Need a Good General Aviation For Commuting...Got Any Advice?!?!?

P

Pilot101

Pre-Flight
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
34
Display Name
Display name:
Pilot101
Hi All,
​
I am looking to purchase an aircraft to be used for commuting from Northern California to my job in Los Angeles. I have had lots of time to day dream (and night dream) of flying this route instead of driving during my commute as I haul (you know what) up and down I-5 for 5 hours at a whack...plus pit stops and traffic...Gee I cant wait till the central valley fog hits...Grrr...
​
My search has gone round and round from a real nice Beechcraft Debonair to a Velocity to a Comanche...to a Mooney...then repeat.
​
The older certified airframes can be had for relatively cheap however most have outdated avionics and parts can be difficult to find.

An experimental would be way more cost effective because I can do the maintenance myself.
​
For this dream to become a reality, I really need a reliable solid IFR platform with a stable. approach coupled autopilot for safety during those late night/ early morning, fog in the air and in my eyes, trips.
​
Some days I will need to fly fast however on most other days I can pull it back to save on fuel.
​
I sat in a Velocity XL-RG (did not fly in it) and the cabin width felt a bit tight so that combined with the fact that I have three kids would make a Velocity XL-RG "Dash 5" (two adult seats in front and 3 small-ish adult seats in back) more practical than a four seater Velocity or an aluminum legacy airplane.

Most flights will be with either me alone or with my work partner and our roller bags and computer bags.
​
I looked at a Lancair 360 and that airplane is just way too small and it simply does not have any luggage space. Except for the Mooney, the other old airplanes are real comfortable to sit in because the seats are taller than the Velocity and the cabins are kinda roomy.
​
The flight will be 203 NM from home to work so I am trying to run some numbers to see how do-able this in. I guess I will need to do a round trip 5 times a month. It would be best to have an airplane that can do the round trip without having to refuel as my home airport has reasonable fuel cost as compared to the airport in SoCal.
​
Any help/ suggestions would be greatly appreciated...:dunno:
​
Bill
 
200nm isn't too far. Zipping along in a mooney vs. a 172 may range from 1:20 to a little under 2 hrs. Maybe a 30 minute difference barring headwinds. My mooney has 4.5 hrs endurance. It could do that trip with enough for IFR reserves. The 172 may need to add fuel.

that being said, rule #1 in general aviation is to have a backup transportation plan. Even with an instrument rating, there will be days when weather will have the upper hand and you will need to drive.
 
Last edited:
I do that commute several times a month from Nor Cal to So Cal for both work and play. I am in a 182 with standard tanks (60 gal) and typically refuel before departing back home (I personally prefer to fly with as much fuel reserve as possible). If I had the 80 Gal long range tanks it would be no issue for a round trip.

Knowing what I know know with your wanting a transportation commuter...you are on the right track with wanting a solid IFR GPS and Autopilot.

IFR rating will be a requirement to make that a viable commute. Not a lot of hard IFR, but a lot of marine layers to have to punch in and out of on both ends.

At times I wish I had more speed but I opted for cabin space and payload capacity to be able to actually take a more than two adults with bags when needed. Keep an eye on useful load when searching. Even though it may be a four place, two adults with full fuel and some bags may be max gross on a lot of singles.

My 230NM typical trip is 2 hours wheels up to wheel down with a good tail wind, 2:30 if I have a not good headwind so the 30 min variation mentioned is accurate.

I used to do that drive literally twice a week. Departing LA and not giving a rats arse about rush hour traffic makes it worth all the costs.

It will never be cheaper than driving or commercial if you are looking at it as cost savings...but you are buying time and convince.
 
Last edited:
Make sure you have a car at both ends. Simplicity over performance. The less you can break, the better. Good autopilot and ifr gps.

Consider a tiger or da40.
 
Hard to provide guidance without knowing the experience of the OP.

I commute to work on Sundays and home on Fridays typically in a Lancair 235/320. Lately it has been in our RV-9a. The plane should be equipped with an IFR gps, 2 axis autopilot and some sort of weather. The pilot should get instrument rated if not. There will be days the weather will cancel the trip, and days the plane will be down for maintenance. When will the go/no go decision be made? If no go will there be enough time to drive? There is danger in allowing oneself to paint themselves into a corner. If you will be solo for 95% of the commutes, it may be better to get the fast, efficient 2 seat experimental over the slower, less efficient more capable certified plane.
 
The number of planes that would fit that mission with very little appreciable difference between them over that distance is rather large. Pick the plane you like best and go for it. Keep in mind what other types of flying you might want an airplane for.
 
Hi All, Thanks for the suggestions/advice.
 
Pilot101 said:
Hi All,
​
I am looking to purchase an aircraft to be used for commuting from Northern California to my job in Los Angeles. I have had lots of time to day dream (and night dream) of flying this route instead of driving during my commute as I haul (you know what) up and down I-5 for 5 hours at a whack...plus pit stops and traffic...Gee I cant wait till the central valley fog hits...Grrr...
​
My search has gone round and round from a real nice Beechcraft Debonair to a Velocity to a Comanche...to a Mooney...then repeat.
​
The older certified airframes can be had for relatively cheap however most have outdated avionics and parts can be difficult to find.

An experimental would be way more cost effective because I can do the maintenance myself.
​
For this dream to become a reality, I really need a reliable solid IFR platform with a stable. approach coupled autopilot for safety during those late night/ early morning, fog in the air and in my eyes, trips.
​
Some days I will need to fly fast however on most other days I can pull it back to save on fuel.
​
I sat in a Velocity XL-RG (did not fly in it) and the cabin width felt a bit tight so that combined with the fact that I have three kids would make a Velocity XL-RG "Dash 5" (two adult seats in front and 3 small-ish adult seats in back) more practical than a four seater Velocity or an aluminum legacy airplane.

Most flights will be with either me alone or with my work partner and our roller bags and computer bags.
​
I looked at a Lancair 360 and that airplane is just way too small and it simply does not have any luggage space. Except for the Mooney, the other old airplanes are real comfortable to sit in because the seats are taller than the Velocity and the cabins are kinda roomy.
​
The flight will be 203 NM from home to work so I am trying to run some numbers to see how do-able this in. I guess I will need to do a round trip 5 times a month. It would be best to have an airplane that can do the round trip without having to refuel as my home airport has reasonable fuel cost as compared to the airport in SoCal.
​
Any help/ suggestions would be greatly appreciated...:dunno:
​
Bill
Click to expand...

The Lancair 360 would be my choice, the Tango is nearly as fast and efficient and I think it hauls more stuff. If you ping Anymouse on this board, he has one. I sat in t and it was nice and comfortable and fully rigged for IR, and IIRC, it hauls a pretty decent load.

In the end though, with a 203 mile trip, the time difference in a Bonanza or SR-22 won't be hugely greater nor the costs. One thing you will need is to be IFR capable, but the good thing is your route is one of the few that has reliably safe to fly forms of IMC, though there are times of year that may delay you with mountain icing that you won't be able to make without DeIce gear. I doubt it catches you more than two or three flights a year, it never did me, and I flew that basic schedule and route in my Travelair.

If I could afford $200k, I would use an SR-22 w/TKS. If I could afford $100k and could wait on weather, I would have a Lancair 360 with the MkII tail and BRS. If I couldn't wait on weather, I would have a 310. If I had $50k I would have an RV-4 or 6 and not have an option on weather.
 
Last edited:
Glasair is another option and also aerobatic for fun flying. Other than that probably an RV 7/8 is affordable.
 
Piper Comanche 250 with tip tanks.

Pros:

Large Cabin
Hauls 1200 lbs +/-
90 gal of gas
Solid 140kt TAS at 4000 ft, 150kts at 10k burning 12.5hr.
200lbs baggage campartment
Corrosion profed at the factory
Inexpensive upfront, maintainace inline with other HP single retracts

Cons:

Gear AD roughly $4k every 1000 hrs
Tail Horn AD (most have been done)

Often overlooked choice for what you are wanting to do.

Flav
 
Oh great, another 'the plane that I own' thread !
 
And you are an IFR pilot, right?

Else it doesn't much matter about the plane that sits at home while you "drive" through the Tully Fog.
 
James331 said:
Pick her up for 70k spend a few bucks getting her all done up and this would be my better version of the standard issue boring Bo, Mooney etc.

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=88676
Click to expand...

It's a cool plane to have for air shows and having fun for sure, but with a 230hp Renault 6Q engine, I would not choose it to serve as a commuter. It will neither be fast, nor have very good dispatch reliability since every time you need a part may be 3 months or more to find. Maybe hang a dry sumped LS Chevy on it...
 
Flavius Renatus said:
Piper Comanche 250 with tip tanks.

Pros:

Large Cabin
Hauls 1200 lbs +/-
90 gal of gas
Solid 140kt TAS at 4000 ft, 150kts at 10k burning 12.5hr.
200lbs baggage campartment
Corrosion profed at the factory
Inexpensive upfront, maintainace inline with other HP single retracts

Cons:

Gear AD roughly $4k every 1000 hrs
Tail Horn AD (most have been done)

Often overlooked choice for what you are wanting to do.

Flav
Click to expand...

Mine wins :D

24414f_cf24231495154b7eac874bddbc778d7b.jpg



Well not "mine" but my recommendation lol
 
+





























------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\*/0p[-3ew
 
Sorry to hear the Lancair 360 is too small for you. I'm 6'0 and 240lbs and do 1200nm trips with it without discomfort. It's a spectacular platform for XC. Low acquisition cost, low maintenance and you'd be hard pressed to burn less fuel on the round trip.

200nm trip is literally going to be just over an hour each way, with maybe 12 gallons burned each way (burns around 9.5gph in cruise).

One caveat, unless you have your A&P ticket, you can't do the maintenance yourself on an experimental unless you built it.
 
coma24 said:
One caveat, unless you have your A&P ticket, you can't do the maintenance yourself on an experimental unless you built it.
Click to expand...

I'm 99.9% sure you can do the mx on an owner owned experimental, but you can't sign it off for "annual" inspection unless you built it.
 
I'm not a AP and I do most the mx on my certified plane, after the works done, or while it's being done my friendly APIA looks it over. No biggie.
 
coma24 said:
Sorry to hear the Lancair 360 is too small for you. I'm 6'0 and 240lbs and do 1200nm trips with it without discomfort. It's a spectacular platform for XC. Low acquisition cost, low maintenance and you'd be hard pressed to burn less fuel on the round trip.

200nm trip is literally going to be just over an hour each way, with maybe 12 gallons burned each way (burns around 9.5gph in cruise).

One caveat, unless you have your A&P ticket, you can't do the maintenance yourself on an experimental unless you built it.
Click to expand...

Did you add the last line to troll people?:dunno::lol: It's completely incorrect. You need to have an A&P sign off your annual condition inspection, that is the only restriction on a non builder/repairman certificate holder owner.
 
James331 said:
I'm not a AP and I do most the mx on my certified plane, after the works done, or while it's being done my friendly APIA looks it over. No biggie.
Click to expand...

Aware of that, my point is that experimentals aren't any different in that regard (or at least, I thought they weren't).
 
Henning said:
Did you add the last line to troll people?:dunno::lol: It's completely incorrect. You need to have an A&P sign off your annual condition inspection, that is the only restriction on a non builder/repairman certificate holder owner.
Click to expand...

Not trying to troll anyone. Agreed that an A&P needs to sign off on the condition inspection, but if there was other maintenance that took place during the year, the regs were basically the same as certified aircraft in that if isn't listed in the list of blessed tasks that an owner can perform, an A&P has to do it (by 'do it', I mean sign the log. I'm well aware that the person who actually performs the work is often the owner whether it's certified or experimental, no argument there).

I suspect I'm about to learn something new, though.
 
coma24 said:
Not trying to troll anyone. Agreed that an A&P needs to sign off on the condition inspection, but if there was other maintenance that took place during the year, the regs were basically the same as certified aircraft in that if isn't listed in the list of blessed tasks that an owner can perform, an A&P has to do it (by 'do it', I mean sign the log. I'm well aware that the person who actually performs the work is often the owner whether it's certified or experimental, no argument there).

I suspect I'm about to learn something new, though.
Click to expand...

I think you just did!! :D

Any and all maintenance on an Experimental-Amatuer Build aircraft can be done by anyone. Even that annoying 8 year old kid from across the street can do maintenance on it. However, it's up to the owner/operator to ensure the maintenance is done properly. That's not written, it's just common sense.

At least once a year, an A&P or a Repairman for that specific aircraft needs to sign off a condition inspection. An IA never needs to see E-AB birds.
 
Henning said:
The Lancair 360 would be my choice, the Tango is nearly as fast and efficient and I think it hauls more stuff. If you ping Anymouse on this board, he has one. I sat in t and it was nice and comfortable and fully rigged for IR, and IIRC, it hauls a pretty decent load.
Click to expand...

When I was shopping for a kit to build, I actually had commuting in mind. My Tango will hold 8+ hours of gas and gets 180 KTAS consistently. I like to travel in the mid teens for altitude and that gets me 8-9 GPH. You could probably do that commute with zero wind in 1.3 or so including the climb, and burn less than 12 gallons. For useful load, I have about 1000lbs. 540 pounds of that gets eaten up if you have full tanks. If you only go with forward tanks, it's 360 pounds for fuel.

The bad news is that there's not that many already built Tangos out there for sale. Not many owners are selling.
 
Anymouse said:
In addition to this, consider renting a tie down at your destination. It may get you a discount on fuel and less questions/complaints about a car being parked there all the time.
Click to expand...

Forgot that one.

That's what I did when I commuted. I actually had a hangar. Depending on the airport, a tiedown may allow you to park the car in the planes spot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top