Seriously considering a ('81) Beech 77 Skipper

Warren Dunes

Warren Dunes

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Dec 2, 2021
Messages
141
Location
92.5 inches aft of datum
Display Name
Display name:
Warren Dunes
Intended mission: one 180 pound pilot and 20 pounds of baggage 3.5 250 mile one-way trips per week. Additional trips as able with 150 pound passenger and additional 20 pounds baggage. Aircraft has useful weight of 525 pounds. In 40 years has accumulated just over 1666 total hours on airframe and engine... 666? Cue Mike Olfield's 'Tubular Bells' (the theme from 'Exorcist').

I have flown it, it seems okay for what it is (a commuter). The first cost is attractve, it performs well enough to meet mission requirements. Looking at logs and speaking to seller it appears to deliver just over 100 mph on just under 5 gph.

Does anyone have first (or reliable second-hand) info on any reason not to?

Thanks
 
Awesome airplane, I have about 150 hours in them, I learned to fly in Skippers. They are roomy, fly great, stable, you can spin them. But they are slow, the only drawback. 250 miles should be very doable, and still a lot faster than driving.
 
Replacement parts availability? Only 300 or so built.
No idea how many flying.
If you have twenty flying, you have potentially 280 aircraft for parts :)
 
I've heard they're nice flying, well built airplanes. Get used to people calling it a Tomahawk!

Nice write up here on POA. Beech Skipper Review
 
I started my training in a Skipper. Nice little airplane, and Beech quality throughout.
 
Spend $50 and join Beech Aero Club. It's the best money I spend on aviation.

I was concerned 22 years ago that my Sundowner was an "orphan". BAC is a great group of people, many make OPP parts that are hard to get. Parts have never been a problem for me. Sometimes you may have to scrounge, and some things are getting worse. But I don't think it would be much different than any other airframe. I just heard there is a six month delay on Lyc O-360 cylinders. That has to be one of the most common Lyconisaurus engines there is.
 
Last edited:
Warren Dunes said:
Intended mission: one 180 pound pilot and 20 pounds of baggage 3.5 250 mile one-way trips per week. Additional trips as able with 150 pound passenger and additional 20 pounds baggage.
Click to expand...

I've no experience with the plane, but you are getting plenty of positive feedback from those that do.

But if you plan to make multiple 250 mile trips every week, I wonder how long it might take to wish you had something faster?
 
Never did see the big whip about the Baby Beeches. Piper Cherokees are almost the same airplane, considerably less money, stone simple and plentiful.
 
steingar said:
Never did see the big whip about the Baby Beeches. Piper Cherokees are almost the same airplane, considerably less money, stone simple and plentiful.
Click to expand...
I was actually looking at a few Cherokees when I saw the Skipper for sale. In aggregate Cherokee 140-150s are cheaper, but each used airplane offered for sale is unique. Some sellers think brass is gold, others mistake platinum for silver.

The PA-28's I have seen will carry 200 more pounds and burn an extra gallon of cheaper fuel per hour to operate at about the same speeds. Unless I toss a few thousand dollars into pants, seals and fairings to equalize fuel use. But I don't need that additional capacity and my (hopefully not mis-) calculated costs on the Skipper would be lower.

To me, the big thing is that there aren't tons of 'em around, and I didn't want to buy something with gremlins known only to the relatively small number of owners.
 
Last edited:
I have a bit of time flying and maintaining a Skipper. They’re pleasant to fly and I would consider owning one. Regarding “quality” of their construction, I’d consider them average. Based on what I saw, I thought the design and some of the components were budget items, intended to keep the overall cost of the aircraft under control. I wouldn’t consider that a detriment, just an observation as a pilot and mechanic.
 
GaryM said:
If you plan to make multiple 250 mile trips every week, I wonder how long it might take to wish you had something faster?
Click to expand...

Well, there is a Sukhoi 27B for sale with only 599 total hours. But after paying $8.75 million for it I'm not sure how I'll pay for the type rating. Jet-A is usually cheaper than 100 LL though...

More seriously, faster would be nicer but I shake my head when people say the Skipper is slow. It is what it is. There are POHs online for the Tomahawk and 152. I have paper copies for the 150, Cherokee, and Mooney. The first four are rough equivalents in terms of performance, the Cherokee can be flown so that it is a near equivalent with greater capacity or as an incrementally faster option for incrementally more fuel cost. I love flying the Mooney, but it is significantly more expensive to buy and maintain and you pay for that additional speed at the pump. On 250 miles, ground time is a much larger percentage of block time than on longer trips...

Something I tried to point out to a former employer who spent millions turning a forty minute flight into a twenty minute flight that about ten percent of the market was willing to pay a premium for. Former... because he went out of business in about three months... I ended up flying the same airplane I had flown before the "service improvement" on the same route for a new owner for less pay.

A Commanche would likewise be cool, twice as fast in the air, but at eight to ten times the first cost and three times the fuel and twice the maintenance cost. Or an Aerostar... three times as fast... even cooler, if only my parents had the foresight to have been billionaires.
 
Warren, where do you live? A Skipper has very limited climb performance. If you're flying anywhere with DA over say 5,000', it'll be a challenge.

Also, of the three O-235 powered trainers (Tomahawk, 152, Skipper), the Skipper has the lowest performance, regardless of what the POH's say.

For a 250 mile trip, speed isn't important unless you're trying to beat darknesss or weather. If you need to go 50 miles out of your way to go around a storm, that 100 knot cruise speed really hurts. Same thing in a headwind or if you need to climb over a layer.

That said, any of the trainers would seem to be a decent fit for your mission, unless you're in a place with high DA.

Edit to add: None of the trainers with O-235's are really 5 GPH airplanes. You'll probably get a little over 6 in cruise, but average 7 or so, 'cause you're gonna be flying it at high power settings most of the time. Otherwise, you'll be going really slow.
 
mondtster said:
I have a bit of time flying and maintaining a Skipper. They’re pleasant to fly and I would consider owning one. Regarding “quality” of their construction, I’d consider them average. Based on what I saw, I thought the design and some of the components were budget items, intended to keep the overall cost of the aircraft under control. I wouldn’t consider that a detriment, just an observation as a pilot and mechanic.
Click to expand...
They are what they are. Budget or simple doesn't concern me, cheap or shoddy does. Of the potential aircraft I identified, there were two VFR only Cherokees that had slightly lower asking prices. But comparably equipped IFR PA-28 were slightly more expensive. Of three sites that try to predict maintenance and or operating expenses, each ranked the Skipper as having a slightly lower variable cost once depriciation was backed out ($31 hr vs $40 hr, maint. only) ($60 hr vs $75 hr maint & fuel) ($75 hr vs $90 hr for all non fixed costs). I am not saying that any of those numbers are accurate, but presumably using the same matrix the smaller, lighter, lower hp aircraft was said to be cheaper... No need to "hold the presses..."
 
kyleb said:
Warren, where do you live? A Skipper has very limited climb performance. If you're flying anywhere with DA over say 5,000', it'll be a challenge.
Click to expand...

Midwest USA, no DA issues, O and D airports are 500 foot or so AMSL, highest terrain I might fly over is 2000 ft AMSL. The seller says it's climb rate is 3000 foot... (pause)... per hour. But as a commuter I will be flying it at well below gross weight

kyleb said:
Also, of the three O-235 powered trainers (Tomahawk, 152, Skipper), the Skipper has the lowest performance, regardless of what the POH's say.

For a 250 mile trip, speed isn't important unless you're trying to beat darknesss or weather. If you need to go 50 miles out of your way to go around a storm, that 100 knot cruise speed really hurts. Same thing in a headwind or if you need to climb over a layer.

That said, any of the trainers would seem to be a decent fit for your mission, unless you're in a place with high DA.

Edit to add: None of the trainers with O-235's are really 5 GPH airplanes. You'll probably get a little over 6 in cruise, but average 7 or so, 'cause you're gonna be flying it at high power settings most of the time. Otherwise, you'll be going really slow.
Click to expand...
I trained in a 152 years ago, and my recollection of it is the same as what the Tomahawk and Skipper books say. Not lies, but an absolute all the stars lining up best case senario with a brand new airplane and a three-million hour pilot. (There really is only 25 calories per serving, but a "serving" is 1.25 ounces.) To me it's like picking apples in winter time. Not so much which variety do I prefer, but which individual apple looks best today.
 
Warren Dunes said:
They are what they are. Budget or simple doesn't concern me, cheap or shoddy does. Of the potential aircraft I identified, there were two VFR only Cherokees that had slightly lower asking prices. But comparably equipped IFR PA-28 were slightly more expensive. Of three sites that try to predict maintenance and or operating expenses, each ranked the Skipper as having a slightly lower variable cost once depriciation was backed out ($31 hr vs $40 hr, maint. only) ($60 hr vs $75 hr maint & fuel) ($75 hr vs $90 hr for all non fixed costs). I am not saying that any of those numbers are accurate, but presumably using the same matrix the smaller, lighter, lower hp aircraft was said to be cheaper... No need to "hold the presses..."
Click to expand...

Comparing a Cherokee to a Skipper is going to be hard, and the price and performance difference reflects that. Comparing a Skipper to a Tomahawk or a Cessna 152 is much more realistic.

Actual cost of ownership/upkeep can be all over the board but is at least partially tied to how nice the aircraft in question is to begin with and what your expectations are. I don't know how supportive Beech is when it comes to the Skipper, so that should be a consideration if you plan to own the plane long term. Cherokees are still well supported and there are a lot of them in junkyards so parts won't be a problem for them. I wouldn't expect consumables to be a big concern for Skipper ownership.
 
Sounds like a reasonable airplane for you. Make sure and get a good prebuy - particularly on the engine. That's where you could spend a bunch of money unexpectedly.
 
Warren Dunes said:
Midwest USA, no DA issues, O and D airports are 500 foot or so AMSL, highest terrain I might fly over is 2000 ft AMSL. The seller says it's climb rate is 3000 foot... (pause)... per hour. But as a commuter I will be flying it at well below gross weight


I trained in a 152 years ago, and my recollection of it is the same as what the Tomahawk and Skipper books say. Not lies, but an absolute all the stars lining up best case senario with a brand new airplane and a three-million hour pilot. (There really is only 25 calories per serving, but a "serving" is 1.25 ounces.) To me it's like picking apples in winter time. Not so much which variety do I prefer, but which individual apple looks best today.
Click to expand...

There is skipper book, then there is reality, I said they are slow because they are slow. It sounds like you don't care about that, which is a good thing. The trauma hawk is faster, but I think the skipper is nicer. That little engine is pretty bullet proof, they sip gas, they are fun to fly. I used to flight plan 90 kts.
 
I love skippers. In the midwest, though? A 30kt headwind is going to RUIN your day with those legs. Ours never really got over 90kt in still air.

I'd try hard to get into the 130kt/140kt club or faster. Hard to do on skipper money, but something like a Comanche or cherokee 235 would be worth a stretch. I don't know what's been overlooked in this superheated market, but there's gotta be some quick-enough oddball out there to get instead.

I feel like an RV-4 or something similar is what you want.
 
:( Undisclosed damage... Seller said he was unaware of it, that aircraft was "priced to sell quickly." Maybe, but if true an indictment of his A&P.:(
 
Wrinkled firewall? Hard landings do a number on them.
 
Slow is relative. If you're averaging 60 MPH on the highway, going 115 MPH in an airplane is a pretty good upgrade.
 
Does “undisclosed” mean that’s is currently damaged (needing repairs) and they haven’t disclosed the condition to you? Or does it mean that it was previously repaired but undocumented in the maintenance logs?

Find a lot of both on prebuys. I’ve seen quality repairs that were undocumented in the logs because the seller didn’t want to take a financial hit on the sale. Sometimes the damage dates way back to previous owners.
 
Never flown a skipper but one up the Tomahawk can uplift more fuel than a C152
 
Jdm said:
Does “undisclosed” mean that’s is currently damaged (needing repairs) and they haven’t disclosed the condition to you? Or does it mean that it was previously repaired but undocumented in the maintenance logs?

Find a lot of both on prebuys. I’ve seen quality repairs that were undocumented in the logs because the seller didn’t want to take a financial hit on the sale. Sometimes the damage dates way back to previous owners.
Click to expand...

There is a difference of opinion between my A&P and the seller. The seller claims this "whatever it is" pre-dates his ownership. Maybe... (It is possible that what was undocumented was done later than what was documented.) I won't call anyone dishonest without evidence. The aircraft was offered for sale at a little under market, but seller does say he wants to sell quickly... My A&P found evidence of a repair that far exceeded in scope what was documented. The owner doesn't dispute that a significant repair was done, but points out that his A&P "is okay with the way it is documented." It has passed several annuals since he has owned it, but that is irrelevant to me. And yes, if documented as my A&P believes it should have been it would affect price. Caveat Emptor.
 
Warren Dunes said:
There is a difference of opinion between my A&P and the seller. The seller claims this "whatever it is" pre-dates his ownership. Maybe... (It is possible that what was undocumented was done later than what was documented.) I won't call anyone dishonest without evidence. The aircraft was offered for sale at a little under market, but seller does say he wants to sell quickly... My A&P found evidence of a repair that far exceeded in scope what was documented. The owner doesn't dispute that a significant repair was done, but points out that his A&P "is okay with the way it is documented." It has passed several annuals since he has owned it, but that is irrelevant to me. And yes, if documented as my A&P believes it should have been it would affect price. Caveat Emptor.
Click to expand...

Affect the price by how much, and why do you care? Is it safe? I'd offer what it is worth and see what happens.
 
What do you call an airworthy aircraft that has had a repair larger than what was documented?


Airworthy.
 
Warren Dunes said:
^^ Never said it wasn't airworthy. Never said the seller misrepresented it. Just no longer interested in it...
Click to expand...
Certainly your choice. And I might not disagree in your shoes.

But, entries get lost and they aren’t required after a year anyway. I’d be worried about something documented but not done. I probably wouldn’t worry about something done (right) but I can’t find the document. I’d look closer, but fixed is fixed regardless of a logbook entry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top