PNC aircraft

Tom-D said:
Who is this guy and is this an actual accounting of what we are expecting to happen ??


http://macsblog.com/2014/03/could-your-airplane-be-a-pnc/
Click to expand...

Mac McClellan used to be editor at Flying Magazine. I believe he took over after Richard Collins.

That article sounds a bit too good to be true. I suspect the idea of going back and forth between a PNC and standard certification just by doing an annual inspection might draw some heat.
 
I think it is a great idea, and would be a real boon to our dying segment of the industry. Think of all the crap and high cost associated with what should be no-brainers like installing modern LED lights, strobes, etc. Why should experimentals get to install Dynon or G3X systems and fly IFR in the same airspace as me with my legacy gyros while I cannot install those systems?

I don't think there would be any back-and-forth with 99% of the fleet. It reads to me that taking a PNC airplane back into the standard cert land would be more like a full conformity inspection, not just a regular annual inspection. Just like importing a plane back into the US. Regardless, my expectation is that once owners (like me) take advantage of such an environment there would be no reason to un-do any such modifications since our planes aren't used for commercial ops.
 
KSMooniac said:
Regardless, my expectation is that once owners (like me) take advantage of such an environment there would be no reason to un-do any such modifications since our planes aren't used for commercial ops.
Click to expand...

The main reason to switch back would be for resale. IOW, you might have a Stearman that you go PNC with for pleasure flying, but when it comes time to sell it, you are limited to selling to other non-commercial pilots. Someone who wants a Stearman for a ride business can't buy your plane unless there is a way to cross back.

If it goes through it would be a definite improvement if the Canadian system.
 
Man, an affordable glass cockpit in my Cherokee 235. Really wanting PNC to be implemented.
 
I would like to see such a thing go into effect, but I'm not holding my breath. I think it would really make ownership a more viable option for a lot of people, and I think the price of older used planes would go up as they become more viable candidates for a lot of pilots. I suspect there are people who'd like to own their own plane, but can't see sinking the money into a 30- or 40-plus year old airplane that they will never be able to afford to upgrade with anything resembling current technology.

Just imagine how EFI, electronic ignition, a Dynon panel and autopilot would breathe new life into a 70s vintage 172 -- all for about what you'd currently expect to spend just getting a 15 year old GPS installed.
 
That would be fantastic. I have so many things I want to do with my 150 that the expense of it doesn't make it worthwhile. If this passes it would bring a whole new meaning to "pimp my ride".
 
JB1842 said:
That would be fantastic. I have so many things I want to do with my 150 that the expense of it doesn't make it worthwhile. If this passes it would bring a whole new meaning to "pimp my ride".
Click to expand...

If you think the aircraft market is bad now, wait until you try to sell that low rider.
 
Tom-D said:
If you think the aircraft market is bad now, wait until you try to sell that low rider.
Click to expand...

I don't think putting hydraulics on the wheels to make it jump would be good on the airframe, but I wouldn't mind watching if someone else did that one their plane.
 
Tom-D said:
If you think the aircraft market is bad now, wait until you try to sell that low rider.
Click to expand...

:dunno: People don't seem to be having a lot of difficulty selling kit-built E/AB planes now. Like anything else, I think a lot of the resale value will be determined by what has been done, and how well it was done. Potential new regulatory rules aside, we're really not breaking new ground here.

It will be interesting to see how the resale value question would work out. I can see a potential new "flip this airplane" business opportunity -- buy a good solid airframe, bring it up to date and make it worth more than the sum of its parts. Or maybe (probably) not. Maybe the only people who will do significant updates will be the ones who will keep it until the estate sale.
 
JB1842 said:
I don't think putting hydraulics on the wheels to make it jump would be good on the airframe, but I wouldn't mind watching if someone else did that one their plane.
Click to expand...

Shag carpeting and furry upholstery on the glareshield and door panels would make it quieter and warmer in the wintertime. Neon running board lights along the underside of the fuselage would make it more visible at night too.
 
I think the value of undamaged/uncorroded vintage airplanes would go up immediately as they become prime targets for flipping, or new owner-upgrade planes.

I don't see how it could hurt values at all... the best C-150 out there today fetches around $20k (except for a recent outlier on this board). Say 2 years from now would you think a nice C-150 with modern LED lights, a Dynon PFD, AGM battery, no vacuum pump, etc. would be worth less than $20k? I could see it being worth substantially more in fact, especially if it could lead to more new pilot starts. Perhaps with an electronic ignition as well...

There is a ton of upside to this idea, and I can't see any downside really.
 
Neal Howard said:
Shag carpeting and furry upholstery on the glareshield and door panels would make it quieter and warmer in the wintertime. Neon running board lights along the underside of the fuselage would make it more visible at night too.
Click to expand...

I've already got the 70's paint job, the carpet and upholstery would go well. Maybe I can change my GoPro mount to a disco ball mount.
 
KSMooniac said:
I don't see how it could hurt values at all... the best C-150 out there today fetches around $20k (except for a recent outlier on this board). Say 2 years from now would you think a nice C-150 with modern LED lights, a Dynon PFD, AGM battery, no vacuum pump, etc. would be worth less than $20k? I could see it being worth substantially more in fact, especially if it could lead to more new pilot starts. Perhaps with an electronic ignition as well...
Click to expand...

I'll bet the price of the 150PNC and the regular version with all the same equipment with the proper paper work won't be pocket change different.

but you loose all the pilots that don't trust your work. all the flight schools are going to shy away. the buyer will be a Nub who has a dream machine in mind that they want to build, and will want it cheap.
 
Well, the market would certainly sort it out... I suspect any vintage plane with PNC upgrades to the panel and non-critical systems (like lights, not fuel delivery!) would sell quicker and for far great money than the un-upgraded versions that are rotting away today.

Hopefully we get a chance to see.

I know in my case if I were shopping Mooneys in this scenario, I'd pick one with a G3X or Dynon and a TruTrak or similar autopilot compared to one with 40 year old gyros and an INOP Brittain or Century autopilot. I suspect many other buyers would agree.
 
KSMooniac said:
Well, the market would certainly sort it out... I suspect any vintage plane with PNC upgrades to the panel and non-critical systems (like lights, not fuel delivery!) would sell quicker and for far great money than the un-upgraded versions that are rotting away today.

Hopefully we get a chance to see.

I know in my case if I were shopping Mooneys in this scenario, I'd pick one with a G3X or Dynon and a TruTrak or similar autopilot compared to one with 40 year old gyros and an INOP Brittain or Century autopilot. I suspect many other buyers would agree.
Click to expand...

After we see the new reg we will be more able to tell what the market will do.
 
I think we already know what the market will do. Today there are tons of old airframes sitting on the market for months and months with old radios, etc. because the cost of upgrades to last decades technology is ridiculous. When old airframes hit the market with new radios and equipment they are gone almost as fast as they can be listed.

EAB's sell every day and tons of certified owners lust for the number of things that EAB guys can do with their dollar. To think that going PNC and adding capability for reduced cost will kill values is just ludicrous. Got news for you, values are already in the toilet and now we are just getting to the point where things aren't selling. I dont see a bunch of people putting their planes in PNC so they can bolt junk equipment on them. They will convert them to merge with the accepted technologies and cost competitiveness found in the EAB world.
 
PilotSpike said:
I think we already know what the market will do. Today there are tons of old airframes sitting on the market for months and months with old radios, etc. because the cost of upgrades to last decades technology is ridiculous. When old airframes hit the market with new radios and equipment they are gone almost as fast as they can be listed.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of holes in that theory. First and foremost, when we start talking about "old" airframes, if your main concern is the bling of new avionics then maybe you ought to just give up flying. Because honestly, flight isn't about video screens and radios. :rolleyes:
 
Jhernandez04 said:
Man, an affordable glass cockpit in my Cherokee 235. Really wanting PNC to be implemented.
Click to expand...

Exactly! I think the PNC rule would breath a ton of life back into GA. It will make flying more attractive, less expensive and safer for many pilots and would be pilots. The ability to put in a Dynon non certified glass panel or back up AI at less than half the cost of a certified one would be great!

I'm not waiting with baited breath however I think PNC would do as much or more for GA than the Drivers License 3rd class medical. Its about time.

I do wonder what they mean about "aviation appropriate" parts can I get the alternator belt from Pep Boys or not? Also not sure how it will affect Public Benefit Flying, but all in all I think its a good thing.
 
AdamZ said:
Exactly! I think the PNC rule would breath a ton of life back into GA. It will make flying more attractive, less expensive and safer for many pilots and would be pilots. The ability to put in a Dynon non certified glass panel or back up AI at less than half the cost of a certified one would be great!

I'm not waiting with baited breath however I think PNC would do as much or more for GA than the Drivers License 3rd class medical. Its about time.

I do wonder what they mean about "aviation appropriate" parts can I get the alternator belt from Pep Boys or not? Also not sure how it will affect Public Benefit Flying, but all in all I think its a good thing.
Click to expand...

As long as it's not your primary source of instruments can't you put a dynon screen I'm your certified plane any ways?
 
Tom-D said:
Well maybe you do, care to share your reference?
Click to expand...

Nope. Its an opinion. Its mine. I have come to have it from spending the last 6 months in the market for an airplane. I am quite comfortable with it.

Silvaire said:
There are a lot of holes in that theory. First and foremost, when we start talking about "old" airframes, if your main concern is the bling of new avionics then maybe you ought to just give up flying. Because honestly, flight isn't about video screens and radios. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...


Holes in what theory? That planes with with old stacks and panels sit on the market for a longer period of time than planes with newer modern equipment? And why should I personally give up flying? I think I missed that.
 
PilotSpike said:
...Holes in what theory? That planes with with old stacks and panels sit on the market for a longer period of time than planes with newer modern equipment?...
Click to expand...

They do? If an airplane with old radios is not being purchased there's certainly more to the story than that. There is more at stake in regards to the condition of the airframe and engine. If you have two theoretically equal aircraft, one with new radios and one with old radios are you suggesting that they are both going to be on the market for the same price? Because if they are either the guy with the old radios is dreaming or the guy with the new radios just wants to give them away. Wouldn't it be arguably better to buy the old stack and use the savings to upgrade to exactly what you want? Isn't the old stack in fact a buyers bargaining chip?

Furthermore if you are the guy trying to sell an airplane with old radios do you think it would be a good move to dump ten large on avionics upgrades to increase your chances of finding a buyer? Because I don't think you'll come out ahead.

On the "quit flying" part - sorry I didn't mean "you" I meant a person that was buying an airplane based solely on what kind of radios it had.
 
Last edited:
Neal Howard said:
Nope. Not legally anyway unless you went thru the process of developing your own STC for such an installation.
Click to expand...

It can be done on a field approval, talk to your A&P-IA and their PMI about how to.
 
Silvaire said:
... If you have two theoretically equal aircraft, one with new radios and one with old radios are you suggesting that they are both going to be on the market for the same price?
Click to expand...

Nope, I am suggesting that the one with more modern radios will sell faster even with disparate prices.

Wouldn't it be arguably better to buy the old stack and use the savings to upgrade to exactly what you want? Isn't the old stack in fact a buyers bargaining chip?
Click to expand...
In a few cases, possibly. But mostly Im not convinced purely due to the astronomical cost of upgrading avionics today. Even for modest upgrades.


On the "quit flying" part - sorry I didn't mean "you" I meant a person that was buying an airplane based solely on what kind of radios it had.
Click to expand...
Thanx for the clarification. Ive actually been flying a 45 year old Arrow with a 30 yr old stack :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top