Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: craz07 on May 22, 2014, 01:36:19 AM
-
So a little bit of time away from the boards got me thinking, if I had the cash, which private airplane would i buy.. I know a few guys on here fly.. and HTC just bought a Cherokee.. Some reading and spec checking found me in love with the Mooney bravo.. lol I believe now it is called the acclaim.. Why you ask me? Well I thought about the twin engines.. reliability and power.. something like the beechcraft baron.. (geez how cool would that be to own something like that) the tiny turbo 182 skylane.. and then the roomier single engined models.. anyone that has any interest in this topic probably already knows the answer about what sets the Mooney apart.. speed.. Yes there are slightly quicker air planes out there.. but the newer Mooney does something on the order of 250 mph cruise?? It's not even particularly nice looking.. looks like a blunt-nosed yak.. Anyone here own of fly one.. is it really as fast as they say?
-
my college years consisted of me skipping classes to go down to the local regional airport, park with some munchies, and watch guys land and up their birds.. it was pretty awesome lol
-
English Electric Lightning!
or now they have retired the fleet you might be able to get an ex RAF Tornado for cheap
(http://i638.photobucket.com/albums/uu108/metallldan/Tornado_GR4.jpg) (http://s638.photobucket.com/user/metallldan/media/Tornado_GR4.jpg.html)
-
i knew i'd hook something.. sooner or later..
-
These are nice lol (http://i1272.photobucket.com/albums/y389/Decio_Pacheco/8237-1_zps7fa2d09d.jpg)
-
The Mooney's strength is efficiency. For its speed, it's a pretty economical plane to operate. The drawback (at least with the early versions) is they're pretty tight inside.
-
j/k Danny <S> I have honestly lost track at this point about what this original thread was about.. ok get up and start over.. it was more about the cool prop plane designs that are out there.. finding it difficult to pinpoint which would be the one I would buy the more i think about it.. lol had I the money
-
If I had the cash...
Grob G120TP
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/G120TP_-_Air-to-Air.tif/lossy-page1-800px-G120TP_-_Air-to-Air.tif.jpg)
Or perhaps a Diamond DA42 Twin Star.
(http://www.avsim.su/forum/uploads/monthly_12_2010/post-6343-0-51904000-1292322708.jpg)
If I didn't have that much cash I'd go for a Europa Classic with the mono wheel...
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26232318/AH/Europa_Classic.JPG)
-
I have a thing for twins... :devil
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQ7MkRInFyM&feature=player_detailpage#t=50
-
Depends on what I wanted to use it for and exactly how much money I had.
The money's are currently unavailable as they no longer are in production though I believe that is supposed to change this year or next. I have access to a M20E Super 21 which is nice but as already said, it's a tight aircraft. With the front seats back all the way, they touch the rear seats.
A 182 is a nice alternative. I have about 15hrs in a G1000 T182T. It's nice and spacious compared to the 172. It also has a pretty good payload as well. However, it gulps 16gal an hour in cruise but only goes 135-145kts at the altitudes we were flying it at. If I were to get a 182, I would go for the new J182T that burns jet-a. Same payload and speeds but burns a max of 12gal in any configuration. However that is a 650k plane.
If I wanted a really light twin, I would go for a g500 or g1000 equipped Seminole. Almost all my multi time is in a none glass Seminole. Easy plane to fly and maintain.
If I was to step up into six seats and I had a lot of money, I would probably skip light/medium piston twins and go straight for a turboprop Socata TBM 850 or the new 900; but those are 3.5/3.75 million dollar aircraft respectively. They offer 325/335kts respectively burning about 40gal an hour in cruise.
And finally, if I needed to haul a large family around and had loads of money, I would get a Kingair 250i or 350i. Something about a Kingair just has me in love with them.
And if I wanted a jet instead of a turboprop, I would get a embraer phenom 300, which costs about the same to buy as a Kingair 350 but does not carry as much but is faster with a longer range.
-
Mooney's back in production right now, thanks to Chinese investors. If I was going for a single engine piston, it'd be a Cessna TTx. Or maybe a Pipistrel Pantera when / if it makes it to market.
-
Man you guys must be doing ok if you can seriously look at turboprop singles. Yeah, they are nice
and jet A is usually cheaper than avgas, but your maintenance costs will skyrocket.
If I had that kind of money, I'd look at the Pilatus PC-12. It's got a King-Air 200 sized fuselage and a
very nice cargo door. Here is some wiki info on it. I know..wiki, but it's fairly on target.
It will cruise above 300 mph and carry 9 pax about 1700 nm. Not the prettiest bird but you gotta love
a PT-6 in the nose :)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilatus_PC-12 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilatus_PC-12)
-
Personally, the glass cockpit and stability of the Cirrus makes me want one.
(http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/autopia/2009/08/cirrus_interior.jpg)
-
One of the best things i ever owned was a sportbike.. man i miss it.. so fast, powerful, etc.. and cheap.. although it would rob the life out of you to ride it aggresively.. thats kind of the reason why I woudn't be interested in a small like cessna or something.. i'm pretty sure i've gone faster on a flat open highway on a 600cc bike then some of the smaller cessnas can operate at.. <-- not a boast in the least..
-
lol and always fun to make a little kids day by chuckin up a little wheelie for em when they're stranded in the yard all day.. lol (I know for me it was always cool)
-
I'd get a '57 or '58 model 182, do one of the engine mods to bump the power up a bit, the Stolx wing extensions and vortex generators. Not fast but can land and takeoff in under 500'. If not the 182 it would be a P206 (two front doors) with the wing extensions and vortex generators.
-
The closest i got to being serious about a purchase was crunching numbers on some of the homebuilts out there.. I would be a little nervous about flying something built in the 50's.. doesn't the airframe have limited hours of airworthiness? I have no idea how that is regulated
-
I'd go for a Van's RV.
Also, I liked the ol' Grumman private planes (Tiger, Cheetah, Lynx) because they were Grumman and because they had WWII fighter-style sliding canopies. :aok
-
Yeah, Tigers were fun, but took a little getting used to after flying Cessnas. The nose would point
about 2 degrees low in level flight and the landing speed much faster due to the small wing area.
That and the free castering nosewheel steering thing were the main things I remember about it.
-
I'd love to own a stearman or Great Lakes, do some barnstorming off a grass strip somewhere
-
The closest i got to being serious about a purchase was crunching numbers on some of the homebuilts out there.. I would be a little nervous about flying something built in the 50's.. doesn't the airframe have limited hours of airworthiness? I have no idea how that is regulated
Nope. Unpressurized Cessna singles do not have a life limit at all, on any part of the major structure. I can't say that is true for the pressurized versions as pressurization is something that causes fatigue with aircraft. And I'm also not saying there are not life limited parts, but what I am saying is that there are no major structures that will have a life limit on them that will cause a Cessna to be grounded or scrapped.
The flight school I worked and trained at, we had multiple 1997 model 172R's with over 11,000 tach hours on them. We had a 1974 Cessna 172M with just over 5,000hrs on it. But as you can see, the younger aircraft has more hours on it than the much older aircraft. In aviation you can not go by age at all, it's all about hours flown and even then, a high hour Cessna is still a very good aircraft.
We also had a 13,000hr '88 Piper Arrow. Now the pipers on the other hand... Piper's aircraft wings do have a life limit on them. Which is around 15,000hrs if I remember correctly. At that point you either put new wings onto the aircraft or you scrap it.
At our museum, we have a 1958 Cessna 150. Not a Cessna 150A/B/C/D/etc, but the original C-150. It was line number 47 of 23,000+ C-150's and a further 7,000+ C-152's. I don't think it even has 1,000hrs on it. But I don't have any issue flying it as I know it's a sound aircraft and was well taken care for by the single owner it had prior to us acquiring it.
The only thing you truly have to worry with older aircraft is corrosion. If it's a well maintained old aircraft, it will be just as good as a new aircraft.
-
Mooney's back in production right now, thanks to Chinese investors. If I was going for a single engine piston, it'd be a Cessna TTx. Or maybe a Pipistrel Pantera when / if it makes it to market.
Yes they are working on it, but they are not available to the public yet. The first one off the line will not have an owner announced until Oshkosh as they are auctioning off the first.
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDglkSIeYtw neighbors definitely would say i'd lost my mind for good if I showed up flying around in this thing lol
-
The closest i got to being serious about a purchase was crunching numbers on some of the homebuilts out there.. I would be a little nervous about flying something built in the 50's.. doesn't the airframe have limited hours of airworthiness? I have no idea how that is regulated
My plane was built in '48. Only one AD (airworthiness directive) on it for the seat rails which is checked every year at inspection. It keeps passing so there is no need to fix it yet. My old plane has less than 3000 hours on the airframe and I wouldn't hesitate to fly it anywhere. To put it in perspective, it would be like an all original '48 Chevy with 50000 original miles on it. If it sat in a garage all it's life it would still be a functional car. If it sat in a feild, not so much. But even if it sat in a feild, it could still be restored and put back in driver status.
-
Yea man you gotta do what you gotta do when you don't have money lol :cheers:
-
Yeah, gotta make sure those seat rails are good, because it would truly suck to end up in the
backseat on takeoff :eek:
-
thats the ticket ^ ^ ^
-
Yea man you gotta do what you gotta do when you don't have money lol :cheers:
Have the money to fix it but it's not broken so why fix it.
-
Yea.. follow your nose man... 48' and still runs good then more power to ya..