Are Complex Aircraft Obsolete?

I was thinking about this thread, well really more about this concept of a "TAA" being in some way similar or equal to a "Complex" aircraft.....

I'm old school, and haven't flown very much in the way of "TAA". In fact the vast majority of my flying was without GPS.

Seeing these high tech panels has always bothered me becasue I know if I were to fly one I'd not be able to preflight and go. It would take a significant amount of time to learn which buttons to press...even going from one plane with say Garmin stuff to another with something else.... So for a guy like me they are fairly complex.
And probably even more than that I've thought about the "conflict" that while these things make situational awareness a non-issue, especially considering the mental gymnastics required when looking at nothing but needles.....so on one hand this TAA stuff is a huge improvement but on the other hand it seems like it leads to much more time spent head down not looking out the windows.
Anyway, when I look at them now with this new to me definition of TAA and think of them more along the lines of something more complex and advanced, I somehow see them in a better way.
 
If he's gonig to rent it out, his qualifications are not going to be a concern. The price is going to be much higher and having hunted insurance for leasebacks in the past, I can tell you the "kind of plane" really doesn't make much difference. Across our fleet everything from a 172 to a couple of taildraggers, to my Turbo Arrow and my Navion pretty much scaled linearly with hull value.
 
flyingron said:
If he's gonig to rent it out, his qualifications are not going to be a concern. The price is going to be much higher and having hunted insurance for leasebacks in the past, I can tell you the "kind of plane" really doesn't make much difference. Across our fleet everything from a 172 to a couple of taildraggers, to my Turbo Arrow and my Navion pretty much scaled linearly with hull value.
Click to expand...
I noticed this. A rental/instruction policy for a retract vs fixed is almost the same in cost for a given hull value.Why is that? A 172 doesn’t have the risk of a gear up landing, but is it maybe just as risky in insurance’s eyes as it’s used for primary training where as a retract typically isn’t? I noticed with an owner policy the premium difference is significant.
 
Todd82 said:
Depends on how low time you are. Fresh PPL in a $80k Arrow about $8k vs $1500ish for fixed gear PA28.
Click to expand...

I purchased an Arrow this year for roughly 80k, fresh PPL last year. Before my IR the highest quote I got was around $4200. No idea where $8k is coming from...
 
Todd82 said:
I'd buy an Arrow over a fixed gear Cherokee for a personal plane if the insurance delta wasn't so steep.
Click to expand...

What insurance rates were you being quoted? When I called around the insurance was about $1000 more per year for an Arrow vs a 182. A high time Arrow with low hull value was the same as a 182. Granted that is not comparing the same thing.
 
farangutan said:
The closest school to me in Tampa rents 172s in the $189-$229 per hour wet.
Click to expand...

Thats high but I don’t know the rates in your area. Smaller clubs are closer to $100/hr. $130-150/hr was pretty normal for a 172. (Prices wet usually incl insurance). Unless your rate included the instructor?
 
Todd82 said:
Depends on how low time you are. Fresh PPL in a $80k Arrow about $8k vs $1500ish for fixed gear PA28.
Click to expand...

Some quotes for thought. Freshly minted PPL on a high time PA28R180 hull $35000 was $1800/year. PPL + IR on a low time PA28R180 hill $80000 was $2800/year zero deductible.
 
MauleSkinner said:
They’re not high performance, either…those airline guys aren’t building time towards anything useful!
Click to expand...

Is High Performance time that important? One of my instructors went to fly jets and he was mostly all 172 time if I’m not mistaken.
 
When I was shopping I considered a couple Mooney M20Cs (when they were trading around $30K). For an 85 hour PPL, no complex endorsement or IR, an M20C(3000/yr) around 3x as much to insure as a 150 (800/yr), 172(900/yr), PA28(1200/yr) or my AA1(1000/yr).

Having said that, the number was expected to fall drastically with time in type, so with time that would even out.

Also, all 5 of those planes were priced in the 20k-35K range, so there was little cost reduction by choosing one over the other. If the market does not change before my next purchase, I will go for an M20C over the 172 or Pa28, because the price of 4 seat trainers has exploded much faster than the price of 4 seat retracts.
 
MarkH said:
When I was shopping I considered a couple Mooney M20Cs (when they were trading around $30K). For an 85 hour PPL, no complex endorsement or IR, an M20C(3000/yr) around 3x as much to insure as a 150 (800/yr), 172(900/yr), PA28(1200/yr) or my AA1(1000/yr).

Having said that, the number was expected to fall drastically with time in type, so with time that would even out.

Also, all 5 of those planes were priced in the 20k-35K range, so there was little cost reduction by choosing one over the other. If the market does not change before my next purchase, I will go for an M20C over the 172 or Pa28, because the price of 4 seat trainers has exploded much faster than the price of 4 seat retracts.
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t mind a Mooney, the only issue for my mission was how to get large dogs in the aircraft. The baggage door made that a bit difficult and not ideal to have them walking over the wing, imo. I’m thinking the dogs can jump right into the Arrow via the baggage door.
 
The Mooney is an example, my point is, even for a low time pilot, when 172s are trading for $10K+ more than faster complex aircraft, the extra cost of insurance is offset by the lower purchase costs when used as personal transport.

But for pilot factories, there is little incentive to pay the extra cost for a complex when they can get the complex endorsement while picking up the multi time they need for an ATP.
 
mandm said:
Is High Performance time that important? One of my instructors went to fly jets and he was mostly all 172 time if I’m not mistaken.
Click to expand...

These days the only prerequisite is 1,500 hours and a pulse. I'm sure if the FAA allowed it, they would even count drone time!
 
mandm said:
Thats high but I don’t know the rates in your area. Smaller clubs are closer to $100/hr. $130-150/hr was pretty normal for a 172. (Prices wet usually incl insurance). Unless your rate included the instructor?
Click to expand...

That's just the plane wet rate. Tack on another $60 per hour for instructor. That's probably the most expensive school close to me though. The other schools around are not far behind. I drove further out to rent a C172N for $160/hr wet rate recently. There are a couple cheaper places and the club plane I fly is much cheaper but I have to rent any time it's down for maintenance. The Arrow rents for $180/hr wet, another reason I like it over the TAA C172s near me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top