Rental Planes - Am I Alone in my Fears?

VWGhiaBob

VWGhiaBob

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
884
Display Name
Display name:
VWGhiaBob
Non-functioning fuel gauges. Cracked plastic pieces. Doors that don't close properly. "In-op" signs on the panel. Years old stains on the carpets. Seats that don't really work right (one of which collapsed on downwind, causing a sudden altitude change and a need to recover immediately), fading paint, fiberglass pieces with fine cracks.

I fly at a So. Cal. FBO that's supposedly "the best" for maintenace. Folks tell me that "paint covers a lot" and that I shouldn't worry about all the "little things" and that aren't maintained properly on the planes I fly. They tell me cosmetics shouldn't matter.

Still, this is my life and my hobby. When I sit in a plane that's theoretically in great flying condition, but it looks and feels like it belongs in the junkyard, it bothers me. Not to mention...I could never take up friends and family in one of these planes.

OK, logically the planes might be safe. But in my experience outside aviation, inattention to details leads to inattention to the bigger things.

Am I being overly obsessive about this? Should I just get over it? Or should I bite the bullet and buy a plane I can pamper? Or does someone know of a So. Cal. FBO that has nicer planes (and maybe charges a bit more)?

Advise appreciated!
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Non-functioning fuel gauges. Cracked plastic pieces. Doors that don't close properly. "In-op" signs on the panel. Years old stains on the carpets. Seats that don't really work right (one of which collapsed on downwind, causing a sudden altitude change and a need to recover immediately), fading paint, fiberglass pieces with fine cracks.

I fly at a So. Cal. FBO that's supposedly "the best" for maintenace. Folks tell me that "paint covers a lot" and that I shouldn't worry about all the "little things" and that aren't maintained properly on the planes I fly. They tell me cosmetics shouldn't matter.

Still, this is my life and my hobby. When I sit in a plane that's theoretically in great flying condition, but it looks and feels like it belongs in the junkyard, it bothers me. Not to mention...I could never take up friends and family in one of these planes.

OK, logically the planes might be safe. But in my experience outside aviation, inattention to details leads to inattention to the bigger things.

Am I being overly obsessive about this? Should I just get over it? Or should I bite the bullet and buy a plane I can pamper? Or does someone know of a So. Cal. FBO that has nicer planes (and maybe charges a bit more)?

Advise appreciated!
Click to expand...

A plane with collapsing seats is NOT safe..:no::nonod::yikes:
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Non-functioning fuel gauges. Cracked plastic pieces. Doors that don't close properly. "In-op" signs on the panel. Years old stains on the carpets. Seats that don't really work right (one of which collapsed on downwind, causing a sudden altitude change and a need to recover immediately), fading paint, fiberglass pieces with fine cracks.

I fly at a So. Cal. FBO that's supposedly "the best" for maintenace. Folks tell me that "paint covers a lot" and that I shouldn't worry about all the "little things" and that aren't maintained properly on the planes I fly. They tell me cosmetics shouldn't matter.

Still, this is my life and my hobby. When I sit in a plane that's theoretically in great flying condition, but it looks and feels like it belongs in the junkyard, it bothers me. Not to mention...I could never take up friends and family in one of these planes.

OK, logically the planes might be safe. But in my experience outside aviation, inattention to details leads to inattention to the bigger things.

Am I being overly obsessive about this? Should I just get over it? Or should I bite the bullet and buy a plane I can pamper? Or does someone know of a So. Cal. FBO that has nicer planes (and maybe charges a bit more)?

Advise appreciated!
Click to expand...

My FBO has some planes that have been "well-loved" but none that exhibit any of the issues that you describe, other than cosmetic issues on some of the older "vintages" ...:rolleyes:

I agree with Ben, I wouldn't fly a plane with collapsing seats. Sheesh.
Paint and interior I can live with. The other stuff? Not so much.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Non-functioning fuel gauges. Cracked plastic pieces. Doors that don't close properly. "In-op" signs on the panel. Years old stains on the carpets. Seats that don't really work right (one of which collapsed on downwind, causing a sudden altitude change and a need to recover immediately), fading paint, fiberglass pieces with fine cracks.
Click to expand...

This is an interesting way of dumping together complete non-issues and extreme hazards. Do they really belong in the same sentence in your mind?

If airplane had a broken seat on me, I'd stop using the FBO and found another. SoCal is crawling with them. Broken fuel gauge puts you 1 ramp check away from having a tedious interview with FSDO. But the rest is eh, who cares. Stains on the carpets, LOL
 
"Arrow, why do you like to rent the Cherokee 140 so much?"

"It's comforting to know that the plane can still fly with so much equipment not working."

(They didn't particularly like that response by the way.)
 
I agree with those who say it's a mistake to connect things like seat and fuel gauges with paint, carpet, and yellow, cracked fiberglass. But can these be a symptom of a bigger problem?

In my feeble mind, someone who takes care of the "whole plane" is less likely to skip the more important items.

Another example...my FBO rents planes (some but not all of them) that have low idle speeds and run very rough at idle. I'm guessing that although this technically is OK, the roughness and shaking are not good for the engine inside or the mounts. Not to mention tires with clear bald spots (but no tread showing). Not to mention door mechanisms that don't really work and sometimes take up to 10 minutes to properly close and secure.

I guess at the end of the day, this is my decision. But I still find the perspectives of others very interesting.
 
I've rented enough planes over the years that have had varying levels of quality of care. Some have been well kept cosmetically, but underneath had a lot of problems. Others looked like they'd been rode hard and put away wet but mechanically were outstanding. It just depends on the mentality of the owner, FBO, and mechanic. Some like to make it look pretty so it will be easier to rent, others prefer to keep it mechanically sound and put off the cosmetic touch-ups.

If there is something questionable, talk with the mechanics and you'll quickly find out which plane(s) to stay away from.
 
One good thing about rentals at least is that some of them get pre-flighted by several people, including instructors, daily. A lot of eyes at least. The seat is certainly a safety issue. Imagine that on rotation.

As for the fuel gauges, I've never once flown a small a/c where I did anything more than glance at them once in a while to see if one plummets unexpectedly in flight. I'm not sure i've ever seen one remotely accurate in a small plane, or for that matter, my truck. Some of them are about as good as a dummy light for 'fuel/no fuel.' Then again nearly all my time has been in a/c that are 40/50 years old. From back when common sense prevailed, now a bad fuel gauge would be lawsuit city and manufacturers tend to care more about having one that functions with some accuracy.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
I agree with those who say it's a mistake to connect things like seat and fuel gauges with paint, carpet, and yellow, cracked fiberglass. But can these be a symptom of a bigger problem?

In my feeble mind, someone who takes care of the "whole plane" is less likely to skip the more important items.
Click to expand...

I don't know. I don't think there's an absolute connection and would say "it depends."

A couple of the planes at the FBO I train at are beat up cosmetically but are completely airworthy. I would rather they put money back into the important things on an aircraft that has been "used and abused" by primary students for 34 years. For instance, the C172N I rent the most has chipped paint, cracked plastic, stains on the carpet, a tear in the back seat fabric. I really don't care about that. If I take my family along, maybe I'll rent one of the newer SP's. Fuel gauges non-functioning and seats that collapse would be a no-go for me. The other stuff you mentioned really just doesn't matter as far as my situation is concerned, because I have faith that the aircraft I rent are being maintained and are airworthy.

Obviously it's your call and your life. I'm just saying it's not so black and white. Cosmetic issues are not necessarily indicative of a lack of maintenance.
 
There are plenty of SoCal FBOs that either cater to this very concern, and only line up $180 skyhawks of newer vintage, or have a range of aircraft so that you can choose your own adventure.

We were one of the latter, and had everything ranging from a beater F model to a G1000 172SP. What is funny is that the extreme ends were not profitable for us -- the planes that flew the most, by an overwhelming margin, were the mid-range skyhawks -- the M/N/P models of the mid-70s to early 80s. I am also certain that if we didn't have the cheap beater on the menu, we'd have missed a lot of opportunities to meet new clients. There is often an amusing moment when they go "Wait, so the $79 skyhawk... is THAT one? Where's the $94 one?" heh heh.

If you're an average renter, and grab a plane say 3 times a month -- that plane has flown dozens of times since your last rental, by pilots with wildly varying techniques and aptitudes -- the opportunity for broken things is very high, and you'd be amazed at how hard it is to get squawk reports for nuisance items.

If you lived in the sticks, you'd only have access to one or maybe two beaters in a cornfield, so I say leverage your superior access to aircraft and find exactly what ya want. :D
 
Was this the same plane that lacked the brake release item on the check-list?

VWGhiaBob said:
Non-functioning fuel gauges. Cracked plastic pieces. Doors that don't close properly. "In-op" signs on the panel. Years old stains on the carpets. Seats that don't really work right (one of which collapsed on downwind, causing a sudden altitude change and a need to recover immediately), fading paint, fiberglass pieces with fine cracks.

I fly at a So. Cal. FBO that's supposedly "the best" for maintenace. Folks tell me that "paint covers a lot" and that I shouldn't worry about all the "little things" and that aren't maintained properly on the planes I fly. They tell me cosmetics shouldn't matter.

Still, this is my life and my hobby. When I sit in a plane that's theoretically in great flying condition, but it looks and feels like it belongs in the junkyard, it bothers me. Not to mention...I could never take up friends and family in one of these planes.

OK, logically the planes might be safe. But in my experience outside aviation, inattention to details leads to inattention to the bigger things.

Am I being overly obsessive about this? Should I just get over it? Or should I bite the bullet and buy a plane I can pamper? Or does someone know of a So. Cal. FBO that has nicer planes (and maybe charges a bit more)?

Advise appreciated!
Click to expand...
 
Bob, are there any flying clubs in your area that you could check out? There are always exceptions, but IME club planes (especially those that belong to real equity clubs and not FBOs masquerading as clubs) are better maintained as a rule than rentals.
 
+1, as well as having numerous other advantages.

azure said:
Bob, are there any flying clubs in your area that you could check out? There are always exceptions, but IME club planes (especially those that belong to real equity clubs and not FBOs masquerading as clubs) are better maintained as a rule than rentals.
Click to expand...
 
Before I put the cash into my ownership share, I had to get a grip on a rental deal that was so enticing from a monetary standpoint but I had to walk away due to a mentality that manifests as what you describe. Although the planes looked fine, talking with management gave me the hebegebees.
 
Have you ever owned an airplane on which something broke in flight?

A guy came into the shop yesterday with a Cessna twin on which he said everything worked. When he tried to depart, the R/H fuel selector wouldn't move into the cross-feed position. Since it tested good prior to takeoff on the last leg, it had obviously failed during the flight to Dallas. Was it safe when he took off?

N801BH said:
A plane with collapsing seats is NOT safe..:no::nonod::yikes:
Click to expand...
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Non-functioning fuel gauges. Cracked plastic pieces. Doors that don't close properly. "In-op" signs on the panel. Years old stains on the carpets. Seats that don't really work right (one of which collapsed on downwind, causing a sudden altitude change and a need to recover immediately), fading paint, fiberglass pieces with fine cracks.
Click to expand...

The bolded are unacceptable. Find somewhere else to rent. The others come with the territory on 30+ year-old rental aircraft.

edit: There are cosmetically nicer airplanes out there for a premium price. For some folks that is important and they are willing to pay the price. I have a friend (or teo or three) that is like that.
 
alfadog said:
The bolded are unacceptable. Find somewhere else to rent. The others come with the territory on 30+ year-old rental aircraft.

edit: There are cosmetically nicer airplanes out there for a premium price. For some folks that is important and they are willing to pay the price. I have a friend (or teo or three) that is like that.
Click to expand...

I'll bite. Why is "in-op signs on the panel" so horrible? I think every trainer I've been in has in-op A/C and/or AP. Is that really an issue if properly placarded and deactivated?
 
My wife has something like 250 hours in our (very well maintained) flying club 172 and then another 300 or so in our Navion. She had never really flown a "rental" until we were out in Colorado (flew out commercially) and decided we'd go do a quick checkout and fly around a bit. Even I had forgotten how ragged out the training fleet was.

When getting scuba certified I was talking to my instructor after the last of our pool dives as he was putting away his personal equipment. I asked him about the general quality of rental scuba gear and he said it was OK but he preferred to have the known quantity of his own gear. I told him I suspected it was much the same with airplanes and that for that reason I had bought my own plane. I subsequently bought my own scuba gear for that reason.
 
Ventucky...yes...I am in touch with them and considering joining. My only issue is they only have one plane I qualified for and want to fly. This is a great club...one of the best anywhere.
 
The magazines make aviation look new and hip and flashy... the reality is the fleet is decrepit and some places don't do proper maintenance, since it's the equivalent of keeping a 70's Monte Carlo in tip-top shape. LOL...
 
Matthew said:
I've rented enough planes over the years that have had varying levels of quality of care. Some have been well kept cosmetically, but underneath had a lot of problems. Others looked like they'd been rode hard and put away wet but mechanically were outstanding. It just depends on the mentality of the owner, FBO, and mechanic. Some like to make it look pretty so it will be easier to rent, others prefer to keep it mechanically sound and put off the cosmetic touch-ups.

If there is something questionable, talk with the mechanics and you'll quickly find out which plane(s) to stay away from.
Click to expand...
Why are these things mutually exclusive?

I'm not talking about you, but about the mentality of some flight schools. That thought process scares the **** out of me. If they don't clean the underbelly more than once per year, if that, I have little comfort that the engine and other systems are up to par.

Are we renters that unsophisticated that we will take whatever POS we are offered to rent? I guess the answer is yes, absent any real competition.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Ventucky...yes...I am in touch with them and considering joining. My only issue is they only have one plane I qualified for and want to fly. This is a great club...one of the best anywhere.
Click to expand...

If you're willing to come to CMA I can hook you up with a 172 private rental deal.....

Or head on down to Long Beach Flying Club...
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Non-functioning fuel gauges. Cracked plastic pieces. Doors that don't close properly. "In-op" signs on the panel. Years old stains on the carpets. Seats that don't really work right (one of which collapsed on downwind, causing a sudden altitude change and a need to recover immediately), fading paint, fiberglass pieces with fine cracks.

I fly at a So. Cal. FBO that's supposedly "the best" for maintenace. Folks tell me that "paint covers a lot" and that I shouldn't worry about all the "little things" and that aren't maintained properly on the planes I fly. They tell me cosmetics shouldn't matter.

Still, this is my life and my hobby. When I sit in a plane that's theoretically in great flying condition, but it looks and feels like it belongs in the junkyard, it bothers me. Not to mention...I could never take up friends and family in one of these planes.

OK, logically the planes might be safe. But in my experience outside aviation, inattention to details leads to inattention to the bigger things.

Am I being overly obsessive about this? Should I just get over it? Or should I bite the bullet and buy a plane I can pamper? Or does someone know of a So. Cal. FBO that has nicer planes (and maybe charges a bit more)?

Advise appreciated!
Click to expand...
Bob, you are spot on with the problem with general aviation. In some places it is downright embarrasing to take a passenger in one of their planes, and I feel like an idiot parroting the FBO or flight school's argument that "it might not look like much, but it's mechanically sound."
 
EpicDraws said:
I'll bite. Why is "in-op signs on the panel" so horrible? I think every trainer I've been in has in-op A/C and/or AP. Is that really an issue if properly placarded and deactivated?
Click to expand...
OK, you have a point. I was SO disappointed that the 172's ADF was INOP for my IR checkride. :goofy::rofl:
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Ventucky...yes...I am in touch with them and considering joining. My only issue is they only have one plane I qualified for and want to fly. This is a great club...one of the best anywhere.
Click to expand...

109 wet tach for a skyhawk, 119 for an SP, and "still considering"? really?
 
schmookeeg said:
109 wet tach for a skyhawk, 119 for an SP, and "still considering"? really?
Click to expand...
Yeah, but it's a club. I don't think I would ever join a club. What does it matter how much they charge? My health is more important.
 
To Denver Pilot...

Who says you can't take good care of a 1970's car or plane? Here are the two in my garage (yes really):




 
nddons said:
Why are these things mutually exclusive?

I'm not talking about you, but about the mentality of some flight schools. That thought process scares the **** out of me. If they don't clean the underbelly more than once per year, if that, I have little comfort that the engine and other systems are up to par.

Are we renters that unsophisticated that we will take whatever POS we are offered to rent? I guess the answer is yes, absent any real competition.
Click to expand...

In my experience a lot comes down to the owner of the lease-back and the relationship with the FBO. It almost always comes down to money. How much is it going to cost to clean that belly or replace that cracked headliner? Does it affect airworthiness? Some owners say - if it's not an airworthiness deal, I'll worry about it later. Some FBOs say - we'll cut you a deal on the parts and labor to fix that broken piece of plastic that renters complain about.

Like any partnership: sometimes it's a good arrangement, sometimes not.
 
I was in a flight club that kept immaculate airplanes once. What goes along with that is a serious cussing out by the aircraft owner if you don't clean up the aircraft after use...

How many pilots spending over $100/hr on a rental's egos could handle that?

The guy didn't need the club... he didn't need the money... he did it so he could afford to own TWO aircraft instead of one... he eventually sold the airplanes and the club (which had three airplanes) folded within a month.

The club provided cleaning materials, kept the aircraft in hangars (in Murphy's hangar which wasn't Murphy's back then, and the one next door, to be exact! Grin...), and the owner himself typically visited the airplanes on about an every-other-day basis.

If he found trash or dirt or mud in the carpet or wayward pop cans... whatever... everyone who'd flown the airplane got the third degree, until he figured out who hadn't learned the childhood lesson to clean up after themselves. And then he "taught" them the lesson their momma forgot.

This included VACCUMMING out dirt if you tracked any in. Each hangar had a vaccuum and you were EXPECTED to use it. Bugs on leading edges? No... never. You clean them off before you leave. And if you spilled oil and it had run back on the belly? You got under the damn airplane and cleaned it off. Even if it was the pilot before you who did it and the oil is still seeping down from somewhere and on the belly after YOU landed... you cleaned it off.

How many renters today would put up with an owner who called and cussed them out if the aircraft was dirty or otherwise not taken care of under their care? That guy wasn't "PC" at all.

Made for some damn nice airplanes to fly...

He also returned the care with maintenance care of his own... if you broke down somewhere he'd move heaven and earth to get the aircraft fixed, find you a ride home, whatever.

Pride of ownership was strong with that dude...
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Who says you can't take good care of a 1970's car or plane? Here are the two in my garage (yes really):
Click to expand...

That was not my point. My point was that it becomes a different type of maintenance than most folks will spend time on... restorative rather than just maintenance, really.
 
The only rental planes crashes I am aware of were caused by the pilot not the airplane . . .

That said - the bolded items on a prior post are an issue - while fuel gauges need to only be accurate when empty it would nice to have some idea where the fuel level is.

You asked about alternative - you are at EMT - which side of EMT are you on? Because POC is down the road a piece the Chinese flight school on the NW corner of the field has decent Skyhawks - a nice Arrow and a rat trap Cherokee 140.

Dunno about the other schools on the south side of the field since I never get there.

There is also CCB a few miles further down the 210. . . .

West of EMT is VNY and BUR. Don't ignore BUR if you are looking for cosmetically nice aircraft. VentuckyRed makes a good point out the VNY based club - as well as the flight schools there tend to have newer airplanes because of the clientele.

None of the options are great because you need to drive thet 210 to get there I presume . . .
 
Last edited:
I learned to fly in a 1946 Aeronca 7AC Champ which was seeing 100 hours a month (in 2003) and rented for $35/hr wet. The mechanics took great care of her, but she never went to the beauty parlor. If a student scuffed a wingtip, the torches were going in the hangar at 1am, the fabric people took it from there, and they had her back on the line in the morning. Solid, but not always beautiful.

In all fairness, that's a really simple airframe with not much of a panel, not even an electrical system. A beater 172 has many more places for potentially serious issues to hide.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
Not to mention tires with clear bald spots (but no tread showing).
Click to expand...
Do you know how fast that can happen in a training environment?
I think a lot of rental owners eventually give up on cosmetic maintenance. that's not how it should be, but it happens. My old flight school boss put a new interior in a Cessna 172, and a student ripped the seat back the NEXT week. He was so ticked he said he'd never spend $2000 on an interior again.

Ryan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top