Buying Old Airplanes

Flying Viking

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Oct 2, 2014
Messages
270
Location
SoCal
Display Name

Display name:
Flying Viking
The old airplanes thread got me thinking... When I buy I will most likely go down the Glasair/Lancair route as I want a serious XC travel machine for me and my wife. But...I keep looking at ads for beautiful, well maintained and fairly inexpensive (<$100k) old trainers such as the Focke-Wulf P 149D or the Saab 91 Safir that will give you decent XC speed and most definitely turn some heads in the process.

The question is how much trouble would I be buying if I go down this route? I have no mechanical abilities whatsoever, and need an illustrated instruction booklet in five languages just to change a light bulb...in other words all maintenance would have to be done in a shop.
 
you just answered your own question. If you are unable or unwilling to do your own wrenching and you aren't independantly wealthy, then stick with the garden variety C/P/B/M spam cans or the well-established E/AB types
 
you just answered your own question. If you are unable or unwilling to do your own wrenching and you aren't independantly wealthy, then stick with the garden variety C/P/B/M spam cans or the well-established E/AB types

Then I guess I didn't ask the question clearly enough -- how much more trouble is a 1950s Focke-Wulf as compared to say a Mooney M20F?
 
who knows? t's a rare machine that is 60 years old. who is going to work on it? where will you get parts? why search out an oddball when you can get a pretty darn nice comanche for 50k or Bo for slightly more ?
 
I agree, unless you have a specific passion for it or just gotta have one there is no reason to take on the extra headaches. For one thing I think you'd have to find an A&P that can at least read German and in regards to certain parts you might need to have a good fabricator at times. It would be challenging to own and operate one but certainly not impossible.
 
Agree with the previous posts, i would suggest sticking with a relatively known aircraft that mechanics are familiar with, with ample parts available. There are alot of good XC machines in the Cessna, Piper, Beech, and Mooney line, that should be able to accomplish your mission.
 
then stick with the garden variety C/P/B/M spam cans
I'd say that Grumman belongs in that group at least as much as Mooney, but otherwise, for your first airplane ownership experience, I'd agree. Imagine your first home ownership being an original 17th century stone cottage, or your first car being a 1929 Model A Ford. Might be useful as a learning experience, but not much else.
 
I finally decided to buy my oldie - because I hang out with the WRONG CROWD. Yea, a lot of experimental builders and oldie caretakers. I don't have time right now to build so I was lured into the oldies. Thought about a Navion and a few similarly aged aircraft that my local "wrong crowd" was suggesting. But then I bumped into an old -35 that I liked better.

All I can say is the older it is, toss out the idea of buying required parts "new" - that hasn't happened in a long time. (I just purchased a "new" 50 year old prop.) Hopefully you can find something that is NOS (yea!) or better yet "owner produced part". Basically, there is a lot of unobtonium in the oldies. (Even thought about some wooden aircraft - but not sure I like the idea of flying around in something that is basically termites holding hands! Guess I'm chicken.)

One advantage of some of the oldie type groups is the support. Old Beechcraft - especially the 35s - is excellent. A beech 18 looks doable, but bring a REALY BIG checkbook. Even if the old gurus aren't with us after a while, there is still a long list of 60 somethings out there that are pretty good at turning wrenches on these oldies. Ditto for the Navion.

Anyway, I like the oldies for the "fun factor" - and they turn heads. (Just wish I would have gotten one with better skins to polish - but I'm too lazy for that anyway.) Checkout the parts and knowledge availability to see what the $$s might look like. Then go for it- with the knowledge that you are likely the last "caretaker" for that aircraft - that is you may not ever be able to sell it. For mine, the cost to maintain is about what you would find for the later models with the smaller 470 engine. But add in time to talk to some "interesting characters" to get things like PSC5 carbs and who might still overhaul one...

I'm still not bold enough for a round engine though (but they are sooooo cool!).

The new aircraft are fun. But the oldies are really cool!

(By the way, my uncle has access to an old Fairchild - can't remember model. Just imagine a really cool C195. I decided that would be more than I'm ready for and just drooled when offered to buy.)
 
Last edited:
Brian, you might mention the length of time you've been working on finding a prop for your plane (I seem to recall it was quite lengthy). I know I've had the same types of extended downtime periods while looking for parts and/or getting them overhauled.

The time and attention needed to keep the old planes flying is the killer. Many people don't want to have their plane down for 6-8 months for a simple item that could have been located and repaired/replaced in a couple of weeks on a newer, more supported airplane. Many mechanics won't take the time to research and hunt down the best source for a part or service as well, so the owner had better be resourceful and willing to do the legwork on many projects.

I'd recommend having a big checkbook and a lot of patience if your mechanical skills and aptitude are lacking. You're going to need it.
 
How much do you want to fly it? If you don't care, then that's fine. If you want to travel, Jeff's suggestion for one of the normal name brands is a good one. At only 48 years old, the 310 I fly has very good support. Of course, there are a lot of 310s out there.
 
Brian, you might mention the length of time you've been working on finding a prop for your plane (I seem to recall it was quite lengthy). I know I've had the same types of extended downtime periods while looking for parts and/or getting them overhauled.

The time and attention needed to keep the old planes flying is the killer. Many people don't want to have their plane down for 6-8 months for a simple item that could have been located and repaired/replaced in a couple of weeks on a newer, more supported airplane. Many mechanics won't take the time to research and hunt down the best source for a part or service as well, so the owner had better be resourceful and willing to do the legwork on many projects.

I'd recommend having a big checkbook and a lot of patience if your mechanical skills and aptitude are lacking. You're going to need it.

You nailed it, but don't over estimate the costs. I've been looking at the possibility of needing to fly for business. The beech baron has been coming on the list with used sr22s- my oldie is cheaper than either. But yea, if you need it for business, an oldie is not for you.

I mostly fly to the local eaa fly ins and I fly to see my elderly mother. I really don't need an airplane at all. I just enjoy the machines, flying and the people I meet. Taking a 4 month "rest" sucks, but isn't costing me money.

If I need something for business, you'll know. I'll be asking for the easiest high performance aircraft to get fixed. Cost becomes a different kind of variable too..

But the oldies sure are fun :)
 
The old airplanes thread got me thinking... When I buy I will most likely go down the Glasair/Lancair route as I want a serious XC travel machine for me and my wife. But...I keep looking at ads for beautiful, well maintained and fairly inexpensive (<$100k) old trainers such as the Focke-Wulf P 149D or the Saab 91 Safir that will give you decent XC speed and most definitely turn some heads in the process.

The question is how much trouble would I be buying if I go down this route? I have no mechanical abilities whatsoever, and need an illustrated instruction booklet in five languages just to change a light bulb...in other words all maintenance would have to be done in a shop.

If you are not good with tools you are then totally dependent on those that are. The light bulb should come on for you immed. Or......if you are in the inheritance business, go ahead, no problem.
 
Agree with the previous posts, i would suggest sticking with a relatively known aircraft that mechanics are familiar with, with ample parts available. There are alot of good XC machines in the Cessna, Piper, Beech, and Mooney line, that should be able to accomplish your mission.
Exactly. I love old airplanes and own one originally built in 1933 by a company that no longer exists.

But for the family traveling machine, we bought a Baron. While my specific model is no longer made, there were tons made, lots of parts available and since it has a lot of commonality with newer Barons and Bonanza, I can still get new parts overnighted if something breaks on the road.

When you have something that isn't well supported, your odds of getting stuck somewhere increase.
 
Some of the older machines are very simple and quite overbuilt with next to no ADs.

My first plane was a 46' and I really had next to nothing in mandatory maintance, I did a few upgrades, but nothing crazy came up on annuals.
 
Flying Viking said:
1683199The question is how much trouble would I be buying if I go down this route?

Before you buy any old aircraft that is not supported by the manufacturer, you must investigate the type clubs because that is where your support comes from.

This aircraft is a prime example.

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_957385_Fairchild+C8C+1934.html

Every part in the aircraft can be fabricated in the field, your type club will know who will do it best/worse.

By the looks it was done once already, you will never worry about AD's
 
Before you buy any old aircraft that is not supported by the manufacturer, you must investigate the type clubs because that is where your support comes from.

This aircraft is a prime example.

http://www.barnstormers.com/classified_957385_Fairchild+C8C+1934.html

Every part in the aircraft can be fabricated in the field, your type club will know who will do it best/worse.

By the looks it was done once already, you will never worry about AD's

I so have to quit looking at the links you post...

My uncle tried to get me to buy a Fairchild just like that one- but in amazing yellow on white...
 
I bought what was generally considered to be a very nice 1978 Grumman Tiger. It has an Aspen PFD and is GPS/WAAS equipped. So far I have put about 20 hours on it over the last 18 months. The last time I flew (6 months?), I discovered the ALT breaker didn't stop alternator from charging, pulling the Aux Audio Breaker did.

When I started looking into it, I found other wiring problems, 3 breakers not carrying a load were left in the airplane after old equipment was removed. Wires were run to new breakers installed in odd places to power new equipment.

There were old wires with insulation cracking off. Mis-wired circuits (somebody's better idea for a start circuit). Undocumented mystery wiring for unknown removable equipment. There were undocumented lighting parts that looked like somebody's old Heath kit. Most original lights were gone, original dome light with no on/off switches (INOP), glareshield lights that cut out after 5 minutes. In one area, the original wiring was working out of the crimped pins an original connector. There were many original radio wires that were cut and half removed still tied up under the instrument panel.

With the addition of the approved instrument modifications (generally well done), a lot of the original wiring diagrams are now obsolete. Unfortunately how new breakers were actually connected and what the loads on those breakers were was not apparent on any drawing.

Supposedly electrical loads were calculated with the various changes but there were no copies of an Electrical Load Analysis in the records. When I started working up my own wiring diagrams, I could see many of the wire size selections were incorrect for the breakers used.

Breakers keep wires from becoming a fire hazard, a breaker has to trip before a shorted wire can become hot enough to start a fire. It does you no good to use a 35A current protected switch to supply power using 20 GA wire. It also does you little good to install a breaker at the device being powered because the wire to the breaker is unprotected.

I also didn't like the current protected switches because you don't get an indication it if it does trip. The entire avionics master switch and bus aren't shown in the AMM diagrams or in the POH diagrams. It's there in the plane though, almost certainly installed with the Garmin which was conformed by a Garmin dealer on a 337 after the original undocumented installation.

Wires were rats nested everywhere. Grounds were attached everywhere. There were no places to secure the wiring added over the years, most of it was just suspended by the connectors. Small parts like the antenna coax splitter were just kind of wedged in the rats nest of wires.

Most of the STC records came with the airplane, but not all. There is a lot of typical aging aircraft stuff. I find new minor issues under almost every panel I open for the first time. I pulled back the side wall panel and found a cracked static line. Often it's just small stuff like edge grommet peeling and wires chafing. Several fairings and plastic parts need some TLC too. After 35 years, this ship needed more than another quickie line repair.

I still have most of the tools I used when I worked as a full time A&P. I'm an airline Engineer and have access to technical data and excellent contacts for advice.

My biggest problem is finding the time to drive to the field and work on the plane. I give it one day a weekend. That's the pace I can sustain without upending higher priorities in my life. I expect to be flying again in the spring.

I never really wanted a project plane and I knew an out of production airplane would present challenges. None of the problems are insurmountable.

My capacity planning was hugely unrealistic, but I'll definitely be flying soon and I'm really happy with how things are turning out. I will need a very thorough flight refresher.
 
Last edited:
The Focke Wulf and the Saab both use Lycoming engines and Hartzell props so no problem getting any of those maintained. There are translated manuals and the airframe is all done with AN hardware. I have owned and maintained a couple of oddballs like a Nanchang CJ6 and a Yugoslavian UTVA 66. The Nanchang was very easy to maintain and there is now a lot of translated info on them. All we had when we got two of them was the Chinese manuals. It would be best to be able to do some of the mechanical work if you ever decide to buy and old airplane. It is fun to own something different and any time you arrive at a new airport you are the center of attention. Don
 
Back
Top