What plane would you fly "just for fun" and to build experience?

L

Lunar Module

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Dec 15, 2024
Messages
16
Display Name
Display name:
Lunar Module
New here. Thanks for letting me join your community. I'm in a kind of unique situation and thought I would ask for your advice. Hope I'm not asking a silly question.

I got my PPL when I was in college but stopped flying shortly thereafter. I retired a few years ago and thought it would be a stiff but rewarding challenge to see if I could start flying again after a 50+ year hiatus. I have been taking regular lessons with a CFI and am close to getting signed off but I will need much more time in the air before I will consider myself to be actually retrained. Once I get signed off myy plan is to stay local (KSTS, Sonoma County Airport), do lots of solo work accumulating hours and honing skills and to continue to take lessons with my CFI to build skills further. The rental fleet at my airport is pretty thin so I have been thinking about possibly buying a plane. One that is easy to fly, fun and good to hone skills on. It doesn't need to go fast or far. It doesn't need to hold more than two people. I'd like it to be reasonably well equipped so I can get practice using modern avionics, including instrument stuff, if only for practice and fun. I might want to go for an IFR rating eventually.

I have been training in a 172S, which has been fine. It is probably the smart choice but is also kind of "sedate". In looking around at other options I stumbled upon the "bush planes" and they strike me as being most of what I want. Small. Light. High power to weight ratio. Maneuverable. Good at "low and slow". Fun. But almost all of them are taildraggers and I'm thinking that getting a taildragger is probably not the smartest thing for me to do at this stage of my flying career. In looking for a tricycle gear "bush plane" I found the CubCrafter NXCub and it strikes me as being almost perfect for what I want except for the unfortunate reality that it costs an absurd amount of money ($550K for a fully equipped plane) and used ones are hard to find and almost equally expensive.

So I was wondering if any of you might have any suggestions or recommendations for someone in my position? Do you think my attraction to the "bush plane" idea is misguided? Are there other reasonable options? Should I just stick with the tried and true 172 and be happy?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.
 
Welcome to PoA! Paging @wanttaja, if only due to your choice of username.

Lunar Module said:
In looking for a tricycle gear "bush plane" I found the CubCrafter NXCub and it strikes me as being almost perfect for what I want except for the unfortunate reality that it costs an absurd amount of money ($550K for a fully equipped plane) and used ones are hard to find and almost equally expensive.
Click to expand...

Maybe look at trike gear Maules? @Tampico Trauma
 
Honestly, 172s are pretty good at low & slow, if a little boring. You can put big tires and {relatively} big motors on them, too. I don't think you should preclude the idea of a taildragger though. Thousands (millions?) of pilots before you received ab initio training in taildraggers. Harder to find an instructor, and insurance can be an issue, butyou can work through those issues if you want.

Nothing wrong with bushplane types if that's what you're into. They're the hot thing these days. There is a safety factor to the slow speeds they're capable of flying at. That's the reason @455 Bravo Uniform picked his Katmai 182, which is a pretty cool & capable tri-gear, if it's in your budget and you can find one.
 
Last edited:
Go buy this plane and be happy. Tailwheel is awesome (and the only time high-wing is acceptable), worth the additional effort of finding an instructor and paying the additional insurance for a while, and better for "back country" if that's what you're really wanting to do. Although I do feel that a TW aircraft should have a stick, not a yoke. I loved my little Citabria. In your situation, I'd rather own that and just rent for the instrument rating training.
 
If I were to buy a plane for low/slow fun flying, I’d be looking at a Citabria, Decathlon, or similar. Fun to fly, great visibility for low and slow sightseeing, and you can hone your skills with gentlemans aerobatics.

Yes, it’s tailwheel, but you can do it!
 
Last edited:
eman1200 said:
someone else is going to say "ditch the high wing for a low wing asap". I'M not saying it, I'm just saying that someone else is going to say it, and they'd be right. when they say it. because it's not me saying it.
Click to expand...
Perfect. Thanks. : )
 
AvNavCom said:
Go buy this plane and be happy. Tailwheel is awesome (and the only time high-wing is acceptable), worth the additional effort of finding an instructor and paying the additional insurance for a while, and better for "back country" if that's what you're really wanting to do. Although I do feel that a TW aircraft should have a stick, not a yoke. I loved my little Citabria. In your situation, I'd rather own that and just rent for the instrument rating training.
Click to expand...
I actually really like the idea of a stick. I looked at the Aviat and the Citabria/Scout and several other similar planes, but I heard enough horror stories about taildraggers being prone to ground looping that I kind of ruled them out. The options are much broader if taildraggers are included. Maybe I should reconsider. Is that crazy? I imagine that insurance might be a problem for me.

And no, I have no realistic plans to fly into the "backcountry". I'm (a young) 74 yo and even though the idea of it really appeals to me (I used to do a lot of backcountry/adventure motorcycling) I don't think that is realistically in the cards for me at this point in my life. I'm just looking for a plane that is a blast to fly. And I like the idea that the bush planes can be flown (and landed) at such low speeds that you can leisurely sights see and if, heaven forbid, your engine quits you have the possibility of putting the plane down in almost any patch of dirt and with such low kinetic energy that you have a pretty good chance of walking away from the event.
 
Tricycle back country capable? Take a look at a Rans S-21 Outbound. A couple of our neighbors fly them. Good enough performers, easy to fly and maintain, and they don’t appear to have any attributes that would rule them out for a low-timer.
 
Jim K said:
Honestly, 172s are pretty good at low & slow, if a little boring. You can put big tires and {relatively} big motors on them, too. I don't think you should preclude the idea of a taildragger though. Thousands (millions?) of pilots before you received ab initio training in taildraggers. Harder to find an instructor, and insurance can be an issue, butyou can work through those issues if you want.

Nothing wrong with bushplane types if that's what you're into. They're the hot thing these days. There is a safety factor to the slow speeds they're capable of flying at. That's the reason @455 Bravo Uniform picked his Katmai 182, which is a pretty cool & capable tri-gear, if it's in your budget and you can find one.
Click to expand...
Wow. That Katmai looks pretty amazing. Didn't see the pricetag. I imagine it is stratospheric. Very cool plane.
 
The great thing about a high wing tandem is the visibility on each side for sightseeing. Its wonderful! I only have about 12hrs in the Citabria but I loved every minute.
 
ateamer said:
Tricycle back country capable? Take a look at a Rans S-21 Outbound. A couple of our neighbors fly them. Good enough performers, easy to fly and maintain, and they don’t appear to have any attributes that would rule them out for a low-timer.
Click to expand...
Except that you'd have to build it.
 
Lunar Module said:
I actually really like the idea of a stick. I looked at the Aviat and the Citabria/Scout and several other similar planes, but I heard enough horror stories about taildraggers being prone to ground looping that I kind of ruled them out. The options are much broader if taildraggers are included. Maybe I should reconsider. Is that crazy? I imagine that insurance might be a problem for me.
Click to expand...
Insurance is going to be more expensive, especially if you are new to tail-wheel flying. There will certainly be a period of required dual-instruction for your insurance coverage, which can double as your training time. As much as I hate to say it, your age may also play a factor for insurance. All that said, I will say unequivocally that flying a tailwheel aircraft is the most fun I've ever had, with the window open at 80kts and 700ft AGL, landing on almost anything. The difficulty and danger is exaggerated, in my opinion, often by people who don't have experience. TW aircraft *will* make you a better pilot regarding ground handling and landings. My Citabria was fairly forgiving (but still demanded attention), and I'd recommend you look into something like that. You can probably pick up a decent example for somewhere in the region of $50-60k for a Champion/Bellanca vintage Citabria. Newer versions rise steeply in price into clown-car territory.
 
Insurance is going to stink in anything you get, but fewer seats is probably going to help you out with that so you don't necessarily want a 172. Add up your weight and that of your instructor. Choose a plane you can both fit into with full fuel tanks and be below the maximum gross weight. Here are the planes I would be thinking about, with that limitation in mind:

Piper Tri Pacer
Cessna 150 or 152
American Champion Champ

My dad's flying timeline is similar to yours but not as long of a break and a few years younger when he got back into it. He had mostly flown a Piper Tomahawk and Piper Archer, then took ~25 years without a flight, and then got his tailwheel endorsement in a Piper J-3 Cub. He wanted something more modern so he tried a Flight Design CTSW but it didn't suit him, and then he bought a 2007 Champ.

Of the planes I've flown, the Champ was the one that I most often got out of and wanted to immediately get back in and fly it some more. That might be due to the fact it was the easiest plane to get in and out of, at least compared with the Cub. It's a taildragger but about 100 times easier to land than the average tricycle light sport airplane. And if you're concerned about learning skills at your age, I think taildragger skills are easier than complicated glass panels.

Whatever you end up doing, fly as much as your heart desires. Not everyone has the opportunity to take to the skies, or even to take a breath, after 70 and I think you should make the most of it.
 
Jim K said:
Except that you'd have to build it.
Click to expand...
They offer factory-built S-21s. One of our neighbors has two S-21s, a taildragger and a trike,mbothnfactory built. I think the price is $200K-ish.

I tried looking it up, but their website is atrocious.
 
Gilbert Buettner said:
As you are shopping, I suggest you also talk with some insurance folks. At 74, you may only have a few years left before you encounter problems getting insured.
Click to expand...
I know. I was thinking that if I could keep the overall price of the plane down and pay cash that I might be willing to go with liability insurance only and go naked on hull insurance. Do you think that would make a difference?
 
Bill said:
The great thing about a high wing tandem is the visibility on each side for sightseeing. Its wonderful! I only have about 12hrs in the Citabria but I loved every minute.
Click to expand...
Thanks. What kind of bike is that? I was heavy into motorcycling for years. Hung up my leathers around 8 years ago. I had multiple KTMs (dirt and street), BMWs (GS1200 and others), race bikes (GSXR1000, R6, SV650), dirt bikes, supermotos (for being naughty on the coast highway). Loved them all. I guess getting back into flying is my replacement for missing motorcycling.
 
A 172 is sedate? Maybe your routine is what's sedate. I find it unlikely that a low time pilot looking for a fun time-builder has become more capable than the airplane.
 
ateamer said:
They offer factory-built S-21s. One of our neighbors has two S-21s, a taildragger and a trike,mbothnfactory built. I think the price is $200K-ish.
Click to expand...
I was not aware of that it was available as an SLSA, or that they were that light. Probably going to have to have a couple pretty small guys to legally train in one, but would be a lot of fun solo.
 
Stewartb said:
A 172 is sedate? Maybe your routine is what's sedate. I find it unlikely that a low time pilot looking for a fun time-builder has become more capable than the airplane.
Click to expand...
I'm definitely not more capable than the 172. It's probably the most rational choice of all. But I'm thinking that I only have so many years left to fly (given my age) and that I would like to make the most of what time I have. I was thinking that a small two seater low/slow plane would be more of a hoot than a 172 and would be just as good (maybe even better) as a training platform.
 
Lunar Module said:
Thanks. What kind of bike is that? I was heavy into motorcycling for years. Hung up my leathers around 8 years ago. I had multiple KTMs (dirt and street), BMWs (GS1200 and others), race bikes (GSXR1000, R6, SV650), dirt bikes, supermotos (for being naughty on the coast highway). Loved them all. I guess getting back into flying is my replacement for missing motorcycling.
Click to expand...
That was my Ducati Multistrada 1100. I presently have a BMW R1200GS and a Honda Goldwing Tour DCT as well. I've owned over 20 bikes, lots of sportbikes, one dirt bike, several standards, a Harley, and two Goldwings.

Bikes from the past that stand out:

Suzuki SV650 standard: So much fun! I Race-Tech'd the forks, Fox twin clicker shock on the back, Factory stage 1 jet kit, and a Yoshi RS-1 slip on. So much fun at Deals Gap and Suches badgering the guys on litre bikes!

BMW S1000RR: Nobody, and I mean nobody needs a 189hp 430lb bike, but that thing was just nuts. Thrillingly fast and a fantastic handler.

BMW R1200GS: Probably the best all around bike I've owned. Fast enough and good enough handling to hang with the sportbikes guys, lots of luggage capacity, as comfortable on the highway as a Goldwing (with the suspension set to soft), and of course great on fire roads.
 
Bill said:
That was my Ducati Multistrada 1100. I presently have a BMW R1200GS and a Honda Goldwing Tour DCT as well. I've owned over 20 bikes, lots of sportbikes, one dirt bike, several standards, a Harley, and two Goldwings.

Bikes from the past that stand out:

Suzuki SV650 standard: So much fun! I Race-Tech'd the forks, Fox twin clicker shock on the back, Factory stage 1 jet kit, and a Yoshi RS-1 slip on. So much fun at Deals Gap and Suches badgering the guys on litre bikes!

BMW S1000RR: Nobody, and I mean nobody needs a 189hp 430lb bike, but that thing was just nuts. Thrillingly fast and a fantastic handler.

BMW R1200GS: Probably the best all around bike I've owned. Fast enough and good enough handling to hang with the sportbikes guys, lots of luggage capacity, as comfortable on the highway as a Goldwing (with the suspension set to soft), and of course great on fire roads.
Click to expand...
Very nice! You sound as crazy about motorcycles as I was before I hung up my leathers (literally - I had a full body leather race suit that I wore at the track that had abrasion marks all over it from various crashes. Looked like something out of Mad Max. I loved it. My wife got tired of it hanging in the garage so I ultimately tossed it out. Got misty eyed watching it go into the trash. End of an era for me.)

I took my GS up to Alaska, all over California (where I live), down to the tip of Baja, and deep into the backwoods of the Sierra Madre mountains in Northern Mexico with my wife on the back. It was my favorite all round bike. I did weekend bad boy riding on the Coast Highway north of SF on my Honda XR650R modded to be a supermoto bike. What a screamer. Most fun I've ever had on two wheels. I built several track bikes and did lots of track days at Laguna Seca, Sears Point, Thunderhill and other places. I raced AFM local amateur track racing for a year on a race prepped R6 and had race prepped GSXR 1000 and SV650 as well that I used for track days. Super fun. Too many other bikes to mention. Never owned a touring bike or a cruiser, mostly because my GS was so good at it and it was also a lot of fun to ride on twisty roads and dirt roads. I really miss them all. What a hoot it was. Memories I will have forever.

Ride safe and keep the rubber side down.

Anyway, back to airplanes. Don't want to get dinged by the admins for straying off topic.
 
As a Zenith owner, I'm prejudiced, but the 750 or Cruiser are great planes. The cruiser, in particular, has this "solid" feel in flight that I've not felt with any other aircraft. There's a ton of online support, and the factory will help you even if you aren't the builder. And replacement parts are actually cheap.

These are the second most popular homebuilt next to Vans and there is a reason for that.
 
There are some relatively rare planes that might also fit your needs. The Varga Kachina is a tandem seat tri-gear that is cheap to buy, cheap to own and cheap to operate. With a Lycoming O-320 in the nose only burning ~ 7 gph. https://www.planeandpilotmag.com/aircraft/bargain-buys-on-aircraftforsale-1978-varga-2150a-kachina/

Another model to consider for fun flying if you really don't plan to head into the backcountry is the Grumman line of planes. Low wing, tri-gear and very responsive handling. I owned a Grumman AA-5 traveler and had a blast flying all over the country in it. It was also powered by the stalwart Lycoming O-320, but 160 Hp and 180 Hp versions of the same basic plane are available. They are branded as the Cheetah and the Tiger respectively. With their laminar flow airfoils, these are not STOL planes, but they are a blast to fly and also relatively cheap to buy, cheap to maintain and cheap to operate. With the sliding canopy, you get the bonus of a fighter pilot feel in the plane. You can also crack the canopy open in flight and that adds to the allure https://aya.org/AA-5-Traveler

Finally, if you really want a high wing, backcountry capable aircraft with tri-gear, you can't go wrong with the Maule. I currently fly a 180Hp Maule taildragger and it is the perfect plane for me at this stage of my flying life. I like flying to places to ride my bike, and I do like airplane camping in the backcountry. Here are a couple videos of life with a taildragger Maule. One big benefit of the design is the cavernous barn door rear-seat and baggage area. That is present in both the taildragger and trike configurations, and it adds immense practicality to the plane!

 
midlifeflyer said:
"Sedate" is less about the airplane than what you do with it.
Click to expand...
True, but no Cessna has every made me happy like the little Citabria made me happy when I could just jam the heel brake and swing the tail around in the run-up area or before I put her back in the hangar! Ah, the little silly things that make us smile.
 
iamtheari said:
Besides, I consider BMW "R" bikes on-topic because they have boxer engines.
Click to expand...
Whew. Thanks. : )

I loved the boxer engine on the GS. Tons of torque. Lowish rpms. Nice low pitched sound. The only drawback of having an airplane engine on a motorcycle, especially one that goes off-road, is that the cylinder heads are perfectly positioned for the head covers to get destroyed when the bike inevitably tips over. Don’t ask me how I know. LOL.
 
Flyhound said:
There are some relatively rare planes that might also fit your needs. The Varga Kachina is a tandem seat tri-gear that is cheap to buy, cheap to own and cheap to operate. With a Lycoming O-320 in the nose only burning ~ 7 gph. https://www.planeandpilotmag.com/aircraft/bargain-buys-on-aircraftforsale-1978-varga-2150a-kachina/

Another model to consider for fun flying if you really don't plan to head into the backcountry is the Grumman line of planes. Low wing, tri-gear and very responsive handling. I owned a Grumman AA-5 traveler and had a blast flying all over the country in it. It was also powered by the stalwart Lycoming O-320, but 160 Hp and 180 Hp versions of the same basic plane are available. They are branded as the Cheetah and the Tiger respectively. With their laminar flow airfoils, these are not STOL planes, but they are a blast to fly and also relatively cheap to buy, cheap to maintain and cheap to operate. With the sliding canopy, you get the bonus of a fighter pilot feel in the plane. You can also crack the canopy open in flight and that adds to the allure https://aya.org/AA-5-Traveler

Finally, if you really want a high wing, backcountry capable aircraft with tri-gear, you can't go wrong with the Maule. I currently fly a 180Hp Maule taildragger and it is the perfect plane for me at this stage of my flying life. I like flying to places to ride my bike, and I do like airplane camping in the backcountry. Here are a couple videos of life with a taildragger Maule. One big benefit of the design is the cavernous barn door rear-seat and baggage area. That is present in both the taildragger and trike configurations, and it adds immense practicality to the plane!

Click to expand...
Sweet! Thank you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top