No logs!!!

[Brian2034]

Need the forums input and wisdom!
Looking at a 201 J

No annual for 15 years but flown,  the last 3 or 4 years it wasn’t flown. 

Judging by the Hobbs maybe 100 or so hours over the years and NOTHING in the logs.

Feedback!!!!

 

[Fly Boomer]

9 minutes ago, Brian2034 said:

Need the forums input and wisdom!
Looking at a 201 J

No annual for 15 years but flown,  the last 3 or 4 years it wasn’t flown. 

Judging by the Hobbs maybe 100 or so hours over the years and NOTHING in the logs.

Feedback!!!!

 

I couldn't afford it even if it was free.

[kortopates]

Walk or run!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[varlajo]

Well if you have another 201J and need a parts donor... 

[MikeOH]

17 minutes ago, Brian2034 said:

Need the forums input and wisdom!
Looking at a 201 J

No annual for 15 years but flown,  the last 3 or 4 years it wasn’t flown. 

Judging by the Hobbs maybe 100 or so hours over the years and NOTHING in the logs.

Feedback!!!!

 

RUN, Forrest, RUN!!

[Justin Schmidt]

Be wary, most likely will be a massive headache at best, scrap at worst. I found People that do that, not keep in annual, no log entries and still fly tend to do bad things.

[N201MKTurbo]

If you were a mechanic, and if it was real cheap, and if it had some redeeming value like modern avionics or a low time engine, you could probably make it airworthy. If it has been sitting outside and has original radios and a run out engine, it is probably worth more parting it out.

At best it would be a labor of love, or a hobby project.

[Rwsavory]

No way. 

[Utah20Gflyer]

Nothing in the logs?  Or no logbooks at all? What exactly are we talking about here? 

[N201MKTurbo]

There is no legal requirement to keep logs past an annual inspection. You will need to re-do all the ADs so you can prove compliance. You will need to all the AD mandated inspections mags, landing gear actuator, etc.

TTAF will need to be estimated, you may get lucky and the plane has the original tach. The engine and prop may be more difficult, but part 91 you can run them till you can’t. 
 

So there is a path to airworthiness. The resale value will always be low.

[Jsno]

You can get the records on it from the FAA.  That will have any 337 forms ever submitted for it.  Sitting so long the engine and prop probably need an overhaul or at least a tear down and IRAN with new seals.  You can inspect and document AD compliance.  Check the weight and balance against the equipment installed.  Probably all engine and brake hoses need replaced.  Probably all seals in the brake system need replaced.  Nothing like a brake reservoir on the inside firewall leaking all over your carpet.

In short I would buy it as a project and plane on a year or three before flying it.

[A64Pilot]

38 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

There is no legal requirement to keep logs past an annual inspection. You will need to re-do all the ADs so you can prove compliance. You will need to all the AD mandated inspections mags, landing gear actuator, etc.

TTAF will need to be estimated, you may get lucky and the plane has the original tach. The engine and prop may be more difficult, but part 91 you can run them till you can’t. 
 

So there is a path to airworthiness. The resale value will always be low.

This, but the longer you keep it and fly it, the less the effect on resale it will have, it arguably could be an appreciating asset.

I’m assuming it has  log books, just no entries for the last couple of years?

As an A&P/IA for me if the price and condition were right I’d do it, but then I don’t have to pay myself.

Corrosion as always is the biggest concern, but that’s true on an aircraft with new avionics and engine etc too.

Personally I believe avionics are overstated myself, something that will in time I believe change, quite a few of us don’t need or even want “glass”

[A64Pilot]

A neighbor bought a C-182 that was that way, except someone I think made Annual entries before the sale, my Neighbor brags on his low time 182 saying it flew 12 hours per year every year for the 8 before he bought it. Cylinders are low compression due to pitting, but other than that it’s been a good reliable airplane, he flies it several times a week for probably 6 or 8 hours a week.

I think it flew 96 hours the last year before it was parked and never flew again and someone divided 96 by 8 and got 12. Pretty sloppy I think and somewhat obvious, but he didn’t realize it.

This happens on more aircraft than you might imagine. 

[Utah20Gflyer]

43 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

A neighbor bought a C-182 that was that way, except someone I think made Annual entries before the sale, my Neighbor brags on his low time 182 saying it flew 12 hours per year every year for the 8 before he bought it. Cylinders are low compression due to pitting, but other than that it’s been a good reliable airplane, he flies it several times a week for probably 6 or 8 hours a week.

I think it flew 96 hours the last year before it was parked and never flew again and someone divided 96 by 8 and got 12. Pretty sloppy I think and somewhat obvious, but he didn’t realize it.

This happens on more aircraft than you might imagine. 

Yeah, big difference between 96 hours one year and then sitting 8 years vs 12 hours a year for 8 years.  Neither is good but I’d prefer the 12 hours a year.  At least then the engine would occasionally be coated with some oil.  

[A64Pilot]

1 hour ago, Utah20Gflyer said:

Yeah, big difference between 96 hours one year and then sitting 8 years vs 12 hours a year for 8 years.  Neither is good but I’d prefer the 12 hours a year.  At least then the engine would occasionally be coated with some oil.  

I can’t prove it and honestly don’t know the 12 is correct, but his comment of it flew x number of hours for years got my attention. I guess it could have flown the exact number of hours per year for years, but what are the odds? Usually people don’t just divide the hour out and use the exact number, they usually make the hours differ. I’ve heard but have no personal experience that the mechanical tach’s aren’t any harder to change the reading than the 1960’s cars were. So some might add 100 hours so the hours per year look better.

There are dishonest people out there. I’ve even sat and watched an old aircraft dealer take a razor blade and cut out a logbook page that he didn’t like. Was that illegal if the entry was over a year old? I’m no Laywer so I don’t know.

I think airplanes that sit for years not flying and out of annual is pretty common. Someone buys them, sometimes “fixes” the books may or may not put some hours on it and sells it.

My personal little C-140 sat for I think it was four years when we were living aboard a sailboat and cruising, difference was I pickled the engine, drained all the fuel out etc. Put an entry of what I did in the logbook and said “Aircraft placed into long time storage”, mine was planned most I don’t think are.

I think anytime you find an older aircraft for sale it’s not at all unlikely that it might have years of sitting in its history, it’s not always terminal if it’s hangared etc., but left outside it might be.

On the ramp at Crystal River Fl. I had to see them die like this, this one I’m certain is gone.

 

 

 

Edited April 23 by A64Pilot

[Pinecone]

Hate to see airplanes left to rot away.

Local A&P just picked up an M20F that had the last annual done in 1997.  Yes NINETEEN ninety seven.

He got it for a few months hangar rent.   It was hangared, so that is a plus.

He will try to restore it to flying status and sell it, but will have to see if there is any corrosion that may turn it into a parts source.

 

[A64Pilot]

Abandonment is pretty common, for several reasons, maybe lost medical but that seems not as common as I would have thought, most it seems to me to be financial, aircraft goes out of annual etc, can’t afford it right now and of course it never gets cheaper.

So why don’t they sell? I think it’s because they wanted their own airplane for a long time, finally got it and don’t want to give that up. Just my theory. Add to that the cost to get it ready to sell maybe?

Lots of abandoned airplanes where I came from in S Georgia, and as I was paying $125 a month for a brand new T-hangar quite a few are hangared too.

When they built the new T-hangars in Camilla the took any aircraft off the ramp and gave them the old shades I guess they are called, essentially T-hangars without doors.

I don’t think they allow tie downs now.

They needed all the ramp space for Biz-Jet parking as many come to hunt the Plantations.

[Vance Harral]

21 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

So why don’t they sell? I think it’s because they wanted their own airplane for a long time, finally got it and don’t want to give that up.

For a lot of people, aircraft ownership is effectively a social club in addition to actually using the thing.  They like hanging out at the airport FBO or cafe, watching students work the traffic pattern, eating doughnuts and chewing the fat at the hangar owners meetings, etc.  Sure, they could do those things without owning an airplane, but ownership gives it a certain weight and cache'.

Then as folks age, it's often more and more difficult to go flying for a number of reasons, while the cost and time sink of keeping the airplane airworthy increases.  But if you give up on the flying and the airworthiness, the cost of staying in the social club becomes mostly fixed, relatively small, and is already baked into the retirement budget.  Every "club" has members like this, e.g. people who drive their golf cart to the 19th hole cafe every other day but haven't played a round in years.

People who are still flying find this sad, and lament seeing formerly airworthy airplanes rot on the ramp, with all purchase and partnership offers rejected.  To the extent you think of an airplane as a living object to be loved, I get it.  But in reality, it's just a machine, and it's really no one's place to tell the owner different as long as they're keeping up with hangar/tie down fees and taxes  It's no more or less sad than Grandma's mostly unused fine china ultimately going in the dumpster, or being sold for a dollar a plate at an estate sale.

[Schllc]

The confusing ones for me are the ones like N505WM which is on the ramp at KAPF.  The owner does not live here, nor does he even visit!

it sat, delinquent in rent for 7 or so years until the airport threatened to auction the plane.  I tried to buy it and the owner told me he would take $400k for it since that is what he saw on controller.  I passed.

The owner then had a new engine and prop put on the plane, and immediately refused to pay the shop, sell the plane or pay the ramp rent.  this was around 2019.  

It has sat on the ramp, in the sun, three flat tires and no cover, since then without being run once.  The airport has had to threaten auction a few times to get him to pay the rent, and he finally settled with the shop and paid them, but refuses to sell.

This makes no sense at all to me.

[A64Pilot]

30 minutes ago, Schllc said:

This makes no sense at all to me.

That’s a really unusual outlier, some just feel like they are entitled, the world owes them I guess. Airplane like that you would think would be in a hangar somewhere.

Most I think mean to fly but for some reason just don’t, the longer it’s been the harder it is to do, checkride lapses maybe they are working on getting their medical back after an event, annual lapses, maybe they were hit with financial issues, who knows, but it does hit a point of no return for them

I would certainly buy the theory of it’s just a machine, except they aren’t being made anymore, by allowing one to rot away, your depriving the next generation, and while I admit the future of the average guy being able to fly GA is Experimental aircraft, I hade to see it.

To be honest I hate seeing aircraft that aren’t transient tied down.

 

Edited April 24 by A64Pilot

[Schllc]

20 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

That’s a really unusual outlier, some just feel like they are entitled, the world owes them I guess. Airplane like that you would think would be in a hangar somewhere.

Most I think mean to fly but for some reason just don’t, the longer it’s been the harder it is to do, checkride lapses maybe they are working on getting their medical back after an event, annual lapses, maybe they were hit with financial issues, who knows, but it does hit a point of no return for them

I would certainly buy the theory of it’s just a machine, except they aren’t being made anymore, by allowing one to rot away, your depriving the next generation, and while I admit the future of the average guy being able to fly GA is Experimental aircraft, I hade to see it.

To be honest I hate seeing aircraft that aren’t transient tied down.

 

This guy owns a company that does something with avionics, and he is not a licensed pilot.

he told me he bought the plane around 2013 for his son to train in, and finished the training in 2015.  Has been sitting, rotting ever since.