How much aeroplane do you really need?

[rans6andrew]

there are a couple of threads running which I think are related to the subject of how much aeroplane one really needs, although they don't say that specifically. The threads are "Farmstrip Flying" and "Why do people give up?"

There is a lot of good flying to be experienced at the bargain basement end of the market. I know, I live there. I fly a two seat, 3 axis rag and tube microlight. It cruises at 65 to 70 mph, drinks about 14 litres of mogas an hour. It is just the job for bimbling about. With a little forethought it is OK for going further afield. It was cheap to buy, it is cheap to maintain and it is quite happy popping into and out of grass airstrips (read low landing fees). It doesn't need to go to licensed fields or use miles of tarmac.

At the end of August it took myself and er indoors down to Blois, in the Loire valley, for a long weekend. We travelled light, we travelled cheaply, we travelled slowly and we enjoyed the scenery. We got caught by the weather and stayed 2 days longer than intended but there was no pressure to get the aircraft back for the next hirer. Try that in your rented school aircraft.

From this viewpoint I look at many threads on this BB with some amusement. While there is nothing wrong with lusting after some of the hotships I can't help thinking that for many PPLs a move down market would be better. A reduction in the hourly cost might lead to an increase in the number of hours flown. Perhaps fewer pilots would give up and others would be more proficient, due to being more current. I find that the more flying I do, the more people I meet and the better the social side of flying becomes, leading to more invitations to go to flyins.......

You just need to escape from the flying school/licensed field/renting spam can environment. There is another world out there if you look for it.

I think that the answer to the title question is, you only need an aircraft as fast as the slowest aircraft in the group of people you fly with. If you can't afford to keep up, join a slower group.

It works for me.

[Pilot DAR]

I suppose that you need at least the most economical aircraft which is capable of doing the job which you need to have done. Buying less may leave the job in complete, or unsafety done. Buying more justs costs more than you needed to spend.

My only critsizm of aircraft ownership comes when the owner buys the wrong plane for the job, and tries the job anyway, which can result in an unsafe condition, or buys more airplane than they will afford to maintain, and then does not maintain it properly, which does cause an unsafe condition.

Other than that, own what you like, maintain it properly, and fly it safely and regularly. Who can critsize that? I'm an expert at being the butt of aircraft jokes. I've flown my C150 more than 2500 hours in the last 21 years. I would not sell it for 4 times what I paid for it! All that fun, and good investment too!

Pilot DAR

[ChampChump]

:D

RansAndrew says much of what many of us have been thinking for a long while. Each to his/her own, but for getting airborne regularly and for fun, the 'LSA' market is hard to beat. I've said it ad nauseum elsewhere, but it's as much about the people one meets and one tends to meet the people to keep one motivated, curious, inspired and on track where one sees such machines. IMHO.

There's no such thing as cheap flying, but I don't see much evidence yet in the hours flown by the rag-and-tube, wood'n'fabric brigade. With the support of & company with another well-known Rans man, I've been to Denmark, Germany and France in my Champ and hope to continue the touring and fly-in fun for a good while yet. This, plus plenty of local flying, keeps us very happy.

It's not a reverse-pi$$ing contest, I hope, but since the OP already answered his question, I'll agree: for me, not too much. Extra speed is the last thing I want, as I discovered recently in a different machine. Where are you? Oh, back there. That won't do at all; first person in has to buy the tea and pay the landing fees. ;)

[scooter boy]

I think the previous posters have it in one.
Mission profile is the key.

For me my flying is all point to point business day and night VFR/IFR.
I almost never just go up to fly around for pleasure.

The R44II and M20-R have been fantastic. I did 4.4h of flying 2 weeks ago instead of 24h+ on the road. My pleasure is the time saving more than anything.

For a light aircraft the Mooney is unbeatable in terms of economy, speed, range and de-icing capability. Of this there is absolutely no question - nothing comes anywhere near close. The next step up is to be sitting behind a PT-6 and this means megabucks.

The R44 is also the Mondeo equivalent helicopter - by far the best value in terms of speed, safety and economy. The bigger stuff costs 5 times as much and goes 20kt faster more expensively with comparable range - go figure?

If I were flying for pleasure then it would definitely be an LAA type - I had one of the first Europas and put 560h on it in the late nineties. Maybe when I retire?

defining optimal choice hinges on the mission profile.

SB

[S-Works]

defining optimal choice hinges on the mission profile.

Exactly, and while Andrew may think that chugging along at 60kts and getting stuck somewhere for an extra 2 days is his idea of fun for others there is far more utility to flying than just a local bimble. I do enjoy the occasional local bimble but if I was restricted to that with an odd tour I would give up flying out of boredom. No challenge to it.

So I think it is horses for courses. My particular horse is one that can cross long distance and visit interesting places on a regular basis, day or night or inclement weather. Not a local bimble and a bacon butty.

[airborne_artist]

The only problem arises when the headwind gets above 25 kts. At 65 mph that's only 38 mph groundspeed ....

[Rod1]

I would agree with a lot of what Rans says except the speed. I have a finite amount of time and like to visit interesting places. My home built does 138kn on 15lph, and as I am doing it for fun, VFR is no restriction. My other comment is I look upon my machine as a step up from my old airways equipped AA5B as it is much faster, gets into many more places and its not 30+ years old.

Rod1

[bjornhall]

"How much aeroplane do you really need?"

Isn't that a rather funny question, considering very few PPL holders have any need whatsoever for any kind of plane? The majority of us fly because we want to, not because we need to.

I choose my "mission" based on what I'm flying, not the other way around, and I choose what I fly based on what I want to fly (given the obvious constraints of cost and availability...). I have a feeling that's not just me... :)

[ChampChump]

On the rash assumption that RansA assumed most of us can afford to run only one aeroplane, the 'mission' is the deciding factor, surely?

For those of us who enjoy the flight as much as the destination, near or far, the choice of that one aeroplane is important: for us speed is not a particularly important factor. We take longer to get there but enjoy the trip/legs. Those of you who have other considerations apply different criteria.

I think, as evidenced in another thread, whom you fly with is an issue. I'm sure those who want or need to consider a non-flying spouse/family/friend on your trip abroad will justify things very differently from those of us whose primary pleasure is geared to self.

Vive la difference!

[rauxaman]

I tend to agree about how a lot of new PPLs haven't yet realised just what they want from flying... they have been so focussed in realising their ambition.

I'm on the brink of actually owning 100% my own aeroplane... A second hand S6 might be modest compared with some of the other posters' dream machines but it will be all mine... a bit daunting in some ways :)

[Rod1]

“but it will be all mine... a bit daunting in some ways”

I know what you mean, good luck with her!

Rod1

[rauxaman]

Thanks for that Rod... I've made my mind up but I have been neglectful in following things through (rather busy... I run a building company and things are a little "strange" at the moment!).

Back to thread... "why do people pack it in?"... it seems to me that buying shares and actual aeroplanes is so much like buying (very expensive) second hand cars so pilots tend to stay close to clubs and rent instead with all of the non-availability issues.

Consider my recent experiences...

Come and buy one quarter of my aeroplane at £8.3k... I will keep 52% ownership but you will pay one third of the running costs and I can sell it on whenever I like and at whatever price I like... hmmmm (this guy also traded in "classic" cars).

Yeah we can set up a flying group around a Piper Cub I know of... come to see me immediately and bring £24k with you.

The asking price is £18k (was £24k)... You can't stretch to that? Ok I'll take £9k now and £9k in 12 months time... Question: When can I have an engineer make an inspection?... Answer: the farmer who built it might have cut a few corners but if you are really sure you want to spend money on this I'll get back to you (still waiting)

So why do people give up?????

[BeechNut]

I have a Beech Sundowner, 180 hp.

Previously I had a Cherokee 140, but with frequent passengers, etc, I was very limited in useful load; it was well equipped for IFR and had only 700 lbs useful load. That's when I sold it and bought the Sundowner. I fixed myself an upper limit: I would not go higher than 180 hp, fixed pitch and fixed gear only. True a Mooney might be nice and efficient with good fuel burn translating into decent speed. But anything with a variable pitch prop and retractable gear will bite back at annual time. And with insurance costs. I dare say unless you have the cash, and do a decent amount of fairly long cross-countries or IFR, a fixed-pitch, fixed gear single should be all you need.

My kids are now growing and leaving the house; I have less need for the extra seats and the high price of fuel has made me reluctant to give free rides to relatives. I have put the Sundowner up for sale (although it is a VERY slow market at the moment) in the hopes of downsizing to a 2-seater. I have my eye on a nice Skipper (in fact I owned it once, what goes around comes around!), but would also look at a C150/152, AA1, Traumahawk, if I found the right bird at the right place.

Never more aircraft than you need should be the Golden Rule.

If I do get around to finding a buyer I will be sad indeed because the Sundowner, while a bit slow, is a very nice stable ride and yet it's certified for aerobatics and is a delight to fly.

Beech