Need "which airplane to buy" advice

Jason - thanks for all the info. And "yes" this will not be an impusive decision by any means. Too much at stake and I will take all the time and research and then add some more time and research. Really just getting my "thoughts" together at this point as to the basic type of plane and cost that could routinely and safely fly the missions I have in mind for it...that will then lead to the next phase of research and then training, etc.

That 36 is some amazing looking aircraft and I can clearly see what you mean by "buy your last aircraft" in that one!

How many hours total did you have when you decided to get that aircraft?

I ask because, "thinking ahead" and multi-tasking when in crowded airspace or whatever is my hardest struggle with flying...and that's in a 172! I do worry about getting enough repetitions in any airplane for that "speed of the game" thing to slow down for me before I buy anything, let alone a 200 kts aircraft!

 

I bought my G36 when I had 150 hours. It is my third airplane. I came out of an SR22 that I'd didn't like. I have IFR and ME.

Insurance made me do 10 hours of dual and a week at FlighSafety which came with the purchase of the plane.

The thing about the turbo is it only adds speed above 5000'. Below 5000' in the airport environment, just pull power to 20" and it's a 120 knot airplane. It's no big deal. Just slow down and it's just like a 172. Easy.

If I never buy a PC12 (the only benefit over what I have is it's much larger) ill keep my Bonanza forever. It's just a kick ass plane. You'll never see 20+ year old composite airplanes. There are many 60 year old Bonanzas still flying. Airplanes don't get the wear and tear that cars get.

 

The 182 should cruise in the 150kt range with the Lycoming 540... been gone for a while and don't do recips, but if I remember correctly advertised cruise was 156kts... when we used to get the planes in, we would re rig them to fine tune their performance to get better speed and economy. When the plane leaves the manufacturer everything is set up per the jigs, a few hours of flight time changes things around. The wing for example has a 3-5 degree adjustment in it. Get everything working together, the plane will go faster at lower power settings ( nothing wrong with better handling and economy ). 135-140kts is a bit slow, check you engine settings, altitude and time enroute, you may not be saving anything definitely not working the engine any. The engine is on a clock, when the timer rings, it needs to come out regardless what power settings were used.

 

I'll call your banana at 185 and raise you with a 210 at 196 and over 205 with a turbo :=)
both use the same engines...

 

Not following

Are you implying a 210 is faster? I disagree and, a 210? The worst looking plane ever built.

 

Yep, I believe 145 - 150 is possible, once you get the MP above 80% power settings.
Here's the performance chart for PA 6000 ft.
As you can see, 2400 rpm at 23 MP gives 143 KTAS at 79% bhp.
Fuel burn is at 13.6 gph at that setting.
Where as, at 21 MP, fuel burn drops to 12.1 gph at 135 KTAS.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

fly higher...
economy and speed increase with altitude, while power decreases

especially if you can get a push

when I was flying recips, my altitude was about as high as conditions would allow and in the optimum range in the book... there was no real gain in economy in final analysis

 

Makes sense.
Not sure why, but the Cessna performance charts use lower & lower max MP settings as the PA goes higher.
For example, here is the chart for PA 10,000 feet.
Here in the Mid-Atlantic states, I do a lot of flying under 10,000 msl. 8500/9500 vfr is typical for a 3 hour flight.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

yup !

The fit and finish of the 210 definitely was not of high standard, but they had a lot of speed and utility

 

I strongly disagree with the "buy you last plane first" mantra for a newly inked private pilot. IMHO you have no business in a complex, HP aircraft even with a wet IFR ticket. I don't "know" you and from what I read no one else here does either, what I do know is that building time is yet another piece of the puzzel in staying ahead of an airplane....practice does not make perfect, perfect practice does. An over the fence speed difference of +20 (and more) knots will seem incredible when you first make the transition let alone the first time you break out at mins!

Go rent and fly, build comfort and time.

Why waste your money now when none of us can tell you what the future of avgas is. Avgas, ADS-B etc.... Why make these coming realities your problem? Lastly, do the research on flying turbo anything....cannulas & masks are super comfortable (ha), no tailwind push ever overcomes the headwind the other way and top end overhauls at 1000 hours get expensive. We ditched our turbo for a FIKI bird and it is much more useful in our flying and maintenance costs have dropped.

Be safe and enjoy....no mater what you decide.

 

Making the jump to JetA costs millions. So, if you don't have millions to spend on aviation then don't take that into consideration. Avgas isn't going anywhere. You know how many folks you'd put out of business by canceling Avgas?

Insurance rules general aviation. If your end goal is a Citation, once you have your IFR, go buy a citation and pay an instructor to fly with you for 1000 hours. It'll be cheaper than buying and selling step up airplanes and you'll be a better pilot.

 

I learned to fly in a complex airplane, soloed on a 182RG. I didn't have a bit of trouble with the gear or managing the engine and prop. Being an aerospace engineer I understood how it all worked and being a racer before a pilot I was used to the pressure of thinking quickly. I only took a short break to build a few hours and then went straight thru to get my IFR rating. I did everything that these guys are saying you shouldn't do and I wouldn't have done it any other way.

I did learn some serious lessons and had a great instructor for my IFR ticket. Proably the biggest lesson learned was that even though it was a complex airplane and was pretty slick when it was cleaned up, if you got the gear and the flaps down and the prop pushed in, it was just a big 172. Like I said, I never had a bit of trouble staying ahead of the airplane.

Only you know and understand how comfortable you are with what type of airplane. At one point I had a guy who wanted to buy half of my plane. I rode with him and turned him down. Even though he had a lot of hours and all the ratings, he was a really bad pilot and I figured he'd prang the thing sooner or later and I didn't want the hassle.

While hours counts for a lot, it's just as dependent on what kind of pilot your are as to how you will take to a more complex airplane. The best thing you can do at this point is go out and get some dual time in a variety of airpanes before you buy one. Find out what you like and want in an airpane and you will be a lot better prepared to make the choice.

 

Hmmmm....more than the CFC ban? More than the ban of TEL in US automotive engines? Evolve or die...and somehow those industries evolved.

I'm not talking about canceling avgas; however, 100LL is doomed... It is only a matter of time and GA needs to come up with a replacement. I have yet to see a time when the EPA put "business" before legislation. Maybe CARB does it first, then the dominos will fall. Further, the business case for 100LL grows weaker with every passing day.

Say what you want about building hours, but I know of few old bold pilots.

Lastly looks like 20knts (give or take) is the difference between a 182RG and the G36....big difference when your new and single pilot.

 

Canceling 100ll would destroy aviation. How would people learn to fly? Avgas isnt going anywhere. A replacement will not come as there's no money in it. People have been saying what you're saying for 30 years.

I'm not following what mean regarding the comparison of the 182 and a Bonanza. In the airport environment (down low) a Bonanza can fly just as slow as a 182.

 

Sorry, I wasn't very clear....

G36 VSO: 59knts
182RG VSO: 37knts

G36 VS: 68knts
182RG VS: 42knts

My point being the 182RG should be more forgiving...Slower everywhere sure, but that "should" help a new ticket pilot in the efforts to stay ahead of the airplane.

We shall see what the next 5 years means to GA and avgas....given the last four years we know the current president is a big fan of GA! (insert sarcasm)

 

Nobody is getting either of those airplanes that slow. There's no reason too.

I touch down around 80 knots. More than manageable for a new pilot with an instructor.

 

I disagree about touchng down "hot", it leaves the door open for anything... idealy if the stall warning starts chirping as the mains touch is a good landing especially for newbies... the plane is through flying and less likely to be upset as the speed continues to come off and the "feet" become firmly planted

 

May be an exaggeration, but, it ain't pretty... awkward.

It's really not the Pontiac Aztec of aircraft.



Pretty? Still like the V-tail Bonanza.

 

80 knots isn't coming in hot. That's what they teach at sim school.

I'm quoting "80 over the numbers". No, I'm not at 80 knots when the wheels touch. But I'm also not looking at my speed when the wheels touch either. I'm looking at the runway.

 

So...."no one flies these planes this slow".....except to land? kinda one of those important phases of flight don't ya think? Especially coming down the slope to minimums with or without a safety pilot beside you.

How about Vref? Again the RG is going to be even slower and thereby providing a fresh pilot with time.

 

Snore

 

Ouch my feelings

 

the split tails are nice... but too many keep falling out of the sky...I have lost a couple of friends in those...lots of speculation...no definitive answers...guess it is easier to stop production

 

Well, your posts are getting a little "mamby pamby".

What do you fly?

 

Pilot error

Airplanes are very rarely the cause of an accident.