Silvaire
En-Route
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2012
- Messages
- 4,679
- Display Name
Display name:
Silvaire
... placards are not airworthy items...
Wanna bet?
... placards are not airworthy items...
Wanna bet?
One more thing, you have *s on everything, placards are not airworthy items, or discolored filters, old heater hoses, etc etc
Show me a NTSB accident where the plane crashed because of a missing placard.
When I arrived here at my field and opened the hangar door there sat a 172. It looked in bad shape. It had not been touched in 19 years.
Me showing up got a fire lit under the airfield owner. I come out to the hangar one day and see the airplane is being worked on. A couple weeks later I show up and she is out side running.
I asked the A&P what it took to get her running again. He said over a week of soaking the cylinders with oil to free them. Then the usual stuff.
Today we have flown this airplane for a few hundred hrs. It made a trip to oshkosh last year.
I could just imagine the amount of corrosion in that engine. I am sure it was full of corrosion. The engine was locked when I saw it the first time.
Tony
The amount of boats out there running on engines that had been rusted seized and then revived without disassembly and continue to run for years would likely astound you.
The amount of boats out there running on engines that had been rusted seized and then revived without disassembly and continue to run for years would likely astound you.
Can't be good long term though?
Occitan is still running 26years later after I unseized her 8-71 with a mix of acetone and transmission fluid, and a pipe wrench with a long assed cheater pipe on it. I did that in Los Angeles in 1989 and she has been around the world 3 times since, just saw her in Genova a couple weeks ago, Denis said he's never done anything but change some injectors.
I agree the corrosion bogeyman has become a urban myth, like a plane in Florida is just asking for it to crumble into a pile of rust.The amount of boats out there running on engines that had been rusted seized and then revived without disassembly and continue to run for years would likely astound you.
I agree the corrosion bogeyman has become a urban myth, like a plane in Florida is just asking for it to crumble into a pile of rust.
Boats are exposed to sea air, used infrequently, and generally are abused.
However they burn diesel, the byproducts might be less corrosive then AvGas, and their air intake is not directly exposed to the weather.
Boats are exposed to sea air, used infrequently, and generally are abused.
However they burn diesel, the byproducts might be less corrosive then AvGas, and their air intake is not directly exposed to the weather.
The amount of boats out there running on engines that had been rusted seized and then revived without disassembly and continue to run for years would likely astound you.
Why I said to run this engine for a while. Then check the oil and filter.
Tony
So while I'm waiting for $ estimates from A&P to decide how I proceed I have a question...
Are there other items in the list of findings that you guys would find to be biggies (expensive, scary, unsafe, warning sign)?
Ok got the cost estimates from the A&P and it comes out to be about $7,800 to do everything on the list and that includes pulling 2 cylinders to inspect as well as to re-hone put new rings on them as per their inspection they only saw corrosion on 2 cylinders (#2 & #4). That also includes doing the repair and complying with SB977.
On a side note... I got a message from Mike Busch and he thinks spending $140K on a 79 Dakota (no matter how well equipped & upgraded) is a poor choice when I could spend $140 - $150K to buy a used Cirrus SR22.
I considered an sr22 but not comfortable with that. I feel is a it too advanced a plane for my experience of 175 hours plus insurance and everything else is more expensive to maintain. Then I looked at the sr20, da40 and and newer archer but useful load is the price to pay with those.
Forgot that I never attached info on the dakota so here it is...
http://www.airmart.com/aircraft-for-sale/115/piper/1979-piper-dakota/n2178z
Ok got the cost estimates from the A&P and it comes out to be about $7,800 to do everything on the list and that includes pulling 2 cylinders to inspect as well as to re-hone put new rings on them as per their inspection they only saw corrosion on 2 cylinders (#2 & #4). That also includes doing the repair and complying with SB977.
On a side note... I got a message from Mike Busch and he thinks spending $140K on a 79 Dakota (no matter how well equipped & upgraded) is a poor choice when I could spend $140 - $150K to buy a used Cirrus SR22.
As I said, I would hold off on pulling 2 cyl, fix the other squawks, continue frequent oil changes with oil analysis done, do a borescope at next annual, check results, rinse and repeat...
Ok got the cost estimates from the A&P and it comes out to be about $7,800 to do everything on the list and that includes pulling 2 cylinders to inspect as well as to re-hone put new rings on them as per their inspection they only saw corrosion on 2 cylinders (#2 & #4). That also includes doing the repair and complying with SB977.
On a side note... I got a message from Mike Busch and he thinks spending $140K on a 79 Dakota (no matter how well equipped & upgraded) is a poor choice when I could spend $140 - $150K to buy a used Cirrus SR22.
I agree with him. $140k for a 79 Dakota no matter what's bolted to the panel seems like too much damn money, especially with an engine that is "questionable".
Not saying the engine won't get you another 15 years, but for that price, there should be any question. Even with a new engine, still seems expensive.
Just my opinion, if it is what you want, go for it.
For what you're getting you're right, you could buy a project plane, but when you were finished it would cost $30k more, and you wouldn't have had use of it for a year. A decade ago that plane would have been $120k without the upgrades.
Exactly. I got some estimates on what it would take to do a lot of what this Dakota has (exterior/interior/avionics) and I would be spending $40K+ more easily along w/ all the hassle and waiting.
Like I said I'd either be looking at a SR22 but even just the insurance on that plane for a low time pilot like me is crazy expensive PLUS that's too advanced a plane for me and similar reason as to why I decided against used Bonanza.
Understood, although I disagree the Bonanza would be too advanced for you, that's your decision to make. If the plane is in good shape and you are going to keep it for several years getting good use out of it, it will serve you just fine. You're buying a plane at top of market, and if buying with intent of resale in a couple of years, it will be difficult to achieve any financial parity at sale. However, if you get good use out of the plane, that becomes a secondary issue because you're actually buying a plane for the use value, not resale, and this sounds like it's a very usable plane for you which leaves the deal at a reasonable value.
So if you buy this plane, fly the hell out of it and get your money's worth.
We're a family of 3 (me, wife, 4 year old) so the plane we've been seeking a plane that can carry the 3 of us plus stuff on 500NM or less x-country trips and also have the ability to carry 4 adults every once in a while. We wanted descent cruise speed, and relatively low ownership/maintenance costs. My wife prefers fixed gear so we don't have to worry about the extra maintenance/insurance and risk of something not working. I also wanted a relatively "safe/forgiving" plane. On top of all that I wanted a plane that looked/felt like a newer plane because although I'm used to beater rental planes I would not ask/expect my family and/or friends to do the same and not be worried about the condition of the plane. Lastly I like modern avionics and some glass panel stuff. Another factor is that I looked at Cherokee 6/Lance/Saratoga but although it would be comfortable it's just a lot of plane for 3 of us and especially when it's just me flying.
Yes you're right we're not buying this plane to turn it around in 2/3 years. We hope this plane can fulfill the mission and is a good long term plane for us.
Then as long as the plane checks out and the deal gets done, I think you'll be very happy with the plane because it does meet your mission requirements well for many years even if you add another kid, heck, you can fit 3 kids across that back seat for a few years as well.
I'm with you on modern avionics, once you see what they do for your situational awareness, it's really hard to go back.
I know what you mean. I rent a 172 with g1000 when I go on longer x-country trips and really like the situational awareness and safety features they bring. I also close to finishing my ifr and for single pilot ifr some of these advanced avionics (auto pilot that can do GPSS and glide slope intercept etc, helps with workload management.