Considering aircraft purchase - finally ;-)

Patrick wrote:

Types looked at are C172, PA28 mostly. My personal preference would be a nice Arrow, but I’m not sure I want the added complexity in terms of maintenance involved with a RG (though I here from owners that it’s not really a factor on their Arrows). Therefore, second choice would be a fixed gear PA28 such as a Cherokee 180 or an early Archer.

If you go for an Arrow, go for a III or IV, with my preferrence being the III. The reason is range. The III has some 25 USG more usable vs the II and that translates to a range of around 800 NM vs 600 of the Arrow II. It is also slightly faster than the II and generally improved. I agree, the gear is not gonna give you that much trouble as some people make up, but it will give you more performance and range. Speed may be something we all disregard until we actually had it. Thereafter, there is no going back. I recall looking at a nice PA28-140 for myself but coming from Piper Senecas I simply thought I’d fall asleep at 90-100 kts when I was used to 150-160 kts and my mission was travelling. So I was more than happy to find a plane which would do that for a price even less than a normal PA28 would cost me.

Patrick wrote:

My “mission” is pretty much known, as it is the type of flying I do and I’ve been doing for the past 6 years. It is local, domestic and occasionally pan-European trips. I need 4 seats, though mostly flying 2 adults with possibly an eight-year old child now. Enough payload to carry 4 adults is a nice plus, but not a definite requirement. Occasional grass strips should be possible (flights within Northern Germany, Danish islands, Sweden etc.). Speed somewhere between 100-130 knots. NVFR required, light IFR optional (I do not fly IFR currently, but it might become an option in the future).

I think you are right on track with an Arrow or, pardon me for bringing in my personal favorite here, a vintage Mooney (C,E,F) would do well in this as well, giving you more performance, speed and range than the Arrows (where the C and E would correspond to an Arrow II and the F to an Arrow III range wise). A C is cost wise very close to a normal Archer or PA28-180 and will carry the same payload as well, but will run 30 kts faster for even less money. Also no M20 has ever had a major structural failure (as opposed to the Arrow unfortunately). If IFR is an option, I’d say 140-150 kts will be a much more attractive base than a 90-110 kt airplane, also when it comes to fit into the approach sequence of busy airports.

For your mission, both a short body C and E or an F would work out, range wise again I’d have to favour the F as it has 64 USG vs 52 available, which corresponds to about 200 NM of range. Also the F is much more comfortable if you do have to carry 4, which it can do.

In the 10 years that I’ve owned my C, I have done all sorts of trips with it, from “long range” to Bulgaria to 10 minute hops to nearby airfields. The Vintage Mooneys also can do grass pretty well, as can the J.

There are countless other options, a Grumman Tiger will run 140 kts with fixed gear and prop for instance and is also very nice bang for buck for 180 HP, close to the Mooney C.

As for insurance, I am with Maoraigh, get proper hull cover as well as a good third party insurace for at least 10 Million SDR’s.

I currently pay about 1.3% of hull value for insurance.

We have many previous threads for buying a plane. Search for e.g. “prebuy”. And indeed that is the key thing. Almost every “can of worms” case is traceable to a basically useless prebuy, sometimes where the buyer just fell in love with it and was going to buy it anyway… especially after having travelled a long way (same psychology works with cars).

A simpler slower plane in a good condition will give you less hassle than a more complicated faster one in a poor condition. I have heard so many stories but they cannot be posted. And a novice owner is going to find any issues much harder to deal with.

Be very careful which mechanic you use. I am not saying more but posting on EuroGA does not mean he’s any good

This is worth a quick scan, too.

Good luck and enjoy

While a fan of the KISS philosophy (not least because a well rigged Archer is only 10 knots slower than an Arrow), I wouldn’t dismiss the Arrow II or even the 180HP I. The slab wing Arrow seems a bit happier in short strips, in part given its ability to glide like an anvil. At VFR levels it is possibly a bit faster than the III. How many times will you plan five hour plus sectors?

The Mooney 201, if you like the seating arrangement which is fine, is a great aircraft but needs a knowledgeable engineering outfit – fortunately Germany has a good Mooniac following. For personal travelling tarmac to tarmac at 150-160 KTAS there isn’t anything out there that is as efficient and solidly built.

Although Düsseldorf – Lübeck isn’t a huge distance, it is something where speed starts getting noticeable. So yes, something like a basic Mooney might make some “sense.”

If you want to be able to comfortably go into Wahlstedt though, you are better off with a Cessna.

Also, if doing a lot of intra-German sectors, having mogas capability is something that will save quite some money over time. Unfortunately, their are no Mogas-approved four seaters that will do more then 120 knots, except the quite rare Beech Debonair and the C182 and C182RG, and these are all expensive to buy, plus they consume at least 12 GPH.

But yes, 172s (especially Ps) are getting rare and highly sought after, thus incredibly expensive, too. N-s not Mogas-approved. Ms have 10 hp less, and Hs are even less powerful.

boscomantico wrote:

Unfortunately, their are no Mogas-approved four seaters that will do more then 120 knots

Those may not count as 4*4 aircraft = 4h endurance*4 seaters

4 seats is an option. The main request is 2+1, and both fit that bill.

The Mooney G is also 180HP – four hours in a small GA requires devotion:)

I think “inserting” a whole family into some – particularly most single-door – GA types would involve a significant “devotion” too

In two words: Reims Rocket