Newbie getting their PPL, buy a plane for hours and training or buy to keep?

J

Jamie Kirk

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Aug 7, 2018
Messages
636
Display Name
Display name:
JamieK
I've spent a lot of time talking to people I know that fly, reading forums and Facebook groups. One thing I have learned is that it is very important to define your mission and use of the plane. So I guess I can stat trying to come to a defined mission and share some information about me.

  • Married with 1 child age 6.
  • Absolutely positively will not go commercial. This is pure personal enjoyment.
  • 95% of my flying time will be with family and as my daughter gets older she will bring a friend so 4 seats in a requirement. Only time they will not be with me is if I have to go somewhere for work and instead of driving 3 hours to travel 40 miles I can fly and uber to my meeting. I have a simple rule, if my family can't go I don't go. We do everything together.
  • I do Triathlons so I need to be able to fit my bike in the plane after removing the wheels.
  • Something nice. Sorry but I work hard and like nice things. A project is fine but the end product must be appealing. In my experience buying someones finished project is FAR cheaper than doing it yourself.
  • 135+ knots cruise speed minimum. Flown a friends Piper 150 many times, average 102 knots. Birds passed us (joking).
  • Wife is 5'5" and has a hard time seeing over a Cesna dash and when we raise the seat her legs hit the yoke.
  • I like, actually I love, center stick airplane. However this limits me to a Diamond or Cirrus I believe.
  • I am learning on a DA40. Love the plane. but also big money.
  • I do not want a Cirrus, I read too many safety reports.
  • I want at least SOME glass in the cockpit. I just think it looks cool but no one I know who has a plane has glass in their cockpit. DA40 I am learning on is steam gauges.
  • Auto pilot is a must. Father in law has it and for longer trips it has been nice.
  • Prefer fixed gear due to lower insurance.
  • Not a fan of the Dual Yoke design. Maybe I need more time in some?
Right now I am trying to spend $100,000 for the plane. I originally started at $50,000 then I saw what $5-10,000 more got you and I kept upping it. Now I have seen used DA40s for around $120k. So I need to come to a firm decision on my cap. I know that even at $100,000 it will be more after travel, transport, inspections and repairs. I am someone that is meticulous on maintenance and safety. If something needs to be repaired or replaced and even if it can wait I would do it. Safety is why I like the Diamonds.

When I speak to other pilots, friend and father in law included, I get conflicted answers. If the price listed negotiable? Sorry but I am someone that firmly believes anything for sale is negotiable. My good friend who bought his Cesna is someone that pays retail, walks onto the car lot and pays MSRP sticker. Father in law spent 3 years building his plane and spent more than if he just bought. Are prices negotiable? Roughly how much? 10%? And does anyone sell privately or are brokers always used? Seems like you'll get a way better deal if you find a plane you want and buy it direct.

My father in law fly's, has a Piper Comanche PA-24. His was a rust bucket and he spent 3 years fixing it up to a beautiful airplane. No glass but he still spent close to $100k when you can buy one already done for $75kish that is comparable and not spend 3 years of time. He did most work himself with a checkoff by an IA(I think that is the abbreviation).

A good friend also fly's and has a Cesna Skyhawk. Almost all original except modern radios. Even has fuzzy brown carpet. Reliable plane and well maintained plane. Just not for me.

Right now I am spending $185 an hour with a wet airplane and instructor. If I say 40 more hours that comes out to $7,400 more I will spend.

I can buy a Cesna 150 locally for $17,000 that is ready to fly. Not pretty but it would just be used for training. If I just pay $65 an hour for an instructor that cuts my cost down to $2,600. Lets say I sell the 150 after getting certified for $15,000, saves me at least $3,000 in rental fees.

Or do you buy the plane you want now, train in that plane and get certified in that plane?

Currently flying 1+ hour twice a week with instructor. Usually go up with a friend once a week for 1-2 hours.

Thanks for reading my ramble, looking for any info people have.
 
Why cram the bike in the cabin when you can do this?

plane-in-air-0-1446426901.jpg
 
Well that is a first, never seen that. I guess that is a positive for high wing planes.
 
As always, RV-10 is the answer. You'll just need to bump the price point once more.
 
Get your last airplane first. Sounds like a job for a Skylane, to be honest. I've seen folks cram bikes into the back of them. Keep it long enough and you can upgrade it to whatever you like.

That said, expecting 135 knot airplane shiny in and out with a glass panel is simply unrealistic.
 
Welcome,a nice Cessna 177 cardinal retrac.
 
Aren't those home builds? Not really interested in buying what someone else thinks they know how to build.
 
I have bunches of time in both a 182 and a DA40. And it's my opinion that an auto pilot is the biggest waste of money you can spend on either.

Both planes, trimmed properly, will easily fly for 10 to 15 minutes at a time without even touching the yoke/stick. I've flown my 182 as long as thirty minutes on long cross country trips without touching anything.

Even hard IFR I've never felt overwhelmed hand flying either. They just fly sweet. And, besides, I fly to fly...not to surf the internet while George is flying.

I'd rather surf the internet in proper trim! ;)
 
FYI, most 4-seat light singles will not carry 4 people and 4 1/2 to 5 hours of fuel with or without belongings. Realistically, it sounds like you are eventually looking for a 6-seat single with a big cargo area to load the bike(s) in with the last 2 seats out.

If you don't mind buying and selling, it COULD make sense to buy a trainer, get your PPL and some time-building, and sell when you are ready to acquire your mission-capable plane. That was close to my strategy when I started training. (But to be honest, in the short term it is probably more cost effective to rent. You will spend a lot of money on a used plane in the first year or two fixing the last owner's deferred maintenance.) I rented until I got my ticket, then bought a 2-seat AA-1A for time-building with the intention for keeping it for a while, which made it less painful to fix it up a bit. Once I got 400 hours, I bought my current AA-5 for instrument training and trip-taking with my wife. (The AA-1A is nice, but just too small, too little payload, and too short-legged for two.) The AA-5 has plenty of useful load for full fuel, the two of us, and everything we bring back from somewhere. We're not in a hurry. 117 kt is fast enough to beat airline travel anywhere within 500 miles, since we live 5 minutes from the local airport.
 
Buy the plane you want and train in that, nothing on your list would be beyond something you could learn in with a good CFI
 
steingar said:
Get your last airplane first. Sounds like a job for a Skylane, to be honest. I've seen folks cram bikes into the back of them. Keep it long enough and you can upgrade it to whatever you like.

That said, expecting 135 knot airplane shiny in and out with a glass panel is simply unrealistic.
Click to expand...

That was my thinking, buy once cry once. But too many people talk about getting one to rack up hours. I'd rather rack up hours in a plane I plan on spending a lot of time in.

Somewhat locally there is a Moorey M20J with some glass and good presence for sale at $95,000.
https://www.controller.com/listings...5/1978-mooney-m20j-201?ST=california&CTRY=usa
 
chemgeek said:
FYI, most 4-seat light singles will not carry 4 people and 4 1/2 to 5 hours of fuel with or without belongings. Realistically, it sounds like you are eventually looking for a 6-seat single with a big cargo area to load the bike(s) in with the last 2 seats out.

If you don't mind buying and selling, it COULD make sense to buy a trainer, get your PPL and some time-building, and sell when you are ready to acquire your mission-capable plane. That was close to my strategy when I started training. (But to be honest, in the short term it is probably more cost effective to rent. You will spend a lot of money on a used plane in the first year or two fixing the last owner's deferred maintenance.) I rented until I got my ticket, then bought a 2-seat AA-1A for time-building with the intention for keeping it for a while, which made it less painful to fix it up a bit. Once I got 400 hours, I bought my current AA-5 for instrument training and trip-taking with my wife. (The AA-1A is nice, but just too small, too little payload, and too short-legged for two.) The AA-5 has plenty of useful load for full fuel, the two of us, and everything we bring back from somewhere. We're not in a hurry. 117 kt is fast enough to beat airline travel anywhere within 500 miles, since we live 5 minutes from the local airport.
Click to expand...

Bike weighs less than my wife's purse so it is not so much weight but space. With the wheels removed it's about the size of a normal luggage piece.

My in-laws are moving to Prescott Arizona, 300ish miles from airport to airport. This would be most likely our longest routine flight as we would like to go out once a month to visit them. Most of our flight time would be spent going to Catalina, Big Bear, Mammoth Northern CA etc for quick weekend trips.

We are also about 10 minutes from our local small field, POC, which makes it nice.
 
a 182 would be interesting, or perhaps a well cared for Bo?

Very clean J35 on beechtalk for $45k. it'd be a little much to learn in, but would seem to meet the needs well and if you learned quickly, you'd have a lifetime plane on the first try.
 
MIFlyer said:
a 182 would be interesting, or perhaps a well cared for Bo?

Very clean J35 on beechtalk for $45k. it'd be a little much to learn in, but would seem to meet the needs well and if you learned quickly, you'd have a lifetime plane on the first try.
Click to expand...

If you’re looking at 182s, you should also look at 180s and 185s, faster and also opens more doors for off airport ops which really change the dynamic when you get into it, I might be biased as a guy who has his 185 parked at his house
 
Cessna 182 fits that mission. Nicely.

And to be a little bit of a contrarian to Tim's post, an autopilot is nice to have, especially in the IFR environment. It leaves you with more brain power to deal with managing the airplane while the electrons manage the actual flying. I learned that when I was flying a Piper Archer with just a simple wing leveler with heading tracking capability. It was amazing to me how much less fatigued I was after a 3 hour IFR flight when the wing leveler took care of some of the navigating.
 
MIFlyer said:
a 182 would be interesting, or perhaps a well cared for Bo?

Very clean J35 on beechtalk for $45k. it'd be a little much to learn in, but would seem to meet the needs well and if you learned quickly, you'd have a lifetime plane on the first try.
Click to expand...

It has been for sale since 2016, looked at it earlier. That just screams out to me of why so many people have passed on it. I Just registered on the forum.
 
Greg Bockelman said:
Cessna 182 fits that mission. Nicely.

And to be a little bit of a contrarian to Tim's post, an autopilot is nice to have, especially in the IFR environment. It leaves you with more brain power to deal with managing the airplane while the electrons manage the actual flying. I learned that when I was flying a Piper Archer with just a simple wing leveler with heading tracking capability. It was amazing to me how much less fatigued I was after a 3 hour IFR flight when the wing leveler took care of some of the navigating.
Click to expand...

My father in law has been flying for 30 years and he was the only person who said make auto pilot a must. You don't have to use it and suggest not using it immediately so you can learn the airplane. But this goes back to the whole I'd rather buy something I can grow into. He has told me countless times and I've seen the difference of a 3+ hour flight with all manual control and one with auto pilot in regards to fatigue. He never gave the aircraft less attention, just was able to focus more on other aspects of flying.
 
I’d say Skylane too, but that’s just because I own a Skylane.

Downside of the Skylane is, if your wife can’t see in other Cessnas over the panel, she definitely won’t see over the Skylane panel without a cushion.

Hitting her legs won’t happen in a Skylane compared to a Skyhawk, the seat slides a LONG way back, even with the (highly recommended) seat stops installed to keep seats from sliding into nearly the back seat upon rotation, if they’re not latched correctly.

Every Skylane pilot does the Cessna butt wiggle and tells the right seater “If your seat comes unlatched avoid the natural urge to reach for the yoke to pull yourself forward. Just ride it back and enjoy the ride and we’ll fix it in a minute.”
 
i'm not sure about getting the bike in, but a bellanca super Viking could be a good plane if you can get a hangar. good value, fast, not known for being hard to fly. I just don't know how the doors/cargo work
 
ktup-flyer said:
You want 10 different airplanes in one. You have to compromise and figure out what you really want
Click to expand...

So you see my problem :).

What are the core things, in your opinion, that make that decision for you?
 
Jamie Kirk said:
So you see my problem :).

What are the core things, in your opinion, that make that decision for you?
Click to expand...
Comfort and useful load were my top 2... probably speed/range at 3. DA40s are somewhat fast and efficient, but they can't carry much. That ruled it out for me.
 
Jamie Kirk said:
So you see my problem :).

What are the core things, in your opinion, that make that decision for you?
Click to expand...

Whatever flying you’re going to do the most with it. You can rent or do something else in the one-offs.
 
ktup-flyer said:
Comfort and useful load were my top 2... probably speed/range at 3. DA40s are somewhat fast and efficient, but they can't carry much. That ruled it out for me.
Click to expand...

Very good points and I would almost have to agree.

denverpilot said:
Whatever flying you’re going to do the most with it. You can rent or do something else in the one-offs.
Click to expand...

I hate renting anything. I hate getting in and trying to find out what someone else broke. What someone else neglected. What someone else left in. Wife wanted an RV, we rented the few times we used it at first. I hated picking up RVs with tires I was not comfortable driving, maintenance I can see wasn't done. Damage I can see was caused by the last person. In an RV this can leave you stranded. In an airplane? Peace of mind and knowing I did everything needed is worth a little extra.

When I did the math I figured we would fly 15-20 hours a month average. If renting that puts me at $2,000-$2,700 a month not counting fuel. You need to buy fuel anyways.

Buying was roughly half of that. I was going to use cash so there would be no loan. Hangers are $450 a month and maintenance/reserve buildup $550 month.

There is just something about being comfortable in your own equipment and knowing it inside and out.
 
I'm in the camp that you should probably buy your forever plane now. No need to spend time renting someone else's plane when you can start learning to fly your own plane right away. You may need a waiver for a high-performance aircraft, but that's been done before.

The problem is that your requirements seem to outmatch your budget. The only alternative to a 182 I can think of that fits in your price range is a Piper Dakota. I'm not positive about the bike, but I think that with the wheels off you could do it. You can't get 4 people in with the bike, but you can take 4 people, 4-5 hours of gas, and a fair amount of luggage.

You *may* be able to find a model 35 Bonanza in that price range, and I believe there's an STC available for a bigger baggage door. The 35 Bonanzas have the advantage of the throwover yoke, so at least it won't be in your wife's way. And now that I think of it, there's an STC to remove the yoke on the passenger side of most Cessnas. It's popular with skydiving and cargo planes. Not sure if it's available for the Dakota.

My family has firmly decided that a single entry door on the passenger side (i.e. Piper) is a no-go. We're in a club with 5 planes, and they only go in the Pipers if the Cessnas are all booked. I've been told that when we're rich and can afford our own fancy-pants plane, a single front entry door will be acceptable if there are also rear entry doors, like the A36 Bonanza, Cherokee 6/Lance, etc.
 
You could just buy your first forever airplane and plan to fill the biggest hangar you can build with them.

Doesn’t anybody dream anymore? :)
 
I think you need a bigger budget or another partner unless you want to fly something very old.
 
Ben2k9 said:
I think you need a bigger budget or another partner unless you want to fly something very old.
Click to expand...

Failure, the age of the plane means VERY little, see PA18s, DHC2/3s, skywagon, U206, etc
 
Cherokee 6 with the cargo doors and fixed gear fills all your requirements. It’s fast enough, roomy enough for any bike and has a good safety record. While not as sexy as some of the newer offerings, it gets the job done. Panel can be updated and it makes a good IFR platform. Definitely buy a plane that’s IFR certified as you’re using it as a traveling machine with your loved ones. You can use the six for basic through advanced ratings and never want for another plane. Get a thorough pre-buy inspection and know what you’re getting. Allot enough money for the unexpected after you take ownership. Don’t over complicate by asking for more than any plane offers within your budget as we all have to make compromises.
 
As far as renting, if you go with a reputable FBO you shouldn't have anything to worry about. Rented planes aren't really like rented U-Hauls. They may look a bit ratty but they are typically maintained well. The FBO that my flight school operates out of takes meticulous care of their planes. A plane that's rented out has to go through inspections every 100 hours and any discrepancies they find are taken care of swiftly. They have a file for each plane listing any AD's that apply to it along with all of the maintenance logs. Personally I'd believe that a plane used commercially will likely be in better average condition from a mechanical standpoint than the same vintage and type of aircraft privately owned.
 
I saw a nice mid 80’s Dakota a few years back I maybe should of bought. I think the price went down to the lower 80’s, after starting high.

The other possibility is to not overbuy for future maybes, a nice Archer covers many bases.
 
You are doing the right thing by defining your mission requirements before buying a plane. One thing you did wrong is apologize several times for personal preferences. Don't say you're sorry for what you want!

My observation is that you have the same dreams that every first-time airplane buyer has: I will use my airplane for everything I do today and a ton of stuff I just wish I could do. It's good to dream. Dreams are one of the four forces that act on an airplane in flight. But you should examine your dreams very closely before spending that much money to chase them. It's obvious that you do chase some dreams pretty successfully, such as clearly having invested good money in a good bike that you actually use to run triathlons. It's just very, very important to be realistic about your airplane dreams.

Once they have the plane, most people end up using it a lot less than they had expected. How many triathlons are you really going to fly to? Is your daughter really going to have a friend who enjoys flying with you and whose parents allow you to fly their kid around? Is your daughter even going to want to spend that much time with her parents 10 years from now when she deep in the teenage years? Is your wife going to want to go with you on every business trip?

Also, look at the lengths of your flights and decide how much time a few knots really saves. And remember that each knot you add will generally cost more money and always save less time than the previous knot. My typical business trip is 120 nm each way and my typical "long" personal trip is 450 nm each way, and at the end of the day it takes a huge increase in speed to make a noticeable difference even on the long trip. The short trip is actually faster in my Arrow than it would be in a Baron, because I have half as much weight to roll out of the hangar and half as much stuff to preflight.

These are the questions you should be doing a lot of brainstorming on to help you choose the best plane for your mission, whether it's a 5-year mission or a continuing one. I don't think you should buy a trainer to build hours in. You don't need the hours for their own sake. You need competence in the plane you will be entrusting your family's life (or, even if you are solo, their livelihood) to. You get that competence by spending as much time learning that plane as you can. The more of your pre-certificate hours you have with an instructor in your post-certificate airplane, the better off you are. Some people get their private in all manner of complex aircraft, even twins and turbines. It takes more learning and more money than learning in a Cessna 150, but at the end you are ready to fly the bigger plane instead of needing to transition. (Just don't get stuck looking at all the fancy controls and instruments in the bigger plane. Every plane has a stick and rudder, and those are the controls that actually fly the airplane so you need to focus on your skill using them before you worry about anything else.)

For what it's worth, I started my private in a J-3 Cub and then moved to a Cherokee. The Cub was great to start in because you learn stick and rudder, on account of there being nothing else in the plane to get in the way. I bought the Arrow after I finished my private and I have a bunch of time in it. My next plane is the RV-14 that I am building, to better suit my mission (in which the rear seat of the Arrow is not used and the extra speed is worth having).

Turning to your actual airplane options, I think you are making a mistake throwing the RV-10 out just because it is homebuilt. You get nearly Cirrus performance and age for the price of a 30-year-old Cessna. You can actually use the rear seats. It has a stick. And most of them are, in many ways, better-built than the major manufacturers' products. They also almost universally have nice panels because the panels were designed by pilots with your same basic mission. You need a good pre-buy inspection, but that is just as true about the 30-year-old Cessna which likely has corrosion and cracks because the factory didn't insist on deburring every hole and priming every part the way that the RV-10 builder probably did.
 
Please read the latest safety reports; Cirrus "turned the corner" more than a decade ago, and has a very good record. Pilot training is the key (as it was in the Piper Malibu and Mitsubishi MU-2 when they had apparent issues. Turns out, as with Cirrus, the problem was behind the stick.)
 
Greg Bockelman said:
And to be a little bit of a contrarian to Tim's post, an autopilot is nice to have, especially in the IFR environment. It leaves you with more brain power to deal with managing the airplane while the electrons manage the actual flying. I learned that when I was flying a Piper Archer...
Click to expand...

I can't comment on the validity of that rebuttal because I have never flown an Archer and I don't know how its inherent stability compares to that of the DA-40 and/or the 182. Thus, I have no idea if the rebuttal is applicable in any way to my original assertion. I was speaking about two planes that I have experience with only, and not the entire fleet of single engines. Extrapolating to the entire fleet is a non-sequitur. For example, I don't think I'd fly any RV IFR w/o an autopilot (at least none of them that I've flown in) but comparing an RV to a 182? Har.

I can definitely see the convenience of having an AP in some of the more sporting and/or less stable aircraft. I just don't know where the Archer falls.

One thing's for certain though. If you buy a plane with an AP that's controlled by a horizontal situation indicator (or similar) then, because of our unwavering philanthropic demeanor, all of us at PoA will take up a collection to buy the highest quality metal landing calculator for you that we can find! This, since you can't use your HI to do those really complex and mind bending heading calculations required for descent planning.

And those damned things are expensive...and hard to find it seems! ;)
 
Kenny Phillips said:
Please read the latest safety reports; Cirrus "turned the corner" more than a decade ago, and has a very good record. Pilot training is the key (as it was in the Piper Malibu and Mitsubishi MU-2 when they had apparent issues. Turns out, as with Cirrus, the problem was behind the stick.)
Click to expand...
‘Turned a corner’ is a bit misleading.

Cirrus has made a lot of progress, but even in the last couple years we have seen plenty of the usual stupid pilot tricks from Cirrus drivers as the Bonanza crowd. Even with the chute we see way too many Cirrus fatals.

Like you said, training is the key. Unfortunately, the old adage applies: you can lead a horse to water...
 
timwinters said:
I can't comment on the validity of that rebuttal because I have never flown an Archer and I don't know how its inherent stability compares to that of the DA-40 and/or the 182. Thus, I have no idea if the rebuttal is applicable in any way to my original assertion. I was speaking about two planes that I have experience with only, and not the entire fleet of single engines. Extrapolating to the entire fleet is a non-sequitur. For example, I don't think I'd fly any RV IFR w/o an autopilot (at least none of them that I've flown in) but comparing an RV to a 182? Har.
Click to expand...

I don’t have any time in a 182 or a DA-40 so I will grant your point. However, as stable as those airframes are, it still takes brain power, no matter how little, to make sure the airplane isn’t straying off course or altitude. Especially in turbulence. While it does take SOME brain power to monitor an autopilot, I suggest that it takes less than monitoring an airplane without, no matter how stable it is.
 
I would never want a plane intended for XC flying without an autopilot.
 
Good luck stuffing a full-size road bicycle into an Archer. It can probably be done but what a PITA. I did like flying the Archer, tho. Good climb with only 1 aboard.
Many years ago I disassembled my YAMAHA IT 250 dirt bike and packed it into my ‘67 Camaro. It can be done but what a hassle.
 
I've never been in one, and have only seen pictures of them, but the Cessna C-177 Cardinal should come close to meeting all of your mission requirements. They were produced from 1968 to 1978, and come in fixed and retractable gear models. They also come with either fixed, or constant speed props.

Early models start around $45K, and later models can run up to $200K.

If you have a budget of $60K, you should look for a $45K plane, and budget the remaining $15K to dealing with owner deferred maintenance.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top