+ Reply to Thread
Results 21 to 30 of 33
04-01-2010, 02:09 AM #21
a 210 is not a plane for someone who has 0 hours. Yes, I know, you've probably heard of a guy who's uncle knew someone who flew it to get his license, but it's not. My cousin started flying his father's when he had about 80 hours, but that's a different story, he had been around airplanes since he had diapers, etc. A 210 is NOT what you want, believe me; too much power, too much speed, too heavy, etc. You'll get behind it too quick and it'll bite, and hard.
Airplanes are not like cars, you have to start very basic and move your way up. In that sense they're more like motorcycles, you have to give them infinite amounts of respect.
Get a 172 to start out, forget range and speed. Speed, usually, comes as a compromise to slow speed handling, and that's not a tradeoff you want right now. Cirrus', for example, fly fast yet their wing isn't approved for spins, that's why they have a chute. A chute sounds like a cool idea, yet do you know when the most probably time is to enter a spin? Just before landing (turning base to final) when you're 500' above ground, and the chute is useless at that altitude, you're toast.
A 182 is more reasonable, but still not what I'd get. One bad landing on a 182 and you'll bend the firewall (nose gear does not attach to the engine mount like a 172). And in cruise you'll pick up 20kt over a 172 and some useful load, but not what you want right now, for the aforementioned reasons.
Forget the trinidad, there's a guy at my field who's been trying to sell his for years to no avail. A 172 is by far the best bet; cheap to acquire and easy to sell, after all it's the most popular light airplane in the world (most units sold). Everyone and their grandmothers know how to fly and fix a 172.
Then, once you gain hours, and experience, you can think about moving up to an A36, etc.
04-01-2010, 09:24 PM #22Junior Member
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
A 177 will barely carry two pilots and fuel. Same for a 172. Both are very slow. A 182 will carry the load but it's still slow. If you intend to fly it yourself, get a Bonanza A36. With air conditioning. Six seats, 165 kts., easy to fly. Buy it now and do all of your training, through instruments, in it. You should be able to pick up an early '80s with a mid-time engine and at least one Garmin 430 for less than $150k.
I've had four and I've sold every one for more than I paid.
04-01-2010, 10:21 PM #23
the bonanza A36 looks like it may fit the bill.UNFUC$WITHABLE
Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
04-01-2010, 10:52 PM #24
Not a machine you want to learn in, but a very good plane to settle down in for a bit. IIRC, you'll need a high-perf. certificate for it, but that's easy with a few hours experience.
04-02-2010, 10:35 PM #25
the A36 is beautiful, but man, it's NOT a plane to learn in. Lots of people have done it, that doesn't mean it should be done. There was an Arab prince who learnt to fly in a 747. That still doesn't make it right, does it? Follow the normal progression, start in a 152/172 then move up. There's a reason why so many pilots have learnt in them.
04-02-2010, 11:10 PM #26
i am going to learn in a 172 as that is what the school provides.UNFUC$WITHABLE
06-08-2010, 07:13 AM #27
Single engine turbine especially in the mountains. The pressurization and the single turbine would make for a safe, fast, comfortable, economical transport. And by the way the best airplane to learn to fly in is something with a tailwheel. That is how I learned and it is like batting with a donut or learning to drive stick first. Once you move on to something with standard tri gear it is cake.
Last edited by Phantom; 06-08-2010 at 07:31 AM.
06-10-2010, 12:03 PM #28Junior Member
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Auckland, New Zealand
The Baron G58 is my favorite by far, you should check one out. 1-2m for a real nice one. Good luck with your flying adventure.
06-11-2010, 06:25 PM #29Junior Member
- Join Date
- Jun 2010
Ever thought of Fractional ownership? Did I spell that right? 25% of a 600k plane for 150 sounds good.
06-14-2010, 02:39 PM #30Banned
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
- Seattle, WA USA
What airport in the Seattle area ??
As far as Bonanzas go, I'd stick to the straight tail ones. I really liked the v-tail ones until I flew one. It was fast for the amount of power it had, but it felt like it was crawling along on its elbows once we got into a bit of rough air. I have no idea how the guy in the back seat held his lunch because it was dutch rolls for quite a while.
Based on the requirements that you list, you will need something a bit bigger than a 182 for 4 adult passengers and 2 dogs.
I second the idea of a fractional ownership in a larger/faster plane, but you will need to have a certain number of hours before an insurance company will touch you in a complex aircraft. Uaually it is around 150 hours for retractable gear and c/s prop. Beyond that, I will have to defer to others who have more seat time than I do as far as getting into the bigger planes.