The wife wants a new plane

[Challenged]

Before I begin, let me first apologize since this is going to be a little long winded in order to explain my situation properly...hopefully you can make it to the bottom of the post.

As mentioned in my first post here, I'm a new Private Pilot, but I do currently own a Cessna 152 that I used for my PPL training as well as my checkride, and it's been great so far. I've been flying it as much as possible lately, in order to get all of the cross country PIC time required for my Instrument Rating.

That said, my wife finds it somewhat annoying that she can't take more stuff with her on our weekend trips, so we would both love to get a larger plane. The front-runner for me currently is a non-retract Cardinal.

While I don't have my high-performance/complex ratings yet, I do already have some time in a Bonanza F33 so I don't think it would take much more to get sign offs for those. My main reason for not wanting a Cardinal RG however, is really the extra expense for annual maintenance and insurance that I understand goes along with retractable gear.

The main use for our plane is to fly 100 nm to see her family, as well as 330 nm trips to Austin for pleasure. I imagine we'll be taking similar 100 to 300 nm trips to the beach and what not as time goes on. Currently I don't see us taking really long cross country trips into the mountains or anything like that, however...mostly just sea level flying.

This is all well and good, but my situation is a bit muddled by the fact that I've offered use of my current 152 to a couple of my good friends at cost, so they can attempt to get their Private Pilot's license as well. Whether or not they see this through remains to be seen. I have also asked them if they would be interested in going in together on a 4 seater and they have expressed some interest. The problem is that when I really consider that, I'm not sure if I want to have the hassles of owning a plane with other people, even though they are both good friends. I can conceivably afford to purchase a cheaper Cardinal ($50,000) by myself and do enjoy owning my current plane without having a partner involved.

So, (and I apologize again for being long-winded), what would you do in this situation? Here are a few options that I see:

• Offer to sell the 152 to your friends so they can use it for their training
• Sell the 152 and buy a Cardinal (or some other 4 seater) alone and let my friends use the Cardinal for their training
• Sell the 152 and purchase the Cardinal in a partnership with friends who may or may not see flight training through

Other options?

Oh, and in case you feel like suggesting options other than the Cardinal: I forgot to mention that I currently fly off of a private grass strip, but it's long (3000 ft), in good shape and trees aren't really a factor.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Ah heck, you already have one plane....what's another?

But seriously, based on what you mentioned, I would try to sell the 152 to your friends and then get into the 177 yourself. I would try that route first and if it doesn't work out, then you could explore the idea of selling the 152 and buying the Cardinal as a partnership. I too agree that it is sooo much nicer to own the plane yourself and not have to deal with the potential headaches of shared ownership.

 

[poadeleted20]

Agree with selling the 152 to the friends and buying what you want for yourself. I think in the long run you'll be happier not sharing. The only other thing I suggest is to look at the other 180HP 4-seat FG planes like the Grumman Tiger, Piper Archer, and Beech Sundowner. You may find one of them more to your taste than the Cardinal, although if your wife like a Cardinal, it's hard to get away from that.

BTW, there are going to be a lot of jealous folks here for a guy whose wife wants him to buy more airplane.

 

[Fearless Tower]

BTW, there are going to be a lot of jealous folks here for a guy whose wife wants him to buy more airplane.

No kidding....I'm just basking in the current glory of finding a wife who let me buy one airplane!

 

[wabower]

I'd look hard at the co-ownership. Most airplanes are grossly under-utilized, especially after the new wears off. Scheduling and accommodation simply isn't that hard to accomplish in most cases. I'd keep my money in my pocket and let somebody else tote a big chunk of the capital and fixed expense.

 

[Ted]

I'd look hard at the co-ownership. Most airplanes are grossly under-utilized, especially after the new wears off. Scheduling and accommodation simply isn't that hard to accomplish in most cases. I'd keep my money in my pocket and let somebody else tote a big chunk of the capital and fixed expense.

What Wayne said.

 

[AdamZ]

I agree with Wayne and Ted but if your financially able and want sole ownership then sell the 152 to the friends and get the cardinal. It may all be moot if the friends don't want to buy the 152. They are getting a pretty sweet deal as it is from you.

 

[SCCutler]

You really want a Bonanza anyway, so just buy one and get it over with.

 

[Trapper John]

Friends are friends, but money is money. See if your friends will buy the 152. If they don't bite, sell it.

Cardinals are nice. If you're sure that's what you want, there's a good online owners group with a lot of prebuy and maintenance advice. It shouldn't be hard to find a partner if you buy one.

$50k will buy a lot of airplane these days. Plenty of other choices out there, too.

 

[azure]

The RG may or not be more expensive as far as annual maintenance is concerned (I tend to think not, but mine is down for annual at the moment so I don't want to jinx myself ), but the 10-20 knots extra speed you get with an RG can make quite a difference in your fuel bill, and considering the price of fuel these days... I don't think it's a clear call at all.

You will need a complex endorsement the RG, but not a high performance endorsement unless it's aftermarket equipped with an IO-390. I am not sure whether the FG counts as complex; it has only 2 of the 3 elements required (flaps, CS prop).

Personally, if I had friends who I trusted who were into flying and able, I would sell the 152 and buy the 177(FG or RG) as a 2 or 3 way partnership. YMMV.

 

[Ted]

(I tend to think not, but mine is down for annual at the moment so I don't want to jinx myself )

I was wondering about your new name! Now I know.

 

[azure]

I was wondering about your new name! Now I know.

Heh. I thought the avatar would have made it obvious, but maybe it was too obscure.

 

[EdFred]

The RG may or not be more expensive as far as annual maintenance is concerned (I tend to think not, but mine is down for annual at the moment so I don't want to jinx myself ), but the 10-20 knots extra speed you get with an RG can make quite a difference in your fuel bill, and considering the price of fuel these days... I don't think it's a clear call at all.

You will need a complex endorsement the RG, but not a high performance endorsement unless it's aftermarket equipped with an IO-390. I am not sure whether the FG counts as complex; it has only 2 of the 3 elements required (flaps, CS prop).

Personally, if I had friends who I trusted who were into flying and able, I would sell the 152 and buy the 177(FG or RG) as a 2 or 3 way partnership. YMMV.

Only if it has floats on it.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I wouldn't want friends learning to fly in my nice "new" airplane... So I've gotta go with the "sell them the 152" option and buy the Cardinal yourself.

As far as the Cardinal RG, the retracts will cost more in insurance and maintenance, and you will burn less fuel for the trip if you get there faster - But you'll only pick up 15-20 knots - That's in the neighborhood of 10-15% - So there's no way it'd be cheaper on trips as short as you're taking. On the 100nm trips, you'd save about 7 minutes (and maybe a gallon of 100LL). Your choice of the fixed-gear bird is smart.

 

[jason]

I'm in the "try to sell them the 152" group. While I think your offer is incredibly generous, if they have access to an airplane at cost and still aren't doing it...you may just be wishing for something that isn't going to happen. It'll kind of be a "**** or get off the pot" moment to see if they're really serious.

I also agree with Kent, that I'm not sure I want a ton of primary training going on in my nice Cardinal.

 

[Henning]

Before I begin, let me first apologize since this is going to be a little long winded in order to explain my situation properly...hopefully you can make it to the bottom of the post.

As mentioned in my first post here, I'm a new Private Pilot, but I do currently own a Cessna 152 that I used for my PPL training as well as my checkride, and it's been great so far. I've been flying it as much as possible lately, in order to get all of the cross country PIC time required for my Instrument Rating.

That said, my wife finds it somewhat annoying that she can't take more stuff with her on our weekend trips, so we would both love to get a larger plane. The front-runner for me currently is a non-retract Cardinal.

While I don't have my high-performance/complex ratings yet, I do already have some time in a Bonanza F33 so I don't think it would take much more to get sign offs for those. My main reason for not wanting a Cardinal RG however, is really the extra expense for annual maintenance and insurance that I understand goes along with retractable gear.

The main use for our plane is to fly 100 nm to see her family, as well as 330 nm trips to Austin for pleasure. I imagine we'll be taking similar 100 to 300 nm trips to the beach and what not as time goes on. Currently I don't see us taking really long cross country trips into the mountains or anything like that, however...mostly just sea level flying.

This is all well and good, but my situation is a bit muddled by the fact that I've offered use of my current 152 to a couple of my good friends at cost, so they can attempt to get their Private Pilot's license as well. Whether or not they see this through remains to be seen. I have also asked them if they would be interested in going in together on a 4 seater and they have expressed some interest. The problem is that when I really consider that, I'm not sure if I want to have the hassles of owning a plane with other people, even though they are both good friends. I can conceivably afford to purchase a cheaper Cardinal ($50,000) by myself and do enjoy owning my current plane without having a partner involved.

So, (and I apologize again for being long-winded), what would you do in this situation? Here are a few options that I see:

• Offer to sell the 152 to your friends so they can use it for their training
• Sell the 152 and buy a Cardinal (or some other 4 seater) alone and let my friends use the Cardinal for their training
• Sell the 152 and purchase the Cardinal in a partnership with friends who may or may not see flight training through

Other options?

Oh, and in case you feel like suggesting options other than the Cardinal: I forgot to mention that I currently fly off of a private grass strip, but it's long (3000 ft), in good shape and trees aren't really a factor.

Sigh... Here we go again... Do these calculations: How much fuel at what $ will you save by covering the ground 20 knots faster? Retractable gear over the 10 years even in a hydraulic situation like the C-177RG will cost about an extra $4500 over fixed gear if you buy a plane in good condition. The insurance premium will be higher for only the first year/100hrs, and will not be that dang much higher anyway. Do your own research on this, everyone who has never owned a retract will tell you how much more expensive it is, but what they don't consider is how much more efficient it is. When 100LL was $.95 a gallon it made less difference, but you still got there faster. Now that fuel is averaging around $5 a gallon, the savings of the efficiency add up much more quickly into significant figures.

Why not just get the Bonanza since it's what you'll be owning in 5 years and take advantage of the deals available at the moment and save yourself the "Upgrade" costs? It's a much more rugged aircraft than a Cardinal. In Australia the Bo is the primary bush plane for flying into the Outback. Also it has no hydraulic lines and pump for the gear. I owned a Travelair (twin engine Bonanza) for over 10 years and never spent anything on the gear, never even changed tires.

 

[poadeleted20]

The RG may or not be more expensive as far as annual maintenance is concerned

If nothing else, there's the gear swing that takes time and effort, and checking the hydraulic and prop systems, so there's always going to be extra cost. Maybe only a couple of hundred, but there will be a difference.

You will need a complex endorsement the RG, but not a high performance endorsement unless it's aftermarket equipped with an IO-390.

If you get a proper checkout in type, there should be no trouble getting the complex and (if applicable) HP endorsements as part of the checkout.

I am not sure whether the FG counts as complex; it has only 2 of the 3 elements required (flaps, CS prop).

Unless it's on floats, 2 out of 3 isn't enough.

 

[wabower]

If nothing else, there's the gear swing that takes time and effort, and checking the hydraulic and prop systems, so there's always going to be extra cost. Maybe only a couple of hundred, but there will be a difference..

Assuming the plane is flown, there will also be performance gains that offset some portion of the cost. Maybe only a couple of hundred, but there will be a difference.

 

[Challenged]

To make things even more convoluted, I've been told that I'll have decent access to the Bonanza F33 that I mentioned in my original post in the future (maybe a year out) when the owner buys a PC-12. I figure a Cardinal is a good middle ground that will work great for when I don't have access to the Bonanza, but still need to head somewhere for the weekend with some luggage. Definitely not counting on having access to a Bonanza whenever I want at this point, but it is in the back of my mind.

Also, any issues with retracts on a grass strip that you wouldn't normally see on a hard surface?

 

[jason]

To make things even more convoluted, I've been told that I'll have decent access to the Bonanza F33 that I mentioned in my original post in the future (maybe a year out) when the owner buys a PC-12. I figure a Cardinal is a good middle ground that will work great for when I don't have access to the Bonanza, but still need to head somewhere for the weekend with some luggage. Definitely not counting on having access to a Bonanza whenever I want at this point, but it is in the back of my mind.

Also, any issues with retracts on a grass strip that you wouldn't normally see on a hard surface?

Depends on the brand. I've never seen problems with Mooney or Beech. Cessna doesn't have a great reputation...though I have to admit that I don't know whether or not it's deserved.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Sigh... Here we go again... Do these calculations: How much fuel at what $ will you save by covering the ground 20 knots faster? Retractable gear over the 10 years even in a hydraulic situation like the C-177RG will cost about an extra $4500 over fixed gear if you buy a plane in good condition. The insurance premium will be higher for only the first year/100hrs, and will not be that dang much higher anyway. Do your own research on this, everyone who has never owned a retract will tell you how much more expensive it is, but what they don't consider is how much more efficient it is. When 100LL was $.95 a gallon it made less difference, but you still got there faster. Now that fuel is averaging around $5 a gallon, the savings of the efficiency add up much more quickly into significant figures.

Okay, let's do that. If your $4500 is correct, then the OP would need to be making those 100nm trips about once a week to make up the $4500. The time savings would add up less than an hour per month.

I'm usually on the side of retractable gear, all else being equal, but for the short trips the OP would be taking, it just doesn't make a big enough difference to make it worthwhile.

 

[Henning]

Okay, let's do that. If your $4500 is correct, then the OP would need to be making those 100nm trips about once a week to make up the $4500. The time savings would add up less than an hour per month.

I'm usually on the side of retractable gear, all else being equal, but for the short trips the OP would be taking, it just doesn't make a big enough difference to make it worthwhile.

How many people do you know once given a more capable airplane don't expand their horizons to take advantage of it? The guy already wasted money once buying a 152 and now realizes he needs to step up, how many more times should he go through the upgrade process?

 

[flyingcheesehead]

To make things even more convoluted, I've been told that I'll have decent access to the Bonanza F33 that I mentioned in my original post in the future (maybe a year out) when the owner buys a PC-12. I figure a Cardinal is a good middle ground that will work great for when I don't have access to the Bonanza, but still need to head somewhere for the weekend with some luggage. Definitely not counting on having access to a Bonanza whenever I want at this point, but it is in the back of my mind.

Hmmm. With the economy improving, airplane prices are likely going to be headed up. Is there any way you can swing owning the Cardinal without selling the 152? Or, is there any way you can make the 152 work for the next year?

If option 1 works - Keep the 152, let your friends learn to fly in it, and use it when the Cardinal is down for mx or whatever. When you gain access to the Bo, and your friends have (hopefully) finished their Private certificates or at least gotten done with the learning-to-land phase, sell the 152 and bring your friends into co-ownership on the Cardinal.

If option 1 doesn't work but option 2 does, keep the 152 for now, let your friends learn to fly, and then do a co-ownership arrangement on the Cardinal.

If you must do something now and can't afford two airplanes, I'd go back to the original recommendation.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Depends on the brand. I've never seen problems with Mooney or Beech. Cessna doesn't have a great reputation...though I have to admit that I don't know whether or not it's deserved.

One of the issues for Cessna retracts on grass/soft fields is the tires are considerably smaller than they are on the fixed gear models of the same type. While it isn't impossible, I'd be alot more cautious of the field condition in a Cessna retract.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

How many people do you know once given a more capable airplane don't expand their horizons to take advantage of it? The guy already wasted money once buying a 152 and now realizes he needs to step up, how many more times should he go through the upgrade process?

There are a metric crap-ton of pilots who own airplanes that are way beyond their needs, that don't "expand their horizons to take advantage of it". The number of hangar/ramp queen airplanes probably exceeds those that are regularly used, sadly - I used to work at an airport, and got to see this sad situation firsthand. The biggest example is the guy who had a Bonanza that he used about once a year - Show up at the airport, but air back into the tires, and go.

I know what you or I would do with a more capable airplane - But you and I aren't necessarily the same as the average person. Hell, I can tell you that for 5 of the last 6 years I have flown more than anyone else in my 30-member flying club - And I fly as much as at least the lowest 20 of those 30 combined, maybe even the lowest 25. And while I tend toward the most capable airplane available, the majority simply pick the cheapest airplane and go bop around the nice comfortable <100nm bubble around the home 'drome.

 

[steingar]

Its not the aircraft, its the field. There are turf strips where any retractable could easily land. There are ones that will challenge fixed gear aircraft. I think I've landed a couple.

Cardinal just doesn't seem to be worth the bother, especially when there is Bo potential. Don't get me wrong, they're nice planes and all. Just doesn't seem like enough of a step up.

 

[Challenged]

Okay, so let's shift gears a bit. If you have $50,000 max on a new plane that is going to be making 100 to 300nm trips off of a grass strip, what do you buy? Or is 50k too limiting and I should just make due with the 152 for a few years until I have more money? In my mind, my trips aren't really long enough to justify any extra cost for extra knots.

 

[steingar]

This is kind of where I was going. You can take the Mrs. all over the place, though you do have to pack light. If you really want to do the occasional big trip, you can probably rent something that will do the job. But with a Bo in the potential offing, and a 152 that will do the majority of your missions, what's the rush? I doubt aircraft prices are going to go up by that much in the near future, there just aren't that many of us left. Fly your airplane. when you leave it behind you'll be nostalgic, trust me.

 

[Challenged]

I do see your point, I guess it's just two ways of looking at the same problem. Wait and only upgrade once, or get a Cardinal and chance the need to have to buy another plane in the coming years. I have to admit that I'm sort of an immediate gratification kind of guy unfortunately (hence the owning of the 152 I guess).

 

[jesse]

Renting larger retractable gear airplane is not an easy task. Getting on a Bonanzas insurance cost me $6000 and required I get a commercial pilots certificate and a flight instructor certificate.

 

[Challenged]

Note that due to my location, I can't easily rent aircraft. I probably wouldn't even own the 152 if it weren't for that fact; the closest rental is 45 minutes away.

Also, I had no idea the Bonanza insurance would be that costly, so that's great info..thanks.

 

[steingar]

Note that due to my location, I can't easily rent aircraft. I probably wouldn't even own the 152 if it weren't for that fact; the closest rental is 45 minutes away.

Also, I had no idea the Bonanza insurance would be that costly, so that's great info..thanks.

You might want to check that. I imagine insurance rates for something like a Bo will vary with pilot ratings and experience. In addition, rates are different for owning versus renting. Not saying it ain't so, just might be different for you. Might not.

Insurance on any retractable will be pricey for a VFR pilot with naught but 152 time.

 

[kyleb]

Okay, so let's shift gears a bit. If you have $50,000 max on a new plane that is going to be making 100 to 300nm trips off of a grass strip, what do you buy? Or is 50k too limiting and I should just make due with the 152 for a few years until I have more money? In my mind, my trips aren't really long enough to justify any extra cost for extra knots.

Pick the mission, then the plane. There are numerous fixed gear aircraft for $50k that'll do very well on 100-300 mile trips off of grass. Worst case is a 2:30 flight length, which isn't bad at all. I wouldn't bother with the up front or ongoing expense of retracts to satisfy that mission.

But again, it gets back to your mission. Think about it, then buy the plane you need. Having too much plane is a different problem than having too little plane, but they are both a PITA.

As others have pointed out, adding a partner is a rational decision. But if you can own your own airplane outright, you'll probably be happier, in my opinion.

 

[jason]

Note that due to my location, I can't easily rent aircraft. I probably wouldn't even own the 152 if it weren't for that fact; the closest rental is 45 minutes away.

Also, I had no idea the Bonanza insurance would be that costly, so that's great info..thanks.

You might want to check that. I imagine insurance rates for something like a Bo will vary with pilot ratings and experience. In addition, rates are different for owning versus renting. Not saying it ain't so, just might be different for you. Might not.

Insurance on any retractable will be pricey for a VFR pilot with naught but 152 time.

He wasn't saying that the insurance was $6000/year. He was saying that they wouldn't even let him on the insurance until he had his commercial/CFI and 25 in type. Getting his Comm/CFI is what cost him $6000. He's simply saying that it's not as easy as walking in and saying, "yeah, I'd like to rent that Bonanza over there."

 

[Henning]

Note that due to my location, I can't easily rent aircraft. I probably wouldn't even own the 152 if it weren't for that fact; the closest rental is 45 minutes away.

Also, I had no idea the Bonanza insurance would be that costly, so that's great info..thanks.

A $50k Bonanza will not cost you $6k to insure. You'll be able to find insurance for between $2k&$3k requiring probably 15hrs dual and 10hrs solo before passengers. After you have 100hrs in it your insurance will be around $1200, probably less, given you have no claims against you. Jesse was probably getting onto a policy of a more expensive plane that already had insurance by a company that prefers high time pilots, and the owner was one. Depending on the company you can get significantly different quotes.

If all you are going to do is 100-300 NM trips and have only $50k to spend and will have access to a Bo in a year, then I suggest you go with an early (50s vintage) straight tail 182 rather than a 177. They have a bit narrower of a cabin, flush turtle deck, straight tail and a trimming horizontal stab so they are the most efficient of the bunch (until you get into the Katmai conversions, but you can't afford one on a $50k budget, not even close) as well as having the taller spring gear and manual flaps. Best if you find one with a STOL kit. The extra 50-70 hp will make a big difference getting it up in the air with all your wife's shtuff on a hot TX day...

I still think you'd be better off with an early Bonanza though.

 

[Trapper John]

Okay, so let's shift gears a bit. If you have $50,000 max on a new plane that is going to be making 100 to 300nm trips off of a grass strip, what do you buy?

If you have $50k to work with, you should think about keeping a chunk of that in reserve for the first (& possibly expensive) annual, maintenance and repairs.

But I'd look at (in no particular order):

Skyhawks - with 180 hp conversions
FG Cardinals
Skyhawk XPs
Cherokee 180s & Archers
Sundowners
Tigers
Older 182s

There wouldn't be anything wrong with 150-160 hp Skyhawks, either.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Okay, so let's shift gears a bit. If you have $50,000 max on a new plane that is going to be making 100 to 300nm trips off of a grass strip, what do you buy? Or is 50k too limiting and I should just make due with the 152 for a few years until I have more money? In my mind, my trips aren't really long enough to justify any extra cost for extra knots.

Really, the Cardinal is a great choice - For your situation and mission, I'm not sure you could do better...

Piper - An Archer or Cherokee 180 would do nicely, but wouldn't be as easy to get into, and probably slower too
Beech - A Bo is overkill, a Sundowner has the same disadvantages as the Archer
Cessna - The Cardinal is faster than the 172, a 182 is too expensive and is overkill and less efficient
Mooney - Overkill, fast but not as easy to climb into as the Cardinal
Diamond - DA20-C1 *might* be an option, but probably won't carry much more (if any) than the 152, and if you're taller than 6 feet, fuggedaboutit. You won't find a DA40 for anywhere near $50K.

The only other thing that *might* do the trick as well would be one of these, but I have no experience with them - And the Cardinal is definitely a better-looking airplane.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Getting on a Bonanzas insurance cost me $6000 and required I get a commercial pilots certificate and a flight instructor certificate.

Good lord - what model Bo???

I'm fairly low time and I can get max coverage for a PA32RT, and a slew of light twins for alot less than that.

 

[EdFred]

Okay, so let's shift gears a bit. If you have $50,000 max on a new plane that is going to be making 100 to 300nm trips off of a grass strip, what do you buy? Or is 50k too limiting and I should just make due with the 152 for a few years until I have more money? In my mind, my trips aren't really long enough to justify any extra cost for extra knots.

I bought a Comanche, and still had money left over with that budget.

 

[azure]

If nothing else, there's the gear swing that takes time and effort, and checking the hydraulic and prop systems, so there's always going to be extra cost. Maybe only a couple of hundred, but there will be a difference.

Okay, I should have said significant difference. When you consider that we're talking about airplanes. The usual objection to retracts is the idea that they're constantly breaking, not to mention the higher insurance. The constant breaking thing is what I disagree with, and so would lots of very satisfied Cardinal RG (and many other make/model RGs) owners. As Henning says, the increased insurance is mainly a first year thing -- and since insurance companies usually require some 15 hours of dual, even that premium is sometimes not what you'd expect. When I was a non-equity partner in my friends Cardinal RG and a newbie to retracts, adding me to the policy was about $200 (at most) over what she paid as sole insured pilot.

If you get a proper checkout in type, there should be no trouble getting the complex and (if applicable) HP endorsements as part of the checkout.

Agreed there -- usually insurance requires way more dual time than you would need for the endorsements anyway.