Excluding warbirds the value of the aircraft is a function of what it yields in revenue, or replacement value where it has perceived commercial utility.
Hence today some Cessna 152s may command £50,000 plus because they can earn £50 per hour dry lease, and on average fly around 400 hours p.a.. Similar cash yield anchors for value may apply to the Archer/Warrior, 172, and DA40.
The Super Cub, Husky, Cessna 180/185/206 and DHC Beaver have a niche commercial market as Bush Planes…in Alaska.
You then jump to turbine equipment. I would suggest the DA42 has too narrow a training market outside of the big integrated schools who own their fleets.
All other GA types are not anchored by true commercial cash yield, and therefore subject to wild swings in sentiment and would not be regarded as investments in the strict sense (acceptable risk adjusted cash return). In fact they all burn cash!
Am not counting the UL training market, which must have a similar anchor for some types. AG, parachute ops, etc are today nearly all kerosene burners.
This seems quite an attractive Cessna 182S. For not much more money you are getting an airframe that is 15 years younger than a P. The six pack panel is serviceable and is easier to upgrade than the 182T G1000.
I still wonder why the ‘new’ 182, ie Lycoming powered after Cessna re started production weighs in at 1920lbs empty, when the last ‘old’ 182 Q or R with a Continental weighed in around 1750 lbs empty. Perhaps better seats (26g) and interior soundproofing, and the Lycoming is heavier?
Robert I saw this one and it’s definitely much better than the original one I wrote in first post… 25k extra for 25 years younger plane seems like a good deal
It has a Hartzell propeller which is different from standard McCauley
I wonder what it brings.
PetitCessnaVoyageur wrote:
It has a Hartzell propeller which is different from standard McCauley
I wonder what it brings.
The 182S feels like a bigger aeroplane than a 182P/Q etc… Don’t know why that is. I think you would land in much tighter spots with the older aircraft somehow. The one thing I’ve noticed is that the price of annual maintenance on a new build one is similar to the cost of the older one. The 182S is lovely to fly, smooth, no big drop in rpm pulling out the carb heat over the sea…. lots of reasons it’s better once you are not trying to emulate backcountry182 dude off youtube.
Dimensions are the same, although the Lycoming and spinner may have lengthened the type by a few inches. The empty weight coming in at 200 lbs more is a bit of a mystery – perhaps there has been structural beefing up, but not aware of it.
Max RPM is lower? With better cabin finish giving a smoother feel?
Another good video on the off airport ability of this type
Another video starring a 182P by Backcountry182 – Other than the AoA indicator, beefed up nose fork and larger tyres this aircraft is stock.
Sportsman STOL, MT Prop, VG’s maybe also adding to the party. He’s also rocking the split induction rubber and jubilee clip mod, that I’ve been known to sport from time to time.
