Buying a single engine plane

L

lavink

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Feb 17, 2013
Messages
2
Location
Brunssum, NL
Display Name
Display name:
ken.lavin
I have been surfing the internet for years trying to figure out what airplane is right for me. I mostly feel that a Cessna 182 would fit me perfect but I don't want to out grow it shortly after I buy it.

I have been flying single engine since 1996 and have been a flight engineer since 1999, so I have some experience but not a lot of PIC. I have my A&P but not a lot of GA experience either.

I love the convenience of GA flying it is almost as good as military flying, so I want a reliable type aircraft. Any help or comments are appreciated.
Ken
 
A 182 is a great ride with decent speed and can carry a good load. Fuel burn is a little high for the speed but not horrible. A good comparable aircraft would be a Cherokee 235.

Does you typical mission require the load carrying of the 182? A good one can be a bit pricey.
 
tmyers said:
A 182 is a great ride with decent speed and can carry a good load. Fuel burn is a little high for the speed but not horrible. A good comparable aircraft would be a Cherokee 235.

Does you typical mission require the load carrying of the 182? A good one can be a bit pricey.
Click to expand...

Just look at what you will be doing the majority of the time. Remember that most people end up flying by themselves or 1 other person 95% of the time. You may be the exception, but you don't want to buy a lot of plane to carry no passengers.
 
rbridges said:
Just look at what you will be doing the majority of the time. Remember that most people end up flying by themselves or 1 other person 95% of the time. You may be the exception, but you don't want to buy a lot of plane to carry no passengers.
Click to expand...

A two seater for 95% of your flights, and rent a 4 seater when you need it. :dunno:
 
I started with a Cherokee 150, realized that it wasn't enough plane and Bought an N35 Bonanza, if (and that's a big if) I ever move up again, It'll be to an A36 Bonanza. I'm married with no kids and 2 dogs, a two seater wouldn't have been enough for 85% of my flights. A 182 seems to fit a lot of people's pile of compromises. I looked into getting one instead of the Bo. I don't really need tons of useful load, just space and speed. I determined that I'd rather fold the gear up and pay my mechanic instead of the oil company.
 
Last edited:
bartmc said:
I determined that I'd rather fold the gear up and pay my mechanic instead of the oil company.
Click to expand...

That's my thought process. The future cost of additional A&P hours is known. The future cost of additional fuel is not known.
 
Don't confuse the extra seats or cruise speed with suitability. I like to take some stuff along on trips, so the extra seats serve as a convenient place to put things I will need or want while in flight. Tool box, folding chairs, golf clubs, plane supplies and parts (I carry a fully inflated tail wheel) require baggage space that's simply not available in most two-seaters.

A cross-country trip of any duration will require part of a day. Whether the plane cruises at 140 knots or 160 won't make enough difference to matter. We used the flight planner to compare the difference in trip time for our 770 nm trip to OSH a couple years ago. If we had 3 or less, we planned to take my Cessna 180, four or more would require the Cessna 340. Total flight time difference between the fixed-gear single and the turbo'd cabin twin was one hour.
 
bartmc said:
I started with a Cherokee 150, realized that it wasn't enough plane and Bought an N35 Bonanza, if (and that's a big if) I ever move up again, It'll be to an A36 Bonanza. I'm married with no kids and 2 dogs, a two seater wouldn't have been enough for 85% of my flights. A 182 seems to fit a lot of people's pile of compromises. I looked into getting one instead of the Bo. I don't really need tons of useful load, just space and speed. I determined that I'd rather fold the gear up and pay my mechanic instead of the oil company.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I'm in the same boat, a Cardinal or Archer would technically suffice versus a Bo/182, but I could see myself outgrowing the capabilities of the former aircraft whereas I could never outgrow either a Bo or a 182. I could also see the comfort differences between these two categories of aircraft discouraging me from pursuing a family trip, negating the purpose of either and any aircraft ownership in the first place. That is one hell of a relevant difference. As such, if one can afford it, people say buy your last airplane first. Going through the sale of my Warrior right now, I agree. It's a real PITA to trade, especially in this economy.

I also agree with Wayne on alternate definitions of utility. Everybody measures the utility of a 182 upon whether or not one needs the ability to lift 2800lbs with any frequency. Of course the majority can't say that honestly. But when I look at a 182, I look at what flying a 182 at 2400# gets me versus a Cardinal/archer/180hp172 at MGW#. That to me makes the 182 a long term keeper for the additional operating cost. 130kts on 12GPH is not all that bad when the fam is nice and happy. Doing the sub 200 spam cans at gross? Not so much.

The good news is that the market is depressed. It is only going to get better to attain the Bonanzas, Dakotas and 182s as the decade progresses. It's not going to get cheaper to operate, but it's gonna get cheaper to acquire, no doubt about it. For those who are willing to play ball there is still a market that finds utility in unloading their toys, for those who are not, they'll go to the scrap yard alongside the too-emotionally-vested to know that sometimes the best hand is knowing when to fold.
 
Last edited:
There is so many different models out there. Take your time and really be honest with yourself on what you need, and what you want. Nothing wrong with just wanting something, but you can really look at everything.
 
I couldn't take a two-seater on almost any overnight trip, insufficient room fro bags. I won't rent an airplane when I own one. Mine doesn't get flown enough as is. Yea, mission, mission, mission. What kind of flying are you going to do? Answer that and you'll have a much better idea of what to buy.

Either that, or go pick up a Skylane.
 
My long term mission will be cross country with a family of 4 so I kind of need a four seater. I would like more efficiency than the 182 but I like the useful load and the proven track record of a 182. I was think of a retractable but only have a PPL SEL cert.

Thanks for the feedback, it is nice to have advice from airplane owners. I guess you could say that my question is the "million dollar question".
 
lavink said:
My long term mission will be cross country with a family of 4 so I kind of need a four seater. I would like more efficiency than the 182 but I like the useful load and the proven track record of a 182. I was think of a retractable but only have a PPL SEL cert.

Thanks for the feedback, it is nice to have advice from airplane owners. I guess you could say that my question is the "million dollar question".
Click to expand...

There is a reason the 182 is popular and sells very well. Plenty of theories about why this shouldn't be the case, but year after year it is. Low cost of insurance, great parts availability, and every mechanic on the planet knows them inside and out might be part of it. Also, very simple operation and benign flight characteristics, also things many pilots say they don't need but in reality do.

I don't think you can go wrong with a 182 (from a former 182 owner).
 
lavink said:
My long term mission will be cross country with a family of 4 so I kind of need a four seater. I would like more efficiency than the 182 but I like the useful load and the proven track record of a 182. I was think of a retractable but only have a PPL SEL cert.

Thanks for the feedback, it is nice to have advice from airplane owners. I guess you could say that my question is the "million dollar question".
Click to expand...

Not really - if you have 4 people, you need a 6 seater. Just because there are 4 seats doesn't mean you can load up 4 with bags & fuel. Always treat the last seat as fuel & bags.

Unless, of course, the other 3 people are very small and will not get bigger.
 
My friends from England came over for my wedding 30 years ago and we were going to drive from Wichita to NYC 1500 miles. They had looked on the map and we were on the road about 1hr 20 minutes and the pulled into a roadside park for tea and sandwich break. I told them we had to do this about 15 more times ot get to NYC. They couldn't really equate the scale between driving xcountry in USA vs trips they normally took at home.

So when you say Xcountry what do you mean?

You can buy a Comanche 4 or 6 seater about the same purchase price as a good 182. The maintenance if you can do some of the work yourself is likely going to be very similar to the 182 as far as parts. Fuel consumption is better in the Comanche. You can figure 500 kilos, about 157 knots at 46 liters vs 130 knots at 43 liters in the 182.

So if you wanted to go 700nm trip which is half the trip from KS to NY it would take 5 1/2 hrs in the 182 and 4 1/3 in the Comanche. I don't like to fly more than about 3-4 hrs without a break especially with women on board. You can fly 5 hrs 50 minutes in the Comanche at full speed and 2 hrs longer if you slow down to 140 knots easily fly 1000nm one way without a stop.

I have another British friend who is a CFI and she owns an Arrow. 545 kilos 137 knots, less than 36 liters fuel per hr if you can get by with that.

It looks like 400 nm radius of your home covers about 85% of western Europe so I suspect you not that interested in speed. Second if you try to covert gallons to litres we use a smaller gallon than the imperial gallon so you use 3.7 litres per us gallon not 4.6 like you would for the imperial gallon.
 
Last edited:
I haven't watched the bag compartment evolution in the 182 models, but the extended compartment in the 180's is a Godsend for ease of travel.

lavink said:
My long term mission will be cross country with a family of 4 so I kind of need a four seater. I would like more efficiency than the 182 but I like the useful load and the proven track record of a 182. I was think of a retractable but only have a PPL SEL cert.

Thanks for the feedback, it is nice to have advice from airplane owners. I guess you could say that my question is the "million dollar question".
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top