First plane for family of 5

J

JBray

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Mar 20, 2024
Messages
4
Display Name
Display name:
Jason
Just started flying and planning on getting my ppl soon. Looking for my first plane later this year. I’d like to stay under $250k. And I’d probably have a partner.
I figure that most of my flight time will be with my wife and 3 small kids flying about 400 miles from Southern California to southern Utah. Maybe eventually up to northern Utah.
I’m leaning toward a piper Lance turbo.

What do you guys think of this as a first plane for someone with <100 hours?
 
without instrument, you may want to check the insurance costs for a ppl with 100 hours to see if its palatable for you. My guess is they'll quote you 10K for a 250K hull value.
 
Get some time under your belt first. Nothing makes me grab the underside of my desk harder than the thought of a brand new private pilot loading up their family and flying them to places unknown; especially in a larger and more complex aircraft without an instrument rating.

Fly just you and maybe one passenger for awhile and get some experience. There’s a lot to learn before making a jump to this.
 
RyanB said:
Get some time under your belt first. Nothing makes me grab the underside of my desk harder than the thought of a brand new private pilot loading up their family and flying them to places unknown; especially in a larger and more complex aircraft without an instrument rating.

Fly just you and maybe one passenger for awhile and get some experience. There’s a lot to learn before making a jump to this.
Click to expand...
One week after I got my PPL (at 70 hrs TT), I flew my family 4,700 nm around the western USA. Landed in KSLC (class B), Renton near Seattle, flew the Golden Gate and SF downtown tour (then flew right over KSFO and landed at Reid Hillview), landed unexpectedly at Mariposa airport due to TS buildups over the Sierras, then next day flew over the Sierras at 16,500. All VFR and very comfortable doing it all.

As long as you do your weather briefings, stay within the limits of the plane, and are prepared to divert, I don't see anything risky about a 100 hr pilot. What some stats show is that pilots that have 500-1000 hrs are actually the riskiest.
 
JBray said:
Just started flying and planning on getting my ppl soon. Looking for my first plane later this year. I’d like to stay under $250k. And I’d probably have a partner.
I figure that most of my flight time will be with my wife and 3 small kids flying about 400 miles from Southern California to southern Utah. Maybe eventually up to northern Utah.
I’m leaning toward a piper Lance turbo.

What do you guys think of this as a first plane for someone with <100 hours?
Click to expand...
I think that's a great plane for you, as long as you and your wife have a clear agreement about handling the kids at critical times. There will be kid drama, and you must be able to focus on flying.
I made an early decision not to get IR, not to fly in any potential bad weather, not to fly at night, and to never plan flying to an event I cannot skip or use a different mode of transportation (last minute).
 
I think that would be a fine family plane as would an A36. I would strongly suggest getting your IFR before buying a cross country machine like that. It helps with insurance and overall experience. Proficiency and experience is key when flying your family around, plus you can’t always predict the vfr weather days out when traveling.
 
RyanB said:
Get some time under your belt first. Nothing makes me grab the underside of my desk harder than the thought of a brand new private pilot loading up their family and flying them to places unknown; especially in a larger and more complex aircraft without an instrument rating.

Fly just you and maybe one passenger for awhile and get some experience. There’s a lot to learn before making a jump to this.
Click to expand...

I got my PPL in a complex airplane I bought. Everyone said I was crazy.

3 months later I bought a PA-32R-301T and flew it from Michigan to Southern California.

Now have almost 700 hours.

Weekend after I got my PPL we flew 300nm trips regularly.

Understand the dangers. Understand the amount of training. Get a GOOD CFI. Build good habits from the start and understand you’ll learn every single flight how to be a better pilot.
 
If you are in SoCal you better get on a hangar and tie down waiting list now, otherwise you will have no place to park your new toy!
 
The best first cross-country plane for almost anyone is a Cessna 182. Except you'd need the 206 if you are really going to put all five family members in at once.

I'll just go out on a limb and say it - you aren't ready to do this until after you have an IR. Not because you can't find enough VFR weather with planning and flexibility to use your new mount, but because you haven't learned the precision and decision making to the degree that getting an IR requires. 300-500 hours VFR might make me think a little differently.

Since you have the means to buy a decent airplane, get it, train in it through IR, do some trips on your own to learn, and then put your family in it. Having your own airplane vastly increases the utility of the instrument rating as well.
 
Maybe a share of a Cirrus?

Not sure how well 5 fit in one, but 5 with luggage puts you in a twin, mostly.

I think we all get mission creep as new pilots. We imagine scenarios that inflate our necessary seat count until we 'require' a PC-12.

An easy metric is vehicle passenger count. How often do you use 5 seats in your car? How often to make the trip you're referring to? Are you sure all 4 of your pax are willing to fly this mission regularly?

You'd be money ahead to pay for a twin ride over this route with your family before you commit to buying a plane.

Insurance will be heinous for sure, rightfully so. I'd want to sort out my skills for a few hundred hours before involving my entire family in rookie mistakes.

Work this plan in stages. Try fixed-gear/CS prop and get your IR while building time. Get a feel for mx costs and downtime. Find a plane that will do 80% of what you envision. You can fly a lot of commercial or charter flights for the care and feeding of a six-seater.
 
here is what a friend of mine did many years ago, if you have the financial ability buy a nice R 310 or. 58 baron and find a flight instructor you like , you can get a multi rating pretty fast and now you are safe with your 6 member family lots of young flight instructor’s would love to do this if it’s a family vacation for two weeks send him home when you get there or take him fishing with you , my friend did this for about 2 years and got his IR with this guy and they became good friends, flying your own plane is so convenient and makes family outings easy to do , Depending on your passenger size a turbo 210 would get you a lot of places I have had some good sized planes and its not the passengers that really counts it’s the baggage , teaching your female passengers to travel with 10 or 15 lbs of bags is a good trick. Have fun
 
Steamflyer said:
The best first cross-country plane for almost anyone is a Cessna 182. Except you'd need the 206 if you are really going to put all five family members in at once.
Click to expand...
The Cherokee 6 and Cessna 206 are similar from a mission perpective. I bought into a C206 forty years ago, partly because there was no C182 option in the city I had just moved to. I still have the same C206 and have zero regrets. I spent a little more time travelling the same distances as a retractable, but the "nearly" unlimited carrying capacity has been worth it. The real bonus for me came later, when I realized the baggage doors allowed me to carry a motorcycle in it.

I like to believe that the cumulative cost of higher maintenence and insurance for a retractable was higher than the added cost of fuel (in miles per gallon) in the fixed gear. When you start thinking twin engine those maintenance, insurance, and fuel costs all go up, as does the need to maintain proficiency for engine failure (which is almost twice as high as in the single).
 
The interesting part of this debate is everyone is right , my friend has a 206 and I have flown it to Mexico with 4 guys and lots of bags great plane they actually fly better when loaded up , I like twins but being retired and getting old they are not for me anymore when I was in business and took family places that’s all I owned so the debate goes on , if I was rich I would call net jet
 
FancyG said:
Not sure how well 5 fit in one, but 5 with luggage puts you in a twin, mostly.
Click to expand...
Not very comfortably. They’re about 750lbs useful with fuel at tabs. Unless they’re small kids and you have very limited luggage, it’s not going far.
 
I mean I question why there are so many GA accidents, but after reading the OP’s post, now I understand.
 
mandm said:
I mean I question why there are so many GA accidents, but after reading the OP’s post, now I understand.
Click to expand...
On the other hand, there are a lot of similarities between a C150 and the rest of the single, fixed gear fleet. Same for other manufacturers. Think of how many people get their certificate then quickly ask themselves, "What should I do now?" There's something to be said for having a plan to go right away to a plane that suits the long term mission and do some training in that, whether it's an instrument rating or just a higher level of proficiency.
 
StraightnLevel said:
The OP stated a $250K limit.

If you can get a reliable 310 or Baron for under $250K, please tell me how, because I would sign up for that deal, as well.
Click to expand...
Yea….and it’s not the purchase price of either twin mentioned but the cost to fly and maintain that really knocks it out of the ballpark budget wise.
 
I agree with Dave. Buy what you think will be your forever plane and learn and get your ratings in it , I think someone who got there instrument rating and has 2 or 3 hundred hours in a 310 is much safer than a guy who did it all in a 172 then bought the big plane , you can buy a real nice 310 for 250 k
 
You mentioned Aztecs they are perfect for what this guy is looking for this was my 3 rd one ,i sold it to a guy in Panama and flew it down there for him great plane 100 k they fly great , I would rather have one of these than a million dollar Cirrus
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0034.jpeg
    IMG_0034.jpeg
    586.8 KB · Views: 22
When looking at 50+ year old aircraft, the parts that are reliability issues have already been replaced many times. The question is how old are those parts, not the airframe.
 
StraightnLevel said:
Right - that's why I stipulated "reliable". The newest ones were built when Carter was in office; most of them are significantly older. What's an honest reliability expectation for any aircraft of that age?
Click to expand...
That's where logs come, and a careful inspection of the logs and of the aircraft itself are an essential part of the evaluation.
 
I don’t think age has much to do with the reliability of a aircraft, look at some of the 50 s Beechcraft that are for sale they look brand new I agree that’s is maintenance that is the rule of thumb , I have had a lot of twin engine aircraft and they cost more to maintain for sure but the only real difference is one more engine ,a baron is just a bonanza with another engine, same size cabin really , if I had a family to fly around I would have one , all of these conversations boil down to one thing MONEY and how much you have to spend on flying is the question, I am retired and old now so really I don’t even need a aircraft but I am heading to hanger now to do something not even sure what yet , but it beats watching t v
 
StraightnLevel said:
Right - that's why I stipulated "reliable". The newest 310s were built when Carter was in office; most of them are significantly older. What's an honest reliability expectation for any aircraft of that age?
Click to expand...

Almost any airplane is only as reliable as your checkbook. Much depends upon how and how much you will use it, how well you maintain it, and how and where you will store it when it's not being used. Short of buying something brand new with a manufacturer's warranty, you can expect an expensive repair to pop up at any time.

With that in mind, there are indeed decent 310s inside your $250k limit. On some of them, you might have to settle for a mid-time engine, or older avionics, but that can still be quite servicible and reliable.


As an alternative, you can have a $500k airplane for $250k if you find a partner. I know several people who are partners on planes, and typically they're getting all the use they want. Depending upon your specific situation and mission, a partnership might be a good option.
 
Last edited:
Not just your checkbook but the skill of your mechanic as well.
 
Another vote for a partnership. They’re really great for reducing costs and there’s the additional benefit of more eyes on the plane looking for things.
 
JBray said:
Just started flying and planning on getting my ppl soon. Looking for my first plane later this year. I’d like to stay under $250k. And I’d probably have a partner.
I figure that most of my flight time will be with my wife and 3 small kids flying about 400 miles from Southern California to southern Utah. Maybe eventually up to northern Utah.
I’m leaning toward a piper Lance turbo.

What do you guys think of this as a first plane for someone with <100 hours?
Click to expand...

EdFred said:
Cherokee Six. Insurance is gonna kill ya on the Lance.
Click to expand...

EdFred is giving sound advice. @JBray , you might enjoy this video:
 
I think a lot of folks on here are being a bit too conservative with “don’t fly your family”.

Either you can fly safe, or you can’t. I would plan to pursue the IFR, but as long as you take the approach you will be forever learning and improving, if you feel OK taking the family, take them.
 
dans2992 said:
Either you can fly safe, or you can’t.
Click to expand...

It's not quite that simple, though. Remember, the OP does not even have his PPL yet.

Family members (and passengers in general) can be distracting and can also add pressure to fly when it might be inadvisable. And in this case, the OP is considering a turbo Lance, a more complex and higher performance plane than we presume he is currently training in. With the extra performance and complexity, it would be safer to have a less distracting environment for those first few post-training hours.

Take folks up in a plane comparable to his trainer? Sure. With a still-wet PPL certificate, load the kiddies into a turbo Lance? Uh, maybe not the best ADM.
 
I own a C205 because I needed 5 seats. The Cherokee 6/260 is probably a sweet spot for you (and cheaper than my 60s era plane.) If not that,, then you pay the Cessna surtax. Don't do retract, it just isn't worth it. Don't do twin, it really isn't worth it at your experience level.
 
StraightnLevel said:
Right - that's why I stipulated "reliable". The newest 310s were built when Carter was in office; most of them are significantly older. What's an honest reliability expectation for any aircraft of that age?
Click to expand...
After one year of extensive maintenance ran a turbo 310 for 800 hours without issue. I'd expect to about the same with any twin that was not impeccably maintained. Very few are and they are not for sale typically.

High performance singles and twins seem to languish for many years after the owner is no longer really using it. This leads to high initial maintenance costs.

Still of the camp you don't take your family on missions (as opposed to local rides) until you have something between 300 and 500 hours. In a variety of aircraft preferably and in different parts of the country. You can't fly for hire until 250 hours, so there's a nice lower bound.
 
RyanB said:
Get some time under your belt first. Nothing makes me grab the underside of my desk harder than the thought of a brand new private pilot loading up their family and flying them to places unknown; especially in a larger and more complex aircraft without an instrument rating.

Fly just you and maybe one passenger for awhile and get some experience. There’s a lot to learn before making a jump to this.
Click to expand...
Thanks everyone for the replies. I totally understand this and after rereading my post I think I came off a more bold than I really am.
I'm a planner. I'm not in a rush but like making plans that are very adjustable. I definitely plan on getting IFR immediately after. I know I am very new and I'll be learning a lot and the experience will help me make better decisions but I always appreciate input from people with experience. I'm not in a rush to fly my family cross country and into the southern Utah Rockies. But I can imagine I may feel reasonably comfortable after/during IFR training in a year.

I believe that I would eventually like to own a Malibu or twin years down the road. But for the first plane I've considered owning a 182 with the STC for the 3 seatbelts in back seat. But I think we'd outgrow that really quick. So I'd basically be considering most single piston, 6 seat simple-ish planes. Right now we only vacation for long weekend trips and we're light packers so most 6 seaters would work. Just debating if retractable gear is reasonable with about 100 hours experience. Seems like the opinions are split. I'm not making the decision for awhile, just gathering input.
 
Half Fast said:
Almost any airplane is only as reliable as your checkbook. Much depends upon how and how much you will use it, how well you maintain it, and how and where you will store it when it's not being used. Short of buying something brand new with a manufacturer's warranty, you can expect an expensive repair to pop up at any time.

With that in mind, there are indeed decent 310s inside your $250k limit. On some of them, you might have to settle for a mid-time engine, or older avionics, but that can still be quite servicible and reliable.


As an alternative, you can have a $500k airplane for $250k if you find a partner. I know several people who are partners on planes, and typically they're getting all the use they want. Depending upon your specific situation and mission, a partnership might be a good option.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the reply. I've definitely considered a 310. I'm leaning away from twins for my first plane though. I think maintenance of most singles will take some getting used to and don't want to throw in the potential financial risk of a twin until the maintenance of a single doesn't make my wince any more. And I'm thinking a twin may be adding more complexity than I'd like.
And I should say that $250k WITH a partner may be at the top of what I want to spend for now because there's so many reliable option for less than that. Things may be different in the future. I have aspirations of a C340 (or maybe 421) for a future plane. But that would be many years away.
 
The Malibu/PA46 airframe is good. Instead of a twin piston, you might want to consider a Meridian (turbine single) instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top