The owner says me that airframe and engine books are missing …. But he has all the historic
It’s difficult to reopen a airframe book by making a complete inspection which will be done anyway ???
I’d be very suspicious unless there was a verifiable story for logbooks loss.
I can’t understand how people can genuinely lose logbooks for a plane.
For a lawn mower, sure.
But losing logbooks for an aeroplane means the owner is
bsamba wrote:
Yes It’s why i want to modify it, to use it in montain, short runway,
Unless the proposed runway is very rough, you’ll get better “bang for your buck” investing in a STOL kit and fine pitch prop (which it may already have) than a tailwheel mod. That mod will be very costly for that model 150, and is really only beneficial for ski operation. A tricycle 150 with a STOL kit will do everything a taildragger will do, if you handle it properly. If you’re flying at high altitude, you would like the extra 50 HP, but the plane is heavier, and burns much more gas, so you lose range and payload. You will probably get an extra 70 pounds gross weight with the 150HP mod, but you’ll use up quite a bit of that with a heavier engine, and prop.
I’ve owned a 1975 C150M with a STOL kit and a 69/48 prop, for 34 years, and flown it to mostly every place I would have taken a taildragger on wheels. Sure, if you’re thinking skis or giant bushwheels, or silly rough runways, then you would prefer the tailwheel. Otherwise, save your money. I love taildraggers, and my other plane is one, but it’s the cost to change over I caution you about.
Having flown several 150HP 150’s and many regular 150’s, I would not spend the extra money for a taildragger conversion, nor 150HP conversion. It’s an adequate plane the way it is. of course, we always go gentle on nosewheels, but the 150 is pretty good. You can get a larger nosewheel if you think you need it. But, if you’re into soft runways, you’re asking for trouble anyway, and even with a taildragger, pushing your limits. A tricycle 150 can operated with the nosewheel mostly off the surface, even at taxiing speeds, by extending 15 flap, and using full nose up elevator. With 1900 RPM, the nosewheel will lift off completely with the least forward motion, and steering with the rudder is fine. I handle my 150 this way all the time on my home grass runway – never a nosewheel problem.
A Horton STOL kit will make the plane noticeably safer, and more able to operate for shorter or softer runways, but there are tricks for this.
Peter wrote:
I can’t understand how people can genuinely lose logbooks for a plane.
My club lost the technical logs for an aircraft when the maintenance company hangar with their office burned down! I think that must count as a “genuine loss”. It was quite some work to attempt to recreate the logs — although this was during the hiatus in my flying so I don’t know the details.
My aircraft has no logs before 1970something, but it was completely rebuilt in the mid-90s so I don’t really care about it that much. Like most tube and fabric planes, it’s a bit like Trigger’s broom anyway. (
)
There’s a difference between an aircraft with missing records, or a known accident, but with 30+ years since of good maintenance and flying record, and one with no records.
The Bolkow 208C I’m happy with was rebuilt from abandoned many years before we bought her.
The Jodel we’ve just sold had an accident and rebuild 20+ years before we bought her, and we had 17 years use before we had to recover the wing.
An authenticated fire would be a reasonable explanation.
(Provided it caused more damage than the value of the plane.)
Maoraigh wrote:
An authenticated fire would be a reasonable explanation.
(Provided it caused more damage than the value of the plane.)
Nop the problem is that the book was lost after the last revision in 2018 by the workshop but he has an historic that i have to see.
alioth wrote:
but it was completely rebuilt in the mid-90s so I don’t really care about it that much.
I want to do a complete revision by myself so i hope that i can rebuilt a book for the administration, and i have to find a controler that can sign for me, it’s an other history.
Ahah thank’s for the video, i laught a lot ;P
Airborne_Again wrote:
Airborne_Again28-Oct-20 07:1415
Peter wrote:
I can’t understand how people can genuinely lose logbooks for a plane.
My club lost the technical logs for an aircraft when the maintenance company hangar with their office burned down! I think that must count as a “genuine loss”. It was quite some work to attempt to recreate the logs — although this was during the hiatus in my flying so I don’t know the details.
Yes something can apened that we can’t explain….Pilot_DAR wrote:
Unless the proposed runway is very rough, you’ll get better “bang for your buck” investing in a STOL kit and fine pitch prop (which it may already have) than a tailwheel mod. That mod will be very costly for that model 150, and is really only beneficial for ski operation. A tricycle 150 with a STOL kit will do everything a taildragger will do, if you handle it properly. If you’re flying at high altitude, you would like the extra 50 HP, but the plane is heavier, and burns much more gas, so you lose range and payload. You will probably get an extra 70 pounds gross weight with the 150HP mod, but you’ll use up quite a bit of that with a heavier engine, and prop.
Yes i have to see all the option and calculate everything :)
Don’t forget that I’m living in France and this exotic machin are extremely rare ! And we don’t have as much fun modification than you !!! we are strangled by administration and the cost of flying…. So the dream I built by myself the exotic 150 or 170 is unique in my country… I can’t find it easily, but with this option i can built it =)
The workshop should have insurance. The seller of the aircraft might have a claim for negligence leading to reduced value of the aircraft.
bsamba wrote:
I can’t find it easily, but with this option i can built it =)
Certainly yes. Just understand that when you do that, you will have invested more into the plane than it’s worth. It becomes what we call an “end user plane”, as the only way that you will recover your value, is if you’re the end user for some time to come. If you can be happy flying off a few thousand hours on your ideal plane, you got your money back from it. I bought my 150M in 1987, and at present, I could sell it for five times what I paid for it, and I’ve flown it 3000 hours in the mean time. I knew I’d keep it when I bought it, so I invested well in engine work, interior, paint and avionics. So not only have I flown the 3000 hours, and multiplied my money, but I flew the plane I wanted all those years. It has paid me to fly it all these years.
Similarly, a client of mine in Norway wanted a 182 amphibian, which everything, and I mean everything. I bought a plain 1977 C182Q wheel plane in western USA, flew it back to central Canada, where I hired a shop to accomplish the mods (I did some, they did most). The Norwegian owner spent $900,000 on that plane, but, it was exactly what he wanted, in perfect condition. He’s even had decent offers, as it is so unique, but he’s just happy to fly it, he’ll never sell it – an end user plane.
So have fun making your dream plane if you like, the damaged one you have chosen could be a very good candidate – just remind yourself that you really couldn’t afford to sell it (and being a taildragger, won’t rent it out) so find its value in the use you will make of it!
