Buying an older airplane

I don't see many people out taking great care of their 30 plus year old
172's.


Well, you just aren't hanging around the right places, then.

My 67 Skyhawk gets the most meticulous care and pampering. There's nothing I
enjoy more (besides flying her) than spending a sunny afternoon washing and
polishing her. She's been detailed at annual, had new paint and glass, and
many, many new additions (beacon, strobes, transponder, Strikefinder, air
vents, Rosen sunshields, headrests, new yoke covers, on and on . . . )

Besides, I have no intention of selling her anyway--so that's not anything that
enters into any decision I make regarding her.


www.Rosspilot.com

Why not? Selling an older airplane is often easier than selling a
newer one. Since they tend to be priced lower, there's a larger
market for them.


Um, you will have to define "newer" and "older"


My plane is of a 60s vintage. It's quite a popular model and I
don't think I'd have any trouble selling it. Folks with similar
planes generally sell them within a few weeks. I've flown a current
model('03) of my plane and there is very little real difference
between the two. The new bird is slower and carries less load, but is
constructed pretty much the same as the 60s version. The major
difference is in aquisition price (~$200K difference).


Will you have the same confidence about it holding its value for another 5
or 10 years?


Now you're getting into the "harder to sell" category. A popular
model also ensures that parts availability will not be a problem and
that most mechanics will be familiar with the airplane. These are big
pluses when considering the amount of time and expense that will be
required to maintain the aircraft.


I know what I am saying is counter to common wisdom, but the world is
getting ready to change. In 5 or 10 years, how many people are going to buy
a plane from the 60's to be flown 100 hours or more a year? The parts issue
starts to get less important to people buying a collectible as opposed to a
working plane. I believe the FAA may have an adverse affect on the older
working planes over the next few years. The cost of operation will be going
up. ( by working plane, I mean one that is bought by someone that places
more value on the flying part, than the owning part).



So, those with non-collectible old planes are not proud of them?
I'm willing to bet that you are not an airplane owner :-)

Don't be silly.

No, those buying non collectible planes are generally not buying them for
that reason. They are buying them to use. That means they are looking at
the cost of maintanence, safety, and dispatch reliability. They may be
looking for an unusual or fun flying experience.

I would make the argument that some owners are more proud than others.
Certainly there are proud owners of lots of common planes, and I enjoy
seeing them on the ramp. I am always complimentary of any well maintained
plane.

However, more and more of the generation where every man was a mechanic are
losing their medicals. The newer pilots are more affluent, and less
interested in spending time under the cowling. Great news for some, because
the value of older planes will be dropping. Many of the people on this
board do supervised work on their planes, but I see that type of pilot
becoming more rare.

Yes, your piper will have parts availability for a long time. That makes it
a safer investment and protects the value - to a point. It is also going to
get to the point where people consider it an antique. Rare antiques bring
more money. Your plane is likely in better shape than many of the same make
that are ten years newer, but how can you advertise your plane for sale on
the market without discounting yours against the newer ones?

There are not people lining up to buy 60's 172's for restoration. There are
surely a few, but there are lots and lots of those planes to go around.

Lastly, planes at that end of the market attract more tire kickers and
useless phone calls than I would want to take.

So, I am a plane owner, and I may be an owner of two planes before long. My
present one was built in this millenium, but I may be buying an older one
which will be more for looking at and showing off. I won't be taking my
family in it, and I won't be flying it IFR.

Hope no one took your bet.

As I said, I know that I am bucking the old school here, but I call them
like I see them, and I didn't get the money to buy a new plane by being
wrong all the time. Also, I didn't make it in the plane business, so feel
free to ignore me if you please







John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

Dude wrote:

I know what I am saying is counter to common wisdom, but the world is
getting ready to change.

No, it's not.


In 5 or 10 years, how many people are going to buy
a plane from the 60's to be flown 100 hours or more a year?

As many if not more than today.


The parts issue
starts to get less important to people buying a collectible as opposed to a
working plane. I believe the FAA may have an adverse affect on the older
working planes over the next few years. The cost of operation will be going
up. ( by working plane, I mean one that is bought by someone that places
more value on the flying part, than the owning part).

Baloney. The 50's thru the late 70's planes will always sell well
because that's when most of the planes were made. You will always have
less popular models such as the cheap Beech products but even they will
still sell. Models like the Cessna 140/170/172/180/182/185/205/206/210
can be easily sold today and will continue that way for the indefintite
future. Likewise with the Cherokee line.

And your evidence, feeling, or intuitive notions on why their will be no
change in the market is...?

Seriously, all you did was state that I was wrong. You didn't need all
those words for that.


"Newps" wrote in message
news:XZgbc.162460$Cb.1651398@attbi_s51...


Dude wrote:

I know what I am saying is counter to common wisdom, but the world is
getting ready to change.

No, it's not.


In 5 or 10 years, how many people are going to buy
a plane from the 60's to be flown 100 hours or more a year?

As many if not more than today.


The parts issue
starts to get less important to people buying a collectible as opposed
to a
working plane. I believe the FAA may have an adverse affect on the
older
working planes over the next few years. The cost of operation will be
going
up. ( by working plane, I mean one that is bought by someone that places
more value on the flying part, than the owning part).

Baloney. The 50's thru the late 70's planes will always sell well
because that's when most of the planes were made. You will always have
less popular models such as the cheap Beech products but even they will
still sell. Models like the Cessna 140/170/172/180/182/185/205/206/210
can be easily sold today and will continue that way for the indefintite
future. Likewise with the Cherokee line.

Again, it gets back to condition of the aircraft and your flight
preferences. I have a 1969 cherokee and had no problems buying
an "older" aircraft. compared to corresponding 90's archers,
mine has a service ceiling 2000-3000 higher (very important
out here in the mountains), a bit more load (not as important)
and considerably cheaper than the $150-250K price tag!

Know what? All archers and warriors and cherokees fly pretty
much the same. Other than moving to a completely different style
of aircraft (e.g. husky, cirrus, cubi, pitts) it really doesn't
make that much difference to me.

I was willing to buy a '69 with no corrosion (ok, some damage but
that was back in the 70s). Upkeep is going to be just about the
same - hangar, fuel, insurance, annuals, etc. But what I saved
buying the older aircraft certainly covers 5-10 years of those
upkeep expenses!

Would you have been just as happy to buy a 1963 model? Could have saved
even more money. I just think that we all have an emotional level of how
far back we want to go. I am certainly willing to admit that it is not
always rational. I would rather have a low time, mint condition 63 than a
well worn 83, but if I were looking to buy I would not really be looking at
the ads on '63 models.

Would I possibly be over looking a better plane - yes. Do I think that
many, if not most plane buyers are like me - yes. I could be wrong, but I
do know that we don't exactly have a representative sample of average plane
buyers here. If we did, controller, trade a plane, and aso would be out of
business




"Blanche" wrote in message
...
Again, it gets back to condition of the aircraft and your flight
preferences. I have a 1969 cherokee and had no problems buying
an "older" aircraft. compared to corresponding 90's archers,
mine has a service ceiling 2000-3000 higher (very important
out here in the mountains), a bit more load (not as important)
and considerably cheaper than the $150-250K price tag!

Know what? All archers and warriors and cherokees fly pretty
much the same. Other than moving to a completely different style
of aircraft (e.g. husky, cirrus, cubi, pitts) it really doesn't
make that much difference to me.

I was willing to buy a '69 with no corrosion (ok, some damage but
that was back in the 70s). Upkeep is going to be just about the
same - hangar, fuel, insurance, annuals, etc. But what I saved
buying the older aircraft certainly covers 5-10 years of those
upkeep expenses!

Dude wrote:
Would you have been just as happy to buy a 1963 model? Could have saved
even more money.

"Blanche" wrote in message
Again, it gets back to condition of the aircraft and your flight
preferences. I have a 1969 cherokee and had no problems buying
an "older" aircraft.

The 1969 cherokee was local, discovered after 18 months of looking.
Given all the particulars, it was a logical decision. I never put
a use-by date on my search but I did have a few minimum conditions,
such as 180 hp (minimum), reasonably good shape. Didn't care about
the cosmetics.

Dude wrote:
: Personally, I would not want to own a plane over 30 years old. Not that
: they are unsafe, just that I wouldn't want to have to sell it.

: I think they get harder to sell when they get a certain age. Also, it seems
: to go with decades. At this point, a sixties vintage bird just sounds OLD.
: It conjures up thoughts of antiques rather than used planes.

If you're referring to a "common" airplane, age seems to less important
then condition (as you state in a later post). The airport that I fly out
of has a large group of owners who take very good care of their aircraft,
not one of which is newer than 1975 - and many are much older. Only one I
would consider collectable, and that's a Swift. We have ramp queens, too,
but I would say about 1/2 the airplanes fly regularly and look good.
When I have shown some new pilots my airplane, thay cannot believe that
it is 36 years old (they have been flying reliable, but ugly, rentals -
all from the late 1980s, by the way). I don't think I have a collectable
airplane, but it is a desirable personal transportation airplane - despite
being older than I am. If I manage to maintain it in its present condition,
I will have no trouble selling it should I decide to. The only real
difference between my airplane and the 2004 model is in avionics. I could
have the same avionics installed into my airplane for a fraction of the
cost of changing airplanes. I am considering just this, perhaps next year
after the weather datalink settles out a bit and Chelton STC's their
autopilot for PA-28.

One other thing that I have not yet seen mentioned in this thread:
The supply of *certified* airplanes is not like that of autos. There is
a continuous reduction in the number of airplanes that are in existance.
The total yearly production does not appear to offset the number of
airplanes that are wrecked or scrapped - at least by my reading of the
NTSB data. Unless the supply of pilots decreases as well, one would think
that demand would increase.

: Having said all this, acquisition costs are not the sort of thing that bug
: me. If you are less concerned about the upkeep than the price tag or hangar
: hours, then you may enjoy the older bird more.

I don't entirely agree with your second sentence. There just aren't that many
components to break in a "common" fixed-gear airplane. Now, if the problem
cannot be diagnosed the airplane could be out of service for a long time.
I think that the diagnosis problem is unrelated to the age of the plane,
though, and newer airplanes may well be more difficult to diagnose.

I fly my airplane about 200 hours a year - probably 75 to 80 flights with
150 individual legs. I've had it for just over 3 years. I have *NEVER* had
the airplane not operate when I wanted it to. Certainly I have had items
break, and I have replaced other items that seemed to be on their last
legs. I think this policy is the key to dispatch reliability. On the other
hand, many folks seem to save up all their maintenance for annual time,
with the result of large annual bills and less than stellar reliability.

About your first sentence: Don't get me wrong. I applaud anyone who will
buy a new airplane. This ensures that the supply of airplanes will decrease
more slowly than otherwise. I personally don't see the additional value
over a used airplane in good condition, but that is my opinion, and you
know what they say about opinions...

--
Aaron Coolidge (N9376J)

What is your definition of "older aircraft"?
My definition is pre-1960. Then again, I fly a 45 Champ.

Kai Glaesner wrote:
Hello community,
imagine you consider byuing an older airplane, e.g. a Piper from the Pa-28
Arrow series: is there an age (or a year of birth ;-) you would not exceed?
If yes, for what reason (e.g. may be that corrosion-protection was not usual
before that year, or that copper was so expensive, they used something less
conductive as a replacement)?

jsmith wrote in message ...
What is your definition of "older aircraft"?
My definition is pre-1960. Then again, I fly a 45 Champ.



My Fairchild and Stinson were built in 1944, my Aero Commander was
built in 1957....The only big problem can be factory support for
aircraft over 20 years old, but there are almost always type or model
clubs that generate their own support network.

As to having N numbers changed, take the time and order the a/c
history and see what the reason was for the change. I know of several
aircraft that have gone through the change process to put personalized
numbers on them every time they were sold.

Craig C.