4-Seat a/c for sale with 500 engine hours. £16k. What am I missing? [Archive]

9 lives

28th Nov 2015, 12:37

Too good to be true?

It's probably a fair price for the aircraft, as to be an aircraft with an operational future, it will need some investment - some plainly obvious, likely more which is not so obvious. Grummans are great planes, though they are different to repair than most other GA aircraft, and their value often reflects this.

As a potential owner, you must make yourself very aware of the characteristics of the aircraft you intend to purchase. Type clubs are a good start, though they are often frequented by owners who love their planes, and have learned to "manage" type challenges, so as an unfamiliar, you may have to dig for the facts. I good tool to understand the potential maintenance costs for an aircraft would be to PAY a maintenance shop for a couple of hours of their time, and have them review the logs of the aircraft, and invoices for the previous work, to establish a cost trend, and sense of completeness of the maintenance over the long term. Then you start to plan for the "owing" maintenance and surprises.

My advice to first time airplane purchasers has always been to consider your realistic budget, and then shop for an aircraft which has a valid C of A, and nothing big on the maintenance horizon - which costs around half the amount of your budget. The leaves you with a fair sum to cover the first year's operating costs, and contingency for unexpected things.

I've seen far too many aircraft up for sale, because the purchaser just did not budget well, and the newly purchased aircraft required unanticipated maintenance investment, which was left un done, and the plane languished for sale, not flyable, and of greatly reduced perceived value.

Always bear in mind that a valid C of A for a plane is like a certificate of fitness for a car - it means that the vehicle has met the standard. But the meeting the standard is at the time of inspection and as is. It may not account for what it's going to be like next year, with a bit more use, and a bit more wear and tear, and corrosion, where upon a whole bunch of work will be required to keep it airworthy.

CSCOT

28th Nov 2015, 13:07

Thanks for the sound advice. I guess I'm trying to work out of its worth owning outright, part-owning or just chartering. All of which depends on projected usage.

This is a long way off but was just curious. As with everything it seems the initial capital cost is just the tip.

So a C of A is otherwise known as the 'annual' (?) and is a costly and through inspection done by an approved organisation (?)

Thanks

Shoestring Flyer

28th Nov 2015, 13:33

Could be made into something nice I suppose if you were willing to throw a lot of money at it.
Personally I would have thought it was probably a tad overpriced. Fully sorted it would be only worth a maximum of £30k.
Avionics...Only the Trig TT31 Txpdr is realistically usable. The rest is just old junk. So would cost you a minimum of £10k to install 8.33 Comm and some sort of cheap Nav equipment.
Then there is the paint which will cost you a minimum of £10k to sort to a reasonable standard.
And that is the known issues. You would need to budget on at least another £5k-6k for the unknowns...

The good news is it is a 1978 model which means it shouldn't have the earlier AA5 debonding issues. They were fully sorted by this time and had gone back to the original vanilla glue.

ChickenHouse

28th Nov 2015, 14:50

Just by looking at the ad:
- the avionics is the usual ancient mix of museum parts and will need serious investment, only Mode S is up to date and 833 COM will be next must, I would expect a minimum of about 10k until usable (which will not give a moving map IFR GPS!, add another 5-10 for a used basic one)
- cosmetic challenge means it is worn to death and will need paint job exterior, maybe 15k, plus interior redone, maybe another 10k
- 500h reads low, but within which time frame?
- Grumman Tiger means NO Mogas, as it is not STC'able according to Petersen
- did I miss? No autopilot? (if you want one, add another 25k)
- my first reaction > hangar queen, old owner, rarely flown, maybe even died already and the heirs try to get rid of it?, so damage by resting may be an issue -> at least oil analysis and endoscopic examination may be advised, another 5k

Add all money until ready up -> +40k on top of the 15k asked for => 55k until you have a realistic spending figure. That is not really cheap and you still have the engine of unknown age in an old Avgas airframe. Comparable already equipped and cared for real nice Tigers you will get for around 45k, so unless you are looking for a project to customize an aircraft to your specs, it is not a bargain.

Grummans are quite nice to fly and they make reasonable light-IFR traveling machines, but the premium to spend until renders the airframe to an unimportant carrier of all the things you need to put in.

CSCOT

28th Nov 2015, 15:05

Wow that's a lot. I had expected to spend the same again as purchase price to get to safe usable basic hour builder but shows what I know...(!)

ericferret

28th Nov 2015, 15:09

We don't really talk about a C of A anymore in Europe. The C of A exists as a continually running document. It is validated by the Airworthiness revue certificate, ARC. The ARC is issued annually based on the maintenance history of the aircraft. The organisation issuing the ARC is not necessarily the same as the one carrying out the maintenance.

The annual inspection might be carried out by a licensed engineer or a maintenance organisation. Cost, how long is a piece of string!!!!!!

Sir George Cayley

28th Nov 2015, 15:34

Buy it

Part it

Use the money to buy something on a permit to fly.

Nuff sed.

SGC

MrAverage

28th Nov 2015, 16:25

It's actually group owned and the engine is still in calendar life, at least it was 10 months ago.............

Silvaire1

28th Nov 2015, 16:30

On N-register and given an involved and reasonably funded owner, an aircraft like this would be a perfect candidate for light ongoing restoration and many years of service. I can't on the face of it see anything negative about this one, except for somewhat high airframe hours (5720 TTAF). Tigers are good and popular aircraft, notwithstanding the outrageous and fundamentally unnecessary hassles associated with aircraft ownership in EASA Land.

rifruffian

28th Nov 2015, 16:49

hum ho OP, it depends what you want from this airplane. I will simply relate my own experience in this regard and you make what you can of it.
Around 50 years ago I perused the 'for sale' columns of Flight International and as a result purchased a four seat airplane with current CofA and maintenance records....in flyaway condition....for £500. It was low cost at that time. At time of acquisition I was student ppl. My idea was hours building with view to CPL. It worked out OK. I was entirely untroubled about residual value although in fact it sold easily at disposal.....Was lots of fun as well.

So I suggest decide what you want from the venture....and go for it.

RatherBeFlying

28th Nov 2015, 17:22

If regularly flown by a group, it is more likely that issues have been resolved as they came up.

Look over the logs with a mechanic experienced in Grummans. There is a type club. Check with them and consider flying over a mechanic.

Provided no glaring issues raise their head in the logs, book a flight with an IFR pilot to check out the panel. You will likely be in the back seat as an owner and your experienced IFR pilot will be in front.

Perhaps some avionics are inop and the aircraft is no longer approved for IFR. But if it is, it may be well worth while keeping it that way.

In the pre GPS days (aka Stone Age) , the panel would be considered pretty good for IFR.

Converting to glass could cost the asking price if not more.

The glider folk put a PDA, iPad, Dell Streak whatever on a RAM mount. Lots of software available including moving map showing airspace plus you can take it home and load up your flight plan.

Best of all you don't need to go through the CAA approved modification process.

As for paint, it's been kept outside:uhoh: When you want to spend money, research Eastern Europe for a refinish.

Capt Kremmen

28th Nov 2015, 17:26

Do not buy 'certified,' you'll end up in a debtors prison. Buy Permit or Experimental.

Sir George Cayley is right !

The Ancient Geek

28th Nov 2015, 21:37

Do not buy 'certified,' you'll end up in a debtors prison. Buy Permit or Experimental.

A bit harsh but true for those with limited resources.
Maintaining any aircraft costs "some money", rather take a cold practical view of what you want to do and what you can afford.
If you just want to bimble around the sky in good VFR conditions with little or no luggage then a modern permit aircraft is the way to go. Permit aircraft are strictly VFR only.
If you want to go places and carry a decent load you need something bigger and that means certified. Get an instrument rating to get the full benefit of your investment. A well known and well supported model such as the Cessna 182 is a good practical workhorse.
Beware of older aircraft, they are almost always being sold because some expensive work is getting too close for the sellers comfort.

Above all - flying is an expensive hobby and penny pinching can be very dangerous so make sure that you can afford the long term commitment required.

Cuillin Hills

28th Nov 2015, 22:15

All the above is, generally, good advice.

The only thing I would add is that Just Plane Trading's advertised prices, over the years, have seemed pretty fair to me.

I see many aircraft, both C of A and LAA Permit, advertised on other sites that are, most definitely, overpriced.

Choose carefully where you take it for maintenance as well.

Some maintenance organisations are top quality with fair pricing whereas others are a complete rip-off (and not necessarily that great).

Broadlands

28th Nov 2015, 23:22

This aircraft was used as a club trainer but sold because of the cost of keeping it airborne. Looks pretty much the same as 15years ago.

Bob Upanddown

30th Nov 2015, 09:33

Get a trusted (Grumman experienced) engineer to look at it first but if you can buy a sound, reliable little steed for that price, go for it.

Two ways I look at ownership.
200 hours at £80 an hour equals £16k. Add fuel and maybe still cheaper than hiring. Then you could throw it away and get another. As long as you look at aircraft ownership as an expense rather than an investment, you won't go wrong.

If you think it is a keeper, just remember that if it needs paint, avionics and interior, any money you spend on those won't be recovered (may be a little, but no where near what you spend). There is no financial incentive to fit a GPS or whatever.

I think the AA5B is undervalued compared to what they would go for in the USA, no idea why.

CSCOT

30th Nov 2015, 19:00

Here's a thought.

E.g.
Cirrus SR22 G2 GTS aircraft for sale - GBP 126,522 - F-HEXP - AirCraft24.com (http://www.aircraft24.co.uk/singleprop/cirrus/sr22-g2-gts--xi123311.htm?fbacklink=sr22--xm10304--xp2.htm)

10 Members: £15k each buy-in.

Total Revenue: £150k

A/C Cost: £125k

Surplus for Initial Costs: £25k

Monthly Contribution Fee (MCF): £149.00 Per Member paid by direct debit.

Total Annual Revenue from MCF: £17.9k

MCF used to cover MIHSF costs (Maintenance, Insurance, Hangarage, Surplus Fund)

Cost Charged Per Flight Hour: £0.00 (Dry)

Fuel Used Paid By Member Flying.

Mobile booking and maintenance management app.

Group Aim: Shared risk, shared costs, reduced-cost flying for members who have bought-in.

£0.00 per hour flying but with fixed monthly fee encourages flying - the more you fly the more notional ROI each member gets. Per hour charge is a barrier / discouragement.

Minimum experience and training level required for members for everyone's benefit. Individual members liable for cost of damage or insurance excess for anything that happens on their watch.

This may well be pretty pie in the sky. You need to remember that I am pretty new to the world of GA, and the associated costs and economics - not an ideal base from which to think about such things but everyone needs to starts somewhere. And it is only personal musings. Thoughts I can splurge out of my brain on a forum to either get shot down, or not.

It's worth saying however that I have put groups together in this and similar models for yachts and motor boats, which is my business.

No personal financial gain for me - just flying, when buy-in money is spent, it's mentally written off as a leisure spend so no expectation of future recoup.

Formula may be flawed in an aviation context because I simply do not have;

a). Experience with reality of actual costs;
b). Understanding of market concentration;
c). Contacts.

The particular example linked above is obviously closer to TBO but it's the method rather than specific aircraft I'm talking about. Find a different type or costed a/c and drop in your own figures

Anyway like I say. Brain splurge, and I defer to the more experienced for comment...

abgd

30th Nov 2015, 19:32

Do you need to get lots of IMC and night experience for your hour building?

If not, you could pick up a 1-seater permit aircraft like a Mono for 6-7k and benefit from vastly lower fuel costs than you would get from running a 4-seater. If you wanted to invest the savings into a few hours on an IMC equipped aircraft then I'm sure you'd have change left over.

I bought a Turbulent which, despite a glowing pre-buy inspection turned out to have a number of issues. Had it been certified, every penny would have been wasted as it would have been totally un-economical to fix. As things are, fixing it has been time-consuming but hasn't broken the bank. It's also been quite rewarding, and I certainly learned more about the technical side of aircraft than I would have through owning a certified machine.

I can't see that owning a certified machine makes sense unless you want it as a business (e.g. to rent out) or you need the IMC/Night capability.

rifruffian

30th Nov 2015, 19:46

I started my flying with a low cost airplane just like you are considering...(that was in 1960's) and just a few years ago enters a shared ownership as you now contemplate..
Both arrangements produced cost effective fun flying. The main difference between the two arrangements was when the shared ownership aircraft sustained damage.....it took an unreasonably long time to restore to serviceability....(due to several people each with their own agenda)...

AN2 Driver

30th Nov 2015, 21:55

Fully depends what you want from that airplane. I would not think so negatively of it. Tigers are not that often on the market and then a LOT more expensive usually.

If you want it as a pure VFR tourer? The Tiger is great for that. 140 kt cruise, decent payload and range, they usually are much more expensive. The advantages of the Tiger are that they are relatively economical in terms of what they need in maintenance: fixed gear and prop will do that. It won't set you back more than a PA28 but it is a good 20-30 kts faster!

You would need a full pre-buy with an experienced Grumman mechanic. But you need that with any plane you buy.

From the add: I am not a fan of such adds which really don't say much. The general numbers look not too bad, 500 hours on the engine, yea ok if it is what it's meant to portray (500 hrs since full overhaul or remanufacture) and it does look quite decent from the outside, inside a tad challenged. IF those figures are ok, then that is one quite decent airframe.

Avionics: The Trigg is good news. The audio panel is old but trusty. Whether that DME is still useable, don't know. The 2 nav/coms need eventual replacement. Don't know how long you can still fly with 720 channels, but for VFR, you don't need an expensive set.

What is "nice" about a plane like that is that you can eventually make it your own and put there what you want rather than be annoyed about what someone else bought. For a VFR plane, you could simply get one of those 8.33 Garmin sets which cost about 2.5k $, or you could look around for one or two GNS430 to replace those kings. VFR, a GPS695 with a panel mount can do the trick together with one new nav com. These are upgrades which won't break the bank and will do the job.

AP: For this airplane I'd recommend a S-Tec system 30. That would set you back around 20k installed.

As a first airplane for VFR touring, I'd try to get the price down a tad and give it a go (provided that all important pre-buy inspection does not bring up any show stoppers.) Tigers are fun airplanes. Then see that you can eventually upgrade those nav coms and have a great time flying it.

IF the plane is properly airworthy, the engine really 500 hrs since overhaul and the pre-buy checks out, try to get it for 15k. Upgraded those planes have asking prices of around 40k easily, so you could safely spend some 20k to make it yours and have good chances to resell eventually.

my 2 cents.

And of course: It kind of looks out for a pilot named "Gerry" ;)

9 lives

1st Dec 2015, 02:30

For this airplane I'd recommend a S-Tec system 30. That would set you back around 20k installed.

On a 15k basic plane form early experience building? Auto pilot? I disagree!

While dining with another well known poster here in a fine English pub earlier in the year, we mused about autopilots in VFR GA aircraft. I mentioned to him that in 7000 hours of flying, my total use of an autopilot would not exceed 40 hours. He laughed, and said it was just about the same for him.

I agree that in IFR, single pilot, in tough weather, an autopilot can be a saver, and even a requirement for some operations. But in a light VFR tourer, a waste on money. The whole point of the aircraft is a platform to build skill and experience, so to pay a huge cost for equipment to prevent gaining this hands on flying experience seems silly to me....

Bob Upanddown

1st Dec 2015, 10:14

Tiger is great for that. 140 kt cruise, decent payload and range, they usually are much more expensive.

I have never flown a Tiger that does 140kts. 120kts is more realistic and have flown many Tigers.

Upgraded those planes have asking prices of around 40k

Only when "bargains" like this one are not for sale. The problem with types where only a few are for sale at one time is that just one for sale at a low price like this skews the market into thinking all of the type should be as cheap.

Never, ever, think you will make money from upgrading. Upgrade because you want to.

i agree, spending money on an autopilot is a waste of time. I suspect that the seller doesn't know that it has an autopilot (usually they had a Century 1 which most people think is just a turn and slip indicator).

Maoraigh1

1st Dec 2015, 10:18

If you can, go to look at it yourself, and go through the logs. Then find your engineer. Use your engineer, not the local one. We made a profit on sending our local guy from Inverness to Cornwall, on work to be done before we bought. But you can't afford to do this unless you are likely to buy. We'd looked at several planes, talked to our engineer, and had enough information to make a NO decision.

ChickenHouse

1st Dec 2015, 11:24

AP: For this airplane I'd recommend a S-Tec system 30. That would set you back around 20k installed.

These times are over since Genesys took over the S-Tec systems. I doubt anything below 25k will be possible, suspect more to 30 ...

RatherBeFlying

1st Dec 2015, 15:45

While the autopilot is a nice to have, the last Tiger I flew did not fly hands-off.

That didn't stop me from flying 3+ hours on a moonless night.

The price comes out to $32K Canadian, but the ferry plus minimum $10K Transport Canada Import Airworthiness makes it much less a bargain in Canada. A yank could do well.

As for ferry or cross channel, they float :p

9 lives

1st Dec 2015, 16:09

last Tiger I flew did not fly hands-off.

Both Grumman and deHavilland, for my experience.

For the convenience of the pilot, they (as all aircraft) are fitted with flight controls, so hands off flying is not required.

If you want to log the time, fly the plane!

AN2 Driver

1st Dec 2015, 18:37

@Step Turn

I mentioned to him that in 7000 hours of flying, my total use of an autopilot would not exceed 40 hours. He laughed, and said it was just about the same for him.

Matter of taste I presume. I upgraded my airplane with an S-Tec 55x and an Aspen, as I wanted that functionality. It makes longer trips simply a LOT more relaxing. Even though my airplane would fly hands off, it is simply a lot easier to have "George" take the controls while I sort my charts, have a sip of water or do my checklists.

But in a light VFR tourer, a waste on money. The whole point of the aircraft is a platform to build skill and experience, so to pay a huge cost for equipment to prevent gaining this hands on flying experience seems silly to me....

I did not tell him to buy an AP. I said if he wanted one, as many suggested, that would be my choice for this airplane. While my experience on the AA5 is limited, I recall reading a review about the Grummans which did suggest that they are quite lively and do profit from a dual axis AP. Most of them had the single axis Century I installed if I remember right.

I have never flown a Tiger that does 140kts. 120kts is more realistic and have flown many Tigers.

Bob, we are both talking TAS, right? 120 kts would be realistic for a Cheetah rather.

In this POH for the 1977-79 Tiger (http://www.jasonblair.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Grumman-AA5B-Tiger-1977-79-POH.pdf) on pages 5.19-22 the value for 75% at 8000 ft is 140 kts. Ok, that is probably the top speed at WOT, but that is how normally most fixed pitch prop airplanes fly. I'd settle for 130-140 kts Cruise TAS in most cases, unless the airplane is flown at low power. In terms of range, there is not much to be gained by using lower power settings. I see the difference in range between max speed and max range around 40 NM...

Alt: PWR: KTAS: Range (plus 45' VFR reserve)
8000 75% 139 550NM
12000 75% 131 580NM
12000 55% 121 592NM
(Page 5-24)

In an airplane like that, flying "Eco Cruise" really doesn't gain you much range or economy. These planes are best flown at wide open throttle and optimum mixture. The Tiger is a pretty fast machine for the fact that it is a fixed gear / fixed prop machine. And 550 NM should be enough for most VFR trips.

Never, ever, think you will make money from upgrading. Upgrade because you want to.

I agree. But it is useful to know what a fully equipped one usually costs.

These times are over since Genesys took over the S-Tec systems. I doubt anything below 25k will be possible, suspect more to 30 ...

Interesting. Genesys do not carry a price list. Last year when I checked at the Aero the System 30 was around $13000. I paid €5k for my installation of the 55x, which is quite a bit more complex. So unless Genesys have upped the prices massively, I'd guess €20k should do for a system 30.

9 lives

2nd Dec 2015, 02:55

A friend installed an S-Tec 30 in his 182 amphibian. It works well, though I hardly ever use it. I believe that it was around CDN$30k, so the 20k Euros sounds about correct. Massively out of proportion in a sub $100k aircraft in my opinion.

If the aircraft comes with the avionics which support the use of an autopilot (full IFR +), it probably cost more than $100k. Or, you're going to have to add another $30k in avionics to get the "empty radio stack" plane to that point.

The aforementioned 182 received a totally new panel, with all new top of the line radios for full IFR, glass panel, and the S-Tec30. I believe that passed the $100K mark by the time it was installed and running well.

AN2 Driver

2nd Dec 2015, 09:16

It really comes down what you want to do with an airplane.

This AA5 looks to me as if it could be used VFR as is (depending when they are mandating 8.33 for VFR) for quite some time as, what the OP said, time builder and inexpensive Burger Run shuttle. For flights of up to 2 hours or so, going purely VFR, what else do you need. If anything, get a hand held GPS and mount it someplace and be done. Any Garmin 495/695 or Ipad/Android based GPS will do that job nicely.

It is however a much more capable airplane than that.

Basically, the AA5 is the fastest fixed gear/prop certified plane I am aware of, it will most of the time fly similar speeds than some retracables at much less cost. Also with the range of 500+NM it is quite suitable for travel in Europe.

So it is all down to what you want to do. If you plan on using this airplane to its full capacity, you can fly up to 5 hours in it. In flights like that, an AP is quite desirable.

The other bit with airplanes with "avionic museums" is, that they can be regarded as a "white sheet" on which to develop what you really want. Because, what most people really want is mostly not out there. Many airplanes which are even IFR these days carry equipment which will need the same kind of upgrades than a full replacement, but at a much higher initial cost.

If that way "MY" project, I´d probably go out and look for a 530/430W combo, S-Tec 30 AP and Aspen PFD. That would leave this airplane as an excellent tourer with even IFR capability if needed.

If I was only doing VFR and staying there, I´d put a new radio, buy a 2nd hand GPS695 and panel mount that and think about getting that AP for more comfortable travel.

I did the same to my own airplane, a Mooney M20C. My panel today looks like this:
http://www.hbdwc.ch/Newpanel2.jpg

I am extremely happy flying this 50 year old airframe in this configuration. It will go maybe 15 kts faster than an AA5 and 100 NM further, but other than that the AA5 can do the same missions. I was looking around for one at the time, if I had seen this one, I´d probably have had a close look at it. It would basically do a similar job but a tad cheaper due to the fixed gear and prop.

Pilot DAR

2nd Dec 2015, 12:33

If the OP presents:

So as a newbie low time student perusing the web I come across this. Seems to good to be true, so it must be.

.....about a 15,000 plane, is a prolonged discussion about 30K autopilots and a full IFR radio stack not thread drift?

AN2 Driver

2nd Dec 2015, 12:48

.about a 15,000 plane, is a prolonged discussion about 30K autopilots and a full IFR radio stack not thread drift?

Possibly. That is why I listed what I'd do for especcially that purpose. Which can start by "nothing" to "minimum upgrade" to conform to EASA laws if applicable.

So let's ask the other question then.

As is: 720 channel radio and Mode S Transponder, 2x VOR, 1x ILS and a non TSO'd DME. 500 hrs on the engine. Provided a pre-buy inspection unearths no show stoppers:

Now is that an airplane which the OP can buy, sit inside and fly off and do what the original question was?

Or does he need any form of upgrade pretty sharpishly (8.33, where is that required for VFR)?

EDIT: I today got the information that 8.33 will be required as of January 1st 2018 EASA wide, so that settles that. We have 2016 for all practical purposes so that AA5 can fly on as it is until then and then needs to get a 8.33 radio.

If nothing is required, it could really be a nice time builder airframe with potential to become more than that eventually.

Clearly my intention was not to tell him he has to upgrade it to IFR, but simply to show possible options for different types of usage. From where I am sitting, this little AA5 could be flown as is with possibly a handheld GPS if so desired.

But IF he finds that after flying it for a while, it could benfit from some improvements, I wanted to give him some ideas on what the possibilities are.

WhiskeyPapa

5th Dec 2015, 10:05

If the airframe is clean and the engine looks good, it could be worth it. A sorted out Tiger would bring more money than the asking for this plane. I would say it's worth a close look by an engineer familiar with the type. But make sure you have the resources available in addition to purchase price to get it sorted (and that might include an engine overhaul). My experience suggests you won't discover everything you need to know in the pre buy.

Don't forget the cost of 8.33. The fact that it has Mode S might be a good sign. It might mean the owner is not flat broke and has been trying to maintain the plane. (I suspect we'll see a number of VFR planes come on to the market this year as people throw in the towel over required upgrades.)

I'm speaking as someone in the middle stages of sorting out a plane bought "cheaply." If you can get it airworthy for VFR, you can upgrade it in stages as finances allow and fly it in the meantime.

Had I not bought the Rallye, I would actually be looking at this one. The advantage of a Tiger is that the upper limit of price for a sorted one is higher than that of many other planes.

AN2 Driver

6th Dec 2015, 02:13

Don't forget the cost of 8.33.

The units available are actually not that bad. There is a Garmin one for about $2.5k, Trigg also have one at less I believe and there are more.

What can be worth it, especcially in a panel like this one, is to maybe look for a GNS430 or even 530 second hand, as they are coming down in price too. VFR does not need WAAS, so there will be quite a few of those around when people upgrade to the new GTN series. But most of the 430/530 could even be upgraded to WAAS If necessary, i.e. if there were to be a ADS-B mandate at some stage. That combination would work with the Trigg.

(I suspect we'll see a number of VFR planes come on to the market this year as people throw in the towel over required upgrades.)

That would be a pity. People should not get totally spazed out on this matter. Mode S was also considered by some as the death blow for GA and it ended up not being that. 8.33 can be solved relatively economical too. The trouble often is about such things that people will bring up the most ridiculous amounts that an upgrade like that costs rather than acually checking with someone who has done it.

horizon flyer

6th Dec 2015, 12:17

My thoughts are Plane Trading are a above board company and price realistically not an owner hoped for price and do not trade in full basket cases.
So this AA5 will be priced for what it is, a usable VFR hour builder.

If you want a GPS buy something you can take home and program 430/530s are a pain as you have to sit with engine running and program them. Garmin missed the plot on them, as it does have a spare memory slot. Could have designed them to program on a PC/Mac/other they have the training software.

ChickenHouse

6th Dec 2015, 18:43

430/530 are not that bad and most of the time you have to program, or reprogram anyways at clearance. If you want "home story programming" go for a WAAS version, which allows programming at your PC@home and transfer via the PC interface.

Bob Upanddown

11th Dec 2015, 17:37

Has the OP made any enquiries or had someone look at it? I am just interested to hear if this really is a bargain or a crock of...

When you consider that there are people in the USA paying around £10,000 to put a new STC'd engine cowling on these aircraft, you have to wonder why aircraft in the UK are so cheap if this is a good one.

AN2 Driver

12th Dec 2015, 14:24

Aircraft are cheap because there is hardly any market.

They can also be too cheap, if the seller lacks confidence from looking at the current adds and concluding that his plane is not worth anything... have seen that too.

Frankly, you can't judge any add, any plane and any owner unless you have had expert advice on the plane in question. And before you buy, there is that all important pre-buy inspection. Without it, forget even looking at planes.

From afar, this AA5 looks like it is not badly priced for what it has to offer, in a normal marketplace it could make much more, but this is no normal market anymore. This plane is looking for someone who either wants to fly cheap as is (and put in a Trigg Radio in 2 years time) or someone who has been looking for a Tiger to make his own.

But without a serious inquiry, this is simply a game of guessing.

Bob Upanddown

13th Dec 2015, 11:58

Aircraft are cheap because there is hardly any market.

That's a sweeping statement which is just not right.

There is a small market in the UK but that's not why they are cheap.

This particular trader is, in a small market, selling an aircraft cheap for a quick return (watch how quickly his stock turns over compared to more established brokers). It is just unfortunate that people will look at other aircraft they are buying and expect to pay the same. It is a question of knowing the price, not the value.
M&S have had to compete on price whilst quality of their products has dropped to compensate for the lower price. Those who want quality have gone elsewhere. M&S knickers are cheap but only because they have made them cheap to compete. The market for knickers is huge.