Gotta have Useful Load

[wabower]

Have you ever seen the baggage area of a Velocity?

At the moment there is a 1993 Velocity SE on aso.com with an asking price of $47k. Useful load is "only" 1000 lbs, but at 180 mph @ 9 GPH, maybe the efficiency may be worth a look? Besides - it's much newer and prettier than the doddering Cessnas models being recommended!

 

[COFlyBoy]

OK, I gotta jump in to defend the Cherokee 6. It is a dog if you load it up to gross, but for the same load it will definitely out perform a c-182. (Don't know about a 206 or 205, which prolly cost more)
Example: Would you rather be in a Cherokee 6 at 400lbs below gross or in a 182 at 50lbs over gross?

 

[EdFred]

Walk around OSH and note the number of green prop tips. All of the trike recips will have them. And the ones that are usually thought to be the most prone are the models that are owned by somebody else.

I'm just going by what I've seen in person at our fly-in. The two planes that looked REALLY close to digging the prop into the turf were the 210 and the Mooney. I don't recall if either were a 2 or 3-blade prop. My tips have remained un-greened, but I also have a 3 blader. I'm sure with 2, I'd might have some added color.

 

[wabower]

One of the avmags had an article about it once upon a time. Issues they cited included absolute (static) ground clearance, strut compression, lever factor (distance from nose-wheel to prop tip, various approved props and blade lengths, and other stuff I can't remember. Mooney was (at the time) deemed to be the prime suspect based on their parameters. IIRC, the article was written prior to the engine manufacturers' pronouncements that a teardown inspection is required if a prop hits "anything other than air". Which simply leads me to conclude that some airports simply have greener air than others.

I'm just going by what I've seen in person at our fly-in. The two planes that looked REALLY close to digging the prop into the turf were the 210 and the Mooney. I don't recall if either were a 2 or 3-blade prop. My tips have remained un-greened, but I also have a 3 blader. I'm sure with 2, I'd might have some added color.

 

[OkieFlyer]

OK, I gotta jump in to defend the Cherokee 6. It is a dog if you load it up to gross, but for the same load it will definitely out perform a c-182. (Don't know about a 206 or 205, which prolly cost more)
Example: Would you rather be in a Cherokee 6 at 400lbs below gross or in a 182 at 50lbs over gross?

I'm glad someone stepped up for the Cherokee 6. Yessir, the good thing about the 6 is I wouldn't come anywhere close to gross on a typical flight of 4, even with my crew of heavyweights. 850# of people, 150# of baggage and 60 gal of fuel would still be 350# under gross.

I wonder how the Cherokee 6 would do in the mountains. Our trips to the mountains would be to Pagosa Springs in SW CO. Field elevation there is 7500 I believe, and we would need to fly Wolf Creek Pass (10,900 ft.) and LaVeta Pass (9,500 ft) to get in and out. Would a 6 do it okay? Obviously, we would avoid taking off in the heat of the day and avoid excessively high density altitudes. I'm sure the Cherokee 6 300 would do fine, but I"m not sure about the 260s.

 

[Fearless Tower]

I wonder how the Cherokee 6 would do in the mountains. Our trips to the mountains would be to Pagosa Springs in SW CO. Field elevation there is 7500 I believe, and we would need to fly Wolf Creek Pass (10,900 ft.) and LaVeta Pass (9,500 ft) to get in and out. Would a 6 do it okay? Obviously, we would avoid taking off in the heat of the day and avoid excessively high density altitudes. I'm sure the Cherokee 6 300 would do fine, but I"m not sure about the 260s.

A PA32-300 will do just fine cruising in the mountains. High DA takeoffs could still be an issue though - IIRC, the Piper Charts (at least the early ones) stop at 8000' Density Altitude (that's DA not Field Elevation) and the performance curve as the DA rises drops dramatically to the point that I have always been a little uncomfortable extrapolating the charts much beyond that. In CO in the summer, almost all of the airports are going to be off the chart.

I'd be okay flying a PA32-300 lightly loaded in the mountains, but wouldn't be too thrilled of doing it in a -260.

 

[OkieFlyer]

A PA32-300 will do just fine cruising in the mountains. High DA takeoffs could still be an issue though - IIRC, the Piper Charts (at least the early ones) stop at 8000' Density Altitude (that's DA not Field Elevation) and the performance curve as the DA rises drops dramatically to the point that I have always been a little uncomfortable extrapolating the charts much beyond that. In CO in the summer, almost all of the airports are going to be off the chart.

I'd be okay flying a PA32-300 lightly loaded in the mountains, but wouldn't be too thrilled of doing it in a -260.

Fair enough. Thanks.

 

[bbchien]

Have you ever seen the baggage area of a Velocity?

Have you ever looked at the landing and TO distances over 50 foot obstacles in a Velocity? Really TERRIBLE first ownership choice , esp for a big guy.

And the Cessna 205 with the same 260 hp as the Cherokee six, climbed nicely through 14,000 with four aboard, departing Telluride....tailing off to 300 fpm at the top. It's got a longer, tapered wing

 

[Jim Logajan]

I'm in need of a plane with a 1200 lb useful load, with plenty of leg room in the back, for less than 50K. [...] Basically, I need to haul 850 lbs of people, some luggage, and enough gas for 2.5 to 3 hrs with reserves.

Give one of those four people $10,000 so they can earn their own pilot certificate.

With the remaining $40,000, go out and buy two Piper Colts, Pacers, or Tri-Pacers or combination thereof. In theory you have met or exceeded all your requirements within budget. :wink2:

 

[OkieFlyer]

Give one of those four people $10,000 so they can earn their own pilot certificate.

With the remaining $40,000, go out and buy two Piper Colts, Pacers, or Tri-Pacers or combination thereof. In theory you have met or exceeded all your requirements within budget. :wink2:

Well Jim, I guess you're right. Although, if one of the others had their license, they could get their own dang plane.

 

[Jim Logajan]

Well Jim, I guess you're right. Although, if one of the others had their license, they could get their own dang plane.

For sure - but consider that you've basically posed a problem that inherently involves you subsidizing the asset cost for the required excess load. I'm just making the assumption more explicit.

(I'm assuming none of these family or friends was originally going to kick in money for the airplane purchase.)

 

[OkieFlyer]

For sure - but consider that you've basically posed a problem that inherently involves you subsidizing the asset cost for the required excess load. I'm just making the assumption more explicit.

(I'm assuming none of these family or friends was originally going to kick in money for the airplane purchase.)

You assume correctly, but here's the situation. My wife and I want to be able to travel with my parents quite a bit. It would make sense to have my parents throw in some cash for the airplane, but their part of the deal comes in the form providing us with free lodging on our travels. They have owned time shares for years, and are now to the point where we can travel all over the U.S. and they can provide us condominium accomodations free of charge. The problem is, with so many destinations to choose from, It's hard to have time to use them if we have to drive. So we could fly on my dime, and stay on theirs. Our typical destinations are Pagosa Springs CO, Destin FL, Wisconsin Dells WI(which happens to be just 60 miles from Oshkosh :wink2, Boise ID, Branson MO, Fairfield Bay AR, Williamsburg VA, and there are many more to choose from. I think it's a heck of a trade if I can come up with a suitable mode of transportation.

Here are some 210s that may be worth a look. Asking prices are higher than 50K, but it might be close enough for me. Surely I can talk them down a little as well.

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/CESSNA-210/1963-CESSNA-210/1196355.htm?

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/CESSNA-210/1964-CESSNA-210/1187801.htm?

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/CESSNA-210/1965-CESSNA-210/1197689.htm?

Some of the 210s have the kiddie seats in the back. Could a guy tear out the useless seats and gain some useful load and cargo space? Or is that a no no?

 

[Fearless Tower]

Some of the 210s have the kiddie seats in the back. Could a guy tear out the useless seats and gain some useful load and cargo space? Or is that a no no?

You can remove them, but I believe that it would require an A&P - I have never tried it in the 210, but I don't believe they are a simple pop in and out design like the seats in the PA32.

Most people leave the seat in place and use it as a baggage holder as-is. The 210 with the middle seats slid all the way back is a pretty comfortable 4 adult airplane. My only complaint with the 210 is that it doesn't have the same baggage space that a PA32 does (PA32 has a much bigger baggage compartment plus it has the nose baggage as well).

 

[wabower]

Kiddie seats are just a cushion and seatback built onto/into the structure. The useful load gain isn't enough to matter, and when the backs are folded down they make the bag compartment into a flat surface.

A gal who attended a CFI refresher last week said she had a D model with a 530 that would soon be for sale. If you're interested I'll find her and get the details.

You assume correctly, but here's the situation. My wife and I want to be able to travel with my parents quite a bit. It would make sense to have my parents throw in some cash for the airplane, but their part of the deal comes in the form providing us with free lodging on our travels. They have owned time shares for years, and are now to the point where we can travel all over the U.S. and they can provide us condominium accomodations free of charge. The problem is, with so many destinations to choose from, It's hard to have time to use them if we have to drive. So we could fly on my dime, and stay on theirs. Our typical destinations are Pagosa Springs CO, Destin FL, Wisconsin Dells WI(which happens to be just 60 miles from Oshkosh :wink2, Boise ID, Branson MO, Fairfield Bay AR, Williamsburg VA, and there are many more to choose from. I think it's a heck of a trade if I can come up with a suitable mode of transportation.

Here are some 210s that may be worth a look. Asking prices are higher than 50K, but it might be close enough for me. Surely I can talk them down a little as well.

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/CESSNA-210/1963-CESSNA-210/1196355.htm?

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/CESSNA-210/1964-CESSNA-210/1187801.htm?

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/CESSNA-210/1965-CESSNA-210/1197689.htm?

Some of the 210s have the kiddie seats in the back. Could a guy tear out the useless seats and gain some useful load and cargo space? Or is that a no no?

 

[OkieFlyer]

A gal who attended a CFI refresher last week said she had a D model with a 530 that would soon be for sale. If you're interested I'll find her and get the details.

If it wouldn't be too much trouble, that would be great. Does she keep it at Elk City?

 

[wabower]

Nope, she's in east TX and drove to Dallas for the refresher since our local airport was closed for resurfacing. She was going to provide me with a contact number, but the meeting ended in a bit of confusion and we didn't all leave at the same time. I'll try to find her.

If it wouldn't be too much trouble, that would be great. Does she keep it at Elk City?

 

[OkieFlyer]

Nope, she's in east TX and drove to Dallas for the refresher since our local airport was closed for resurfacing. She was going to provide me with a contact number, but the meeting ended in a bit of confusion and we didn't all leave at the same time. I'll try to find her.

OK. Well, it's still close enough that it wouldn't be much trouble to come take a look at it when the time comes. Thanks man. I just assumed you were in Elk City since you mentioned it earlier, but I guess you aren't there anymore.

 

[Jim Logajan]

Asking prices are higher than 50K, but it might be close enough for me. Surely I can talk them down a little as well.

Offering $50k (or less) when the asking price is ~$55k is perfectly reasonable - and I imagine should eventually net you a plane in your budget range.

 

[OkieFlyer]

Offering $50k (or less) when the asking price is ~$55k is perfectly reasonable - and I imagine should eventually net you a plane in your budget range.

Thanks Jim. I hope that's the case, and I hope it's the plane I need.

You know, one of those 210s I linked earlier is in Bend, OR. If you find yourself in Bend sometime, pop in and take a look at it for me.

 

[COFlyBoy]

I'd be okay flying a PA32-300 lightly loaded in the mountains, but wouldn't be too thrilled of doing it in a -260.

I have a '66 PA-32-260 that I have taken over Rollins Pass (11,300) with 4 adults (a bit more than FAA standard) and a kiddo with no problems. The 40 extra horsepower you get with the -300 is not the same as a turbo.

 

[COFlyBoy]

I wonder how the Cherokee 6 would do in the mountains. Our trips to the mountains would be to Pagosa Springs in SW CO. Field elevation there is 7500 I believe, and we would need to fly Wolf Creek Pass (10,900 ft.) and LaVeta Pass (9,500 ft) to get in and out. Would a 6 do it okay? Obviously, we would avoid taking off in the heat of the day and avoid excessively high density altitudes. I'm sure the Cherokee 6 300 would do fine, but I"m not sure about the 260s.

I'll let you know. We're currently on vacation in Page, AZ. We'll be goin home via Cortez, CO, Cumbres Pass, and La Veta Pass. Avoiding Wolf Creek Pass just because its unpleasant no matter what you're flying. Unless, you have a turbo, at which point it isn't really mountain flying anymore.

Disclaimer, if you're going to be flying in the big rocks you need either big rocks yourself, or you need mad skllz. Fortunately mad skillz can be learned from a competant mountain CFI. Getting big rocks for yourself may be more problematic.

 

[bbchien]

Unless, you have a turbo, at which point it isn't really mountain flying anymore.

Disagree totally. Have done it both ways. Mogollon Rim/ Colorado Plateau in the background. No turbo; lived there two years.

 

[COFlyBoy]

Disagree totally. Have done it both ways.

I's just poking at the difference between flying through the mountains and flying over the mountains. I wouldn't object to a turbo on my bird, but I'd still fly through the passes, cuz its cool.

 

[OkieFlyer]

I'll let you know. We're currently on vacation in Page, AZ. We'll be goin home via Cortez, CO, Cumbres Pass, and La Veta Pass. Avoiding Wolf Creek Pass just because its unpleasant no matter what you're flying. Unless, you have a turbo, at which point it isn't really mountain flying anymore.

Disclaimer, if you're going to be flying in the big rocks you need either big rocks yourself, or you need mad skllz. Fortunately mad skillz can be learned from a competant mountain CFI. Getting big rocks for yourself may be more problematic.

Vacation on Lake Powell?

It may actually be about the same distance for us to take a more southerly route and come up to Pagosa from the south and avoid WC pass altogether. Red River Pass may be a better way in, or maybe down around Taos.

 

[Everskyward]

I's just poking at the difference between flying through the mountains and flying over the mountains. I wouldn't object to a turbo on my bird, but I'd still fly through the passes, cuz its cool.

Almost all of my mountain time is in turbos but I flew down below the peaks a lot, sometimes because of my job and sometimes because I wanted to. I rarely flew any higher than I had to if I had a choice. Part of it was because I didn't like wearing O2 but the other part was that it was fun.

 

[wabower]

Elk City wasn't a big enough stage for my act, so I moved on to bright-lights big-city. When I moved from Oklahoma to Texas they said it increased the average IQ in both states.

OK. Well, it's still close enough that it wouldn't be much trouble to come take a look at it when the time comes. Thanks man. I just assumed you were in Elk City since you mentioned it earlier, but I guess you aren't there anymore.

 

[denverpilot]

Disclaimer, if you're going to be flying in the big rocks you need either big rocks yourself, or you need mad skllz. Fortunately mad skillz can be learned from a competant mountain CFI. Getting big rocks for yourself may be more problematic.

We usually find the big rocks busted at the crash site. Big brains work a lot better.

 

[OkieFlyer]

Almost all of my mountain time is in turbos but I flew down below the peaks a lot, sometimes because of my job and sometimes because I wanted to. I rarely flew any higher than I had to if I had a choice. Part of it was because I didn't like wearing O2 but the other part was that it was fun.

I won't be in the mountains much really, so I don't want to get into turbos. I do want to make sure I can get in there and get out a couple times a year. The way I've heard some people talk about Cheroke 6 260s, it was starting to sound like I'd have a hard time getting over the passes and a really hard time getting off the ground once I'm there. I've really heard some smack talk regarding the 260s. Not so much on this forum, but one guy did mention that they are a joke above 10K MSL. I've had a Cherokee 140 over 10K without a problem, so I figured a 260hp would do fine. Would vortex generators help the climb up in the mountains?

 

[OkieFlyer]

Elk City wasn't a big enough stage for my act, so I moved on to bright-lights big-city. When I moved from Oklahoma to Texas they said it increased the average IQ in both states.

 

[Tom-D]

at which point it isn't really mountain flying anymore.

Disclaimer, if you're going to be flying in the big rocks you need either big rocks yourself, or you need mad skllz. Fortunately mad skillz can be learned from a competent mountain CFI. Getting big rocks for yourself may be more problematic.

I have been across the continental divide many times, and never had a turbo. last time left Rock Springs, it was 98 degrees, and the 170 flew away OK.

You don't always go over the top.

 

[OkieFlyer]

Cool pics dude.

 

[Ted]

Which simply leads me to conclude that some airports simply have greener air than others.

It's not easy being green...

 

[flyersfan31]

May I ask, just what in the heck do I need another 25k for?

If you don't know the answer to that question, you ain't ready for ownership!!!

All due respect - if you think "$50k and I'm done," you are sadly mistaken. Crap, I spend $000's and I have a new plane.

 

[flyersfan31]

My own personal opinion?

For the less than $0.25 it's worth?

Turbos rule. I love chugging skyward like a rocket, instead of like a fat guy gasping for breath climbing stairs. Well maybe not a rocket, but you get the point.

Even here in the flats, I'd rather have a turbo any day of the week. Ted would rather have two.

 

[wabower]

Yeah, I just spent $500 for a new 1/4" windshield. First POS that Cessna installed only lasted 51 years.

If you don't know the answer to that question, you ain't ready for ownership!!!

All due respect - if you think "$50k and I'm done," you are sadly mistaken. Crap, I spend $000's and I have a new plane.

 

[OkieFlyer]

If you don't know the answer to that question, you ain't ready for ownership!!!

All due respect - if you think "$50k and I'm done," you are sadly mistaken. Crap, I spend $000's and I have a new plane.

Well I'm glad I was able to provide you with a good laugh this evening. I find little "respect" in that reply.

 

[Doggtyred]

Have you ever seen the baggage area of a Velocity?

I've helped build one. You access the baggage area through the front door, past two rows of seats.

Definitely a paved, non-short field plane.

 

[Ted]

Turbos rule. I love chugging skyward like a rocket, instead of like a fat guy gasping for breath climbing stairs. Well maybe not a rocket, but you get the point.

Even here in the flats, I'd rather have a turbo any day of the week. Ted would rather have two.

Andrew speaks the truth. With all the traveling I do, I really wish the planes I flew had turbos. However, you and I put most of our hours on flying trips. For people who don't, it's probably less of a big deal.

That said, I bet the 310 will out-chug most naturally aspirated planes through 5000 ft or better. But it's a good hot rod. RAM T310R would be better still.

 

[OkieFlyer]

Andrew speaks the truth. With all the traveling I do, I really wish the planes I flew had turbos. However, you and I put most of our hours on flying trips. For people who don't, it's probably less of a big deal.

That said, I bet the 310 will out-chug most naturally aspirated planes through 5000 ft or better. But it's a good hot rod. RAM T310R would be better still.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have a turbo, but they cost too much for me. A normally aspirated 210 would perform so much better than what I've been flying anyway, I bet I would be quite happy.

 

[denverpilot]

Well I'm glad I was able to provide you with a good laugh this evening. I find little "respect" in that reply.

I thought his reply was reserved. Ownership costs to properly maintain and fly an aircraft are a very large percentage over and above the purchase price.

He was trying to get your attention about that, not insult you.