Question for airplane owners

j1b3h0

j1b3h0

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
685
Location
SF Bay area
Display Name
Display name:
Doug
Was the mission for your first airplane what you thought it was going to be before you bought it? What do you know now about how you actually use the airplane vs. the way you thought you would? I ask these silly questions because I want an airplane...mostly for fun, but wouldn't mind traveling with it.
 
My original mission was to use as a trainer, low cost family flying so I went with a 4 seat, Cherokee 140. Had I been a 160 pound guy I might have considered 2 seater that burns less fuel. However the mogas stc on the Cherokee made it perfect for me.

I flew 500 hrs in 3 years and then longed for much longer trips and upgraded to a Comanche 250. My flying per year actually decreased as did my long distance trips.

If I had the possibility of keeping the very low cost and easy to own Cherokee and renting a HP/Complex 1-2% of my flights, I would have done that at a great cost savings over owning a HP/Complex.
 
My first (and current) owned airplane was bought primarily as a tailwheel timebuilder and $100 hamburger runner. Accounted for at least 75% of my flying and I was able to rent larger and faster aircraft for x-country trips.

Now that I have built up the tailwheel time and we are now in a location that has far fewer rentals available that fit the family hauling needs, I am contemplating selling the 170 and stepping up to a 310.

To me, there are two ways to look at it. Either find a single airplane that perfectly meets 75% or more of your mission requirements and then rent other types for the outstanding requirements, or pick the best compromise. Often, that can kind of depend on where you are and what the rental market is like. There is a third option and that is to buy two airplanes, but that obviously requires sufficient funding.
 
Answer to both your questions, for me: Yes and Yes

The 172 with 180hp conversion and I have logged many hours (600+) in 3 years training for my IR, mission flying and the usual $200 hamburger flights.

Big consideration is the cost of insuring and maintaining the aircraft, the larger and more complex you get, the more expensive it is to own.
 
I fly more long distance XC than I thought I would. Once you have a plane, and hate TSA, you find use in it for vacations that used to be handled with the airlines.
 
j1b3h0 said:
Was the mission for your first airplane what you thought it was going to be before you bought it?
Click to expand...
Yes. Of course, the mission later changed, but that was years later and then we upgraded to a bigger plane which could handle the mission.

What do you know now about how you actually use the airplane vs. the way you thought you would?
Click to expand...
Not a whole lot. However, I'd been flying for 8 years, most of it professionally, when we bought our first plane, so there weren't a lot of surprises. Of course, my mission has changed over the years, and I've changed airplanes accordingly, but I've never had any real surprises.

I ask these silly questions because I want an airplane...mostly for fun, but wouldn't mind traveling with it.
Click to expand...
Lay out your mission requirements (payload, speed, range, airports) and see if it makes sense with your expected frequency of flight.
 
Yes. Got my IR and make some trips with my wife.
 
Yes and yes, but I will say my expectations for what I would do with an airplane changed over time during the dream / look / get serious timeline. And they continue to change, so I am still dreaming / looking right now, even though I am an owner.
 
I'd say yes and yes, although details weren't quite what I expected. I ended up flying the Aztec more than I expected to, and further. I think I made a great choice for what I needed.

Today we'd benefit from turbos and pressurization more for our mission. I suppose we would have before, as well, but the negative trades for that make it a non-starter, primarily the cost and runway requirements.
 
I have found that my missions have changed with the capabilities of the aircraft that I am flying.

When I purchased my first airplane, I anticipated using it almost exclusively for business, charitable flights within the area and the occasional family trip.

Over time, and after a few different airplanes, I still use the airplane primarily for business, but I am doing much longer charitable flights for the Veterans Airlift Command and Angel Flight.

The biggest change for me is that I am doing more family travel and going much further than I anticipated in the beginning. I have been able to eliminate most of my commercial flying for the past few years and I am flying quickly to places that are hard to get to using the airlines.

Abram
 
j1b3h0 said:
Was the mission for your first airplane what you thought it was going to be before you bought it? What do you know now about how you actually use the airplane vs. the way you thought you would? I ask these silly questions because I want an airplane...mostly for fun, but wouldn't mind traveling with it.
Click to expand...

My first plane was a Rans S-12 ultra light. I soon realized I liked flying faster than 70 mph.

I then bought an RV-9a that had a 220 hp 0-360. Now that was more like it. :D. 200+ cruise, but could go low n slow also, stall speed is around 50 mph. RV's are amazing planes that fit the fun mission extremely well. ;)
 
momalley said:
Fixed that for ya :)
Click to expand...

I never claimed to know how to spell anything other than airport codes for the GPS. Half the time I ask for my instrument clearance by airport code alone. Once I was asked by ATC "Where on earth do you find all these weird airports?"
 
When the first oil embargo effectively eliminated my ability to travel to mid-small market destinations in the midwest, I knew a retrac single would be a good fit, just didn't know which one or how much use I would obtain.

When it happened, I had accumulated a few hundred VFR hours over 15 years. When I sold the last business-use plane 26 years later the logbooks showed almost 10k hours and the card in my wallet included quite a few more credentials. None of it was planned, but allowed me to be "free to move about the country."
 
Fearless Tower said:
Either find a single airplane that perfectly meets 75% or more of your mission requirements and then rent other types for the outstanding requirements, or pick the best compromise.
Click to expand...


+1 :yes:
 
You may well have a good handle on your mission now, but does your spouse? Nothing will change your idea of the right airplane more than the wife deciding she likes to fly to see her mother or her kids or on vacation. That's the part that may be hard to anticipate. Her view will likely be much more practical than yours. There goes the Citabria or C180 and here comes the C182 or T210 or Apache.
 
If you're a low time pilot your first first mission should simply be aircraft ownership. 1. Getting up in the air in something you can handle. 2. After a year or two determine if you can actually afford to keep doing it.

My first plane was an AA-5. Great first plane to meet the two basic requirements. Then I realized I wanted to travel and that 90 % of the time when I do travel the seats in the back were empty. Enter the Glasair. Now instead of plowing through the air at 118 KTAS, I'm doing 168 KTAS and I can roll it to boot. After a couple of years I decided I still like having seats in the back for rare ocassions and I wanted a little more leg room up front. Enter the Velocity. Now I have the room of the AA-5, almost the speed of the Glasair but with a slightly greater range. Only thing I've lost is the ability to roll it. :)
 
Velocity173 said:
If you're a low time pilot your first first mission should simply be aircraft ownership. 1. Getting up in the air in something you can handle. 2. After a year or two determine if you can actually afford to keep doing it.
Click to expand...

My first plane at 225 total time was the Aztec with FIKI and radar. Although Bruce had his doubts, it seemed to work out well for me.

I disagree that it should just be "airplane ownership." An airplane that doesn't fit your mission doesn't necessarily help any goals.

Figure out what you want to do with a plane, run some numbers, figure out if it works. Get help with the numbers from people who have experience.

From the spousal perspective, depends heavily upon your spouse. However, extra capability will rarely be frowned upon - just make sure you can afford it.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
My first plane at 225 total time was the Aztec with FIKI and radar. Although Bruce had his doubts, it seemed to work out well for me.

I disagree that it should just be "airplane ownership." An airplane that doesn't fit your mission doesn't necessarily help any goals.

Figure out what you want to do with a plane, run some numbers, figure out if it works. Get help with the numbers from people who have experience.

From the spousal perspective, depends heavily upon your spouse. However, extra capability will rarely be frowned upon - just make sure you can afford it.
Click to expand...

I'm talking about 70 hrs and single engine not 225 hrs and multi. I would hope that someone with low time (70hrs) isn't going to jump into a high performance single or even a multi for their first aircraft.

I don't know of too many low time pilots who bought their first aircraft and it met their end state goals. You start off small and work your way up. My mission is to have a Citation II SP but that doesn't mean I'm ready for it yet.
 
Last edited:
I wanted speed and economy. Looked at glasairs but went with a mooney. I love it, and it meets 95% of my mission needs. I just got checked out in a 182 today b/c I can't take friends/luggage with me. I really like the 182 a lot, but I'd sacrifice a little speed and fuel burn to have something I only need 5% of the time.

I'd love to own the mooney AND a 182....
 
j1b3h0 said:
Was the mission for your first airplane what you thought it was going to be before you bought it? What do you know now about how you actually use the airplane vs. the way you thought you would? I ask these silly questions because I want an airplane...mostly for fun, but wouldn't mind traveling with it.
Click to expand...


My first and only airplane was a cherokee 140, which I bought in 1994 (just sold it at the end of Aug 2012). I had been flying a 140 for several years prior to that, so I knew what I was going to do with it and what the airplane was capable of.
 
My first plane was a 172 which did exactly what I had hoped it would. Was cheap to fly and I could put 4 people in it if they weren't to big. Never did though. Since then I have had several planes as my needs changed. Have sold a few of them but just can't seem to just have one. Still own the 172 by the way.
 
Cessna 172 was my first plane to get all my ratings in, got about 530 hours in it in less tha 2 years, ended up flying a lot more XCs than I thought I would, so I bought a Mooney.
 
Thanks for the opinions. I think the mission requirements are 1)Fun...share the joy of flight with friends, $100 hamburgers. Fly formation with my brothers' Bonanza. Mild aerobatics, and once in a great while, go on a 450nm x-c. Go to airshows, do young eagles, and, if it were the right kind of airplane, give dual in it. Prefer sporty but not hard core, stick over yoke, tail wheel over trike but would tolerate a nose wheel if it retracked. I love Bonanzas but doubt that I would have as much fun burning 16gals/hr. My dear wife is not wild about the idea...she thinks it's the same as my Ducati - an unnecessary indulgence. We can travel long distance with my airline for free. Some airplanes I've thought about -in no particular order...Sequoia Falco, Mustang II, RV4,6,7,8, Cessna 180, Bellanca Cruisemaster, Super Decathlon, Piper Clipper with an O-320, Wittman Tailwind. Oh, and I plan on doing the maint. myself. Also would like at least one partner.
 
Looks like you have a good list. The RVs and Mustang sound like a perfect fit for your mission.
 
Answers...

Original mission: Go flying.

Current mission: Go flying.

I like to keep it simple. :)
 
j1b3h0 said:
Thanks for the opinions. I think the mission requirements are 1)Fun...share the joy of flight with friends, $100 hamburgers. Fly formation with my brothers' Bonanza. Mild aerobatics, and once in a great while, go on a 450nm x-c. Go to airshows, do young eagles, and, if it were the right kind of airplane, give dual in it. Prefer sporty but not hard core, stick over yoke, tail wheel over trike but would tolerate a nose wheel if it retracked. I love Bonanzas but doubt that I would have as much fun burning 16gals/hr. My dear wife is not wild about the idea...she thinks it's the same as my Ducati - an unnecessary indulgence. We can travel long distance with my airline for free. Some airplanes I've thought about -in no particular order...Sequoia Falco, Mustang II, RV4,6,7,8, Cessna 180, Bellanca Cruisemaster, Super Decathlon, Piper Clipper with an O-320, Wittman Tailwind. Oh, and I plan on doing the maint. myself. Also would like at least one partner.
Click to expand...

RV-8/8A for that list.
 
I bought a twin (Commander 520) because the main flying I do is long x-countries, and because almost all of them (living on the west coast) takes me over the Sierras and Rockies - I get nervous with a single engine over mountains. Or just at night over the LA basin. So it had to be a twin - and it was the only twin I could afford!

It had to be rugged, as I like to be able to land on grass and gravel as well and go camping etc. It had to have decent range. It had to be able to be a transportation device when I go for work and the weather cooperates, so I don't have to deal with TSA etc. And it had to be reasonably fast - although now after having flown a lot of long trips, it's obviously never fast enough.:)

I was a low time pilot and didn't even have a twin rating when I bought mine, but it has worked out fine. Maintenance has been a little steeper than I anticipated, but not unreasonable. On all of these long trips, she's only left me stranded twice. Once she blew two valves coming in to Chicago and on the trip I just got back from to Nashville, I had an oil pressure problem that was taken care of by a local mechanic.

I'm looking to step up to a faster twin within the next year and will probably buy an Aerostar. Fast all-weather tourer/traveller that makes me able to really use it for all my business trips, not just the ones where the weather's going to be decent.
 
Last edited:
jnmeade said:
You may well have a good handle on your mission now, but does your spouse? Nothing will change your idea of the right airplane more than the wife deciding she likes to fly to see her mother or her kids or on vacation. That's the part that may be hard to anticipate. Her view will likely be much more practical than yours. There goes the Citabria or C180 and here comes the C182 or T210 or Apache.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, I agree with your assessment of spousal desires. We moved from a 177RG to a (de-T)210 with FIKI and radar when the "kids" were in CT in school. The wife would tolerate flying if it was up and down the east coast to see the kids. (And we wanted the ability to fly with four or five aboard). Now the kids are in CA and TX. Now we might fly to TX once a year, but she is always looking for an excuse to buy airline tickets at the last minute, as she simply does not like flying in the small plane, especially over long distances and across weather systems.

Now I could use a simple plane that burns less fuel for my increasingly rare fly-locally-on-pretty-days kind of flying.

Missions change.

Wells
 
W. Stewart said:
Unfortunately, I agree with your assessment of spousal desires. We moved from a 177RG to a (de-T)210 with FIKI and radar when the "kids" were in CT in school. The wife would tolerate flying if it was up and down the east coast to see the kids. (And we wanted the ability to fly with four or five aboard). Now the kids are in CA and TX. Now we might fly to TX once a year, but she is always looking for an excuse to buy airline tickets at the last minute, as she simply does not like flying in the small plane, especially over long distances and across weather systems.

Now I could use a simple plane that burns less fuel for my increasingly rare fly-locally-on-pretty-days kind of flying.

Missions change.

Wells
Click to expand...

A number of people on the Twin Cessna forum cite similar to your first paragraph, and that's why they upgraded with good results following. On the other hand, for every success story, there's probably at least one failure story that doesn't get posted. And cost wise, a 340-421 is a big step from a 210.
 
j1b3h0 said:
Was the mission for your first airplane what you thought it was going to be before you bought it? What do you know now about how you actually use the airplane vs. the way you thought you would? I ask these silly questions because I want an airplane...mostly for fun, but wouldn't mind traveling with it.
Click to expand...
Our first aircraft were sailplanes. After lots of cross country and racing we decided to get our first airplane.

I had envisioned just sort of flying around poking holes in the sky, getting the occasional burger and taking short trips. Two seats would be all we'd need (100% more seating than the sailplanes). Side by side would be desirable so we could see each other. I wanted a tailwheel for the challenge.

After years of glider crewing, she looked forward to actually flying with me. She immediately asked about baggage capacity. Hearing that a two seater was very comfortable with 1 person and baggage, while most light 4 seaters were great for 2 and all the baggage they'd need, she insisted on a 4 seater.

So we got a Maule. It was perfect in several ways; the tw challenge was as expected, It was reasonably comfortable for 2 and made baggage a non-issue. We flew off grass and the Maule was a great 'mudder'.

But aside from getting proficient with the tw, the thought of just "flying around" turned out to be a non-starter. We needed a mission and were fortunate enough to find a need to commute to lake friends an hour away every weekend. This immediately created the need to get an IR and a panel upgrade to support the training. Didn't exactly expect all that. That turned out to be the key use for the plane and pointed us in the right direction for our next move.

Ended up building an RV10 for the build experience, cheaper maintenance, comfort and speed. We work hard to come up with cross country missions which turns out to be the thing that keeps us in the game.
 
A dispiriting thought, most airplanes parked at most airports rarely fly.

The people here include some of the few owners that actually fly regularly.

The implication is that owners with the wrong plane, no mission or who otherwise regret their airplane decision, aren't represented here.

Just saying
 
j1b3h0 said:
Was the mission for your first airplane what you thought it was going to be before you bought it? What do you know now about how you actually use the airplane vs. the way you thought you would?
Click to expand...

The Mooney is my first plane, but I rented for 12 years and have participated in forums for many years, gone to fly ins and talked to owners quite a bit, so there hasn't been too many surprises because, well, I knew to expect expensive surprises from time to time. Expect the unexpected.

My wife is a double edged sword. On one hand she is very supportive and encourages my flying, but on the other hand she does not care for it one bit herself. This means I fly around by myself a lot which I'm OK with, but it also means I really don't go anywhere far away... yet. I would be perfectly happy with a Lancair Legacy, or some sort of two seat experimental, but strangely, it's my wife that insisted I buy a four seater.

I had envisioned what I do, flights around the patch, local fly ins and hamburger runs, but I had also thought of traveling further on over nights. Doesn't really happen for me. Two reasons, I can't guarantee reliable service (leave Friday and absolutely for sure back on Sunday) and expense. The gas bills are an eye opener. The later is more of an obstacle than I thought it would be.

I could in theory decide to go by myself to Vegas, or Santa Fe, or Sedona, etc, but when I think of the fuel bill it seems a big waste of money for essentially a long distance hamburger run. Fly ins do give me a good reason to go, but there are only 52 weekends and my free ones rarely seem to mesh with others.

Still, I am happy with ownership and enjoying the plane. It's fun to tinker with and upgrade and I really do enjoy my spontaneous afternoon magic carpet rides around Nor Cal. My advice to someone thinking of owning would be-

Think efficiency and fuel economy. The fuel bills really suck.

Buy experimental if you can. It will save you money and headaches.

Do owner assited annuals, get intimate and involved with your plane's maintenance. It could save your life. I know it may have saved mine.

Plan on a hangar. It really helps and it amplifies the owner experience.

If you're not married yet, only marry someone that likes to fly in little airplanes and have a long talk about kids and what that will mean for your flying in the future.

Have lots of money and be willing to part with it. Flying airplanes is silly, stupid expensive.

Think of ownership as an adventure, with lots of pit falls and thrills along the way. Be flexible and prepared for the worst.

Good luck!:)
 
Learning to fly, puttering around and quick flights from northern california to eastern washington and north coast. First two are a total success, third one, not so much. Without an IFR rating and airplane, weather puts big constraints on my flights out of the area. I still do trips to Humboldt and washington, but the weather has to be good enough to get up there and get back.
 
Is it really feasible to be a travelling pilot and stay VFR or is IFR a necessity if you plan on doing lots of xcountry?
 
Bill Watson said:
A dispiriting thought, most airplanes parked at most airports rarely fly.

The people here include some of the few owners that actually fly regularly.

The implication is that owners with the wrong plane, no mission or who otherwise regret their airplane decision, aren't represented here.

Just saying
Click to expand...

This is very true. America's airports are littered with unused, rotting dreams. You don't want to go there. Be realistic and pessimistic in your planning for ownership. As this thread has shown, many are pleasantly surprised by expanded flying they hadn't expected. This is the way you want to be rather than the other way around.
 
supernovae said:
Is it really feasible to be a travelling pilot and stay VFR or is IFR a necessity if you plan on doing lots of xcountry?
Click to expand...

Lots of cross country is doable VFR, if you're retired, or have a very flexible schedule and don't mind unexpected stays and overnights during your travels. An IR helps a lot in keeping you on schedule, but IMO, if you're a person with a rigid schedule where you must be at your job Monday through Friday, think twice about lots of long x country even with a IR.
 
Velocity173 said:
I'm talking about 70 hrs and single engine not 225 hrs and multi. I would hope that someone with low time (70hrs) isn't going to jump into a high performance single or even a multi for their first aircraft.

I don't know of too many low time pilots who bought their first aircraft and it met their end state goals. You start off small and work your way up. My mission is to have a Citation II SP but that doesn't mean I'm ready for it yet.
Click to expand...

I bought the cherokee 180 before the checkride. Would I like more speed? Is there anyone around here who doesn't want faster? But the cherokee handles all the gear & luggage for 1,2 or 3 people on an XC trip, is comfortable, and is IFR even if I'm not.

If there is a problem on a trip, it's really rare to find someone that doesn't know how to fix it, rare to not have the parts available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top