This sounds like the deadly D's.As you setup the structure of your common ownership, you need to have an agreement that provides for what will happen in the case of death, disability, disinterest, drugs, delinquency, divorce, and the eventual dissolution.
Looks like the perfect trainer for PPL getting north of 100hrs doing IA in and then selling for something better, more capable, etc.So we pulled the trigger on a 172. It’s an old, boring, simple, vfr 172. But we will use it for three of us to get our ppl then look at possibly upgrading.
It’s a 1960 172A. 900 hours smoh, fresh annual last month, ancient narco radios, basic 6 pack, four place ics, manual flaps, full logs, no damage history. Thorough prebuy only revealed a small exhaust leak and a few cracked push rod seals.
Though I really wanted something with a little higher useful load and a gps, we got it for $47,000. Well below our budget. We had even started looking at $90,000 planes. But in this market it seemed impossible to find anything with a decent useful load, gps and not at tbo below $125k. Much less on the east coast.
This one popped up a few hours south of me and it turned out we had some mutual acquaintances and I knew a few guys that had flown the plane.
What do y’all think?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So we pulled the trigger on a 172.
I have tons of hours training in the small Cessnas, and I owned a 172 for a few years. In my opinion, the 150 is the best trainer. Why? Because it is underpowered, and you need to learn to think ahead before you get in trouble. The 172 may allow you to power out of a problem, but the 150 often will not. For that reason, I think it is a better trainer.Greatest trainer ever.
Instructing in a straight tail C-150 was the only time I experienced climbing out of ground effect without enough airspeed resulted in sinking. We talk about it, but to see it happen was a real eye opener.I have tons of hours training in the small Cessnas, and I owned a 172 for a few years. In my opinion, the 150 is the best trainer. Why? Because it is underpowered, and you need to learn to think ahead before you get in trouble. The 172 may allow you to power out of a problem, but the 150 often will not. For that reason, I think it is a better trainer.
This is not an opinion that came easily. When I took my current flight instructing job 14 years ago, I got a checkout in a 150 in August with another CFI who weighed 230 pounds. It was August, and the climb after takeoff was anemic. I thought, "I am going to hate teaching in this airplane." But, over time, I discovered my students in the 150 were better at the basics than those who trained in the 172.
Interesting that you said that. It happened to me yesterday.Instructing in a straight tail C-150 was the only time I experienced climbing out of ground effect without enough airspeed resulted in sinking. We talk about it, but to see it happen was a real eye opener.
Dad had a partner in his six that bought a 150 for his kids to learn. When he was flying it home after buying it, he was ahead of a thunderstorm but couldn't outrun it so he had to spend the night somewhere. Dad ended up partnering in the 150 when he bought him out of the Six partnership. He thought he'd start IFR training in the 150. He flew in it exactly once. Too cramped and too anemic for him.I have tons of hours training in the small Cessnas, and I owned a 172 for a few years. In my opinion, the 150 is the best trainer. Why? Because it is underpowered, and you need to learn to think ahead before you get in trouble. The 172 may allow you to power out of a problem, but the 150 often will not. For that reason, I think it is a better trainer.
This is not an opinion that came easily. When I took my current flight instructing job 14 years ago, I got a checkout in a 150 in August with another CFI who weighed 230 pounds. It was August, and the climb after takeoff was anemic. I thought, "I am going to hate teaching in this airplane." But, over time, I discovered my students in the 150 were better at the basics than those who trained in the 172.