that covers your needs 80% of the time" wisdom. First, what you need the other 20% of the time may not be available. Second, you're probably hauling a bunch of your family in a plane that you're not as familiar with and that may be more complex and/or higher performance than what you're used to. Might not be the safest thing in the world to do.

20 years ago it was workable, if you live in San Diego, you may still be able to make it work (Plus One Flyers has a very nice assortment of planes for rent), any where else I've been in the last decade, fuggedaboudit. If it isn't a 172 or Warrior, you aren't likely to find it for rent. (There's a few DA-40s that come and go from rental lines, they don't seem to stay there long though) There is the occasional Arrow or Seminole I have found available, but you can't take them anywhere because they are heavily scheduled trainers.

If you want more than a basic aircraft anymore, you have to buy it or at least into it.

 

[steingar]

Insurance changed to make lease-backs financially unattractive. How I got my first airplane.

 

[Ted]

Either way that's still quite the requirement to rent the airplane for a one time trip. Basically unless you have some sweet flying club around, or know a lot of owners, you're going to have a hard time easily renting anything other than fixed gear 180 hp airplanes.

I agree that it's a ridiculous amount of money to have to spend to get checked out in a plane for one trip. But then again if you're only doing one trip, the extra cost in purchasing, insuring, and maintaining that nicer aircraft is probably going to be higher, as well.

The plane availability will vary wildly, though, and every situation is different. I've gotten into some pretty good situations, and know others who have, too. There are good arrangements out there.

So if you see yourself needing the larger airplane on some missions well then you might need to buy that larger airplane. You can't just plan on renting it like you can a cargo van.

That is absolutely correct. You had to build and maintain a relationship with the plane and its owner, be it an FBO or an individual, and that's assuming a plane is even available to rent. Ultimately, one of the major reasons I bought the Aztec was that I wanted access to a FIKI twin, and knew there was no way I was going to get it unless I bought it myself. There's only one other person who flies it solo now, and only a few others who I'd let fly it solo after appropriate training from me.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Where I am there just aren't any 6-seat retractables available to rent. I don't expect that situation to get any better over time.

It can be tough finding a 6 seat retractable for rent anywhere!

At Plus One, we have exactly 2 (a C-210 and an Aztec) out of a fleet of 49 airplanes. And it amazes me that we even have those since the rental rates are so high that hardly anyone flies them (the 210 is going up for sale and the Aztec will probably leave because no one flies it). You could probably count the number of 6 seat retracts available for rent in Southern California on one hand.

 

[Henning]

It can be tough finding a 6 seat retractable for rent anywhere!

At Plus One, we have exactly 2 (a C-210 and an Aztec) out of a fleet of 49 airplanes. And it amazes me that we even have those since the rental rates are so high that hardly anyone flies them (the 210 is going up for sale and the Aztec will probably leave because no one flies it). You could probably count the number of 6 seat retracts available for rent in Southern California on one hand.

You also have a PA-46....

 

[Fearless Tower]

You also have a PA-46....

Ah yes, forgot about that one - at almost $300/hr, I haven't bothered to get checked out in that thing. Maybe I should....where else can one rent a Malibu???

 

[Henning]

Ah yes, forgot about that one - at almost $300/hr, I haven't bothered to get checked out in that thing. Maybe I should....where else can one rent a Malibu???

IIRC it's cheaper than the Cirrii... It's the only PA-46 anywhere that I know of for rent. The checkout requirements they gave me weren't even that bad.

 

[CJones]

Either way that's still quite the requirement to rent the airplane for a one time trip. Basically unless you have some sweet flying club around, or know a lot of owners, you're going to have a hard time easily renting anything other than fixed gear 180 hp airplanes.

So if you see yourself needing the larger airplane on some missions well then you might need to buy that larger airplane. You can't just plan on renting it like you can a cargo van.

Fo sho. The 182RG in Ames was the only one for rent in Iowa - the FBO said they had people calling from all over the state asking about renting it.

Once I had a trip planned and the plane went down for unexpected maintenance. It was questionable whether or not it would be ready for my trip (which I had planned and reserved the plane months in advance). I went crazy trying to find another similar 4 people + stuff plane for rent. Ankeny had a Lance for rent for ~$200/hr but you couldn't take it overnight as they flew freight with it.

The kicker with getting into rental retracts (if they are even available) is 1.) Total retract time (usually 25+) and 2.) Standard 'time in type' which is usually substantially less than 'total retract time' requirement. Once you get some significant (25-50hrs) in retracts, checkouts in other retracts gets substantially easier.

 

[Fearless Tower]

IIRC it's cheaper than the Cirrii... It's the only PA-46 anywhere that I know of for rent. The checkout requirements they gave me weren't even that bad.

Actually, the SR22s are a little cheaper - currently $268/hr (they had been $258 before the latest fuel crisis).

Agree, the Malibu does have some pretty reasonable requirements - 500 TT and an instrument rating plus 10 hrs in type or 5 if you have have an ATP.

 

[rainsux]

> You may find one of them more to your taste than the Cardinal, although
> if your wife like a Cardinal, it's hard to get away from that.

Musicks's 2nd Law: The best airplane for you, is the one your wife likes.

 

[Henning]

Actually, the SR22s are a little cheaper - currently $268/hr (they had been $258 before the latest fuel crisis).

Agree, the Malibu does have some pretty reasonable requirements - 500 TT and an instrument rating plus 10 hrs in type or 5 if you have have an ATP.

They were going to give it to me on a 5 hr check out as well even without the ATP because of >2000hrs with >1500 ME/HP Complex time and the fact that they wanted to get more usage on it.

 

[Fearless Tower]

and the fact that they wanted to get more usage on it.

Yeah...it doesn't get used much.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Either way that's still quite the requirement to rent the airplane for a one time trip. Basically unless you have some sweet flying club around, or know a lot of owners, you're going to have a hard time easily renting anything other than fixed gear 180 hp airplanes.

So if you see yourself needing the larger airplane on some missions well then you might need to buy that larger airplane. You can't just plan on renting it like you can a cargo van.

Bingo. If I want to do better than the DA40 or C182, I have two options locally: A Seneca or an SR22. The SR22 is $235/hr with a mandatory 15-hour checkout regardless of what other experience you have - That's a $4,275 checkout when the CFI is included. The Seneca is something like $305/hr now, $355/hr with the instructor. IIRC, it requires 25 time-in-type to rent - An $8,875 checkout! And considering I "need" it generally only once per year (and I have better than a 50% dispatch rate using club airplanes for that trip anyway), it's just not worthwhile to do it.

Sigh.

 

[Challenged]

This is sort of depressing. I guess the best that most of us can hope for is to buy a plane that fits our needs 80% of the time and the rest of the time you're just out of luck.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

This is sort of depressing. I guess the best that most of us can hope for is to buy a plane that fits our needs 80% of the time and the rest of the time you're just out of luck.

No, you buy the plane that meets 99% instead, and 80% of the time it just costs you more to fly than you really need to spend.

Hell, technically a 172 meets 80% of my mission requirements, but IMO it's too slow and doesn't carry enough for the 20% so I'd never buy one. The 182 is my 99% airplane, but that means that I'm burning more fuel than I need to 80% of the time. Or, it did, until my club bought a DA40 that lets me go a hair faster and burn much less fuel, while leaving the 182 available for when I need to carry lots of stuff.

Flying clubs rule.

 

[Trapper John]

This is sort of depressing. I guess the best that most of us can hope for is to buy a plane that fits our needs 80% of the time and the rest of the time you're just out of luck.

I don't know if I'd go that far. The 172 I fly the most has a 1,070 lb. useful load. That's not too bad. 182s are much better than that. Cherokee 235s that have the fuselage stretch (Charger & Pathfinder) are big load haulers and have decent rear seat room, too.

Do you really know 5 people that really want to ride in a small GA plane at the same time anyway?

 

[billwil]

...

Do you really know 5 people that really want to ride in a small GA plane at the same time anyway?

Yes. My wife and my three boys (plus me). This is the situation I've been in since I got my cert. I fly a 182 right now and love the plane...in fact, it's all I really need right now...except for that extra pesky seat. It's affordable and carries a load of stuff...except for my whole family. It's a frustrating predicament to be in because as has been discussed, it's virtually impossible to rent for the situations where we all want to go somewhere. As it is, my flying has become somewhat niche because we can't really use it a great deal for quick family trips and the like because we always have to leave someone behind. My wife, while not "into" aviation, loves going places, and we would use aviation a lot more if I had access to 5 or 6 seats. Right now we do couple trips with friends or partial family trips...but it's certainly not ideal...and the travel aspect is what she digs about GA.

The costs of running out and buying a 6 seat airplane by myself are too severe, so co-ownership is my only real option, and it has proven quite difficult to find the two additional people that I would want to own with. Candidates come and go, and sometimes aren't as interested as they initially appear to be (or, as happened recently, find a really good deal on an old Debonair and pull the trigger solo). Most people don't seem to really need or can afford, even with co-ownership, a bigger plane like that...and if they can afford it, go by themselves.

I really wish that I only needed a 182. I would own one right now (I'm in a club, currently, but would love to own). As it stands, though, with my boys beginning to become teenagers and only getting bigger, I either need a big payload 6 seater, or I have to wait to buy something after at least one of my kids is off to college. I like the first option better, but it's proving to be very frustrating to try to make it happen. Also, as a relatively inexperienced pilot (~180 hours, no IR yet, no retract time, and no time in any 6-seat airplane), the insurance on something like a C210 or Saratoga is rediculous. I've come to the conclusion that I'll likely have to stick to fixed gear for now. They want over $6,000 a year to insure me in a 6-seat retract. It goes down to almost half that for a fixed gear. Still really expensive, but more reasonable. Even after gaining a lot of experience in type and getting an IR (which I would do) only brings it down to a little under $3K...and would likely take me two years to gain the necessary 150 additional hours in type.

Sorry for venting...I just want to use GA for our family in a more effecient way, but don't really want to pay for another "house" in the process.

 

[skidoo]

snip... The 182 is my 99% airplane, but that means that I'm burning more fuel than I need to 80% of the time. ...snip

Why can't you simply slow down the 182 for that 80% of the time and get the fuel burn of the 172?

 

[Ted]

No, you buy the plane that meets 99% instead, and 80% of the time it just costs you more to fly than you really need to spend.

That was pretty much what I did. For the first 100 hours or so, I really was spending more money than I needed to. By now, well, another story. The couple times I need a Navajo/421, well, too bad. But that's alright, because those are very, very rare.

I think that this philosophy makes a lot more sense than people give it credit for.

 

[Everskyward]

Heh. I thought the avatar would have made it obvious, but maybe it was too obscure.

Here I was thinking that this is the wrong season for a pumpkin avatar.

 

[Richard]

BillWil, get your IR. You could recapture the cost in a few yrs just by reduction of ins premiums.

 

[Trapper John]

Yes. My wife and my three boys (plus me). This is the situation I've been in since I got my cert. I fly a 182 right now and love the plane...in fact, it's all I really need right now...except for that extra pesky seat. It's affordable and carries a load of stuff...except for my whole family.

Have you thought about a Cherokee 6?

 

[weilke]

I really wish that I only needed a 182. I would own one right now (I'm in a club, currently, but would love to own). As it stands, though, with my boys beginning to become teenagers and only getting bigger, I either need a big payload 6 seater, or I have to wait to buy something after at least one of my kids is off to college. I like the first option better, but it's proving to be very frustrating to try to make it happen. Also, as a relatively inexperienced pilot (~180 hours, no IR yet, no retract time, and no time in any 6-seat airplane), the insurance on something like a C210 or Saratoga is rediculous. I've come to the conclusion that I'll likely have to stick to fixed gear for now.

Have you looked at a 205 ? Not that much more to buy and operate than a 182 but has the extra seats for some skinny butts.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Why can't you simply slow down the 182 for that 80% of the time and get the fuel burn of the 172?

A few reasons:

1) I fly to go fast. I hear that "well, you could slow down your x so that it only burns as much fuel as a y" argument all the time, but I know of exactly NOBODY who actually does that. Why the hell would I fly a 182 on a cross-country trip at 105 KTAS?

2) I'm in a club with a wet rate. We pay by tach time. In the Archer, I could slow down to 152 speeds and it'd make a difference. In the 182 and DA40, the CS prop means that the tach rate is the same whether I'm burning the fuel or not. I still try to fly efficiently, but I'm sure as hell not gonna slow down 30-40 knots (see number 1).

3) You don't buy a fast airplane to go slow. Faster airplanes are generally more expensive to purchase as well as operate, so you might as well take advantage of the time savings you bought the fast airplane for.

 

[skidoo]

A few reasons:

1) I fly to go fast. I hear that "well, you could slow down your x so that it only burns as much fuel as a y" argument all the time, but I know of exactly NOBODY who actually does that. Why the hell would I fly a 182 on a cross-country trip at 105 KTAS?

Well you did say that a 172 would meet your needs 80% of the time, so no need to go fast. I guess you mean that you need to go fast the other 14% of the time, in which case you could certainly go faster with the 182.

I would consider going slow on a cross-country with a 40kt tailwind...

I actually like to slow mine down for putting around the local area.

2) I'm in a club with a wet rate. We pay by tach time. In the Archer, I could slow down to 152 speeds and it'd make a difference. In the 182 and DA40, the CS prop means that the tach rate is the same whether I'm burning the fuel or not. I still try to fly efficiently, but I'm sure as hell not gonna slow down 30-40 knots (see number 1).

I suspect that is not necessarily true. With the CS prop, you can run it at max or slow. In my 182 POH, at 10000 ft, I can slow the tach to 2000 rpm and still run power from 75% power at 28", 145kts, 13.3 gph, to 44% power at 18", 108 kts, 8.4 gph. With max rpm of 2400, that would be a tach time of 83%. I really like the range of power available.

3) You don't buy a fast airplane to go slow. Faster airplanes are generally more expensive to purchase as well as operate, so you might as well take advantage of the time savings you bought the fast airplane for.

Maybe not, but I do like the option to go slower or faster as the mission varies. You do have different mission profiles, right?

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Well you did say that a 172 would meet your needs 80% of the time, so no need to go fast. I guess you mean that you need to go fast the other 14% of the time, in which case you could certainly go faster with the 182.

I don't really have a NEED to go fast - Even a 172 is significantly faster than driving - but since my main use of GA is to go places, I certainly WANT to go fast.

I would consider going slow on a cross-country with a 40kt tailwind...

So would I, but only to the degree necessary to eliminate a fuel stop on a long XC trip, which will make things that much faster - If I can't eliminate a fuel stop, well, I'm still gonna go fast - It'll just be faster.

I actually like to slow mine down for putting around the local area.

I don't do a whole lot of putting-around type flying, though when I do I'll maybe slow it down some.

I suspect that is not necessarily true. With the CS prop, you can run it at max or slow. In my 182 POH, at 10000 ft, I can slow the tach to 2000 rpm and still run power from 75% power at 28", 145kts, 13.3 gph, to 44% power at 18", 108 kts, 8.4 gph. With max rpm of 2400, that would be a tach time of 83%. I really like the range of power available.

Huh. In mine, 2000 RPM is the lowest in the book, and it's never above 50% power. But I don't have a blower... And max RPM for me is 2600. (I'm guessing you have a blower and an IO-540 with the max RPM of 2400...)

Generally, I run WOT and about 2200-2300 in cruise in the 182.

In the DA40, the tach is part of the G1000 and it runs 1:1 above a certain RPM (which I haven't figured out yet - Would love to see documentation on that!) so it doesn't do me any good at all to slow down except for the aforementioned tailwind scenario - And while I did have one situation where I could have flown nonstop from Fort Worth, TX to Madison, WI with that 40-knot tailwind, I ended up stopping twice just to fill up with dirt-cheap fuel instead. Saved me about $20, even with the extra 25nm in trip distance and two extra climbs, plus I got to fly an extra 15 minutes or so while saving that money.

 

[Ted]

1) I fly to go fast. I hear that "well, you could slow down your x so that it only burns as much fuel as a y" argument all the time, but I know of exactly NOBODY who actually does that. Why the hell would I fly a 182 on a cross-country trip at 105 KTAS?

You also run into inefficiencies at a certain point. Economy cruise tends to be the best combination of engine/airframe efficiency, so that's where I run. But at economy cruise, I'm still going faster than whatever downgrade equivalent.

3) You don't buy a fast airplane to go slow. Faster airplanes are generally more expensive to purchase as well as operate, so you might as well take advantage of the time savings you bought the fast airplane for.

Exactly. The only time I've ever intentionally run a fast plane slow was on sight-seeing tours of New York. That was because we flew the fast plane there, slowed down to enjoy the view, and then sped up to get where we were going.

 

[denverpilot]

No kidding....I'm just basking in the current glory of finding a wife who let me buy one airplane!

+1 !!!

 

[RickH]

$50K will buy a lot of Bonanza these days and get you real speed. The maintenance will be higher though, as you said. Still...a decent V-tail would be seriously worth considering.