Will Samurai Husky Solo?

[Samurai Husky]

18 hours ago, gsengle said:

So remembering the first mega-thread, I'm curious, how much has your thinking on owning a light aircraft, your mission, Mooneys etc, evolved?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Its changed a lot. Though probably more or informed on why i want something and then asking my self 'is this needed' and secondly how will this affect my ability to fly the plane. Case in point, I used to see IFR as a way of just getting through the marine layer, now i see it as more of a insurance discount and shouldnt even be thinking of flying IMC.

Im not really looking at speed of the plane anymore, I am looking at the useful load/payload first. It just so happens that they kind of go hand and hand, but at least the starting point is different. I pretty much have it narrowed down to 4 plane types for various reasons. I wont be ready to say 'this is the one' until i can actually fly a Mooney, sitting in one just isnt enough at this point in the game. 

I never really thought of this when i first started to fly, originally it would be me and the dogs. But now that i am getting close to PPL i can see instances where i fly down to AZ and pick up my Dad and nephew to go camping somewhere. My nephew is 6 and wants to be a firefighter..... I want to convert him to a pilot  But in all seriousness, useful load has become a larger factor than speed. Second on that list is distance, last is speed. 

So this is what its broken down to (in no particular order); 

1. Mooney J 1983+ - What i like: Its affordable for me, I can buy one thats around a 100k redo the inside, redo the panel and still feel comfortable with the price of the plane to fly it. It is crazy fuel economical, which would lead me more to just going somewhere with out thinking about cost (as 9gal/hr will get you pretty far) and with fuel prices going up, who knows what avgas will cost in the future.

What i dont like: Payload is a little tight for me and 2 other people. I also had a problem when i sat in an acclaim of not being able to see over the cowl and that makes me nervous; I am sure the view changes when you are flying, but really need to experience that before passing judgement. Im also a little worried about getting into a plane with little 'technical; knowledge and then not being able to spot potential problems. Some of the things i read on this site about leaks, engines going out etc have me worried. Lastly, there will be a heavy transition period that might take a while before i feel safe flying one especially long distance.

2. Ovation 2: What i like: Useful load over 1000#, nice glass interior; Plenty of room inside.

What i dont like: Its hard to get stuff in the cargo area. Its not easy getting from the back seat into the cargo area (ie dogs); It burns slightly more fuel, but still doable. Even with the glass, getting ADS-B and WAAS could be a problem as few planes had the upgrades done that make them ready for that. Lastly, there will be a heavy transition period that might take a while before i feel safe flying one (plus same issue above as to having little technical knowledge of the plane and what to look for prior to flying); 

3. Cirrus SR22-G3 Turbo

What I like: 950# of useful load. I already know how to fly it. I found a 'cargo conversion' STC to remove the back seats for the doggies. It does have the parashoot system, which gives me peace of mind, especially on long trips. Cost: Its cheaper (about about 60k) than a NA Cirrus. Can go high if i had to. Already comes with a really nice glass system that i am already trained on. I already have a CISP to train me in it for moving up from a SR20 to 22 and IFR. The one I am looking at has a R9 system in it, which has redundant AHARS and all sorts of IFR goodies. 

What i dont like: Burns fuel like a mofo (16-18gh). Has a questionably history on burning up cylinders (ie your doing a top before OH); Has a history of burning up exhaust systems (though i guess some of this has been fixed with a new manifold system); Initial cost is high.

4. Cirrus SR22-G3 NA

Pros: Over 1000# useful load. Doesn't have the same turbo problems as mentioned above. Can keep my CFI and get through IFR, Again parashoot is a nice to have especially going long distance by myself.

Cons: Initial cost is way more than a Turbo (starting 325k); Doesn't come with the latest avionics unless you pay way more (350k+); Fuel consumption is still not that great 12-14gal/hr but on par with the O2.

So far no plane i have found jumps out at me as a must have. All of them have their pros and cons; At this point i feel like i would be safer in a SR22 as it handles a lot like the SR20 and since i already have 45 or so hours in a 20, the transition will be a lot smoother. However from an ownership perspective and not wanting to go bankrupt, the J seems like a lot more 'logical' choice but comes with a heavy training requirement.

Dont take anything in this post as chiseled in stone. Its just my thought process which may or my not change in the next few months.

[Samurai Husky]

29 minutes ago, carusoam said:

Dual XC is normal prior to solo XC.  Could be just the words being used.  The 'long XC' is the real test of all things related to normal travel in a GA plane.

At this point in the training, the expenses are often high.  Burning 15gph and returning to the place you started can be tough on some finances.

Best regards,

-a-

We already did dual XC; Now we are just doing a check ride XC. Im guessing it will simulate a PPL check ride where i do a plan and we divert etc with out the instructor saying anything.

From a cost perspective, its actually getting cheaper solo means i dont have to pay for the CFI; The plane i am renting is already 'wet' so the fuel costs are baked in.

[HRM]

I remember my 'Long XC' like it was yesterday.

Needed to fly KSFB (home base) to KFPR, then on to KVNC. I flew down to KFPR and enroute I lost a mag. I was able to land and they called my CFI. After I waited an hour or few, he flew in with another Cessna (and a mag to fix the one I flew down in) for me to complete my XC.

By the time all this happened it was getting late in the afternoon, but I took off anyway and headed across the great (narrow) State of Florida. As I neared Lake Okeechobee, my mind flashed to a newspaper article that had appeared the week before in the Orlando Sentinel about how alligators were making a comeback and that Lake O was full of them.

At that point I decided not to cross over the middle of the lake as planned (keep in mind I was on my second A/C), even though it's average depth is 9', and skirted it instead.

This put me into KVNC after dark and that was quite exciting until I remembered that you turn the lights on by keying the mike. I don't know where I stayed that night, but I got up bright and early to fly back. On the way, a fighter jet from MacDill AFB flew underneath me at high speed such that I could see the top of the jet with perfect clarity.

When I landed back at KSFB my instructor came running up and I asked him, "Has the FAA called yet?" Then, "You should have seen my night landing," to which he exclaimed, "But you don't know how to land at night!" 

I do now 

[bonal]

Sounds like your getting it all sorted out.  Once again the advantage of a slow trainer building time is easier since you don't go far from home you can get 5 hours and never lose sight of your home field. Juuuuuust kidding.

[Samurai Husky]

19 minutes ago, HRM said:

When I landed back at KSFB my instructor came running up and I asked him, "Has the FAA called yet?" Then, "You should have seen my night landing," to which he exclaimed, "But you don't know how to land at night!" 

I do now 

We did 2 night landing sessions. Including landing and taking off with out a landing light (that was a bit freaky) and the most fun one... Landing at an unlit airstrip, we only did one of these to prove a point, but it was soooooo much fun. My instructor is like, see the 2 Vasi? aim right of that... The whole time im like 'where's the runway'.... Eventually you just 'see' it and its like 'oh there it is, crap i got like 10 seconds to get on the centerline and readjust my speed/altitude. Overall it was a lesson in why its a bad idea to land at an unfamiliar unlit airport....

But yea, turning on the lights is fun too. I was surprised how long they take to warm up. I through they would be like LED's and just turn on, but no, it took a good 3 minutes for them to heat up and get bright... Maybe it was just the airport i was at.

I need to post a picture of landing at SJC last night. Its like landing on a christmas tree

So i have night landings at 4 different airports; Turns out Im not bad at it, though Palo Alto was challenging, i was always flaring high at that one, might have been just because i was getting tired as we had already flown to 3 other airports to do landings.

[Dave Colangelo]

2 hours ago, Samurai Husky said:

Im not really looking at speed of the plane anymore, I am looking at the useful load/payload first. It just so happens that they kind of go hand and hand, but at least the starting point is different.

There are plenty of planes out there that have great useful loads and are not rocket ships. Have you considered something like a Saratoga, Cherokee 6, Bonanza, Piper Comanche, or the like. Many have useful loads into the 900 Lbs range with full tanks. In the larger of those birds you can usually remove some of the seats (ex. back row of the toga) which leaves plenty of space for dogs. As a matter of fact the local Pilots n' Paws uses a cherokee/lance (basically an early toga) as its main plane. Ill admit that it seems like you want a newer plane which is totally fair but there are some togas that were made well in to the 2000's and the Bo is still in production. Much like Brooklyn any panel can be gentrified. The toga and Bo will be significantly better dog planes for both entry and exit ability. Just some thoughts, keep up the work you will get there soon! 

[bonal]

Which leads us back to the C182 lots of load easy in and out and good space plus rear seat removal makes like a mini van

[Samurai Husky]

I looked at the Bonanza's pretty hard as some one from the twin forums said the same thing; after looking at one, i think it too big of a plane for me right now. Im trying to find that happy medium between eco, distance, payload and not being so big that i never want to fly it except on special occasion. If i had to put a 'car' type on a Bonanza, its more or less like a SUV and i dont see my self taking it out to just fly around in the pattern.

The Cherokee looks interesting since it has a 1400# useful load, but again, that more of a SUV then a hamburger plane. It would be something that i would consider renting if i had to take a bunch of people somewhere. The club as a dakota for rent for 185/hr wet. So for some missions that may make more sense. 

I guess this is where my thinking has changed. Before i wanted a twin, or something big, but now when i think about it, those are not the type of planes you can just jump in and go for a hamburger in, or fly around a pattern for fun in. Last night was a good example, it was wonderful weather. Calm winds, nice and cool after a hot day. I could really see my self throwing the dogs in the back and just jumping from airport to airport practicing night landings. Even the tower at SJC was laughing with the pilots. 

"Tower.... what gate am i at again, i'm having a brain freeze"

'Southwest 302 your at gate 22'

"Thanks tower... its like 3AM my time"

"LOL, i hear you, unfortunately i dont get to use that excuse up here"

"roger that tower, thank for looking out for us"

Different at night... thats for sure.

I know a lot of people buy a plane then 3 years later trade in or trade up, but I am more a steady guy. I want to buy something that for the next 8 years or more I will be happy with and if the mission changes, it will be close enough to fit it. My dogs are getting up their in age, i would venture to say that they wont be around in 8 years  so i am trying to keep that in mind too.

Which is why its really down to the cirrus or the J. If a SR22-G3 NA came up for under 250k then i would probably end up going with that. The turbo is only a consideration because with a 60k difference, you can replace a lot of cylinders and  exhaust pipes. The J i see as the best all around utility plane since the seats fold down, good mileage and the initial cost is cheap enough that i can put a lot of money into it and make it 'my' plane but still keep it around for a long long time. Its actually the posts on this site that have me thinking like that since there have been plenty of 'i am completely happy with my J, but now i need something bigger'. At the same time, going long distance by myself in a J seems to be a bit scarier as i dont have the safety blanket of the 'oh $hit handle'; and being a low time pilot having that red handle can make up for a lot of mistakes (not all, but a lot); An i do value my life more than 200k

The 182 I look at time and again, but like the J better. Just my opinion for now. Again, i really need to fly a J before i can say anything.

 

 

[Dave Colangelo]

1 hour ago, Samurai Husky said:

The Cherokee looks interesting since it has a 1400# useful load, but again, that more of a SUV then a hamburger plane. It would be something that i would consider renting if i had to take a bunch of people somewhere. The club as a dakota for rent for 185/hr wet. So for some missions that may make more sense. 

I guess this is where my thinking has changed. Before i wanted a twin, or something big, but now when i think about it, those are not the type of planes you can just jump in and go for a hamburger in, or fly around a pattern for fun in.

I would not be so fast to jump to the conclusion that the 'Toga, Dakota, or Cherokee 6 is not a 100$ Hamburger/Pattern plane. All these planes have somewhat similar (if not cheaper) operational costs than an ovation or a Cirrus (considering the Chute repack etc.). Lets break down the numbers quickly (from a purchasing standpoint). I have looked in some capacity at all these planes and flow all but the cherokee 6 so far. The Dakota is basically a super powered archer, its not all that different that a Mooney Rocket, take an airframe your already making and bolt a really big engine to the front. Resulting in a solid useful load but a high fuel burn and a bump in speed up high. I was riding shotgun in a Dakota recently that my buddies flight club had just bought. Its a nice plane and more than capable of just hanging out for pattern work. The Dakota has the 540 engine which is not all that far off from the SR22's 550's. The 'Toga also has the 540 engine. All the pipers will have slower speeds than just about everything you listed and you may see some of the later 'Togas on par with the J's so around the pattern and to a hamburger they will be the same. Fuel burn is fuel burn and you are pulling teeth at the differences at this end of things. Of the stuff you picked the J can be had the cheapest by far and you can get the older Togas for the same price as J. The new ones will run you about what an SR22 will. Further more the missions you described like picking up family, flying far with dogs fits way better in the toga/bo space than a J. While the they may have 6 seats that makes them true 4 people and bags planes. I would try and fly some of these before making a decision. I was up with my buddy last weekend in his 94 II HP saratoga, handles like a dream.

 

On a bit of a side note you seem to be quoting the unloaded useful load (this is generally what manufactures publish). It may be worth your time to check out what the full fuel effective useful loads of these planes is. A lot of these planes may have things like AC or extended range tanks installed which really cuts into the useful load. A useful load of 1400Lbs does not mean you can put 1400Lbs of stuff in the plane as you will have to run with empty gas tanks and you most likely wont get very far.  

[Hank]

A straight comparison of useful load, or even full fuel,payload, is no t necessarily even if here is a large difference in fuel burn. Look at fuel required for a trip somewhere you want to go, add reserves, then see how much payload is left. A J will hold 64 gallons, good for 6-7 hours; others will hold 80-90 gallons (100-150 lbs more fuel), but will only fly ~5 hours. So the J, with a lighter fuel load, will go further and often have larger payload when fueled for your trip.

just one more thing to look at . . .

[HRM]

4 hours ago, Samurai Husky said:

So i have night landings at 4 different airports; Turns out Im not bad at it, though Palo Alto was challenging, i was always flaring high at that one, might have been just because i was getting tired as we had already flown to 3 other airports to do landings.

Keep in mind that my LXC was in '86.

I am getting the picture that you are loving flying the way I do. Don't lose that sense of adventure.

Know that nothing flys like a Mooney. Also know that nothing provides more excitement than an old Mooney. Night landings without the landing light? Shoot, those are almost expected 

[Hank]

34 minutes ago, HRM said:

Don't lose that sense of adventure.

Know that nothing flys like a Mooney. Also know that nothing provides more excitement than an old Mooney. Night landings without the landing light? Shoot, those are almost expected 

Yep, my landing light was fine on preflight after work. After 3:30 enroute, from AL back to WV, I don't see the ridge in front of me on base . . . On final, I can't see the treetops I need to clear (the ones hiding the REIL). Managed to land on the runway anyway, must be the bright CFL bulbs in the runway lights that work, 200' wide with a 75' strip of off center asphalt.

But it's still lots of fun!

I planned my Long XC to get enough time that my Dual XC, Short and Long would get the 5.0 hours that I needed. Made for a long 4-leg flight with a stop for lunch and fuel, but it was educational and a huge confidence builder.

[carusoam]

Choose the engine that best fits your needs, then select the airframe to bolt to it...

Fortunately, Mooney built a good airframe for all the best motors available to GA. O360, IO360, IO550 and a few good TSIO and TN'd things...  Except the one engine Clarence cruises around with. 

Then, add as many LED lights as you can.

A long body has two landing lights, two taxi lights, and a pair of recog lights...nearly enough to light up the Black Forest from here...

Best regards,

-a-

[Samurai Husky]

I need a nap; Just got back from my 2nd supervised solo outting. This time it was a little more challenging because the wind was 33015g17, But landed every time with no issues. My CFI on the ground said he didnt see anything wrong with any of my landings. But man, that was a lot of work; 6 more solo landgins and 4 with the CFI prior to that.

Now its just a madder of paperwork and i can just 'gooooooo', so long as its within 25nm and i only land at the 2 airports and stay out of the bravo 

Friday we tackle short field and soft field. One ground school lesson to go over the remaining items. I have a XC check ride which then opens me up to all the airports, my solo XC then ppl prep and thats it. 

I will respond to the other posts in a bit; i need to eat something

 

[carusoam]

You are starting to see the limitations of the human body...

The first few long XCs take their toll.  Needing rest after a two hour flight takes a while to get used to.  Flying is a cognitive drain.

if you use a Fitbit HR, it collects your heart rate data 24/7.  You will probably see an elevated level a little more than driving.

Once you do it a few times, the drain is much less.  Then when you fly a Mooney, it can be sooooo relaxing (some days).

Best regards,

-a-

[HRM]

12 hours ago, carusoam said:

Flying is a cognitive drain.

For some more than others 

 

"I resemble that remark!"--Curly Howard, stooge.

[Samurai Husky]

Ok so here it goes.

Useful vs payload: Yes i know the difference, yes i am quoting useful load and yes i know that does not include fuel. Its just the easiest most universal weight that i can post. Because if i start saying 650# for a 'J' i will be told wrong by 500 people (which is normal useful load minus my weight without fuel); 

Toga - not discounting it, just dont know if i want to own one. You're the first to even suggest it out of i dont know how many people, and i am not just talking this forums, but the twins, COPA, Mooney Space, etc. So i dont have enough info on it to say it's worth looking at. What i do know is that the club owns one and its generally available for rent. The pilot TT to rent it is pretty low (125hr TT + 5hr checkout), so i didnt see a need of owning one when i could just rent one.

I dont want to buy something that only fufills the last 5% of my missions. Yea, it hauls 1400# UL, but outside maybe once a year i dont see that much weight being necessary. But if you are saying that it burns 9gal/hr and still does 150knts, then i will look at it. 

Altitude - Yes, with the dogs going high is not an option. So why the turbo? It has nothing to do with going high, its just a financial decision based on the market conditions. A turbo is going for 60k less than a non turbo and while they need more maintenance, 60k buys me a lot of maintenance. 

TKS - I would like TKS, all of the cirrus's have TKS already, it came standard with the planes i am looking at. Finding one in a 83'+J is almost impossible. Again, its not to fly into icing, its just a plan b in case i find my self in it because of a bad decision.

J/Acclaim - Yes, i know they are 2 completely different planes. I was referencing that i was able to sit in an Acclaim. I have not found anyone with a 'j' yet where i could sit in it. So right now that is my only reference point. If someone in norcal wants to trade a ride in a 'j' for lunch, i would be happy too! Now that I am solo and almost XC solo i should be able to meet you somewhere. I think i understand the whole 'in' 'on' statement as when i say in the mooney, i felt like i was sitting very low, like you said, like sitting in a sports car vs sitting on a chair. Not sure which i would prefer;

The reason for the sudden interest in a Cirrus is actually from this forum where they said that i should fly what ever i trained in because i will be more familiar and safer flying until i can build time and experience; For some reason it seems that opinion is shifting? I remember in the big thread how much i complained about it, but now that i know how to fly it and feel comfortable flying it, its less work and more fun but its also my only reference point besides a 172 i took out for a few hours. 

For buying a plane. I am probably a few months off on that one, but we'll see. I know all about pre-buy inspections, etc. I was going to have Savvy manage the pre buy since they will know what shops are reputable in the area; I contact Dorr about financing and I talked to steel about brokering. Overall, my checkbook is staying in my pocket until i can get past my PPL.

I think that covers everything....

 

[wishboneash]

1 hour ago, Samurai Husky said:

 

J/Acclaim - Yes, i know they are 2 completely different planes. I was referencing that i was able to sit in an Acclaim. I have not found anyone with a 'j' yet where i could sit in it. So right now that is my only reference point. If someone in norcal wants to trade a ride in a 'j' for lunch, i would be happy too! Now that I am solo and almost XC solo i should be able to meet you somewhere. I think i understand the whole 'in' 'on' statement as when i say in the mooney, i felt like i was sitting very low, like you said, like sitting in a sports car vs sitting on a chair. Not sure which i would prefer;

 

 

If you are in the Livermore area, I can take you up in a J. Probably on the weekend some time.

There are a ton of J owners in the Bay area.

[Samurai Husky]

41 minutes ago, wishboneash said:

If you are in the Livermore area, I can take you up in a J. Probably on the weekend some time.

There are a ton of J owners in the Bay area.

Any time! Livermore is actually the only other airport i am signed off for right now  not that i couldn't just drive there, but where's the fun in that!

Are you N43CA? if so, i tried to join the flying particles to rent your plane and try a 'j' out, but at the time there were no CFI's available at the club, so i kept going with the cirrus. 

[bradp]

Mission primacy.  

Seems like your mission has changed slightly with some new types of trips.  Based on your anticipated trip lengths (nm), you require efficiency.  Efficiency in fuel configuration lends to payload flexibility.  It sounds like the mission with the dogs requires low altitudes. Despite you wanting to fly to Arizona where straight line would have you crossing the sierras.  I'm assuming based on previous posts that your milk run would be bay -> BFL -> Arizona.  And you'd expect altitudes of 8-9k.

I agree with Anthony that you should choose your engine and find an airframe that fits best.  

If your mission creep is now including trips across the sierras (To the NE) without dogs and you want a turbo then look for turbo'd engine and bolt an airframe to that.  

Along with Js consider a turbo-normalized short/med body Mooney.  You'd get flexibility in mission and significantly lower maintenance costs, especially for a turbo.  You not would run with the same maintenance risks compared to the Cirrus (tops at 25k and expensive turbo OH).  It would be a substrate by which you could do the customizations that you like, including avionics.  You could maintain at a high standard to ensure a dispatch rate to your liking.  It could have either manual  <early E/F> or electric gear (late models).

With the left over funds, continue on with IFR / ME and consider a multi partnership in a twin or something you'd use less frequently but that the Mooney couldn't do.   

Look a John Breda's F for an example of an F-vation. 

 

Here is a TN F for sale close to you (Napa).  Might be with checking into.  

http://www.wolfeaviation.com/aircraft_for_sale/specs/1967M20FE.pdf

[Guest]

I fail to follow all of this useful load vs. payload.  Call it what you will, for me it comes down to I can carry 1500 pounds in my plane. The most fuel I can carry is 780 pound leaving 720 pound of people and stuff, up to 200 pounds can go in the baggage compartment.  With no zero fuel weight I can vary the loads within the limits above.

Clarence

[wishboneash]

3 hours ago, Samurai Husky said:

Any time! Livermore is actually the only other airport i am signed off for right now  not that i couldn't just drive there, but where's the fun in that!

Are you N43CA? if so, i tried to join the flying particles to rent your plane and try a 'j' out, but at the time there were no CFI's available at the club, so i kept going with the cirrus. 

I have my own M20J, not part of the club. I used to be an active member of Flying Particles. Will try to coordinate something. Let me know when you plan on flying in to Livermore.

[CaptainAB]

6 hours ago, Samurai Husky said:

Ok so here it goes.

Useful vs payload: Yes i know the difference, yes i am quoting useful load and yes i know that does not include fuel. Its just the easiest most universal weight that i can post. Because if i start saying 650# for a 'J' i will be told wrong by 500 people (which is normal useful load minus my weight without fuel); 

Toga - not discounting it, just dont know if i want to own one. You're the first to even suggest it out of i dont know how many people, and i am not just talking this forums, but the twins, COPA, Mooney Space, etc. So i dont have enough info on it to say it's worth looking at. What i do know is that the club owns one and its generally available for rent. The pilot TT to rent it is pretty low (125hr TT + 5hr checkout), so i didnt see a need of owning one when i could just rent one.

I dont want to buy something that only fufills the last 5% of my missions. Yea, it hauls 1400# UL, but outside maybe once a year i dont see that much weight being necessary. But if you are saying that it burns 9gal/hr and still does 150knts, then i will look at it. 

Altitude - Yes, with the dogs going high is not an option. So why the turbo? It has nothing to do with going high, its just a financial decision based on the market conditions. A turbo is going for 60k less than a non turbo and while they need more maintenance, 60k buys me a lot of maintenance. 

TKS - I would like TKS, all of the cirrus's have TKS already, it came standard with the planes i am looking at. Finding one in a 83'+J is almost impossible. Again, its not to fly into icing, its just a plan b in case i find my self in it because of a bad decision.

J/Acclaim - Yes, i know they are 2 completely different planes. I was referencing that i was able to sit in an Acclaim. I have not found anyone with a 'j' yet where i could sit in it. So right now that is my only reference point. If someone in norcal wants to trade a ride in a 'j' for lunch, i would be happy too! Now that I am solo and almost XC solo i should be able to meet you somewhere. I think i understand the whole 'in' 'on' statement as when i say in the mooney, i felt like i was sitting very low, like you said, like sitting in a sports car vs sitting on a chair. Not sure which i would prefer;

The reason for the sudden interest in a Cirrus is actually from this forum where they said that i should fly what ever i trained in because i will be more familiar and safer flying until i can build time and experience; For some reason it seems that opinion is shifting? I remember in the big thread how much i complained about it, but now that i know how to fly it and feel comfortable flying it, its less work and more fun but its also my only reference point besides a 172 i took out for a few hours. 

For buying a plane. I am probably a few months off on that one, but we'll see. I know all about pre-buy inspections, etc. I was going to have Savvy manage the pre buy since they will know what shops are reputable in the area; I contact Dorr about financing and I talked to steel about brokering. Overall, my checkbook is staying in my pocket until i can get past my PPL.

I think that covers everything....

 

 

Husky, quit letting these cheap bastards tell you you can't take your dogs up high. If you can fly a cirrus and afford a turbo cirrus you are rich enough to buy a Malibu. I bet your first years insurance will come in just under 20k (plus type training and 25 hours dual) If that scares you a p210 might cut it in half. I think you can get three months free on MMOPA.org if you tell them you are considering buying one. Keep up the good work. Your landings might not be consistent until 100 hrs. Unless you do a lot of soft and short field work.

[Samurai Husky]

 

48 minutes ago, CaptainAB said:

Husky, quit letting these cheap bastards tell you you can't take your dogs up high. 

LOL;

I looked at the Malibu's; I saw an unbelievable one for about 350k, but thats just simply too much plane for right now. Even if i can afford one, its probably not the best idea to just jump into one on fresh ink. Since i am so new to aviation i want to work my way in. I also looked and talked to a lot of p210n people. They said the pressurization implementation was horrible and it wasn't worth the fuel tax. Believe me when i say i have talked to almost every person i have run into and asked their opinion.

Besides, if i wait 10yrs i might be able to get a SF50

 

[Samurai Husky]

Since people have asked for updates. 

I passed my solo XC check ride today, so i am now allowed to start planning my solo XC. 

I also took the plane up for the first time by myself yesterday; It was 99F on the ground, 88F at 5000MSL. I tried doing some practice but every time i would start something and try to keep it in check ride standards, i would hit a thermal and balloon up, or hit some major unsettled air. Winds were calm though. 

It was so different flying somewhere by yourself. I didnt stick around the pattern, i went out to KLVH and did maneuvers over the city. On the way back ATC was picking on me; They gave president to a diamond coming in. Problem is, i was doing 140kts, he was doing maybe 105knts (this is about 4miles out); It started out as enter right traffic #4 clear to land, To Follow the diamond into right base (they had me going into right pattern where the diamond was told to go directly into right base), to Extend downwind into moffet, to extend again for straight in cessna (must of had IFR or something); I had to slow up and do slow flight to let everyone by. It felt like every 10 seconds he was calling on me to do something... and of course i was nervous enough as is being my first time back by myself....