Schllc

That isn't really relevant to my comment. People that don't buy damage history airplanes, don't care about the time or the number of owners. They just move on. That being said, the value has already taken the lick so now its just down to the time it takes to move, and with less prospects willing to consider, it would stand to reason it will take longer. A friend of mine in real estate told me a clever analogy that is true for anything you are selling. You have two levers, time or money. Pulling one directly affects the other. Want it to sell faster pull the price down. Want it to take longer be prepared to wait.... I don't personally think damage history is always a huge problem on a plane, and yes the older a plane gets the more likely it will have some, but if some of the buyers out there avoid it because its a mental hurdle they refuse to accept, it is no less real.

The price ding for damage history is real, but as described, if you get the discount when you purchase, you give it when you sell it so it’s a wash. The harder to quantify challenge with damage history, is that if there are say 10 given people at any time looking for “your plane”. Half, if not more, will rule it out of potential planes to buy immediately. Which obviously severely limits your market. The psychology of the purchase discrimination Is very real, so they are harder to sell. The first guy buying the plane after the damage has the benefit of the first hand account of events. The second guy is here say, and so on… But there is always a buyer out there, so you just wait.

Absolutely noticeable difference with fine wires. easier hot starts, smoother lop, and smoother running. I have run massive on an acclaim, they work but as soon as I could replace them with FW, I did so.

I wrote this very early in in this thread but deleted it without posting because as I read it, it gave me pause… “The one thing AI lacks, and will always lack is judgement. AI will only be able to access data. Not just data, but data that a human has conveyed at some point, through their judgement, and judgement is very difficult, if not impossible to impart, because it isn’t finite. its cumulative and a function of conscious and unconscious experience, processed without awareness, manifesting in action.” I deleted it because I couldn’t, and still can’t say with certainty that absence of judgement is a good thing or a bad thing…. Because it is both. Maybe I’m an old, stubborn anachronism, maybe I am scared, I don’t want computers replacing human judgement, I prefer to take my chances. Makes me think of the Rush song “Red Barchetta”. Seems pretty prescient these days.

There are procedural things that have to happen in order for this to go smoothly. I have done it in several planes. Paul Maxwell at Maxwell’s knows how to do it for sure, the avionics guy at premier knows his stuff but is a cranky sob, and they are the most crooked and predatory shop I have ever had the misfortune of dealing with. I know if there is a 345 transponder, all updates have to be loaded to the transponder first using the usb dongle, it should not be done through the g1000. the issue of the storm scope and other feature not working is 100% just lack of attention to detail by the shop doing the install. I have learned the hard way you have to test all of those feature on the ground before leaving. the upside is most of them will not require reinstall. Garmin is probably part of the problem, but again, I lay most of this on the FAA for making innovation prohibitively expensive. good luck!

I think its beautiful. Why wouldn't a manufacturer incorporate aerodynamic improvements like this into the plane?

You are delusional if you think the FAA would permit actual progress in a reasonable time frame.

Lol, I read a bit of the responses about why it was still functioning and one answer was notably absent…. None of it was made in china.

All valid, however flying isn’t all about getting from point A to point B in GA. Neither is driving or boating. There is an element of the spirit of adventure that is uniquely human in all these activities. All at a level AI will never be able to compute, much less comprehend. There will likely be a day where the person who actually wants to pilot an aircraft using their wits and skill is a tiny minority, but as long as the human element exists, so will that spirit. I have a good friend that I have done many adventure with over the years. We were at a gathering a few years ago and his wife was telling a story about a camper jackknife accident they had years ago. One of our friends commented, “Wow, stuff always happens to you guys”, she thought about it for a moment and said “it’s because we do shit!, not a lot of danger sitting on your couch at home!”. Flying has risks, as does anything fun or adventurous. AI likely has its place in commercial activity and perhaps for those who prefer to rely on a computer rather than their own skills. I sure hope the freedom to choose between the two is eternal.

AI will likely be flying freight and other non manned flights sooner than we think. There are a lot of valid and emotional concerns about flying humans, but that will likely happen sooner than we think as well. Entire generations of people are growing up right now, which are more than comfortable letting computers do everything and anything without a thought. Time will tell if this advances or regresses society… If you haven’t watched the movie “Idiocracy”, I highly recommend it. It is crass, but amazingly prescient for a 20 year old movie…

I use the pedals on very short final, only to align the plane to the runway before touchdown, otherwise i am crabbing. Isn’t otherwise technically a slip?

Does this actually mean what it sounds like, turning the plane using only the rudder? Why would one do this? What I mean is that doesn’t even really make sense to me in the context of an approach. I suppose that I use the trim for descents because I use VS or FLC, but usually by the initial approach fix I am hand flying so any pitch changes are primarily throttle. Am I missing or misunderstanding what this means? Why would anyone advise turning with rudder only? Is there some benefit at times to this method?

I agree with the opinion about the purchase price being irrelevant to a point. An airplane is a discretionary purchase, and it typically makes little to no financial sense whatsoever. But… Isn’t that what we work for? To buy things for our pleasure and enjoyment? At the rate planes are being damaged they get more scarce everyday. Historically they (single engine pistons)are not assets that depreciate, and this isn’t conjecture or opinion. Even at adjusted dollar value, most are selling for more that they did when new. They are more like large boats in that they cost more to own and operate than to purchase, and as long as you can survive a downturn and keep the plane maintained, your chances of losing money on the sale price, compared to purchase is slim. I like to get deals as much as anyone, but at some point I want what I want. I have a real good friend who is a lifelong bachelor and was a firefighter in New York. He lived in this tiny co-op in New York and I made him a piece of furniture for a gift one year. When I visited him to deliver it I noticed how tired and run down his little kitchen was. I asked him if he wanted to let me help renovate it for him. He thought about it for a minute and said “nahh, I only have 12-14 years left here”. I love to tell this story to clients because, in retrospect, what it taught me is that quality of life means different things to different people. I look, I shop, I research, I understand what prices are doing and when I see the one I want I buy it. I try not to overpay, and I don’t get overly hung up on getting the best price ever. Having it to enjoy is what that delta is worth. To each their own.

I think sometimes t’s just a way to list the plane without paying the fee to put it in the for sale section. Im not accusing the OP of doing that but sometimes …

Some pictures would help, but it sounds well equipped with avionics, and certainly cosmetically upgraded.

I know we are somewhat a vocal bunch, but how many actual members are there to this site? it certainly seems significant enough for an owners group, hoping to shore up its ranks, would frequent and engage. but maybe there aren’t as many of us as I would like to believe….

I started looking with about 20 hours towards my ppl. thinking I was going to get something cheap I could pay cash for and spend about 50k. After a month of looking and learning, i ended up spending almost 5 times that and had to finance, and I have never once even come close to regretting that choice. Lots of people telling you the same thing, buy the best plane you can afford. Fixer uppers in aviation are not for the faint of heart. They are nothing like an old house, car or boat. You are captive to a system that is expensively frustrating on a good day! Make sure you find a plane that is flying often, well maintained and is the best you can afford.

There is, always has been, and always will be a demand for finely crafted, hand built things that people want. The problem isn’t how long it takes to build or how much it costs, the problem is making people want to buy. This is where cirrus excelled. They created their market with a culture. It involves financing, training, tax consulting, leasebacks and a community. They brought people who didn’t even think about airplanes into the fold to become owners. They made people want them.

Why can’t they separate the gear ups in appropriate categories? Mechanical failure and pilot error. I would put money that the mechanicals failure is less than 5%. The Feckless Aviation Administration needs to keep up its well earned reputation. no point in drilling down to those pesky relevant details. Efficacy is a four letter word down there….

Looks like a well cared forand frequently flown bird. Its customary and best to post a price. Also, rockets are wildly varying with UL, may be helpful to post that as well.

This^^^^^^ A good friend of mine bought a TBM 850 a few years ago for 1.7. it was on its first engine and at 2500 hours when it went in for annual in December. When he dropped it off he was quoted 160k ish. 200k+ later it’s almost done. no major items broken or wrong just timed items and inspections required. not even a hot section included in this. that is not something the average single owner would want to tolerate. lot more items on pressurized turbines than pistons. (No it’s not 135, it’s a part 91)

What I meant was when the cheapest new certified aircraft costs more than the average home in the country, it isn’t a hobby for the average joe. I don’t know where the point in quantity efficiency is realized it will never be high enough to make certified planes for 300k. I happen to believe the customers for an 1.5-2 million sexy, fast, quiet high UL plane are out there, they just haven’t been enticed/educated/sold like you said, you don’t need tens of thousands. You need low hundreds. they are out there. people don’t buy Ferraris because they are safe or new tech materials. they buy them because they are handmade, exclusive, rare and sexy. just like a Mooney! PS. Not really disagreeing with anyone on this post so far, we are all just spitballing and unless one of us wants to pony up 100 million we will never know whose idea is best!

Aviation is not an average guy’s game anymore. Given the small quantities, litigiousness of our society, and the FAA, there is no such thing as cheap in aviation. (I just paid $3,000 for 12 spark plugs). If you can’t find a way to interest people with a few million in disposable income laying around you have no hope in selling anything. No one wants to buy the Yugo of aviation.

Commercial glider? I would never even have thought that was even a thing… Are there commercial glider ops?

I hate to break it to you, but you have an incurable disease. I can spot it because I am also afflicted.