Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Which plane to buy for EUR200k

Hey Mooney_driver. Apology accepted. Too late in the evening to post anything now. I’ll see if I have anything relevant to say in the morning.

I am a bit GAed out to be honest

LFMD - Cannes

What a fantastic post.

Let my try something similar about growing as a pilot. I don’t own, but rent (clubs / flying schools initially, then from private owners), so this is more about how my needs evolved with my ambition rather than ownership. We might be comparable – I always wanted to fly longer distances, and always knew that I wanted to get the IR (although it turned out to take quite some time to get there)

Phase 1 – VFR
-—————————

1. There is nothing wrong, nor particularly difficult, to go for a capable, fast touring aircraft as your first one.

After I got my PPL, I flew around a bit in a C172 “Reims Rocket” (200 HP) and a PA28 Archer (180 HP), and then went straight to a Mooney 201. Not the hottest ship these days, but at 150-160kt realistic cruise (you can get it to 175kt at FL75-80 if you don’t mind max RPM…) quite a bit faster and slippery. I did the check-out (differences training these days) 10 hours after I got my PPL, and then flew that type almost exclusively a few years. So don’t limit yourself to something slow or draggy, choose the aircraft for the mission, you should easily learn to fly it.

And I had a student who bought himself a Piper Arrow right after first solo, and finished his PPL in it. Took him 3 hours or so to solo in it.

2. The basic “mission capability” of these machines is about range, payload, and only if you need it, short field performance. Let’s call them “the big three”. Everything else is exotic / special purpose.

For example turbocharger? Unless you fly across the Alps every trip, not really necessary. Autopilot? Luxury. Avionics? Anything from minimum instrumentation (just get a moving map iPad…) to G1000 will do. Speed? Your choice. High or low wing loading? Depends on whether you like roller-coasters. Parachute/CAPS? Cabin size? Doors? High-wing or low-wing? Retractable? Aerobatics?…

All these choices make no real difference whether you can fly from A to B with the payload you want on any given day – if you get the “Big Three” right, that is.

This leaves a bewildering choice, but you don’t need to worry about turbocharging, deicing, IFR certified avionics, etc, etc., they make NO difference to the fundamental mission capability.

The largest limiting factor for your flying VFR is the weather

Phase 2 – IFR
-————————

3. One thing stays exactly the same when you fly IFR – The largest limiting factor for your flying IFR is still the weather

But what changes is that now you have a few more things you could have that improve your mission capability

  • Turbocharger to fly above the weather
  • Oxygen or pressurisation to do so without asphyxiating
  • Deicing to penetrate icing layers
  • Stormscope / radar to fly in weather with embedded TCU / CBs
  • A second engine or parachute so you don’t die if the donkey quits when ceilings are low

Now, I am a “sod the weather, I am going” pilot. That does not mean I fly into forecast icing with a non-deiced aicraft, I stay on the ground. But it means that if I have an Aircraft with deicing, I will fly in forecast icing except “severe”. So I get value from having all the toys, and I will use them.

Peter, on the other hand, wants his flights to be more enjoyable :-) , and tries to stay in VMC more than I do, I don’t think he would get his money’s worth from radar or deicing, although I dare say he would perhaps like a turbocharger.

So now, it gets EXPENSIVE. For me, it ended up with flying either a twin or an SR22, nothing else will do…

Now – do you know what kind of IFR pilot you will be? And what will your passengers tolerate?

If you have all the money you need, you would of course buy at the top end, but you are on a budget. And how many years until you really need what you are buying now?

So here are my suggestions

Phase 1 – VFR – buy a fast VFR tourer. Fly it and go places…
Phase 2 – IFR – make sure the tourer is IFR capable. Consider a turbocharger. Everything else is for “Hard IFR”.

That’ll see you through a few years…

Then, if you really want to go all weather, swap for a used SR22, because by then de-iced FIKI models will be older and more affordable than they are now.

Biggin Hill

Great post Cobalt!

Peter, on the other hand, wants his flights to be more enjoyable :-) , and tries to stay in VMC more than I do, I don’t think he would get his money’s worth from radar or deicing, although I dare say he would perhaps like a turbocharger.

Oddly enough I would go for full TKS as the first thing, but even at that level there are hassles for me e.g. nowhere to store the fluid in the hangar. And the 50kg payload loss…

So, I am staying with the plane which I really like and which does nearly all of what I need, I know every bit of it, I can fix every bit of it without having to use a company, and I can get good pics out of the windows

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Some great mature posts here guys, well done. (Unusually for me, that is NOT sarcasm!).
I like the fact that tinfoilhat is no shrinking violet and will happily defend himself when faced with what he percieved and indeed is often misconstrued on here as eliteism.
I also like the fact that Mooney Driver has not bridled and has merely explained his position with eloquence and obvious knowledge.

THIS is what makes this forum stand out from the others.

Last Edited by Stickandrudderman at 26 Nov 22:39
Forever learning
EGTB

Cobolt

I think you have overlooked, or maybe just forgotten to mention one small but important point in your summary for an IFR aircraft. The Autopilot.

I know that many will say they have done lots of hours without one, and that real pilots don’t need one, and some claim they become a crutch.

I disagree, and so do the regulators; this is why RVR limits are less with a certified autopilot, and why a working autopilot is required for single pilot operation of many small jets. It just makes it much easier and safer.

Darley Moor, Gamston (UK)

Thanks Cobolt.

I fully agree. For hard IFR, that is with minimum ceilings, icing and so on, I would go for a twin every time. Not even necessarily FIKI but de iced never the less. The same goes for longer over water.

Twins are actually quite inexpensive to buy currently, due to the market being what it is and due to many people going the Cirrus/shute path which gives a SEP the mission capability that previously only twins had. Looking at the money needed to buy one of those, with a budget to buy a Cirrus one can get a de iced twin and fly a few years until the same amount of money is used up. My mantra has always been to use part of your budget to fly and the rest to buy. With a 200k budget and 25 k annual flying budget, using 100k to buy and 100k plus 25k p.a to upgrade/fly will give you a very comfortable situation: unexpected engine overhaul? Prop overhaul? A shiny new radio? Also, a twin bought at this kind of price will suffer very few depreciation if any.

Just as an example:

This is a Seneca II, my favorite of the Senecas in terms of price vs utility, relatively recent engines (2005/6 with roughly 1000 hrs SMOH), classic King Avionic fit, radar, long range tanks and full de icing. Add maybe 20k to add a GTN for 8.33 and RNAV and you get a pretty capable FIKI twin for maybe 70-80k. Out of a 200k budget, that would leave a whopping 120k to fly it, more than for a few years. Even if you spend 40 kt on it to get some additional toys such as an Aspen, you end up with half the budget and still have 100k to go flying.

This is a Seneca III for the same price and slightly better avionics.

Same thing but newer airplane. Engines are older with more hours, but you get that KFC200 system and 3 blade props.

Of the two, I’d look at the first one (just looking at the adds, a pre-buy might change that very quickly! ) due to the long range tanks and the more recent engines.

Or here a really nice one, with all the avionics you’d need and scimitar props:

very low time engines, low time props, KFC200, GNS530, Radar, Leather seats and so on. Buy and fly. The asking price would still leave you around 60k to fly but I reckon a well considered offer might stretch that.

Another one I might look at, would be this Twin Commanche:

Main reason: It is de-iced, which almost no Twin Commanche is. It also has mid time engines and low time props. What I would do with this one is to completely redo the avionics which would probably bring to total investment up to around 80-100k. It’s not FIKI but it is a Twin Commanche, which means it will fly 150 kts at the consumption of a powerful single but has that 2nd donkey which can bring you home. Other than the Seneca II however, it won’t keep you out of the dirt over the Alps on one engine.

Again, no recommendation whatsoever but simply a few examples out of the box.

Can a 100 hr PPL deal with a Seneca? Well, tinfoilhat sais he likes instruction. So out of my own experience I’d say yes, with a proper and professionally done instruction and enough time. I did: I transitioned to the Seneca II starting at around 60 hours TT and straight from a Cessna 150L which I used as an hour bilder (which is quite useful as it takes ages to get anywhere…) I had about 50 hours on the Seneca (including doing the CPL and IR) in total before I checked out at 200 hrs total, which at the time was the minimum for the CPL in Switzerland. I still do like the Seneca very much as a transport airplane. If I had to go overwater, night, IFR with icing and all that, it would probably still be my number one choice.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland

WF’s G-COMB is a very nice PA-30 with tip tanks and boots. A relatively tatty 182 would cost considerably more.

Oxford (EGTK), United Kingdom

TFH – how far are you willing to dismantle the bike(s)?

If you want to only remove the front wheel, that narrows the airframe options considerably especially if you don’t want to make the interior too tatty.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Great posts, Cobalt and Mooney_Driver.

After 20 years of flying thereof more than 10 y with an IR, I now want to “sod the weather”. For that I want turbo, oxygen and de-ice. If I were to buy, I would like to be sure that I will have a good supply of AVGAS for my airplane for the rest of my flying carreer, and I would try to avoid burning 22 gph like the nice Seneca in M_D’s post to do 175 kts.

For those reasons my current choice is DA42 TDI/NG. That is around a 300.000 €.plane unfortunately, and in border to no geek bas a bout all that minet sitting in an expensice hangar, i would opt for a 2-3 share syndicate. Not easy to set up.

LFPT, LFPN

Aviathor wrote:

If I were to buy, I would like to be sure that I will have a good supply of AVGAS for my airplane for the rest of my flying carreer, and I would try to avoid burning 22 gph like the nice Seneca in M_D’s post to do 175 kts.

Twin Commanche comes to mind. Burns around 17 GPH at the same kind of speed (Turbo Twincom). If I had the money to upgrade, which I never will probably, that would be my first choice. In theory, you could take G-COMB in that add I linked and get Rajay Turbos installed onto it, as well as do a panel you’d like to have. For me, that would be a dual GTN or IFD installation, Trigg Transponder, some TSO DME and a set of Aspen(s) complemented with an S-Tec 55x if the airplane doesn’t have one yet. Clearly, that would make that airplane cost around 100-120k in total, but it certainly is one of the most economical twins around.

On the other hand, at the prices you can get a Seneca today, the difference buys a lot of Avgas. And the cheapest way to mostly “sod the weather” i.e. in a FIKI twin must be the Seneca. I’d never consider a Seneca I though, mainly for the range. I used to fly one and while I loved it dearly as an airplane, it had just too much of a limited range of around 500 NM.

Re availability, that is a real decision maker. I would not assume that there is no avialability in Europe for the forseeable future, particularly if you want to fly to Africa or Asia or spend most of your time in Greece, then you have a problem. Still, a LR Seneca could probably do most of this. I do recall one exemplar going on the reader’s trips of Pilot und Flugzeug all the way to S-America. Probably with ferry tanks but still feasible. The question would be if the engines could eventually be made to work with UL91 or 95, which is set to replace Avgas before too long.

The Diamond is a nice plane, I am just not sure how it is as a traveller, I’ve heard different things. How does it behave in turbulence, icing, crosswind, e.t.c. as the relatively light construction that it is. A Seneca will take most grass runways an Archer will, I’ve taken a Seneca 2 into Buttwil (LSZU) which has a pretty shortish grass strip (it was based there) on an exam flight, works very well. Will a DA42 do that? Maybe. For me it is a very expensive plane and to really have a proper setup you need a more recent ones, the first ones don’t have a flight director for a start which would be a no go for me IFR. Different league of airplanes. Also not sure how “on condition” works with the TDI’s.

Last Edited by Mooney_Driver at 27 Nov 13:18
LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top