What should I look for when buying an airplane?...

WacoFan said:
I'm going to have a Lodestar someday. And a Lockheed Orion. And a Lockheed Air Express. And maybe a flyable replica of an Alpha. Lockheed used to build some kick-ass machines.
Click to expand...

You're going to need a couple of A&Ps for all that. If someone told me I had to have something built from a Lodestar, I'd want to get the Learstar. Otherwise, the only twin radial tail-draggers that are really interesting to me are the Beech 18 and the Bamboo Bomber.
 
First and foremost, don't sell yourself out a potential job dude...You may have the opportunity for what many of us call the dream job...91 Management/Flying.

If this guy is coming to you, he trust you, and don't shoot yourself in the foot by ever leading on you may not be qualified. You have more than enough resources here on JC to help you out.
 
2 things...

1- In regards to Mx. Call around a handful of shops, and ask them to actual out the door #'s for their last 3-5 annuals, or whatever work you are having done...They should have no problem providing those #'s, and they will be more accurate than a ball park quote.

2- When you start to shop for hangar space, closer isn't always the best. Repo to the boss is always an option.
 
KSCessnaDriver said:
You're going to need a couple of A&Ps for all that. If someone told me I had to have something built from a Lodestar, I'd want to get the Learstar. Otherwise, the only twin radial tail-draggers that are really interesting to me are the Beech 18 and the Bamboo Bomber.
Click to expand...

Hey man, you're a nice guy. You are in need of some counseling though. If you're around KC I'll buy you a beer and explain the error of your ways. The Beech is awesome, and the Bamboo Bomber is neat (but 245hp per side and non-feathering props doesn't sound like huge fun on one engine) - but you SERIOUSLY need to reconsider the Lodestar. And you should google the other airplanes I mentioned.
 
Re: What should I look for when buying an airplane?...

Wings, it should have wings. That would be nice.

Planes are machines, beasts, first wives...it aint like you're gonna be hitched for life. Buy one, ride it, trade it in and trade up again. But it should have wings.

IOW: Which plane to buy is a process not an event.
 
MikeOH58 said:
2 things...

1- In regards to Mx. Call around a handful of shops, and ask them to actual out the door #'s for their last 3-5 annuals, or whatever work you are having done...They should have no problem providing those #'s, and they will be more accurate than a ball park quote.

2- When you start to shop for hangar space, closer isn't always the best. Repo to the boss is always an option.
Click to expand...

Just to add on to this, if you start to get serious about a specific type of airplane and in particular, a certain airplane...I would request copies of the previous 3-5 years of annuals with $$.

I have some great guys here in Georgia that work on my company's plane...they are PHENOMENAL. I know they would be willing to take a call if you'd like to talk to them about cost associated with Twin Cessnas.

Also, when you do start to shop hangars, be sure to talk to the local FBO's to get bulk fuel discounts. Most have a set number of gallons per month that you have to burn to get the discount, but if you can get your gas at "cost" + 50 cents you'll be in good shape.
 
I know this is reviving an old thread, but I am in a similar situation as to OP. I am helping a non-pilot business owner aquaintance choose his business aircraft, and could use some advice. His requirements are similar, 6 seats and flights under 500nm. I should add, the location is Seattle and he has a house in Sun Valley, so the aircraft would have to be icing capable in the winter and DA capable in the summer. It would need to be able to carry a couple large coolers with seafood. Ideally, it would be able to accomodate 4 passengers, bags and a couple sets of skis. From what I understand, a King Air would be ideal, but might be beyond the budget. My question is, based on these needs, what are the pros and cons of a Cessna twin (or other piston twin)? Purchase price and operating costs would be a major factor. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
 
I am surprised more people are not interested in the TBM -

TBM-700.jpg


Looks like a great plane!!!
 
I_Money said:
I am surprised more people are not interested in the TBM -

TBM-700.jpg


Looks like a great plane!!!
Click to expand...


TBM is a fun airplane to fly, but if you go full fuel you won't be getting much else in them. the 700A/B will carry about 200-300lbs with full fuel, and the 700C2 and 850 will do 500-600lbs. They're fast though...700 will do 285-290 and the 850 will do 310-320 KTAS.
 
I'm wondering does the potential of 100LL being phased out have anyone hesitant to purchase an old Cessna piston twin? Just curious
 
SuperScotty said:
I'm wondering does the potential of 100LL being phased out have anyone hesitant to purchase an old Cessna piston twin? Just curious
Click to expand...

Why should it? There still tons of single-engine Cessna's that were built for 80/87 when it was phased out, and they still buy and sell.
 
There will always be an STC for different fuel. That should not be a factor.
 
SurferLucas said:
TBM is a fun airplane to fly, but if you go full fuel you won't be getting much else in them. the 700A/B will carry about 200-300lbs with full fuel, and the 700C2 and 850 will do 500-600lbs. They're fast though...700 will do 285-290 and the 850 will do 310-320 KTAS.
Click to expand...

Yeah, don't buy an A or a B unless you want to fly solo a lot. Nice enough airplanes (as long as you have only two people on board).

The 700C though...oh baby!

I'm wondering does the potential of 100LL being phased out have anyone hesitant to purchase an old Cessna piston twin? Just curious
Click to expand...
Eh.

Phaseout of 100LL is like NextGen: we keep getting told it's 5 years away, every five years. The recent effort seems to have some teeth, but I don't see any serious solutions being thrown around. Besides, my airplane is certificated for 80/87...with some clever engine controls it wouldn't be too hard to get the rest of the fleet outfitted to handle it.
 
I think the C441 would fit the budget pretty well, albeit in the top end of it. Very fuel efficient and there is still a good number of parts around for it.
 
In regards to mx on something like a Twin Cessna-
Find someone who specializes in them and take it to them for the annuals and if possible the pre-buy. Your local A&P is fine for stuff like tire and oil changes, etc, but for the big stuff you want someone who knows the airplane and it's foibles inside and out.
 
mshunter said:
Nothing, other than the fact that there are not to many left, and they should be preserved for future generations to enjoy. Putting an airplane like that back to work vs enjoying it as the history piece it is, is next to blasphemy. Don't destroy it by working it to death. They are like retired race horses. They should be relaxing in a climate controlled hanger and flown when the urge hits. Working planes get beat up on, and I bet parts are hard to find, if availible at all.
Click to expand...

Aircraft don't belong in museums, they belong in the air.

You can always put a replica in a museum, and no one will ever know the difference.

Besides, most of the aircraft I see on static display are in such rough shape that it isn't worth it anyway.
 
If your student is serious about a twin cessna I would lean towards the 421. The gtsio engines are reliable when operated like any large turbo charged engine and the aircraft useful load is better than the 414. I am famililar w the 421 series. If you start looking in this direction let me know and I can provide more info pertinent to a pre purchase.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top