Jump to content

Selling my F to step up


Stephen

Recommended Posts

He guys, I was planning on taking king my F down to DMAX Monday as I suggested them for PPI to the a perspective buyer. He just emailed and said he had changed his mind on getting an F and I was refraining from listing it openly respecting that pending sale. So....  I will be listing it on the open market. As many of you have followed the story know It just came out of overhaul at Jewell. It has a  well equipped IFR panel (530W)  and coupled STEC 60-2, speedbrakes, most all the speed mods except for windshield, CIES , EDM 900, complete logs. etc. It also has the new DLC lifters so hopefully this engine will not be nearly as succeptable to lifter>CAM spalling as normal IO360s.  It should be an excellent platform if anyone knows a serious buyer I would appreciate the referral.

 

Thanks,

 

Stephen

20190523_161606.thumb.jpg.f80ef4236f83d3611302c3cf81b88da3.jpg

20180825_193202.thumb.jpg.d0962499e71a7ce77fe95869e8dd2fd4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, MIm20c said:

So is the step up going to require a username on a different forum?  Good luck with the sale!

Wondering does he need to go to the Gulfstream forum???  (Now that is a step up!!!)  Just kidding but how much of an upgrade is the question???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, steingar said:

One of my buddies has an Acclaim and was looking to step up.  I mentioned that the step up would require something burning kerosene and would be way more to insure.

And depending on where you live the gov't gets 10% of the value of the new airplane. That's too much for me to justify.

-Robert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said:

And depending on where you live the gov't gets 10% of the value of the new airplane. That's too much for me to justify.

-Robert

That is an argument I make to myself against buying a new truck to replace my 2003 Tundra. WA sales tax (8.2%) on a $50-$60K vehicle can buy a lot of maintenance and accessories for the old Tundra (which has only required routine maintenance).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, amillet said:

That is an argument I make to myself against buying a new truck to replace my 2003 Tundra. WA sales tax (8.2%) on a $50-$60K vehicle can buy a lot of maintenance and accessories for the old Tundra (which has only required routine maintenance).

Just remind yourself of the many safety improvements!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, wcb said:

Wondering does he need to go to the Gulfstream forum???  (Now that is a step up!!!)  Just kidding but how much of an upgrade is the question???

I have been considering a "GIII", but that would be Glasair, not Gulfstream :). Most of my consulting is KHAE to the LA area and it is just tooo far for the "F" to usefully get there. 

Regarding the other kind of  "GIII," the more immediate reason for selling the aircraft is to partly finance a prototype build-out for a new big data technology that I have been patenting that compliments current AI (machine/deep learning) technology. The big goal is to ultimately make predictive, prescriptive, root-cause and other advanced analytics tasks far more accurate and also easier for people who don't have a PHD in data science (and of course those that do) to do. I have a couple of large (Fortune) organizations interested if I am successful so, even though I **hate** to sell my Mooney, I'm going to go for it. 

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, they are very thirsty and MX hungry. Even if I had the $$$ to get a jet I think it may remind me too much of the airlines <_< ... I think I would go TBM or maybe PC12. I like the TBM's Mooney history.  That is a pipe dream though for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been considering a "GIII", but that would be Glasair, not Gulfstream . Most of my consulting is KHAE to the LA area and it is just tooo far for the "F" to usefully get there. 
Regarding the other kind of  "GIII," the more immediate reason for selling the aircraft is to partly finance a prototype build-out for a new big data technology that I have been patenting that compliments current AI (machine/deep learning) technology. The big goal is to ultimately make predictive, prescriptive, root-cause and other advanced analytics tasks far more accurate and also easier for people who don't have a PHD in data science (and of course those that do) to do. I have a couple of large (Fortune) organizations interested if I am successful so, even though I **hate** to sell my Mooney, I'm going to go for it. 
Good luck with your entrepreneurial endeavors! Nothing like taking a huge leap of faith and betting your money on something you believe in.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, NJMac said:

Good luck with your entrepreneurial endeavors! Nothing like taking a huge leap of faith and betting your money on something you believe in.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
 

Thanks @NJMac, once I have it out of down-low mode I'll update MS on the journey. My last PA28-235 was sold to start the analytics company that built the basis for this new thing so I have a history of converting airplanes to businesses and back to airplanes. The Cherokee gave us the ability to build analytic plugins to Altiris, Symantec and Microsoft platforms... it worked out great last time; hopefully bigger and better this time. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Stephen said:

I have been considering a "GIII", but that would be Glasair, not Gulfstream :). Most of my consulting is KHAE to the LA area and it is just tooo far for the "F" to usefully get there. 

 

I'd like to caution against any experimental or amateur built aircraft. The temptation to go fast often overpowers our natural tendency to remain safe. I've been an enthusiastic aviation professional for over 30 years. Yet friend after friend is lost. In the last 2 years, I've lost 3 friends to crashes. Despite the claim that it's pilot error and failure to maintain control, a mechanical was involved in each and every one. 

The 5 to 1 crash rate of experimental aircraft puts the operation into the very high risk,,,, actually it puts it into the "test pilot" category for "every flight". And many times worse than riding a motorcycle. 

If you want to go faster, pay the money and get a type certificated plane, of known high quality, that goes faster. If you can't afford it, then go slower. But please don't take the risk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, cujet said:

I'd like to caution against any experimental or amateur built aircraft. The temptation to go fast often overpowers our natural tendency to remain safe. I've been an enthusiastic aviation professional for over 30 years. Yet friend after friend is lost. In the last 2 years, I've lost 3 friends to crashes. Despite the claim that it's pilot error and failure to maintain control, a mechanical was involved in each and every one. 

The 5 to 1 crash rate of experimental aircraft puts the operation into the very high risk,,,, actually it puts it into the "test pilot" category for "every flight". And many times worse than riding a motorcycle. 

If you want to go faster, pay the money and get a type certificated plane, of known high quality, that goes faster. If you can't afford it, then go slower. But please don't take the risk. 

My favorite placard on an experimental. After the required caution was added, "No manufacturer can afford this level of quality."

That doesn't negate your caution.

Edited by midlifeflyer
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing about an FAA type certificate ensures high quality. 737 Max could be exhibit A. Likewise, an Experimental placard doesn't automatically mean the opposite. @Yooper Rocketman experimental home built is likely the highest quality aircraft I'll ever fly in. And that list includes plenty of certificated aircraft.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short of experimental... take a look at what Rocket Engineering did to modify the  Piper into the jet-prop...

Or go Long Body first...  find a mentor like @Jerry 5TJ  :)

just don’t go it alone... TT is everything at that level...

Good luck with the next steps...

Anyone looking to check out the owner before buying the plane... 

Stephen is a high quality person! :)

MS and spending OPM... perfect together... 

Best regards,

-a-

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/18/2019 at 4:33 PM, midlifeflyer said:

My favorite placard on an experimental. After the required caution was added, "No manufacturer can afford this level of quality."

That doesn't negate your caution.

That’s like that quote from Merkel: “Humanity knows no limits” 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing about an FAA type certificate ensures high quality. 737 Max could be exhibit A. Likewise, an Experimental placard doesn't automatically mean the opposite.

First, the 737 MAX crashed because the pilots couldn’t handle a software problem. You can argue that Boeing didn’t provide information or they weren’t trained properly, but the airplane was just fine until the pilots crashed it.
While Experimental doesn’t mean poor quality, there is no history of planes that you can look at and judge the quality. You buy an experimental, you are assuming the risk that the person(s) who built it and designed it was competent. With certified planes, they have gone through tests to insure some level of quality.


Tom
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/18/2019 at 5:26 PM, gsxrpilot said:

Nothing about an FAA type certificate ensures high quality. 737 Max could be exhibit A. Likewise, an Experimental placard doesn't automatically mean the opposite. 

An FAA type certificate, (and if we want to go off topic, AD compliance) absolutely indicates that an aircraft design is deemed airworthy and has a level of safety acceptable to the administrator. No such compliance requirements exist for amateur built, experimental aircraft. In fact, an argument can be made that AD's don't apply to experimental, amateur built aircraft. 

Also of note, I think you'd find impressive build and component quality if you disassembled a 737 Max. The fact that a problem exists in any given aircraft is nothing new. Again, the FAA uses the AD system to address significant issues. 

In fact, despite what people think, with a few notable exceptions, amateur built, experimental aircraft have a horrific safety record, often far worse than the 5 to 1 ratio noted above. The RV series of aircraft tend to bolster the statistics, along with various "Cub" kits. In other words, the farther you get away from an RV-6 with a Lycoming or a Cub kit with a Lycoming = big time risk. 

 

Let's look at the positive side of this. Mooney and Cirrus aircraft exist and are popular because they are a good blend of both fast and safe.  Both have good stall and spin recovery characteristics. Traits that require larger and thicker airfoils that cost some speed. 

Edited by cujet
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:


First, the 737 MAX crashed because the pilots couldn’t handle a software problem. You can argue that Boeing didn’t provide information or they weren’t trained properly, but the airplane was just fine until the pilots crashed it.
 

I don't have the exact information, but I have definitely heard the airplanes weren't "just fine" before they crashed.  Hopefully Byron @jetdriven can chime in, he seemed to have good information regarding the Max.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.