So how bad is the used Aircraft sales

[brien23]

I see a listing for a PA-23 on ebay for buy it now 22.5K and it has not sold. With the instrument panel and New props and engine cores you could scrap it for twice that? Is the market realy that bad or am I missing something on the listing.

 

[Jaybird180]

lack of trust may be a factor on buying an airplane site unseen

 

[Tom-D]

lack of trust may be a factor on buying an airplane site unseen

E-bay does not require you to buy sight unseen.

 

[Jim Logajan]

"Used Aircraft Market: This chart displays each model's quarterly value in relationship to its average equipped price at the inception of the aircraft. The study begins in the spring quarter of 1994 and includes the Jet, Turboprop, Multi, Piston and Helicopter. For all charts, the red number indicates the first reporting date after 9-11."

From: http://www.aircraftbluebookmarketli...k-marketline/2011/6/6/charts-june-6-2011.html

 

[Fearless Tower]

Dang....at these prices, maybe I ought to by myself a PA23 and fly it until it falls apart like the Blues Mobile......hopefully it does that at the tiedown.....

 

[MSPAviator]

I've been tempted to buy a complex single like a Mooney or an Arrow just to finish my IR/COM in. Buying the airplane is easy, it's just the rest of the things that go along with ownership are a bit of an unknown.

 

[ApacheBob]

I loved my Apache. Sipped gas, nice manners, lots of room...

 

[Jaybird180]

"Used Aircraft Market: This chart displays each model's quarterly value in relationship to its average equipped price at the inception of the aircraft. The study begins in the spring quarter of 1994 and includes the Jet, Turboprop, Multi, Piston and Helicopter. For all charts, the red number indicates the first reporting date after 9-11."

From: http://www.aircraftbluebookmarketli...k-marketline/2011/6/6/charts-june-6-2011.html

So, with all this data, what is it actually telling us? What is your analysis please, because it just looks like data points to me because I don't have context to allow me to do anything with it.

 

[Ted]

The problem is that a number of these older twins cost a lot to operate, but aren't worth much because of their age and general depreciation. The fact that they cost a lot to operate means the people who can afford them typically can afford to buy something nicer.

I've seen Lear 24s for $100,000 in flying condition.

 

[Anthony]

The problem is that a number of these older twins cost a lot to operate, but aren't worth much because of their age and general depreciation. The fact that they cost a lot to operate means the people who can afford them typically can afford to buy something nicer.

I've seen Lear 24s for $100,000 in flying condition.

At this point, I think that is true with singles or any plane. The OpEx to own and operate far outpaces the purchase price, especially when you factor in some "gotcha" maintenance/repair issues.

I wouldn't be surprised to see owners just handing the keys to the bank or letting planes sit and rot if they are paid off to avoid the OpEx.

 

[kontiki]

My first rule for any purchase, watch out when it's too good to be true. Maybe do a reality check with V-ref at the AOPA site.

 

[John Baker]

I tried selling my PA 28/161 A last year, never had one nibble. My engine only has about 300 hours before its 2000 TBO. By the time I hang a rebuild and have the prop reconditioned or replaced, I'm going to have to go into debt for around 30-35,000.

So now I'm thinking on selling my plane for whatever I can get then using that money as a down payment on something with a low time engine and prop. I might just be able to put myself into a better airplane and have lower payments than I would if I re-did mine.

Anyway, That's what I'm thinking.

John

 

[Anthony]

John,

Have you thought about flying past TBO if the compressions are good and the engine checks out?

 

[Jay Honeck]

I wouldn't be surprised to see owners just handing the keys to the bank or letting planes sit and rot if they are paid off to avoid the OpEx.

I've spoken with a friend who works at a bank that specializes in aircraft loans.

There are "tons" (her word) of people who bought new Cirruses (Cirri?) in the early to mid-2000s, at top dollar, who are now upside down in their loans. The value of their aircraft has plummeted, and they now owe far more than the plane is actually worth.

The economy, combined with the "Ten Year Cirri" phenomenon (Cirrus owners selling rather than paying to re-pack the parachute), have come together in a perfect storm that has driven the cost of used Cirri to very low levels.

Which, by the way, probably explains why this was the first year we saw appreciable numbers of Cirri in the North 40 at Oshkosh. In prior years, owners of Cirrus would never be seen camping with the unwashed masses.

 

[John Baker]

John,

Have you thought about flying past TBO if the compressions are good and the engine checks out?

I've given it some thought, but I'm concerned that if I got in a accident due to engine failure, and I was past TBO. would my insurance still step up to the plate?

As much as I get to fly, I've probably still got several years before I have to really start getting on it. But then, right now, today, it is a buyers market.

John

 

[brien23]

The PA-23 ebay add was ended early and did not sell. Not sure if the buy it now was a mistake or what. The surprise was that it sat their for two days and did not sell for that price and the highest bid was around 16K. Things must be worse that I thought for selling a used plane.

 

[Tom-D]

The PA-23 ebay add was ended early and did not sell. Not sure if the buy it now was a mistake or what. The surprise was that it sat their for two days and did not sell for that price and the highest bid was around 16K. Things must be worse that I thought for selling a used plane.

I did a prebuy on a C-152 last evening that had a 450 hour factory new engine placed in service last year,a new prop, a full IFR stack of King equipment, TT was 2356, new paint last year, new glass and interior. I thought this aircraft was better than new.

selling price was $14,500

 

[John Baker]

I tried selling my PA 28/161 A last year, never had one nibble. My engine only has about 300 hours before its 2000 TBO. By the time I hang a rebuild and have the prop reconditioned or replaced, I'm going to have to go into debt for around 30-35,000.

So now I'm thinking on selling my plane for whatever I can get then using that money as a down payment on something with a low time engine and prop. I might just be able to put myself into a better airplane and have lower payments than I would if I re-did mine.

Anyway, That's what I'm thinking.

John

I called my insurance company, Aviation Solutions, and talked to my agent about this.

He said that as long as the airplanes annuals have been kept up and the mechanic has signed off the plane as airworthy, then my insurance covers me, regardless of TBO.

John

 

[Fearless Tower]

I called my insurance company, Aviation Solutions, and talked to my agent about this.

He said that as long as the airplanes annuals have been kept up and the mechanic has signed off the plane as airworthy, then my insurance covers me, regardless of TBO.

John

If I had an engine that was at or over recommended TBO but running well, I would feel alot more comfortable flying behind it than one that just came out of an overhaul shop.

With that said, If you are planning on flying more than a few hundred more hours in your lifetime and are not tied to the airframe, then I like your thought of looking around at other reasonably priced planes with low time engines and taking what you can get for yours.

 

[jesse]

I've given it some thought, but I'm concerned that if I got in a accident due to engine failure, and I was past TBO. would my insurance still step up to the plate?

As much as I get to fly, I've probably still got several years before I have to really start getting on it. But then, right now, today, it is a buyers market.

John

There is no reason to replace a perfectly good engine simply because it has met TBO.

TBO is just a number. If there is nothing wrong with the engine. Keep on flying it. That thing could have a LOT of hours left in it.

 

[Ted]

There is no reason to replace a perfectly good engine simply because it has met TBO.

TBO is just a number. If there is nothing wrong with the engine. Keep on flying it. That thing could have a LOT of hours left in it.

+1

3 out of my 4 engines are at or past TBO. I'm happy with them.

 

[Tom-D]

+1

3 out of my 4 engines are at or past TBO. I'm happy with them.

When they go, they go quickly, sudden lost of oil pressure, or a increasing loss of compression, or metal in the oil.

you run a greater possibility of loosing the crank when you run over TBO, that could be a loss of engine core for a factory rebuild.

 

[Jim Logajan]

So, with all this data, what is it actually telling us? What is your analysis please, because it just looks like data points to me because I don't have context to allow me to do anything with it.

The value of used airplanes appears to be very sensitive to changes in GDP per capita. The resale value of used GA aircraft also appears to be more sensitive to operational cost than initial investment in the asset. That's what I take away from the trends.

 

[Fearless Tower]

When they go, they go quickly, sudden lost of oil pressure, or a increasing loss of compression, or metal in the oil.

you run a greater possibility of loosing the crank when you run over TBO, that could be a loss of engine core for a factory rebuild.

Maybe it is just my impression from reading accident reports, but it sure seems like there are alot more cranks failing on recently overhauled engines than high time ones.

 

[Tom-D]

Maybe it is just my impression from reading accident reports, but it sure seems like there are alot more cranks failing on recently overhauled engines than high time ones.

The point being they were replaced,,,,,,, and with junk.

You should do every thing you can to preserve your good old crank, rather than allowing it to be destroyed by something else failing.

If you are planing on overhauling your engine what difference does 200-500 hours make?

 

[MSPAviator]

What can you do to extend the life of an engine besides regular oil changes?

 

[Anthony]

What can you do to extend the life of an engine besides regular oil changes?

Fly it regularly.

 

[Tom-D]

What can you do to extend the life of an engine besides regular oil changes?

Add a filter if it does not have one, shorten the time between oil changes
Don't use Aeroslime in a Continental or any Lycoming that does not require the Snake oil additive, ADD cam guard. do not short hop any engine, run it long enough to get the water out of the crank case, do not idle for long periods of time on the ground, and LEAN LEAN LEAN

 

[Tom-D]

Fly it regularly.

OWT ..........

 

[Ted]

If you are planing on overhauling your engine what difference does 200-500 hours make?

Let's see, the IO-520s in the 310 are 250 hours over TBO on a 1700 hour engine. That's almost 15% past. Overhauled engine is $30,000 each ($60,000 for the pair), so that'd be $9,000. And 500 hours is $18,000.

 

[Tom-D]

Let's see, the IO-520s in the 310 are 250 hours over TBO on a 1700 hour engine. That's almost 15% past. Overhauled engine is $30,000 each ($60,000 for the pair), so that'd be $9,000. And 500 hours is $18,000.

So what is the gain after overhaul? If you loose the crank and cam due to lifter debris, and contaminated your props and governor too how much have you really saved?

Like I said, you run the risk.

 

[Ted]

So what is the gain after overhaul? If you loose the crank and cam due to lifter debris, and contaminated your props and governor too how much have you really saved?

Like I said, you run the risk.

There are no shortage of things you can do wrong that will cause major failures of your engine voiding your core charge prior to TBO. And then there's just bad luck that can happen.

The only guarantee you have that you'll be turning in a good engine is turning in an engine that is running well right now.

 

[Jim Logajan]

The point being they were replaced,,,,,,, and with junk.

You should do every thing you can to preserve your good old crank, rather than allowing it to be destroyed by something else failing.

If you are planing on overhauling your engine what difference does 200-500 hours make?

Indeed - what statistical evidence there is seems to indicate that overhauls place the engine back in service at higher risk.

"There is no engineering basis for assuming a correlation between aviation piston-engine unreliability and high time in service." -- Dr. Nathan Ulrich, mechanical engineer; from:

The Savvy Aviator #45: How Risky Is Going Past TBO?

 

[Tom-D]

you are talking risk, I'm talking cost..

You run the risk..of higher costs beyond TBO. other wise the companies would be touting the ability to run beyond TBO.

 

[jesse]

you are talking risk, I'm talking cost..

You run the risk..of higher costs beyond TBO. other wise the companies would be touting the ability to run beyond TBO.

You also run the risk of spending a hell of a lot of money that you didn't need to. If you can get another 50% out of the engine..well..that's certainly worth considering.

 

[weilke]

What is the distribution of hours on the engines that are in service in the fleet ?

Without the 'population at risk' data, those absolutes are not particularly meaningful. Very few engines in the fleet are past TBO, so that small number of failures in the 2000-3000 range may well represent a higher likelihood of failure.

 

[Doggtyred]

I've given it some thought, but I'm concerned that if I got in a accident due to engine failure, and I was past TBO. would my insurance still step up to the plate?

As much as I get to fly, I've probably still got several years before I have to really start getting on it. But then, right now, today, it is a buyers market.

John

Unless your policy calls out such a thing, or there is a mandatory AD, for part 91 use TBO is a recommendation.

If the engine makes compression well and isn't burning oil excessively then it's your call.

 

[Doggtyred]

you are talking risk, I'm talking cost..

You run the risk..of higher costs beyond TBO. other wise the companies would be touting the ability to run beyond TBO.

e

No. They would be extending TBO. They determine where the line in the sand is. Not the FAA.

Conscientious operators who take care of things routinely go beyond TBO.

 

[Ted]

you are talking risk, I'm talking cost..

Actually I'm talking cost. $18,000 worth of savings is a lot of money.

You run the risk..of higher costs beyond TBO. other wise the companies would be touting the ability to run beyond TBO.

Let's say that at overhaul I find out I need to overhaul my props and governors as well. Well, first off, I plan on overhauling my governors at TBO anyway, because they probably won't make it through another TBO. Even if I have to overhaul both props, that ends up having me breaking even. Props need to get overhauled at some point anyway, just like engines.

Now yes, if I have a crank go out and have to buy a new one, that costs me more. Then again, that would be a great excuse to upgrade to 550s.

However, you're treating TBO as a magic number, which it is not. There's nothing to say that I won't have higher costs with a low-time engine. I'm much more reluctant to put in an overhaul anything less than the best than to leave a known good past-TBO engine in.

No. They would be extending TBO. They determine where the line in the sand is. Not the FAA.

That is actually not how it works. The FAA approves the TBO as stated by the manufacturer, but that needs to be substantiated somehow as part of certification tests. If the manufacturer wishes to extend TBO, then they have to substantiate why, typically through additional testing or field service history that can be documented. The manufacturers have no motivation to tell you you can run your engine beyond TBO, because:

1) They make far more money off the 135 operators who run far more engines and run through them faster (and will need to adhere to TBO).

2) That's telling their customers not to buy products from them (i.e. "Don't buy this engine now, wait another 25% of hours first).

TBO is not a magic number. Running past it, likewise, is not magic. More than anything, TBO is an indicator.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Indeed - what statistical evidence there is seems to indicate that overhauls place the engine back in service at higher risk.

"There is no engineering basis for assuming a correlation between aviation piston-engine unreliability and high time in service." -- Dr. Nathan Ulrich, mechanical engineer; from:

The Savvy Aviator #45: How Risky Is Going Past TBO?

Wow.....so I wasn't just imagining it.