Cessna 310 for low time pilot

1. When you shop for airplanes, look for reasons to walk away from the deal. If you run out of reasons not to buy it then it's probably a good airplane. I would walk from this one without even looking at it.
2. As Henning and others pointed out there are many good twins out there if that is what you want. This one is not a "deal".
3. Insurance on twins for low time pilots is high for a reason. If you do go that route, find an instructor who knows the 310 and your avionics and get some good training, not someone who is going to ride around in the right seat for 25 hours. The 310 is a great airplane (I've flown the -G, -H, -K, -L, -N, -R and wrote a training manual for it), but I've seen pilots with "quickie" twin courses get behind in them and kill themselves and their pax in the process. I was actually training someone in a 310 in the same area when this one occurred (we were going from El Paso to Roswell and back), and had a start as I saw a buddy going out in his 310 the same day. When we heard about this we both started calling each other right away.
http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20100617X45846&key=1
 
fizbanco said:
It's an I model. From looking at prior AD's, it is basically looking like a full disassemble of the engines is required, plus replacing quite a few unknown parts. And that's not even getting to the airframes. Guess we were thinking if it's only putting in $10-$20k it would be a good deal, but that probably isn't close to realistic. Thanks, Ross
Click to expand...

Yeah, don't hang on to this one. The lawyer is either stupid or has a very good reason to withhold the logs. Walk...
 
Henning said:
How do you know how much time is on it? On an overhaul, the time carries forward. There may be some way for Pt 91 service, I'm not sure.
Click to expand...
You don't have to know how much time there is on it to overhaul an engine, but you would have to replace any limited life components (none, IIRC, in these particular engines) with new or known-time replacements. The new log started at the overhaul would say "TTSN Unknown, TSMOH 0". That would satisfy even the Part 135 requirements for overhaul at factory-recommended TBO. Further, the factory can always do a zero-time rebuild regardless and return the engine with "Total Time 0" in the logbook.

Similar deal on the airframe -- any limited-life components would have to be replaced with new or known-time. Not a problem on a 310 as far as I can tell (no limited life components listed in the TCDS), but if you were dealing with a Grumman AA-5-series plane, the wing shoulder bolts (7250 hours), center spar (12,000 hours), and wing spars (12,500 hours) would all have to be replaced before it could fly again legally. Also, every single AD ever issued would either have to be reaccomplished or require accomplishment confirmed by examination.
 
Last edited:
Blackhawk said:
Insurance on twins for low time pilots is high for a reason. If you do go that route, find an instructor who knows the 310 and your avionics and get some good training, not someone who is going to ride around in the right seat for 25 hours. The 310 is a great airplane (I've flown the -G, -H, -K, -L, -N, -R and wrote a training manual for it), but I've seen pilots with "quickie" twin courses get behind in them and kill themselves and their pax in the process. I was actually training someone in a 310 in the same area when this one occurred (we were going from El Paso to Roswell and back), and had a start as I saw a buddy going out in his 310 the same day. When we heard about this we both started calling each other right away.
http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20100617X45846&key=1
Click to expand...

Yep, very true. When I got my Aztec as a low time pilot I spent almost 35 hours with an experienced instructor doing all sorts of work before soloing the plane. Started out with high personal minimums and gradually expanded my boundaries, and flew it regularly. That's the real key. I also wish I'd done some sim time earlier on.
 
fizbanco said:
Hi everybody,
Longtime lurker, but this is my first post. I'm a pretty low time pilot, 125 total with 15 complex and working on my instrument. My friend is a longtime pilot with multi rating.

We are looking at buying together a 310. It is one of the turbocharged Riley conversions. I have two questions in regard to this.

First, do you think there is any chance an insurer would cover me once I have my multi. I'd also assume I'll have my instrument by then an maybe 160 hours with 30 or so complex.

Second question, the plane does not include any logs. Do we need proof of ownership of the Riley conversion stc? Does a copy of the Filed 337 count? I appreciate in info. Thanks, Ross
Click to expand...

The first part jumping into a Twin 310 nothing wrong with that. The second part buying the Twin you are talking about, Education in aviation cost money and you will be well educated if you buy that one.
 
Safely being able to operate a twin involves more than passing a checkride then ticking off a few hours with a CFI. Once you achieve proficiency you've got to maintain it over the long-haul. It takes a serious commitment of both time and money. The problem comes down range a few months. After the new twin pilot is fully fledged and on his own. Sitting in the left front seat with the autopilot on droning on from point A to point B then on to point C,D... does ABSOLUTELY nothing for you when it comes time to deal with an actual OEI emergency in a light twin. What matters at that point in time is what training you've done recently. As you can gather from the NTSB accident reports, a simple flight review every couple of years doesn't cut it. Most part 91, 135 and 121 professional pilots go to recurrent at least every 12 months and many guys go every 6 months and that's without regard to the amount of flying that they do annually.
 
Henning said:
Best was $50k, here's what NAAA comes up with.

View attachment 33217
Click to expand...

If you were offered $50K you should have taken the money and ran. :rolleyes:

Doesn't matter what NAAA or any other market evaluator comes up with, the airplane is only worth what someone is willing to pay.

Old overwing exhaust 310's are not desirable airplanes.
 
RotorAndWing said:
If you were offered $50K you should have taken the money and ran. :rolleyes:

Doesn't matter what NAAA or any other market evaluator comes up with, the airplane is only worth what someone is willing to pay.

Old overwing exhaust 310's are not desirable airplanes.
Click to expand...
Nah, I couldn't have gotten what I wanted in an amphib for $50k and I couldn't replace a 310 in this condition for anything close to that, so I'll hang on to it.
 
Every body back up a minute, the lawyer is in violation of the FARs by not transferring the logs with the sale.

So put the money in escrow then call FSDO about the problem with his thinking on the logs.

91.419 Transfer of maintenance records.
Any owner or operator who sells a U.S.-registered aircraft shall transfer to the purchaser, at the time of sale, the following records of that aircraft, in plain language form or in coded form at the election of the purchaser, if the coded form provides for the preservation and retrieval of information in a manner acceptable to the Administrator:

(a) The records specified in §91.417(a)(2).

(b) The records specified in §91.417(a)(1) which are not included in the records covered by paragraph (a) of this section, except that the purchaser may permit the seller to keep physical custody of such records. However, custody of records by the seller does not relieve the purchaser of the responsibility under §91.417(c) to make the records available for inspection by the Administrator or any authorized representative of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
Every body back up a minute, the lawyer is in violation of the FARs by not transferring the logs with the sale.

So put the money in escrow then call FSDO about the problem with his thinking on the logs.
Click to expand...

What FAR is he in violation of if he is selling it contingent on signing a document that the plane is for salvage only?
 
Henning said:
What FAR is he in violation of if he is selling it contingent on signing a document that the plane is for salvage only?
Click to expand...

try 91.417 when they sell the A/C the maintenance records must go with it, after the sale he has no say in what becomes of the aircraft.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
try 91.417 when they sell the A/C the maintenance records must go with it, after the sale he has no say in what becomes of the aircraft.
Click to expand...

That's just it, he's intentionally NOT selling an Aircraft, he is selling an ensamble of salvage parts.
 
Henning said:
That's just it, he's intentionally NOT selling an Aircraft, he is selling an ensamble of salvage parts.
Click to expand...

you best re-read the FARs that data tag is not an assemblage of parts.

unless that lawyer is willing to disassemble the aircraft and sell all the part separate he is selling the aircraft, and the logs go with it, including any and all records of life limited parts installed.
 
Tom-D said:
you best re-read the FARs that data tag is not an assemblage of parts.

unless that lawyer is willing to disassemble the aircraft and sell all the part separate he is selling the aircraft, and the logs go with it, including any and all records of life limited parts installed.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling the lawyer would rather burn the logs and the plane than hand them over. It's probably the least valuable part of the estate.
 
FSDO: "Hello, Mr. Lawyer? This is the FAA. We understand you have logs you are withholding from the person who bought the airplane you were selling."
Lawyer: "What logs?" *pours gasoline on logs and lights a match* "I don't have any logs."
 
Ted DuPuis said:
FSDO: "Hello, Mr. Lawyer? This is the FAA. We understand you have logs you are withholding from the person who bought the airplane you were selling."
Lawyer: "What logs?" *pours gasoline on logs and lights a match* "I don't have any logs."
Click to expand...

Any one can do what they think is right, you can't stop stupid.

I'd be sure he knew the FARs before I made any decisions.
 
Tom-D said:
you best re-read the FARs that data tag is not an assemblage of parts.

unless that lawyer is willing to disassemble the aircraft and sell all the part separate he is selling the aircraft, and the logs go with it, including any and all records of life limited parts installed.
Click to expand...
If those lawyers know what they're doing, the data tag has been removed and destroyed, and the registration returned to the FAA with the appropriate box checked. In that case, the aircraft has been de-registered and its serial number stricken from the Registry, they are no longer selling a U.S.-registered aircraft, and they are not violating 91.417 in their sale of what is now no more than an assembled collection of aircraft parts (many of which will have substantially less value without those records, but I don't think that bothers the heirs). The real problem would then be trying to get that aircraft back on the Federal registry without a data plate/serial number even if they can take care of all the issues arising from the lack of any maintenance records. So any way you look at it, this is just a walk-away and don't look back.
 
Last edited:
Um, some big, huge assumptions being made.

No one knows the condition but we've got people saying it's a complete wreck. For all we know it could be the most loved, pristine 310 in the fleet.

Next, the lawyer has already admitted he has the logs. If they go conveniently and suddenly 'missing' that is negligent at a minimum and a violation of FARs at the most.

The estate is in a tough spot, and they are being disserved by the lawyer in this case. Dismantle, right down to the bones and sell the bits off. Crush the whole thing, make it completely unairworthy and sell for scrap, or sell the whole plane and the logs go with it, including STCs and 337s. QED
 
Ron Levy said:
If those lawyers know what they're doing, the data tag has been removed and destroyed, and the registration returned to the FAA with the appropriate box checked. In that case, the aircraft has been de-registered and its serial number stricken from the Registry, they are no longer selling a U.S.-registered aircraft, and they are not violating 91.417 in their sale of what is now no more than an assembled collection of aircraft parts (many of which will have substantially less value without those records, but I don't think that bothers the heirs). The real problem would then be trying to get that aircraft back on the Federal registry without a data plate/serial number even if they can take care of all the issues arising from the lack of any maintenance records.
Click to expand...

If they have done that, why buy the aircraft? I doubt the salvage companies would make an offer. That aircraft that has been de-registered is worth recycle scrap prices. If they have completed that paper work, and removed the data tag you can't even export it.
 
docmirror said:
Um, some big, huge assumptions being made.

No one knows the condition but we've got people saying it's a complete wreck. For all we know it could be the most loved, pristine 310 in the fleet.

Next, the lawyer has already admitted he has the logs. If they go conveniently and suddenly 'missing' that is negligent at a minimum and a violation of FARs at the most.

The estate is in a tough spot, and they are being disserved by the lawyer in this case. Dismantle, right down to the bones and sell the bits off. Crush the whole thing, make it completely unairworthy and sell for scrap, or sell the whole plane and the logs go with it, including STCs and 337s. QED
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was a wreck, I said without logs or airworthiness certificate, it's going to cost a good $50k to get it into annual and flying again. They ARE stipulating in the sales contract that the plane is salvage only.
 
OBTW, folks, look at the requirements of removing a data tag, it requires the administrators permission.
 
docmirror said:
No one knows the condition but we've got people saying it's a complete wreck. For all we know it could be the most loved, pristine 310 in the fleet.
Click to expand...
I think most folks are saying the situation is a complete wreck....which renders the airplane itself near worthless in today's light twin market. It could be the most loved 310 ever....but there are so many 310s that it isn't worth the trouble to find out.
 
docmirror said:
Um, some big, huge assumptions being made.

No one knows the condition but we've got people saying it's a complete wreck. For all we know it could be the most loved, pristine 310 in the fleet.

Next, the lawyer has already admitted he has the logs. If they go conveniently and suddenly 'missing' that is negligent at a minimum and a violation of FARs at the most.

The estate is in a tough spot, and they are being disserved by the lawyer in this case. Dismantle, right down to the bones and sell the bits off. Crush the whole thing, make it completely unairworthy and sell for scrap, or sell the whole plane and the logs go with it, including STCs and 337s. QED
Click to expand...

EXACTLY.
 
Fearless Tower said:
I think most folks are saying the situation is a complete wreck....which renders the airplane itself near worthless in today's light twin market. It could be the most loved 310 ever....but there are so many 310s that it isn't worth the trouble to find out.
Click to expand...

To me, it's a train wreck about to happen in two buyers bank account.
 
How much am I offered for a great set of log books and a data tag for a C-310 ?
 
American Flyers does their ME in the 310 if they have a branch that is convenient to you.
 
Tom-D said:
If they have done that, why buy the aircraft?
Click to expand...
To fly? Beats me. As a business investment? That's what salvage companies do.

I doubt the salvage companies would make an offer.
Click to expand...
Why not? The parts are still valuable, including the engines for core value. My guess is that there is at least $30K in revenue (maybe much more) recoverable from that aircraft as long as you put the time and effort into disassembling, transporting, marketing, and selling them. And that's exactly what the salvage companies do -- even with aircraft listed as destroyed and deregistered.

That aircraft that has been de-registered is worth recycle scrap prices.
Click to expand...
As you pointed out in an earlier thread, the parts may still be used as long as the installing mechanic confirms by inspection that they are genuine. The only parts which would be unusable would any limited life components, and my research suggests C-310's don't have any.
 
Hey everybody,

I just checked back in with this thread and am rather amazed at how may posts it has gotten. I wanted to check back in with my decision.

After reading here and enough other research on all of the various AD's and possible STC issues me and my possible partner decided against the plane. This isn't before the owner dropped their price down to $16k. We basically realized to make it flyable would detail two overhauled engines, plus any airframe work. I'm not really looking to put $50k+ into an airplane at this time, even if it will do 300mph.

As far as the airplane was, it had been sitting for at least 5 years, not exactly sure how long. The panel had been half taken apart, as it was in the middle of a replacement before the owner died. Nothing else really looked molested.

I'm in a club at this time, and think that is the best until I decide what I really want to own. Anyway, I've enjoyed all of the discussion and the relevant information.

Ross
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top