Skycatcher - Good as first aircraft for raking up hours?

G

Gordon Freeman

Pre-Flight
Joined
Nov 7, 2019
Messages
71
Location
Westchester Co. NY
Display Name
Display name:
GordonF
I was hoping to get some opinions on the Skycatcher. I see used ones for around $50-$60k with less than 1,000hrs. I am exploring multiple options for raking up my initial hours. I am doing solo flights right now as I work on my PPL. Once I receive my PPL, I can either keep renting from my flight school (C172, $140/hr wet). Problem is they're quite booked and scheduling is going to be a problem. They also have a 4-hr daily minimum if you plan to keep it overnight. Ideally I'd like to rake up flight hours by taking weekend trips with my son.

Another local flying club has a Piper (early 1970s model, $130/hr, $2000 club initiation fee plus $200/monthly fee).

I'm leaning towards a realization that I won't need a 4-seater to rake up hours and gain experience.

As such, Skycatcher caught my eye, although there are a few drawbacks. Less than 200 aircraft were produced. Are parts going to be a problem? Another drawback is its useful load of only 345lbs fully fueled. This won't allow me the opportunity to take another male friend/family member along. I weigh 180lbs, which leaves roughly 165lbs for my passenger.

If anyone has any other suggestions for a relatively new, affordable 2-seater with a slightly better useful load, I'm all ears. I'm hoping to remain in sub $60k price range.

I could probably find a Piper Cub, I'm just hoping to fly something from a more recent era.

The goal here is to remain economical with the cost while retaining some scheduling and overnight freedom. The maintenance, insurance, and overall cost of ownership of a light 2-seater seems to be the ideal choice, and I'm not seeing any for rent in my area.

Thanks for your time guys.
 
I enjoyed renting one at $90/hr or so. They sell for well below $50k, but I probably wouldn't buy one, as they are orphaned. Full fuel useful load is limited. Perfect for flying around with a kid, but so is a 140 or 150.

If you want a newer plane, you can probably get a Flight Design CT of some variety for below $60k.
 
Symphony 160 is a good option for a capable certified 2 seater. That said, I love the skycatcher. It's a little twitchy in pitch and can be a challenging aircraft in gusty conditions but she's a blast to fly and will out-perform a 172 in a lot of ways. She burns 6gph on a 24 gallon tank. So for 2 hours (plus VFR reserve) of flying you fill to the 3/4 mark giving you roughly 15 gallons of gas this will give you another 54lbs of payload. The rear cargo area is huge be be careful with how you load it, you can get out of rear CG pretty easily.

I've never had any performance issues with the skycatcher on a hot day at gross. She still jumps off the runway, so the useful load limitation may have more to do with trying to shoehorn the aircraft into the LSA category. I would love to see Cessna take another look at certifying the aircraft under Normal Part23 but that ain't happening...
 
Don’t know about the Symphony, but isn’t the Skycatcher limited to IFR in VMC only?

I just don’t see the value in time building if VMC is required.
 
Nothing wrong with the skycatcher, it's much more comfortable than a 150 and the same basic performance. But it's a light sport, so not that great to sit in for long periods of time, and it tosses you around a lot in turb. If you were in the area I'd give you a ride in one.
 
They're also quite noisy. I can never seem to never be effectively understood over the radio when at full power.
 
asicer said:
They're also quite noisy. I can never seem to never be effectively understood over the radio when at full power.
Click to expand...
Odd. I've never had that problem. Maybe different headsets.
 
asicer said:
They're also quite noisy. I can never seem to never be effectively understood over the radio when at full power.
Click to expand...
I found that to be the case as well, at least with the cheap headsets I had at the time.
 
buying new, it'd be tempting to get a Vashon ranger for $100k. I'd think the resale on it would be better than a skycatcher if you decide to sell in a few years with 500 hours on it. then you get a simple, rugged plane with 1 or 2 10" glass screens and an autopilot. It does not come with IFR and I've not researched if it can have a NAV added or if IFR is prohibited in the "Kinds of Operations" limitations or the AWC.
 
Head over to the https://www.sportpilottalk.com/ They will have a lot of first hand experience and advice to offer.

IMHO - it is an orphaned plane. Parts will be an issue. Cessna isn't going to offer any LOA's, so when that gizmo breaks and cant' be replaced, your mechanic won't be authorized to have a substitute. If it's only you flying for local trips, it might be OK. You'll never fly far with a passenger. Useful load is very thin, even for an LSA. Unlike other planes I don't think you'll see your investment continue to decline in value/ lower resale price.

So yes, I'd look elsewhere. A used RV12 would be a better choice perhaps.
 
I'd stay away from an orphaned aircraft that the manufacturer has actively taken steps to destroy. For that price, you can buy quite a bit of airplane that performs better and has greater utility. Think a Grumman Cheetah or Traveller, or older Cherokee 180.
 
GeorgeC said:
I enjoyed renting one at $90/hr or so. They sell for well below $50k, but I probably wouldn't buy one, as they are orphaned. Full fuel useful load is limited. Perfect for flying around with a kid, but so is a 140 or 150.

If you want a newer plane, you can probably get a Flight Design CT of some variety for below $60k.
Click to expand...

I wonder what you can get an older Diamond DA-20 for? That's a really fun plane. The bubble canopy is so cool in flight. Also, a very good reputation for safety.
 
Last edited:
N1120A said:
I'd stay away from an orphaned aircraft that the manufacturer has actively taken steps to destroy. For that price, you can buy quite a bit of airplane that performs better and has greater utility. Think a Grumman Cheetah or Traveller, or older Cherokee 180.
Click to expand...

Truthfully, that's part of what appeals to me about it. I can probably find a really good deal on a Skycatcher ($50k) with less than 1000 hours, and they all have glass cockpits. Finding a used C172 for $50k will only yield me a 1960s model with 13,000 hours on the tach. I understand the 162 won't appreciate in value, and finding parts down the line won't be easy, but it's a relatively simple aircraft with a proven, commonly used engine. If I only plan to keep it for 5 years to build time, I still think it's a good prospect.
 
It's a cheap feeling plane, not sure if it's the composites, but the 150/152, while also tiny, don't feel "cheap" and flimsy.. it has a rugged little truck feel in the Aerobat. The skycatcher's got that "Toy's Я Us My First Plane" feel to it
 
Gordon Freeman said:
used C172
Click to expand...
Easily the most over priced and over valued plane on the market. 10/10 would not buy. If you want something kind of goofy (I totally get the appeal) why not a Traumahawk? Maybe before you buy a Skycatcher log a few hours in one and see if it still appeals to you. The "stoke" thing is also weird, there's no comfortable way to hold it. At least the 150/152/Tomahawk feel like real airplanes

upload_2020-1-17_16-36-1.png
 
Not a perfect example - but you can get a killer deal on a BetaMax recorder. Without parts and support not much good. And without taking it ELSA you’re not even allowed to fix things using substitute parts - even though the legal parts don’t exist.

The value of an ELSA skycatcher in 5 years ? The money you loose in value would be far more than if you bought something else.

Get the skycather for $25k, take it ELSA perhaps CORRECTION: ELSA, not EAB

Will still be less capable than alternatives
 
Last edited:
Gordon Freeman said:
Truthfully, that's part of what appeals to me about it. I can probably find a really good deal on a Skycatcher ($50k) with less than 1000 hours, and they all have glass cockpits. Finding a used C172 for $50k will only yield me a 1960s model with 13,000 hours on the tach. I understand the 162 won't appreciate in value, and finding parts down the line won't be easy, but it's a relatively simple aircraft with a proven, commonly used engine. If I only plan to keep it for 5 years to build time, I still think it's a good prospect.
Click to expand...
If you want something that can be found as low as $50k with a glass panel and less than 1000 hours look for a used RV12. Useful load will likely be better than a Skycatcher. Vans still makes them so no issues with parts. You can take a 16 hour course and maintain it yourself if you like. And you can upgrade or modify yourself if you like.
 
Gordon Freeman said:
I can probably find a really good deal on a Skycatcher ($50k) with less than 1000 hours, and they all have glass cockpits.
Click to expand...
That glass cockpit is also a double edged sword. The C162 came with the Garmin G300, which was a one-off special just for the Skycatcher so not only is the airframe orphaned, so is the panel.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Which experimental category, and how do you suggest doing that?
Click to expand...
I don’t know how to do it, but I’ve heard guys that do it get to add air vents to the door windows for more ventilation. The 162 is brutally hot in the summer in stock form. Taxi with the doors open.

Also, from what I understand the certified ELT is unobtanium and our club had to borrow one from Cessna to continue using the plane. Cessna would not sell the 1 of 3 left, so it is on loan.

Ours is a stripped down model with no fuel primer and usually won’t start below 35F. Ours also only has one glass screen so when it fails you have zero instruments (happened to one of our guys once). I also wish the seat would slide back 2” for my 6’2” frame. Maybe the experimental guys get to mod that too.

I prefer the slower climbing 150 with its six pack to the 162. Gives me a warm fuzzy feeling.
 
Gordon Freeman said:
I was hoping to get some opinions on the Skycatcher. I see used ones for around $50-$60k with less than 1,000hrs. I am exploring multiple options for raking up my initial hours. I am doing solo flights right now as I work on my PPL. Once I receive my PPL, I can either keep renting from my flight school (C172, $140/hr wet). Problem is they're quite booked and scheduling is going to be a problem. They also have a 4-hr daily minimum if you plan to keep it overnight. Ideally I'd like to rake up flight hours by taking weekend trips with my son.
Click to expand...

I did the same thing you are planning, and I looked at Skycatchers, but there are better planes for the money. I bought a Yankee, but if I could afford $60 I would have purchased an RV-12 before a 162.

Having said that neither can go into IMC, but you can still rent for IMC (I'll bet there is a lot of availability for rentals on IMC days). I plan on renting for my IFR training (unless I find something like a KI-214 that can add GS to my Nav), but using my plane for some hood work and commercial simulated instrument time.

If you are looking at the 162, then look at a 150. There is nothing about the 162 that would make it more appealing than a 150 with $10K in the passenger seat, although in real life, most 150s are at least 30K cheaper than 162s.

For $50K, I would look for a light sport (just not the 162), or the most pristine 2 seater I could find. I love my Yankee but, being an older plane, I have lost a few good flying days to deferred maintenance from the previous owner. When shopping for a time builder, keep in mind that even if you have the money to fix it, it will still cost you flying time. Paying extra for a better plane will help you build time faster. There is a huge premium on 4 seaters, for time building you are better spending that cash on a more reliable 2 seater. Buy for 70% of the flying you will do, but remember when you see a good deal on an out of annual plane that just needs x to be airworthy if it's not airworthy anything other than x won't be found before you buy it, and 100% of your missions will require an airworthy plane.
 
texasclouds said:
SkyScratchers are fun to fly but you may want to convert it to experimental since Cessna kicked it out of the house.
Click to expand...
Don't even think about it. The only useful experimental classification is E/AB (Experimental / Amateur Built), and the Skycatcher cannot be converted to that. Experimental Exhibition comes with many restrictions. And you cannot change it back to a certified airplane.
 
asicer said:
That glass cockpit is also a double edged sword. The C162 came with the Garmin G300, which was a one-off special just for the Skycatcher so not only is the airframe orphaned, so is the panel.
Click to expand...
They do support it well though, my buddy had a glitch in his and they got him a new one quick for a token amount.
 
I second the Flight Design... CTSW model, 12 years old can get you in range of your budget. Carries 2 legit sized adults and plenty of fuel/range. Faster than a 150/152, superb visibility, Solid feel, parts available and cheap to operate. People (including me) love them.
 
All the things that make you hesitate to buy the Skycatcher will be in the minds of other buyers when you decide to sell it in a few years, and by then it will have many more hours. You may have trouble finding a buyer, and you may have to drop the price way down to move it.
 
There is a reason a relatively new $100k+ Skycatcher is already depreciated to $50k. They are devaluing rapidly due to lack of support. By the end of your 5 year plan, you may end up scrapping it.

A cheap airplane is usually not cheap.
 
chemgeek said:
For cheap and fast in a 2 seater, consider an AA-1X. I had an AA-1A for time building that would cruise at 108-110 kt on 6 gph. Rock solid O235-C2C engine. And a bubble canopy that is a blast. Well supported by owners groups.
Click to expand...

Seriously, this is also good advice. The 2 seat Grummans are awesome, especially if the proposed LSA rules come into being
 
Plenty of Cherokee 140/160s in your price range on trade a plane. Proven airframe and IMHO a whole lot more aircraft for your money.
 
Bill Jennings said:
Plenty of Cherokee 140/160s in your price range on trade a plane. Proven airframe and IMHO a whole lot more aircraft for your money.
Click to expand...

+1

And that’s why I went from Sport to Private, and am renting a 140 while I shop for one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top