New owner of M20M N763RC

[KLRDMD]

On 6/20/2017 at 9:07 PM, Preptechmilitia said:

We decided to go with a 1979 piper arrow IV t-tail. 

Not the best decision, in my opinion. You're buying an airplane to learn on, then resell quickly. An Arrow IV will take forever to sell and the potential market is tiny. You would be MUCH better off buying a 172, getting private and instrument in it, then selling to upgrade to a Mooney. You may not lose anything and priced right a 172 will sell in 24 hours.

But . . . what the hell do I know about buying and selling airplanes ???

[Andy95W]

You can lead a horse to water, doc...

[LANCECASPER]

On 6/21/2017 at 8:49 PM, BigAl said:

Someone actually bid...

http://offer.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewBids&item=122557722381&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2565

And then 5 days later they retracted.

[BigAl]

3 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

And then 5 days later they retracted.

Ha I just saw that. I wonder if they are MS members.

[LANCECASPER]

6 minutes ago, BigAl said:

Ha I just saw that. I wonder if they are MS members.

It's probably a friend of the Seller trying to help him drive up the price.

[Preptechmilitia]

On 6/24/2017 at 8:55 PM, KLRDMD said:

Not the best decision, in my opinion. You're buying an airplane to learn on, then resell quickly. An Arrow IV will take forever to sell and the potential market is tiny. You would be MUCH better off buying a 172, getting private and instrument in it, then selling to upgrade to a Mooney. You may not lose anything and priced right a 172 will sell in 24 hours.

But . . . what the hell do I know about buying and selling airplanes ???

For sure that would be a great option. I'm the kind of person that doesn't want to have to trade in or relearn. The t-tail got snatched up before I could get the deposit in. So maybe dodged a financial bullet on that one too. 

I found another bravo that has low hours and recent OH and meticulous logs and books.  A bit more than the original bravo. And doesn't have tks. But she is amazing. 

Looking to see her next week and do a pre buy. 

 

You our guys have any suggestions?  I know I'm a newbie and I'm not trying to be a smart arse. Just trying to make he right choice for me and fly every couple days. I travel a lot for work and want to fly private to and from LA in 2 hrs vs driving or flying commercial. This will allow me to make this trip more frequently and check on my 

I would prefer to learn on the plane I will stay with and if I don't know any different then Is all the same learning curve. At least I think so. 

 

Let me know your thoughts  please

 

 

[Godfather]

10 minutes ago, Preptechmilitia said:

I would prefer to learn on the plane I will stay with and if I don't know any different then Is all the same learning curve. At least I think so. 

 

Let me know your thoughts  please

I would have to say learning to fly in the bravo vs a 172 will not be the same learning curve. While you are looking at bravos go rent a 172 and fly as often as you can. 

[LANCECASPER]

27 minutes ago, Preptechmilitia said:

For sure that would be a great option. I'm the kind of person that doesn't want to have to trade in or relearn. The t-tail got snatched up before I could get the deposit in. So maybe dodged a financial bullet on that one too. 

I found another bravo that has low hours and recent OH and meticulous logs and books.  A bit more than the original bravo. And doesn't have tks. But she is amazing. 

Looking to see her next week and do a pre buy. 

 

You our guys have any suggestions?  I know I'm a newbie and I'm not trying to be a smart arse. Just trying to make he right choice for me and fly every couple days. I travel a lot for work and want to fly private to and from LA in 2 hrs vs driving or flying commercial. This will allow me to make this trip more frequently and check on my 

I would prefer to learn on the plane I will stay with and if I don't know any different then Is all the same learning curve. At least I think so. 

 

Let me know your thoughts  please

What insurance rates have you been quoted? That's the first step

[KLRDMD]

1 hour ago, Preptechmilitia said:

I found another bravo that has low hours and recent OH and meticulous logs and books.  A bit more than the original bravo. And doesn't have tks. But she is amazing. Looking to see her next week and do a pre buy.  You our guys have any suggestions?

Is it possible to do private pilot training in a Mooney Bravo ? Of course. Is it advisable, no way. If you insist on doing initial training in a Mooney, that's fine, I have no issue with that at all, but do it in a "C", "E" or "F" model - even a "J" but don't do initial training in a turbocharged airplane.

[LANCECASPER]

On 6/27/2017 at 7:08 PM, KLRDMD said:

Is it possible to do private pilot training in a Mooney Bravo ? Of course. Is it advisable, no way. If you insist on doing initial training in a Mooney, that's fine, I have no issue with that at all, but do it in a "C", "E" or "F" model - even a "J" but don't do initial training in a turbocharged airplane.

That's why trainers are used for training. Make the mistakes in a very forgiving airplane that someone else owns and maintains. If the insurance company would even consider covering someone doing initial training in a complex, retractable, turbo charged airplane the cost is going to be exorbitant. If you bring it in gear up or do a prop strike with low hours then the insurance goes from exorbitant or either astronomical or unobtainable.

25 hours into my training 32 years ago I bought a Cessna 172 to finish up my training in. I flew it 500 hours in 3-1/2 yrs. It had no autopilot so I learned to hold altitude and heading. I sold it for $5000 more than I paid for it. I had a Grumman Tiger that I flew 100 hours in for a year and broke even on. Then I bought a 172RG to build up retractable time, again no autopilot, not much faster than a 172. I flew it 100 hours in 15 months and got $15000 more than I paid for it on trade for a 10 year old Mooney 231. Still after 600 hours total time in Cessnas and a Grumman, I was way behind the 231 for the first few months I owned it. I kept that for three years, got my Instrument Rating in it, put a little over 400 hours on it, got all my money back out of it and bought a Bravo. Was I ready for a Bravo at that point? Not really, but Mooney provided Flight Safety Training at the time and I flew it a lot over the next few years and I became very comfortable with it. Looking back, I can't even imagine starting out in the Bravo. It happens all the time though where people who have some money buy an airplane they aren't ready for - people who sell airplanes say that those people have more dollars than sense. They aren't used to being told no. They think instruments and automation will make up for their lack of training and experience - actually it's just the opposite. Then way too often you end up reading about them in NTSB reports after they have killed themselves and their families after spinning it into the ground.

(This is an extreme example, but still supports the idea of "just because you can, doesn't mean you should": http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/lake-erie-crash-pilot-rookie/2017/01/20/id/769591/)

[Bravoman]

Lance, those were the days. I bought the first 77 arrow 3 that came off the assembly line from the original owner in 88. Had AC and the whole works. It actually came with the piper advertising poster that showed my plane with the first turbo arrow 3  that rolled off the line in the air. Had it for about 5 years and almost doubled my money. Kind of wish I never sold that plane.

I agree that it is not advisable to do primary training in a Bravo. Putting aside everything else that has been discussed as to why it is not advisable, it would not be good for that very expensive lycoming to be put through what has to be done for primary training. I can see things getting cooked and shock cooled very quickly.

 

Also, hasn't this very topic been addressed recently in another thread?

[LANCECASPER]

It's baaaaaaack . . .  http://www.ebay.com/itm/93-MOONEY-TLS-BRAVO-1700-TT-/122570286326?hash=item1c89c224f6:g:0ioAAOSwo4pYf~Q9&vxp=mtr

[M016576]

On 6/27/2017 at 5:47 PM, LANCECASPER said:

That's why trainers are used for training. Make the mistakes in a very forgiving airplane that someone else owns and maintains. If the insurance company would even consider covering someone doing initial training in a complex, retractable, turbo charged airplane the cost is going to be exorbitant. If you bring it in gear up or do a prop strike with low hours then the insurance goes from exorbitant or either astronomical or unobtainable.

25 hours into my training 32 years ago I bought a Cessna 172 to finish up my training in. I flew it 500 hours in 3-1/2 yrs. It had no autopilot so I learned to hold altitude and heading. I sold it for $5000 more than I paid for it. I had a Grumman Tiger that I flew 100 hours in for a year and broke even on. Then I bought a 172RG to build up retractable time, again no autopilot, not much faster than a 172. I flew it 100 hours in 15 months and got $15000 more than I paid for it on trade for a 10 year old Mooney 231. Still after 600 hours total time in Cessnas and a Grumman, I was way behind the 231 for the first few months I owned it. I kept that for three years, got my Instrument Rating in it, put a little over 400 hours on it, got all my money back out of it and bought a Bravo. Was I ready for a Bravo at that point? Not really, but Mooney provided Flight Safety Training at the time and I flew it a lot over the next few years and I became very comfortable with it. Looking back, I can't even imagine starting out in the Bravo. It happens all the time though where people who have some money buy an airplane they aren't ready for - people who sell airplanes say that those people have more dollars than sense. They aren't used to being told no. They think instruments and automation will make up for their lack of training and experience - actually it's just the opposite. Then way too often you end up reading about them in NTSB reports after they have killed themselves and their families after spinning it into the ground.

(This is an extreme example, but still supports the idea of "just because you can, doesn't mean you should": http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/lake-erie-crash-pilot-rookie/2017/01/20/id/769591/)

I hate to say this, but I'm pretty sure you won't make out on the Bravo like you did on your other aircraft, at least not percentage wise, sadly.  Brutal what the Bravo market looks like right now: they are such a marvelous aircraft for travel- hard to believe how much they have come down in price.  Probably due to the Cirrus and Columbia- I don't know... but some deals to be had on bravos, for sure.

 

Also, I whole heartedly agree- there is no mechanical replacement in aviation for continuous, recurrent training... and that goes for CFI/CFII's and ATP's just as much as any private pilot or student.  A little humility goes a long ways towards staving off some of the bad side of the pilot decision making process.

[steingar]

Used to be airplanes were actually pretty good investments.  The manufacturers stopped making them in the 80's and have all but stopped ever since.  But I think 2008 really wiped out a lot of pilots such that there is now a glut of aircraft.  There are a lot of hangar queens to be certain, but I think prices on flying aircraft have also gone in the dumpster.  I think the days of appreciating airplane prices are gone.

[peevee]

4 minutes ago, steingar said:

Used to be airplanes were actually pretty good investments.  The manufacturers stopped making them in the 80's and have all but stopped ever since.  But I think 2008 really wiped out a lot of pilots such that there is now a glut of aircraft.  There are a lot of hangar queens to be certain, but I think prices on flying aircraft have also gone in the dumpster.  I think the days of appreciating airplane prices are gone.

I agree for certified, I don't for experimental they seem to be doing a little better.

[Bravoman]

I bought my Bravo at the end of 13 and I think the market has softened even more since then. 

[KSMooniac]

I bought my Bravo at the end of 13 and I think the market has softened even more since then. 

But at least you've been enjoying yours for 3.5 years... that is better than saving a bit of cash!

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk

[steingar]

3 hours ago, peevee said:

I agree for certified, I don't for experimental they seem to be doing a little better.

As far as I can tell, if you build and experimental airplane you get out of it roughly what you spent to get it built.  As a proviso, I am not in the Ex/Ab community, this is all heresy.  I don't know about secondary sales and the like, but I have strong doubts that they're any better an investment than a certificated airframe.

Then again, so what?  I didn't buy my airplane for an investment, I bought it to go flying.  By rights it should depreciate like my car or my bike.  That it doesn't is already quite a plus.

[Bravoman]

2 hours ago, KSMooniac said:

But at least you've been enjoying yours for 3.5 years... that is better than saving a bit of cash!

Sent from my LG-US996 using Tapatalk
 

I'm really not complaining, plan on keeping it till I'm done flying. But with the improvement in the economy and strengthening of the markets it really tells you that there are other market forces at work that we have all discussed ad nauseoum such as less pilots and changing tastes in aircraft, to name a few. I read recently that Cirrus had either 400 or 600 orders, can't remember which,  for their new jet at about 2mm per copy. Looks like there are still pilots out there with some disposable income!

[KLRDMD]

4 hours ago, peevee said:

I agree for certified, I don't for experimental they seem to be doing a little better.

I'm not so sure. I've only had one experimental but was told to expect it to take at least a year to sell. I sold mine in just under 100 days but compared to my average time on the market for certified airplanes I've sold of well under 30 days, that's significant. I almost broke even on the experimental and overwhelmingly have made money selling certified airplanes (yes, even since 2008).

[Cyril Gibb]

13% in Ontario

[peevee]

56 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

I'm not so sure. I've only had one experimental but was told to expect it to take at least a year to sell. I sold mine in just under 100 days but compared to my average time on the market for certified airplanes I've sold of well under 30 days, that's significant. I almost broke even on the experimental and overwhelmingly have made money selling certified airplanes (yes, even since 2008).

If there was an experimental Tha can do what the rocket can for the same price I'd have jumped ship but there really isn't. Lancairs are 300 to 400 and not many turbo exps other than that 

[KLRDMD]

Just now, peevee said:

If there was an experimental Tha can do what the rocket can for the same price I'd have jumped ship but there really isn't. Lancairs are 300 to 400 and not many turbo exps other than that 

I had a Lancair 235 airframe with an IO-320EXP rated at 196 HP in mine. It would do just a hair under 200 KTAS but on 7.5 GPH. And it was ⅓ the price of a somewhat similarly equipped Rocket.

[peevee]

26 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

I had a Lancair 235 airframe with an IO-320EXP rated at 196 HP in mine. It would do just a hair under 200 KTAS but on 7.5 GPH. And it was ⅓ the price of a somewhat similarly equipped Rocket.

Yeah, but would it climb 1500fpm to fl200 and 1k to 240?

The 235 is a nice little airplane but I like the turbo. It's also missing 2 seats.

[KLRDMD]

Just now, peevee said:

Yeah, but would it climb 1500fpm to fl200 and 1k to 240? The 235 is a nice little airplane but I like the turbo. It's also missing 2 seats.

They are obviously different airplanes with different missions and purposes.