(UPDATE-BOUGHT A PLANE)Airplane NEWB - May need a plane for business,help me find the best option

Discussion in 'Flight Following' started by Jared Kornelsen, Aug 12, 2018.

  1. flyingcheesehead

    flyingcheesehead Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    21,270
    Location:
    UQACY, WI
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    iMooniac
    Jared, the 182 is both a "reasonable trainer" (not commonly used because it's high performance, but it'll do the trick) plus a great first airplane to own. Get your private and instrument in it, fly it around for a while, and you'll be in good shape to upgrade once you actually need the six seats. Plus, Van Bortel will have several 182s for you to look at.

    If you absolutely can't live with a 182, get an SR22, but ONLY if you take all of the COPA training and get real comfortable with the idea of pulling the chute if and when the time comes. I don't think there's a good six-seater that fits your mission that would also be good for training in.

    @Ravioli, read the mission parameters the OP posted. No, this is nowhere near 135 territory, nor does it require a commercial ticket. It's pretty much a textbook case of "incidental to the mission" as the OP has clearly stated he'll drive if needed.

    OP, what Ravioli is referring to is this: If you get paid to fly the airplane for your own company, you need to be a commercial pilot, not a private pilot. If you start hauling passengers around for money, that makes you a charter operator and requires a Part 135 air carrier certificate (which is quite an undertaking to obtain). Learn the rules about "compensation or hire" in great detail, including reading the legal interpretations the FAA has released, and follow those rules and interpretations to the letter, and you'll be fine. That means don't take your clients for rides in the plane, don't take other people from your company with you, don't ever call yourself a "company pilot", and don't schedule meetings you couldn't get to without the plane.
     
  2. Jared Kornelsen

    Jared Kornelsen Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jared
    This one is $229,500
    https://vanbortel.com/aircraft-for-sale/aircraft-inventory/905/1998-cessna-182s-skylane

    This one is $289,500
    https://vanbortel.com/aircraft-for-sale/aircraft-inventory/1045/2002-cessna-182t-skylane

    What do yall think would happen if I go for a 182 or similar for around the $200,000 range and fly it for a year or 2 and put on say... 100hrs - 150hrs a year. How much money will I loose if I'd trade it back into them for a 6 seat or something higher performance/more complex provided the economy stays in good shape?
     
  3. Sinistar

    Sinistar Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    Messages:
    1,498
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Brad
    I skimmed the entire thread and I don't think many operational costs have been given.

    For the (2) 182's aboVE I can give our number. Our plane is owned (no loan). Our hangar is $100 a month. We put in $35/hr to engine mx reserve. Out insurance is about $1000/yr for my newbie arSE (wife has Commercial). I flew it just over 100hrs last year and our all in hourly cost (including annual) was about $130/hr.

    Now if your hangar is $400/month, that number is going up. If you have a loan, that number is going up. If you have a parachute that number is going up. If you have a turbo that number is going up. If you have retractable gear that number is going. Same goes for A/C, FIKI, etc, etc.

    Also regarding the planes above, if they are near TBO then adding a 200 hrs will really drop the price. If they have just been rebuilt then adding 200 hrs shouldn't hurt much...but then of course you paid for those low hours in the closing cost.

    It doesn't hurt to look at rental prices to get a good idea of your own operating costs. For example if a SR20 is renting for $220/hr...unless you bought it with cash and your hangar is cheap...your hourly operating cost will probably within %15 of their rental number.

    For a SR22T I would think rental costs are closer to $275/hr so maybe you should be thinking atleast $250/hr for that plane.

    You mentioned redoing interior. Wouldn't it be nice to do it yourself! But, if you don't have a willing A &P to sign off your work, they need to be involved. Expect to pay around $5k..$8k for an interior. The A&P will do a bit of the work, install seats, etc snd final weights.But the majority will be done by the interior crew. And you can't just use any material, it requires proof of burn testing. And you can't just use any seat, it has to be a specified part or will need a IA sign off of modified. Lots of rules.

    You mentioned doing metal buildings. Now here is your best play in aviation. Build us all some big hangars!!!

    Also, has your boss given you his numbers. Does he proclaim to come out ahead flying the SR22...or is it out love of flying and he's paying for it...perhaps more than he letting on.
     
    flyingcheesehead likes this.
  4. Jared Kornelsen

    Jared Kornelsen Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jared
    My boss has another company he uses the plane for alot to fly to auctions etc... He loves flying but also its a great tool for him as well, I believe its him and 2 or 3 other guys that own it together.

    Thank you for sharing your actual expenses.

    I think my biggest questions now would be if I head most everyones advice and go for a 182 to train in and use for 1 or 2 years or so max and then I want to trade it for like a 350/400 or a twin or maybe even a Lancair or something, what will that look like financially for me. I imagine if I got something with around 700-800hrs smoh and I put 300 hrs on it in 2 years it wouldnt be so bad on a 70's 182 but what if I get one that is in the $200,000 range, will it retain its value the same or is it a depreciating money pit and I'll loose big time in 2 years? Also what are the advantages in going with a newer 182?

    Also I researched the 182's more last night and read up on the 182T - the turbo version. Although engine rebuild cost look to be almost that of a N/A twin its looking like if you fly 14,000 or so that you could cruise around the 145-155 mark, maybe even faster, and if you opt to use oxygen then its quite abit faster yet..
     
    Sinistar likes this.
  5. Salty

    Salty En-Route PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,057
    Location:
    FL
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Salty
    Others may disagree, but I don't think a turbo would be a good plane to learn in. It complicates things quite a bit.
     
    flyingcheesehead likes this.
  6. Jared Kornelsen

    Jared Kornelsen Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jared
    Can you elaborate?
     
  7. Skyrys62

    Skyrys62 Pattern Altitude PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2017
    Messages:
    2,222
    Location:
    Owensboro, KY
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Meet the Fokkers
    Van Bortel has a money back guarantee. 30 days, 100%, etc.
    100 hrs I believe is 85%
    Though that is darn pricey at that amount! You'd probably be better off trading it in, but that plane has been for sale quite some time...if it's the same one. I've eyeballed it repeatedly. I personally just won't put that much into a plane without any business use, but you appear to have that.
    One of the nice things about the 97 and later iterations of the 182 is they have fuel injection, so no carb ice worries, but there are pros/cons to everything.
    Here is a quick basic read if you haven't explored it already.

    http://www.boldmethod.com/learn-to-...ed-engines-in-your-airplane-and-how-it-works/
     
  8. Jared Kornelsen

    Jared Kornelsen Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jared
    Good read, thanks.

    So trade in value is that 85% per 100hrs a good rule of thumb? Would I be better off getting pre approved at like Dorr or something and then shop the private market for something without the dealer markup?
     
  9. weilke

    weilke Touchdown! Greaser! PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    12,343
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    weilke
    Have talked to your boss about your interest in learning how to fly so you can help expanding the business footprint (and your territory ;-) ).
     
  10. Jared Kornelsen

    Jared Kornelsen Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jared
    Yes I have, but I wont be charging the company, I want the tax deduction.
     
  11. Jared Kornelsen

    Jared Kornelsen Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jared
  12. Ben2k9

    Ben2k9 Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2018
    Messages:
    190
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Ben2k9
    They are great for training. One of the biggest college affiliated flight schools in the country uses them across the board. (MTSU)

    They have the best safety record, and are very efficient with speed/versus fuel consumption.

    As for value retention it should be top grade. I was shopping for one earlier in the year and prices have increased since then.
     
  13. Skyrys62

    Skyrys62 Pattern Altitude PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2017
    Messages:
    2,222
    Location:
    Owensboro, KY
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Meet the Fokkers
    Yeah, the DA40 is a common trainer. I think they hold their value fairly well from what I can see.
    You may find you like it enough to keep it...unless you need more carrying capacity.
    Take these as pros/cons as you see fit, and they are just my observations of what I have flown.

    Useful load will likely be 3 full size passengers with full fuel.
    Like to wag their tail in turbulence.
    Decent cruise speed. 130(ish) at about 10-11gph full rich. Leaning helps as always.
    KAP140 is a pretty good AP.
    Fuel injected Lycoming 360
    Can't stick the tanks very well. What looks like a half inch fuel means you are almost full. When you can't see any, you really have no idea how much you have except by the gauges.
    40gal/34 useable (2003 model)
    Easy to land for the most part.
    Excellent visability.
    Hotter than hades in the summer sun.
    I haven't flown any with the G1000 so can't comment on that.
     
  14. Jared Kornelsen

    Jared Kornelsen Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jared
    Talked to Van Bortel again, they have a newer 182 for 199,500 w/1800hrs.
    For 249,000 w/new engine including installation come in once it needs it and they'll install it. This seems like an attractive option if it was a plane I'd keep for a very long time.

    For them it would be 10-15% less/depreciation once trading it in if it was about 2 years and 300hrs later, also depending on what I'd trade for.
     
  15. Ben2k9

    Ben2k9 Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2018
    Messages:
    190
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Ben2k9
    Honestly dude you are getting a little ahead of yourself. Start your PPL training, fly a few different planes first.

    You can always get that tax deduction next year if you can’t get it all together this year.
     
  16. Sinistar

    Sinistar Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    Messages:
    1,498
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Brad
    Interesting, your boss and perhaps more so his plane, really has you hooked (its a dang nice plane). But look how practical he is trying to be. A SR22T new will run just shy of $1M. Maybe his is older so lets just guess its value at $500K. And lets go with him having 3 partners so he's only paying 1/4 of annuals, upgrades, hangar, mx reserves for engine rebuild, etc. That's a much nicer position provides he has enough access to it to suit his needs.

    In the ideal world if the "perfect" aviation partner existed, I think you would see way more 2 partner plane owners in the $50K...$250K range. So that is something for you to consider...partnering...after you have learned to fly.

    Regarding older 182's. Most (like ours) have a 1500 TBO on the Continental motor. So if you buy at 700smoh (just like we did) and you fly it 300hrs it will still have about 33% of its hours remaining. If you have a good relationship with the mechanic and take care of it, he may let you fly it past 1500. Go with a motor overhaul cost of $45K. So your scenario has you putting on 300hrs which is (300/1500) * $45K => which gives you $9K of depreciation on the plane's value. A shrewd buyer and of course every savy broker/saleman will know that when it comes time to trade it. So in a way this is a good scenario (for any plane). You go into it thinking you'll just be paying hangar, fuel, and insurance. But there was an addition $9000 of depreciation on thos 300 hours....or $30/hr. If you noticed in my numbers we stuff away $35 for every hour flown just for this! But then again when we bought the plane at roughly half's its TBO our offer took that into consideration.

    Some of the last 182 models before they stopped (maybe 'Q' model???) had TBO of 2000hrs.

    When you start looking at the much newer 182's they will probably have a nice paint job so that is saving you $10K minimum, probably $15K. And they have nice interiors so per an early post that is saving you another $6k+. And someone was great to point out fuel injection and avoiding carb ice. Right now today if I flew with lower ceilings and mist in the air and air temp of about +51F I can promise you I would be watching my Manifold Pressure for carb ice build up. It happened during my training, it was great lesson and I suspect the majority of carb'd 182 owners always have this on their mind. Of course that big Continental can also throw quite a lot of carb heat and just eats is right up provided you don't get behind on it.

    Other airplanes will have their owns set of quirks, crazy AD's, etc.

    Another thing that is really nice about the later 182's is that many will have glass. That fancy big display (usually 2). It will be more like your SR22T ride in that regard. Now adding that G1000 to a older Cessna 182 I think is some crazy amount (maybe $50K, maybe more, ???). So now you can see why the newer models cost so much. Nice new paint, with better corrosion protection, nice interiors, glass cockpits, fuel injection, etc. But I think an older model with your own preferred upgrades is a better deal for single person ownership (and that applies for all these older single piston planes, not just 182's).

    I think the only way you are going to reliably see cruise speeds in a 182 if greater than 140kts is to get a retract. And Cessna retractable gear on the 172/182/210 just don't seem all the strong compared to the low wing planes (Archers, Bonanza's, etc). I would want to have a lot of experience flying planes...as in being fantastic at landing...before considering a small Cessna single engine plane with retractable gear...but that is just me.

    If you are thinking a straight leg (fixed gear) 182 I can give you my numbers. Lately I usually cruise around 145mph and that is at about 10.7gph. I don't have a engine analyzer so I could probably lean it a bit better. Those numbers are not full power though. It just a nice balance between fight time and fuel costs.

    Another place a plane like a 182 or 210 really rock is at high Density Altitudes. Basically that is the equivent altitude you are flying at with temperature and few other things factored in. So lets say in Texas in winter is 60F and you take off from a Hill Country airport at 1700msl. The Density Altitude will also be 1700 (roughly). Now do that same takeoff, same airport but in July when its 101F and some nasty humidity. The Density Altitude could be up around 4000ft! So your plane will take off like you up at 4000msl. To cut to the important part, you will need more runway. So planes with a lot of power will fair better here. A Cessna 152 will climb much more anemic than a 182 or Bonanza (as examples).

    Once again, you can see what learning to fly before getting the plane could save you a lot of hassles in the end. The only reason I learned in our own 182 is that my wife was already a pilot and she taught me a lot about W&B, performance, etc. We decided we wanted a tricycle fixed gear plane that could really haul 4 people. That pretty much means a 182, 206, 210, Dakota and few others. We wanted a high wing and 2 doors for easier entry so the list now has 182,206,210. The 206 and 210 are more plane and mx than we needed so bingo 182. Plus the 182 probably has a STC for just about anything. I would have never knew enough to make all those choices without spending many hours with a experienced pilot. That experienced pilot (my wife) also mentions often how she misses her tailwheel plane!! But for us to fly into our 70's or maybe even longer having a tricycle gear plane and no gear means far less chances of takeoff and landing problems.

    My recommendation to you is if you buy a plane to learn in and fly initially, to find a mentor or two (one high wing, one low wing) and have this conversations over beers. You could also involve your CFI but if your CFI has never owned a plane they will not be able to bring actual ownership experience to the table. You can of course also keep asking here and you will get lots of help.

    The other day at the airport someone was asking about airplanes. We own a 182 and a friend owns a Dakota. It was a fantastic session of shooting the bull, explaining differences and choices made. I hope the 3rd person learned something - I think they did!

    I know paying for test flights can cost a few hundred bucks a pop but maybe you should get a ride in a high wing (182) and low wing (Dakota??) - both older planes with no glass - and you just might be surprised that the 70's "shag" may not bother you so much - LOL :)
     
  17. Kenny Phillips

    Kenny Phillips Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2018
    Messages:
    1,202
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Kenny Phillips
    Certainly bear in mind that unless the plane is used exclusively for business you won't get the full amount as deductible; if you fly on vacations or burger trips 50% of the time, then half of that is gone. I flew my plane on business quite a bit in twenty years ago, and wrote off only the actual expenses of each trip.
     
  18. Jared Kornelsen

    Jared Kornelsen Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jared
    Thank you for the insightful replies. The sr22 my boss bought was about $250,000, its not the turbo version. I've flown with in multiple older high wing cessna's so I'm already familiar with how the passenger pov is atleast.

    Yeah the first little while atleast will probably be almost purely for business. If they wife and kids go with and stay at a hotel while I'm out meeting clients etc then they can get some enjoyment out of it too so that would be nice and still business.

    So nobody has answered directly my question of depreciation because of it being newer, only relating to using it etc. But from what I gather there isnt really an extra depreciation hit just because its a newer model and has modern avionics, its mainly use and how many hours are left until overhaul am I right?

    A 182 or 182T seems like a good choice too for dirt runways.. On the 182T is there extra training you have to do for the onboard oxygen system and is it easy to keep up with or not worth it if you rarely use oxygen?
     
  19. weilke

    weilke Touchdown! Greaser! PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2010
    Messages:
    12,343
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    weilke
    Talk to an accountant familiar with aircraft issues before you assume that this makes financial sense.
     
  20. benyflyguy

    benyflyguy Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2018
    Messages:
    1,245
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    benyflyguy
    I wonder if you are able to deduct any of the lessons???
     
  21. Kenny Phillips

    Kenny Phillips Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2018
    Messages:
    1,202
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Kenny Phillips
    Well, there's tax depreciation, and there's real depreciation. The airplane's actual value will depreciate more slowly than the tax numbers, but when you sell it, you'll "recapture" some of that, and pay taxes on it.
     
  22. iamtheari

    iamtheari Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,434
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Ari
    Turbos require more from the pilot to keep the engine happy. My plane has an IO-360 and good old Cherokee Hershey bar wings. I can cruise at 10,000 feet and watch my GPS for a VSR (vertical speed required) to hit pattern altitude 2 miles before the airport of 700 feet per minute or so, push the nose over and descend at Vne (redline airspeed), level off and throttle back to idle, put down the gear, put down the flaps, taxi to my hangar, and kill the engine without hurting it. If you try that stunt with a turbocharged engine or even a big enough naturally aspirated engine and/or with laminar flow wings (Lancair, Cirrus, etc.), your engine will come from together as a result of shock cooling.

    Turbos also require longer trips or frequent operations at high density altitude to give you any benefit at all. The higher altitudes still require time to climb to and descend from.

    If you can get a newish Cessna 182, I think it's a good choice for your training and your mission. Don't buy more seats until you have enough people who actually like flying with you to require them. You are going to learn a lot about being a safe and versatile pilot in the first few years you fly that 182 around, and it will do your mission well enough that you will not really need to upgrade for a few years. You may even find that it handles your mission perfectly well and never need to upgrade. And, if you do need to upgrade, you'll know by then exactly what upgrades you'll actually get a benefit from. For example, I'm in the process of "upgrading" to a plane with fewer seats, lower maintenance costs, better avionics, and higher speeds with basically the same engine as I have now. If my seating requirements had grown, I'd be going a very different way. Your plane should be chosen based on your mission, but you won't really know all about your mission until you've flown it for a while.
     
  23. Jared Kornelsen

    Jared Kornelsen Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jared
    Yes you can deduct lessons if they are for business use is what I'm told. A 182 really sounds like a good option.. Just will want more speed soon I feel.
     
  24. iamtheari

    iamtheari Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2016
    Messages:
    1,434
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Ari
    Everybody wants more speed, all the time. It's like heroin. You think that you'll be happy if you just get 10 more knots, but then you get them and you think you'll be happy if you can just get another 10. The high you get from each 10-knot speed increase only lasts a day.
     
  25. Mike Blackburn

    Mike Blackburn Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2018
    Messages:
    34
    Location:
    Johannesburg, South Africa
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Mrb13676
    Have you considered a LSA type?In your budget you could get a very nice TAF Sling 4 (they have just started making them with the Rotax 915TSi which is a 145hp) - should get 135-145kts in the cruise, pretty useful load and easy to learn on and fly. And maintenance much less than “traditional” aircraft.

    RV-14? - another option - a bit more pricey though
     
  26. flyingcheesehead

    flyingcheesehead Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    21,270
    Location:
    UQACY, WI
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    iMooniac
    Well, a good gauge for that is what Vref (aircraft valuation tool) says. For a normally-aspirated 182 around that time frame, this is what they say:

    1998: Retail $155,000, 2870 hours assumed, $5.54/hr airframe, $22/hr engine
    2000: Retail $170,000, 2590 hours assumed, $6.73/hr airframe, $22/hr engine
    2002: Retail $180,000, 2310 hours assumed, $7.99/hr airframe, $22/hr engine

    As you can see, newer airplanes are assumed to cost more, every hour on the airframe has a bigger hit to the value, but the engine value is constant.

    So, I would expect that if you buy a 2002 182 now, and sell it 2 years and 300 hours from now, you'll take a depreciation hit of about $10,000 (retail) + $6600 (engine time) + up to $2400 (airframe time) for a total of $19,000.

    Or, the economy could keep humming and the airplane market could keep going up and you could sell it for what you bought it for or more.

    Or, the economy could tank and you could end up losing $50K if you're in a must-sell situation. Who knows. :dunno:

    Really, it could go either way, as I outlined above. Personally, I'd aim for something that's more in the 500-hour SMOH range, since in reality the value at sale is somewhat non-linear both early and late in the engine's life. When I was trying to sell a plane with 1200-1400 hours on a 2000-TBO engine, people were saying the engine "would have to be done right away"! (I picked up a partner and kept the plane, and we're at 1999 hours now, with no trouble at all from the engine...)

    But remember that you'll spend longer climbing (at a slower speed) to get up to that altitude. Really, turbos don't give you any significant speed advantage until you are flying 300+ mile legs on a regular basis. Below about 10,000 feet, a normally aspirated plane will actually be faster, and you won't gain a significant speed advantage until you're in the upper teens. So, look at your normal mission and see if you're going to be doing that the majority of the time. I've thought a lot about whether I should switch to a turbo bird, but in reality, it'd only help me about a half dozen times a year, while the rest of the time I'd be paying for more fuel and more maintenance to go slower. Plus, a lot of those times I'd like a turbo, I have my wife and son along and while my wife is fine with breathing oxygen sometimes, I can't exactly teach my 20-month-old how to breathe through a cannula if I even had one that'd fit him. With children, you pretty much need to stay in the altitudes where the normally-aspirated plane is faster anyway.

    When training, you haven't yet developed a lot of finesse when it comes to handling your engine, and you'll be doing a lot of go-arounds, some of them in "panic mode", after a botched approach or landing attempt. Put those together, and you have a recipe for big maintenance costs. Plus, unless they changed the turbo system in the newer 182s (@flyersfan31 had one, maybe he can elaborate), you can't push the throttle to the stops without overboosting, which makes it even more likely that some of the early panic-y go-arounds you'll have during your first couple hundred hours will result in very expensive trips to the shop, if not a full engine overhaul.

    Don't get a turbo for your first plane, in other words.

    Working with Van Bortel is very different from most of the rest of the market. They do things like let you return the plane within a certain time frame, and I think they have some guarantees in place as well. But, you do pay handsomely for that - Consider it kind of an insurance policy. (Van Bortel also mainly works with Cessnas.)

    Most airplanes are sold with no returns possible and no guarantees whatsoever. A pre-buy inspection is common, but once you sign on the line, it's yours, no matter what expensive thing may pop up. But, it'll probably save you a lot of money, you just are taking on the risk that it may cost you just as much or more. It also opens up a much larger market.

    The DA40 is an excellent airplane to start in as well. You can get a newer/nicer one for your money compared to a 182. Their safety record is stellar. They're as easy to fly as a Cessna, but way more fun. The view is fantastic with the canopy. They're incredibly efficient as well, going as fast as a 182 on 9-10 gallons per hour instead of 13. They hold their value very well - In fact, my club has had one for about 8 years now, and it's worth just as much now as it was when we bought it.

    The biggest drawback in comparison to the 182 will be useful load. Depending on year, 600-650 pounds with full fuel, whereas the 182 should be able to carry about 100 pounds more with full fuel. More details below...

    If you have the money for it, they also make a twin version (the DA42 TwinStar) as well as a larger, 7-seat twin (the DA62 Super TwinStar). However, they're going to be expensive, especially the 62 as it didn't come out until just the last couple of years. If you want to move into a 7-seat twin for probably $700K as your next plane, starting with Diamond now might be a great idea... And really, they're nice planes even if you'd rather go in a different direction for your next one.

    That'd be one of the older, non-glass ones (2001-2003). Our club's 2006 (the 2004-2006 birds were pretty much all the same) will do 140 on 9-10 gph, 135 if you get way LOP burning 7.5 gph, or 145 if you really push it and burn 11 gph. The 2007 and later birds got some aerodynamic cleanups and can be 5-10 knots faster.

    The plane comes with a contraption that you can attach to the fuel drain and put on the leading edge of the wing to get the equivalent of sticking the tanks.

    There are 40-gal and 50-gal planes. Easy to tell between them - They cut holes for both sets of tanks in the top of the wing, so there will be one that has the filler cap in it and the other one that has a composite plug glued there. If the cap is on the inboard hole and the plug on the outboard, it's got 40-gal tanks. If the cap is outboard and the plug inboard, it's got 50 gallons.

    May? It's not up to the mechanic, it's up to the owner. We took our old 1500-TBO 182 up to 2,451 hours before it needed an overhaul. Part of what allowed that is being flown regularly, which keeps things nice and lubricated and keeps corrosion from forming.

    You actually can't add the G1000 to an older plane. It either comes from the factory, or it doesn't. 2003 and earlier will be "steam gauges", 2004-2006 will be the initial non-WAAS G1000 with an external autopilot (which is getting somewhat orphaned by some manufacturers), 2007+ will be the WAAS G1000 with integrated GFC 700 autopilot. The GFC 700-equipped birds tend to sell for about a $60K premium over the older G1000 birds.
     
    Sinistar likes this.
  27. Salty

    Salty En-Route PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,057
    Location:
    FL
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Salty
    How can you justify deducting lessons if you aren't going to be paid for flying? Does not sound legit to me.
     
  28. flyingcheesehead

    flyingcheesehead Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    21,270
    Location:
    UQACY, WI
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    iMooniac
    Don't expect the IRS to make sense. I've heard the same before, so I think it's legit. If you're going to use it for your business, you don't need to be paid for the flying part to have it be for the business.
     
  29. Ben2k9

    Ben2k9 Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2018
    Messages:
    190
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Ben2k9
    With all due respect, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

    Learning to operate your capital / business equipment is a legitimate business expense.
     
  30. Sinistar

    Sinistar Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    Messages:
    1,498
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Brad
    @flyingcheesehead - would you mind explaining this a bit better?

    I own the plane but I am not a A&P/IA.
    The plane requires an annual each year if I want to fly it.
    Since the mfg lists a TBO of 1500hrs doesn't the mechanic have a valid reason to not sign the annual.
    If our A&P/IA does not feel comfortable signing off on an Annual after TBO how can I still fly it?

    ...so it would seem that I only have 2 options. Find a mechanic who will sign it off. Or become a A&P/IA. I have no urgency to do the later.

    Its possible my mechanic will allow it if there are no signs the engine is making metals, etc. However, it would seem that an owner and mechanic could reach a point where the owner has no choice but to overhaul because the mechanic is no longer comfortable signing off on it???
     
  31. Sinistar

    Sinistar Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2016
    Messages:
    1,498
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Brad
    Heck, if you can deduct lessons then why not get a Bonanza. It will take more hours to learn but lets say the lessons are costing %75 after a tax break. You can put that extra saved towards the additional complex hours and then have a awesome plane from day 1. Of course you're gonna hate the fuel truck bill 2-4 times a week :)

    I loved learning in the 182 and had to learn cowl flaps, prop, HP . But I have never had to think about gear or fuel pump / tank management. If I could have had gear management and fuel pump management in my basic training I surely would have done it so it would just be my "norm".
     
  32. Salty

    Salty En-Route PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,057
    Location:
    FL
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Salty
    Then we can all write off our PPL training claiming we’re doing to use it for business. Even if we never do.

    Go for it.
     
    Mike Blackburn likes this.
  33. Ben2k9

    Ben2k9 Pre-takeoff checklist

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2018
    Messages:
    190
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Ben2k9
    Negative, ghostrider.
     
  34. ktup-flyer

    ktup-flyer En-Route

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2012
    Messages:
    2,547
    Location:
    Tupelo, MS
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    ktup-flyer
    Theres a guy here with a metal building business (Reeds Metals) that has a SR20 and SR22. He learned in the SR20, then transitioned to the 22, but kept both.
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2018
  35. Salty

    Salty En-Route PoA Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,057
    Location:
    FL
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Salty
    I have a business. Sometimes I have to travel. Write off.

    According to you.
     
  36. kath

    kath Line Up and Wait

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2005
    Messages:
    721
    Location:
    Anchorage, AK
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Katherine
    What's the difference between legitimate business use and "fakey" business use?
    Legitimate use will survive scrutiny by the IRS. That's really the only meaningful criterion.

    "Sometimes I have to travel, because, y'know, business" would not survive scrutiny, methinks. [Edit: to justify training, that is]

    But hey, only the OP's CPA knows for sure.... :)
     
  37. Kenny Phillips

    Kenny Phillips Cleared for Takeoff

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2018
    Messages:
    1,202
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Kenny Phillips
    For part 91 flying with piston engines, the owner and/or operator determines when the overhaul occurs, absent any signs of impending failure. IOW, if it's not making metal and the compression [or leakdown] numbers are good at 1,500 hours, you can continue to run it.
     
  38. olasek

    olasek Pattern Altitude

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    1,613
    Location:
    Oakland, CA
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    olasek
    Yes, Garmin 500/600 are similar products meant for the retrofit market. Actually there is but one noticeable exception - some King Airs can be retrofitted with G1000, it costs a bundle however, over $300K if I recall.



    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
     
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2018
  39. flyingcheesehead

    flyingcheesehead Touchdown! Greaser!

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2005
    Messages:
    21,270
    Location:
    UQACY, WI
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    iMooniac
    TBO is not required for part 91. And "comfort" isn't a criterion for whether or not to sign off an annual. Maybe one of the A&P/IA's on here can comment on what is required to sign off an annual, but if they made it down the manufacturer's annual inspection checklist for the engine and everything passed except for their "comfort", we would have a problem.

    FWIW, I've never heard of someone not signing off an annual because the engine was over TBO. Like I mentioned, we ran the 182 951 hours past TBO, which would have taken several years, and our Archer had around 3300 hours on the engine when we sold it, so that one was probably signed off for at least a decade after reaching TBO. My airplane will probably hit TBO on the next flight (I'm exactly one hour shy right now), but we're gonna keep running it until it tells us it needs an overhaul.

    I think all the King Airs can get the retrofit. There's also the G950, which is very similar to the G1000 but I think just lacks the autopilot and is "available in upgrade configurations for a wide range of King Air series, Beech 1900D, Twin Commander, Twin Otter, Meridian and Metroliner turboprops, as well as Cessna 501 and 525 series light jets." You can also upgrade the Beechjet, Citation Excel and XLS to the G5000.

    However, that's not exactly the class of plane we're talking about here. ;)
     
  40. Jared Kornelsen

    Jared Kornelsen Pre-Flight

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2018
    Messages:
    55
    Display Name:

    Display name:
    Jared
    Very informative reply flyingcheesehead, thank you for those examples and numbers and taking the time. If I'm going to be okay with the 145kts range then I'm really liking the DA40. If I wanted only 5-10kts more that would be one thing but I'm thinking more like 30-40 more. Most of my flying would probably be around 250nm and up and in the future quite possibly alot of 350nm and up trips. If I'm just hoping to Abilene or Lubbock or San Angelo then I understand why I could just stay in the slower ranges.. Maybe I'll start slow and trade soon.. idk