Cessna 150's getting cheaper?

[bigfoot01]

As an avid wannabe aircraft buyer, I keep a regular eye on what's about (Top Gear's equivalent to sitting on the loo reading Autotrader...) I have noticed recently a few examples of C150's well under £10k. They seem to have moved from their previous pretty stuck position of £15k. Just wondered what peoples thoughts were on the state of the market.

Also, has anybody got any experience of borrowing against an aircraft, where to go and what sort of deals are about?

[Mickey Kaye]

I also feel that alot of the traditional training aircarf pa-28, pa-38, C150 etc don't seem to be selling that fast either. Maybe it the time of year, maybe there are less buyers?

[Genghis the Engineer]

Perhaps the market is recognising that aircraft such as the PA28-140 or C150 are old, often in poor condition, expensive to run - without the compensating enjoyment or charm of something like a Pacer or Cub, or the much better performance and lower running costs of something more modern such as a Europa.

G

[Maoraigh1]

Perhaps owners are wary of the EASA requirements, and are looking for LAA type aircraft.

[civil aviation]

FTO's have flirted with much more modern and efficient types and the 150 now does little for those with penis problems but it is still hard to knock as a cheap basic trainer particularly in the USA with much cheaper fuel and parts.
Inevitably, prices are falling in a recession but, also, because any 150 is now older than most students ! However, very much like tractors, a cheap and old but well-maintained machine is perfectly adequate for most purposes and especially training- but you must be prepared to spend the money to keep it that way.

[Spamcan defender]

I had noticed this too. It seems that the 'good old boys' i.e PA-28's, C150/2 etc are going for silly money even with good amounts of kit.

I had toyed with the idea of buying a C152 but TBH, with all things considered I have decided to build a Vans RV7. As much as I dearly love the Cessna's theres just no comparison in terms of performance, technology etc.

Obviously theres the issue of CofA Vs Permit but I can live with the restrictions.

Now, only if those twins would drop drastically in price :E:E................

Spamcan

[jonkil]

Too expensive to fuel.
Too expensive to maintain.
Too expensive to keep on C of A.

Therefore with the current climate the prices are bound to fall.

LAA & BMAA plastic fantastics from around 20K up offering better performance at a fraction of the cost is where it seems to be happening.

Unless you want IFR and the trappings it is where the sport will go.

[dublinpilot]

Also, has anybody got any experience of borrowing against an aircraft, where to go and what sort of deals are about?

If you need to borrow to by a 10K aircraft, then don't do it. It will end in tears very quickly. These aircraft are cheap because they are old, and come with very expensive maintenance bills. The purchase price is only a fraction of the running costs. Don't be surprised to get a 10K annual every few years.

[rtl_flyer]

I had noticed this too. It seems that the 'good old boys' i.e PA-28's, C150/2 etc are going for silly money even with good amounts of kit.

I had toyed with the idea of buying a C152 but TBH, with all things considered I have decided to build a Vans RV7. As much as I dearly love the Cessna's theres just no comparison in terms of performance, technology etc.

Obviously theres the issue of CofA Vs Permit but I can live with the restrictions.

Now, only if those twins would drop drastically in price ................

Spamcan

I went from a C150 to RV7. The 150 has it's place and I had a great time in it. The RV7 is a different beast. GREAT FUN (just doing aerobatics clearence).

Have to admit one big reason for changing from CofA to permit was EASA.

If you are starting a RV check out www.rvforum.co.uk and my site Building & Flying the Vans RV7 (http://www.go-7.co.uk) (click build diary) maybe handy for your RV7 build. Stick with it you will get a great a/c.

Tim

[BEXIL160]

Thing is, I still love my old straight tail C150... even when it wouldn't start :}

(got the new battery from Lasham, thanks for the advice Tim)

Oh, and it's parked next to Tim's RV

BEX :ok:

[IO540]

Unless you are pretty smart and have certain engineering capabilities, the ownership cost of something as old as a C150 is likely to be eye watering - simply due to the cost of the constant stream of airframe parts which need replacing.

[bigfoot01]

Appreciate I wouldn't borrow to buy a £10k aircraft, but how does aircraft finance work, if it indeed it does work these days. (I am guessing from the comments here, a £10k C150 isn't the place to go...)

[IO540]

I cannot claim to have type specific knowledge (I own a TB20) but the problem isn't borrowing 10k for a C150, as a personal loan which will always be ultimately recoverable from the borrower personally (even if the small print doesn't say so).

The problem is that it might cost you 8k on the first Annual, and you might get a bit p*ssed off by then, but you still have to pay back that 10k, and unless you spend the 8k on the repairs the plane is worthless :)

These old wrecks have a value which is basically the time left on the engine - same as old piston twins really.

A certified engineer can pick up an old dog, repair it and get it flying by the application of a lot of his own time, signing off the work as he goes. Then he can end up with a nice cheap plane. There is nothing actually wrong with a C150 - it flies very nicely. Slowly :)

But for a non-engineering non-hands-on relative novice owner (apologies if I got this description wrong) looking for a cheap runaround which will last him a few years and then be dumped, forget it. You can do that with cars (well you could in the days when you could buy a dodgy MOT for £25) but not with planes. Well you can do it in Botswana but not in the UK :)

[Pilot DAR]

I find the ownership and operating cost of my 150 to be very reasonable. I do a lot of the maintenance work, and keep up with all of the maintenance items, so they don't deteriorate. My generous annual maintenance cost to just keep airworthy (not including upgrades) would be less than $1500 per year. I have owned this particular 150 for nearly 22 years, with 2400 hours flying in that time. I have never had an unexpected expendature of more than $500. In all that time, my dispatch reliability has been 100%.

The Cessna 150 is what it is, and then some. It is very well understood by the industry at large, which always helps to keep costs down. Insuring it (full coverage - same deductable) costs less than insuring my 2003 VW Jetta. When I work out my actual operating costs for business expense purposes, and factor in the value of my time, the cost to operate either the diesel car or the plane as personal transportation comes out about the same.

My plane has taken on many varied roles, which have included both public service (searches) and experimental development. The flight testing which I did today is shown as follows. The 150 was very much more cost effective for this testing in 1/3 model size, than the turbine DC-3, which will have the final version of the full scale equipment installed. I agree that this is a not common use for 150 though!

An for those who hold the opinion that the flaps of the 150 create a challenge to a safe overshoot when fully extended, I will offer the video which can be seen here:

C150 40 Flap Takeoff video by PilotDAR - Photobucket (http://s381.photobucket.com/albums/oo252/PilotDAR/?action=view&current=C15040FlapTakeoff.flv)


Oh, by the way, it was cold with the door off again today, at -21C!


http://i381.photobucket.com/albums/oo252/PilotDAR/Jims%20DAR%20Testing/IMG_0088.jpg

http://i381.photobucket.com/albums/oo252/PilotDAR/Jims%20DAR%20Testing/IMG_0386.jpg

http://i381.photobucket.com/albums/oo252/PilotDAR/Jims%20DAR%20Testing/IMG_0398.jpg


We'll fly this again next week...

http://i381.photobucket.com/albums/oo252/PilotDAR/Jims%20DAR%20Testing/IMG_9367001.jpg

[Monocock]

The Cessna 150 is the perfect first aircraft and yes, the prices are coming down.

However, it tends to be the more tired ones that are going for sub £10k at the moment and when they are tired, they cost money. The £8k Annuals DO happen and are not just myths.

You won't get aircraft finance for a £10k machine. You need to be looking at £50k+ to be offered a deal by the Lombards of this world. Also, I personally wouldn't take out a personal loan for a luxury item in these times, especially for an item that might take some time to sell if you need to when the £8k annaul appears.

That said, I bought one when I was 20 and flew her for 300 hours back in 1993 to 1996. I learnd a lot in her and quite miss her actually.

The Canadian one above is a beauty but in that condition, you'd be looking at circa £17k even in this market.

Good luck

[IO540]

and the owner can do his own maintenance :ok:

That kind of technical + paperwork capability transforms aircraft ownership from top to bottom.

I could spend hours typing up examples...

[Pilot DAR]

There is very little relationship between the people who can properly maintain an aircraft, and the people who can maintain one. I know many people who can do both well, and many others who can only manage one responsibility (and just a few who cannot manage either adequately).

The premise that the owner of an amateur built aircraft could maintain it, and therefore was approved to do so, was based on the idea that that person had built it. Good chance that if someone built an aircraft, and successfully flew it, they can safely maintain it. But, Once that aircraft is sold, the purchaser likely does not have the experience of building that aircraft as the basis for having the skill to maintain it. That does not mean that they can't do a good job, but there's no assurance either, unless they are an experienced maintenance person.

I've frequently heard the attraction of a non-certified aircraft as being the opportunity avoid paying for professional maintenance. This must be the worst safety minded attitude ever. You're already starting with an aircraft which might have been maintained just outside the "norm" of aircraft maintenance (or could be well outside the norm, if the seller was not the builder either). Now the new buyer has to not only meet a safe standard of maintenance, but probably bring the whole aircraft up to that standard as well.

There are many excellently designed and maintained amateur built aircraft out there, and they are a true delight. Indeed, there are very few which are of inadequate design for what they are...

But, economy of purchase and operation is a really poor reason for going the amateur built route. It simply costs money to be safely off earth. If you want to be up there safely, prepare to pay the cost. If you're spending less, you're either flying on borrowed time, or flying an aircraft which is deteriorating as you use it - which I guess is also flying on borrowed time!

Like many certified aircraft, the C150 is very well known and understood. They have their weak points, though not as many as some other types, even some more recent Cessnas. The condition of these aircraft can be very accurately determined, thus the costs to maintain. Non-standard types can be more difficult to cost, and can be equally surprising come maintenance time, no matter who's doing it!

Like everything; in aviation, you get what you pay for!

[Rod1]

Pilot DAR


That may be true of the US system, but in the UK the LAA inspect everything and are responsible to the CAA for maintaining standards. In the UK it is possible to do your own maintenance on a permit aircraft, but the LAA inspector has to sign it off. The inspectors are mostly experienced enthusiasts who only charge expenses. My maintenance bill (including paperwork) dropped from £4000 a year to less than £400 by building my own!

Rod1

[hatzflyer]

I believe the maintainance regime is different in Canada/USA to the UK.
A homebuilt over here still has to be maintained to a laid down standard. It is inspected by a LAA inspector who is usually a volunteer,and it is fair to say that where a less experienced owner is involved,he is expected to provide help and guidence in order to make sure the aircraft is airworthy.If it is not he will not sign it out and if he has any issues with the owner (lack of skills etc.) he is under no obligation to sign any work.
Hence ANY LAA administered aircraft is likely to be better maintained than an average CofA aircraft. As a LAA inspector myself,I would say that the average standard of a modern homebuild is far above that of the average aircraft available to rent.
This is because the owner of a homebuilt can lavish lots of time on his/her pride and joy.
By contrast a hire aircraft is maintained to a standard that is defined ( and NO MORE ) because of the fact that it is maintained in a commercial envirement and no one can afford to lavish the same degree of love and attention.
In theory there is no difference between the two,as the owner of the hire a/c can do all the maintainance under the supervision of the engineer involved ,but as it is a commercial envirement this doesn't happen very often in the real world and almost certainly wouldn't happen with a new owner who is unknown to the engineer involved.( who is under NO obligation to opperate in a teaching mode!).

[Pilot DAR]

Rod,

Then the systems are different, and I think I like yours better. Canada has gone the wrong way with this lately.

If your maintenance costs have come down that much, you must be skilled at maintenance, and doing a good job, that's excellent. With that skill, however, I would wonder that you could not keep a simple certified aircraft maintained for a similarly small sum, with an inspector signing off that maintenance. That's what I do, and my money out of pocket for maintenance in any given year is really only a few hundred dollars, which is mostly parts and recertification of a few items of equipment - which you'd have to pay for with any type of aircraft.

As long as aircraft buyers are making informed decisions, and correctly budgeting their operating expenses...

Pilot DAR

[Rod1]

Pilot DAR

Again in the UK things are different. We have EASA and part M and CAMOS. Then you have the non certified parts (OK on LAA) which are identical to certified ones which cost many times the price. The Inspector system is also set up to help and teach. Against this European H & S has stopped non employees entering maintenance arrears and doing your own work on a C of A aircraft can be very difficult. In some arrears it is common, normally when the local engineer encourages it (Derby in the UK for example), but it is not common in the UK.

I built my machine, so I understand it, but I would have another learning curve if I were to step outside the carbon fiber / Rotax / LAA world.

Rod1

[Fuji Abound]

I would have thought if a 150 fits your bill now is a good time to buy - or at least very soon.

Prices are near to rock bottom although I suspect they will fall further.

Lest it be forgotten the 150 is still good at what it does. Buy one as cheap as chips and be prepared to spend perhaps double again and you could have a beatiful aircraft for a whole lot less that its modern day replacement (the Skycatcher).

[Big Pistons Forever]

After 25 yrs in aviation as a commercial pilot, owner of several airplanes (one of which was a C 150 ), and married to an licensed aircraft mechanic I have learned a few things. The most important is the sum of the parts of a light US built aircraft (that is if you started with a data plate and then bought all the parts to required to assemble a whole aircraft) will cost about 10 times the cost of the aircraft. I have a few rules which I use to evaluate a potential aircraft.

1) The most cost effective approach is to buy the very best example of the model you can find, as this means someone else has spent all the money, not you.

2) If possible buy an aircraft with a known history.

3) Don't economize on the pre purchase inspection. The best way is to have the aircraft flown to your shop and looked at by your engineer. You may end up wasting some money paying for an inspection on a unsuitable aircraft, but that will still be cheaper in the long run than buying a dog.

4) For those contemplating their first aircraft I would also add 2 additional points
a) If it is not on the aircraft it won't need to be fixed. Be realistic about
your needs and stay away from fancy radio fits, constant speed
props and especially retractable gear.

b) Develop a realistic operating budget before you buy. Talk to other
aircraft owners and groups and find out what they have spent over
a multi year period.


The good news is my first four aircraft/aircraft shares sold for equal to or more than I paid for them so it is possible to have a happy ownership experience, not to mentioned the appeal of not having to fly clapped out POS
flying club rentals.

[Pilot DAR]

I could not agree more with Big Piston's advice....

Add to that that the fair market value of my 150 after 22 years and 2400 hours flying, time is 3.5 times what I paid for it, or 2.5 times if you take off the cost of upgrades I've done (mostly paint and interior).

So it's increased more than twice it's value, while I've flown it 2400 hours... What a good investment, I wish I'd bought a half dozen back then!

Pilot DAR

[IO540]

However, PilotDAR, the current market value merely reflects how much you have spent on maintenance over the intervening years :)

[Ultranomad]

I could not agree more with Big Piston's advice....
After 25 yrs in aviation as a commercial pilot, owner of several airplanes (one of which was a C 150 ), and married to an licensed aircraft mechanic I have learned a few things.
That's a really good advice. I guess I ought to try marrying one, too. Hey, are there any gorgeous female mechanics out here?

[Fuji Abound]

With that I would agree. The sum of the parts will always cost you considerably more, however much you kid yourself otherwise - unless perhaps you can do the work yourself. If you buy and restore cars and pay someone to do it for you, you will get back a fraction of what you spent. The same is true of houses and boats and .. .. .. aircraft.

However, it depends on whether you are doing it for an investment.

If you want a reasonably priced aircraft in great condition you can still buy a poor one, as long as it is structurally sound, fit some up date avionics, give the airframe a respray, get the engine zero timed and end up with a really good "modern day" classic. Dont expect to ever get your money back, and if you can buy one to the same standard it will inevitably be cheaper. However, you will gain a certain satisfaction form the project and will end up with an aircraft you know is "right" (so long as you are very careful with the people you use) and that is exactly how you want it. Keep it for ten years, and it will serve you very well indeed. I speak from experience.

[Big Pistons Forever]

Fuji Abound

If you have the financial resources to "do over" a ugly but sound aircraft than you will an have an aircraft that is undisputably "yours",in that its appearance and equipment will be to your spec, not the previous owner(s). You will also have the comfort of knowing exactly how and what work was done to your aircraft. But as you pointed out, make overs are expensive and you should have no expectation of getting much of your money back.

However I took the post by the orginator of this thread to mean he/she was looking for cheap wings and had no previous ownership experience. I would not recommend a "project" airplane to someone in those circumstances. It is possible to buy a ratty simple airplane like a C 150 get a couple of trouble free years and then flog it, but he risk of the aircraft developing very expensive engine/radio/airframe issues is high. You will then end up with an aircraft that is probably beyond economic repair and likely lose all your money.

Knowledge is critical to successfull ownership and a good start for prospective owners would be to search this forum as Fuji Abound and others have posted a lot of good info.

[Genghis the Engineer]

I may as well say this before somebody else does.

For a "cheap" ownership experience, buy a share in something much better with your money.

Running costs, experience problems and aggro get shared, and you'll still fly it as much in reality.

Think about it - all of a knackered C150, or (selected at random) 1/4 of an RV6, Arrow or Europa. Which is going to give you the most pleasure?

G

[Fuji Abound]

Both the last two posters

I could not agree more.

I suppose it was the usual thread drift or thread development.

A "project" aircraft is no place at all for a "beginner". There is a great deal to learn, and, as result, every opportunity to make all sorts of mistakes in this business.

For a "beginner" I have no hesitation at all in recommending they should start with a good group. Even if you have the money and want your own aircraft that may not be a bad thing. Shadow the group member responsible for running the aircraft for a year or so and get a feel for how the maintenance works, what paperwork needs to be done, the issues that inevitably arise etc. Lessons learnt buy your own aircraft if you wish. By then you will have a much better idea whether you have the knowledge, committment and desire to take on a "project" or would do better to buy a "well sorted" aircraft.

[ericferret]

I bought a 150 for £2500 about 14 years ago ratty but not accident damaged. Cost of the project was £14,000 including purchase, respray, overhauled engine, and parts.
Labour not included in this price!!!!!!!!!!!

[rtl_flyer]

Buying a C150 is like buying any(*) other aircraft. The condition is all important, if you buy a rough one you are going to get big bills.

Get a proper pre-purchase inspection and get an a/c that requires as little work as you can afford. Maint/work will always cost more than you are quoted. I owned my C150 for 7 years, all I needed to do was a little engine work in this time - but it was in tiptop condition when I bought it and I kept it that way. It was not a cheap one, but I think in the long run it worked out cheaper than a less expensive one over the 7 years I owned it.

I don't agree a C150 will require any more airframe work than any other a/c. In fact a C150 has usually less problems associated with them than some other types available. They are common, where you go the engineering firm will be familiar with one and parts will not be a problem - which you could find with other a/c. Hence * above!

If you want cheaper (it will never be cheap!) try share/group. Or what about permit? They are not all expensive like RV's. What about a Luscombe - that's a nice a/c. I hear they are great, a few groups about also.

Tim

BEXIL160 - pleased to help. TRAFFIC service please...... :)