Resource for choosing a plane?

So, I've decided to go for my first airplane. As I get started looking for
"the" airplane, I'm hoping I can find some help here in narrowing my
choices. The more I look, the more overwhelmed I get. I'm starting to
think that finding & buying the damn thing will be anticlimactic--deciding
*what* to buy is the hard part!!

What I'd really like to find is some sort of direct comparison tool--like
you find in an auto magazine, say--such as a table with columns listing
features, with added commentary on each model's pros and cons. From reading
this group, I've found a couple of browsing tools, but nothing that really
hits the mark. Suggestions? Ideally, I'd really like an online database
that I can play with different parameters and see different results....

While I've got your eye, I may as well solicit direct advice, too. All the
opinions I've formed so far are written in Jell-O, so please poke holes in
any misconceptions you may spot.

Me:
~4,200 hours: mostly in heavies (various C-135 models); a few hundred in
USAF trainers (T-37/T-38); and about 150 in GA SEL airplanes (Cessnas,
Pipers, and Grummans). PP/SEL, CP/MEL, Instrument, & ATP tickets. My only
GA complex time is the ~4.5 in the Seneca I took my ATP in.

What I've eliminated:
- Twin: in my budget range, twins seem to double (or more) operating
expense for little if any performance gain--redundancy seems to be the real
value-added for entry-level twins. Not that I'm knocking redundancy, but
this prospect will be a wallet-strain as it is.
- Experimentals/Homebuilts/Warbirds: I don't have the fortitude to deal
with the idiosyncrasies of non-certificated. First time out calls for baby
steps.
- Turbines/Floats/Fabric wings/anything else "weird": baby steps again.
- Combine all of the above: I've eliminated everything that's NOT a
certificated, piston, SEL w/ metal hull/wings.

Assumptions/Considerations:
- I will be starting to fly soon w/ a local club that has Cessnas (fixed
and c/s prop models) and Arrows--in addition to currency (I haven't flown GA
for 8+ years, and my last heavy flight was February [now in staff job ]),
I plan to use that time to get comfortable in a small airplane again,
comfortable with a c/s prop, etc.
- I'm less concerned about acquisition cost than recurring
costs--especially if I can find a circumstance where spending a bit more
up-front buys a plane requiring less outlay for maintenance, insurance,
whatever. I've set a ceiling of $100K, but that's only a notional number at
this point. All things being equal, cheaper is better, of course....
- I've had mixed information on just "how much" extra maintenance (read:
$$$) is required on a retract vs fixed gear, and/or c/s vs fixed prop. What
about turbo-charging? I really need to learn in this area....
- I have no idea what my insurance situation will be; I've been assuming
that any time-in-type requirements won't be too restrictive given my
experience, and that I'll be able to get that time w/ an instructor easily
enough.
- I live in Colorado Springs. Airport elevations here run between ~6,000'
and ~7,000', and I'm told 10,000'+ density altitude is commonplace in the
summer. Do I need turbo-charging?
- I want a "real" four-seater, whether that means a heavy-lifting four-seat
or a six-seat. I'm also pretty broad across the shoulders, and not small in
any dimension (6'0", 250#), so comfort is a consideration.
- I want reasonable speed--150 knots-ish seems about right, more is
better....
- I prefer low-wing, but that's a marginal distinction for me. I do wonder
if I'll ever get the urge to land on grass/gravel/etc, in which case I
assume I'd want the high-wing w/ fixed gear, yes?

Thoughts:
It sounds like I want a Mooney for speed & fuel economy, a Dakota for
lifting, and Bonanza for size--or something like that! That brings me back
to my original request, for a means to make direct comparisons between the
various choices out there--I'm having trouble determining what & how I need
to make trade-offs without that sort of tool....

Thanks for any help!

--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)

Douglas Paterson wrote:

What I'd really like to find is some sort of direct comparison tool--like
you find in an auto magazine, say--such as a table with columns listing
features, with added commentary on each model's pros and cons. From reading
this group, I've found a couple of browsing tools, but nothing that really
hits the mark. Suggestions?

I know of nothing out there. What I did when I was shopping for my first
aircraft was to buy a copy of Bill Clarke's "The Illustrated Buyer's Guide to
Used Airplanes" and make lists of possible candidates. You should be able to
throw together a table or spreadsheet of possibilities. There won't be too many
singles that fit all of your conditions.

George Patterson
Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
your slightly older self.

I have that book on backorder from Amazon! Should have it in a week or two
(so they say)....

Thanks!

--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring, "Twilight
Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate change
to contact me)

"George Patterson" wrote in message
news:QuIuf.2936$If.451@trnddc05...
Douglas Paterson wrote:

What I'd really like to find is some sort of direct comparison tool--like
you find in an auto magazine, say--such as a table with columns listing
features, with added commentary on each model's pros and cons. From
reading this group, I've found a couple of browsing tools, but nothing
that really hits the mark. Suggestions?

I know of nothing out there. What I did when I was shopping for my first
aircraft was to buy a copy of Bill Clarke's "The Illustrated Buyer's Guide
to Used Airplanes" and make lists of possible candidates. You should be
able to throw together a table or spreadsheet of possibilities. There
won't be too many singles that fit all of your conditions.

George Patterson
Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
your slightly older self.

Doug.. sounds like you've narrowed it down correctly..
based on your "size" a Turbo Arrow may be too small.. same for the Mooney's.
"If I were you", I'd set my sights on a Turbo Bonanza (yes I think you want
turbo if you are planning on flying anywhere west of Denver) B-36TCs are not
"cheap" but might be found in the under $150K range.

I am (retired) based out of Las Vegas and fly Seneca II (Turbo) on a regular
basis. Normally aspirated Arrow or Bonanza (285HP V35B) do just fine, but
climbs are anemic in summer if near max gross weight.

A Turbo Lance (Cherokee 6) may get the "heavy lift" you seek, but not as
fast.
BT

"Douglas Paterson" wrote in message
...
So, I've decided to go for my first airplane. As I get started looking
for "the" airplane, I'm hoping I can find some help here in narrowing my
choices. The more I look, the more overwhelmed I get. I'm starting to
think that finding & buying the damn thing will be anticlimactic--deciding
*what* to buy is the hard part!!

What I'd really like to find is some sort of direct comparison tool--like
you find in an auto magazine, say--such as a table with columns listing
features, with added commentary on each model's pros and cons. From
reading this group, I've found a couple of browsing tools, but nothing
that really hits the mark. Suggestions? Ideally, I'd really like an
online database that I can play with different parameters and see
different results....

While I've got your eye, I may as well solicit direct advice, too. All
the opinions I've formed so far are written in Jell-O, so please poke
holes in any misconceptions you may spot.

Me:
~4,200 hours: mostly in heavies (various C-135 models); a few hundred in
USAF trainers (T-37/T-38); and about 150 in GA SEL airplanes (Cessnas,
Pipers, and Grummans). PP/SEL, CP/MEL, Instrument, & ATP tickets. My
only GA complex time is the ~4.5 in the Seneca I took my ATP in.

What I've eliminated:
- Twin: in my budget range, twins seem to double (or more) operating
expense for little if any performance gain--redundancy seems to be the
real value-added for entry-level twins. Not that I'm knocking redundancy,
but this prospect will be a wallet-strain as it is.
- Experimentals/Homebuilts/Warbirds: I don't have the fortitude to deal
with the idiosyncrasies of non-certificated. First time out calls for
baby steps.
- Turbines/Floats/Fabric wings/anything else "weird": baby steps again.
- Combine all of the above: I've eliminated everything that's NOT a
certificated, piston, SEL w/ metal hull/wings.

Assumptions/Considerations:
- I will be starting to fly soon w/ a local club that has Cessnas (fixed
and c/s prop models) and Arrows--in addition to currency (I haven't flown
GA for 8+ years, and my last heavy flight was February [now in staff job
]), I plan to use that time to get comfortable in a small airplane
again, comfortable with a c/s prop, etc.
- I'm less concerned about acquisition cost than recurring
costs--especially if I can find a circumstance where spending a bit more
up-front buys a plane requiring less outlay for maintenance, insurance,
whatever. I've set a ceiling of $100K, but that's only a notional number
at this point. All things being equal, cheaper is better, of course....
- I've had mixed information on just "how much" extra maintenance (read:
$$$) is required on a retract vs fixed gear, and/or c/s vs fixed prop.
What about turbo-charging? I really need to learn in this area....
- I have no idea what my insurance situation will be; I've been assuming
that any time-in-type requirements won't be too restrictive given my
experience, and that I'll be able to get that time w/ an instructor easily
enough.
- I live in Colorado Springs. Airport elevations here run between
~6,000' and ~7,000', and I'm told 10,000'+ density altitude is commonplace
in the summer. Do I need turbo-charging?
- I want a "real" four-seater, whether that means a heavy-lifting
four-seat or a six-seat. I'm also pretty broad across the shoulders, and
not small in any dimension (6'0", 250#), so comfort is a consideration.
- I want reasonable speed--150 knots-ish seems about right, more is
better....
- I prefer low-wing, but that's a marginal distinction for me. I do
wonder if I'll ever get the urge to land on grass/gravel/etc, in which
case I assume I'd want the high-wing w/ fixed gear, yes?

Thoughts:
It sounds like I want a Mooney for speed & fuel economy, a Dakota for
lifting, and Bonanza for size--or something like that! That brings me
back to my original request, for a means to make direct comparisons
between the various choices out there--I'm having trouble determining what
& how I need to make trade-offs without that sort of tool....

Thanks for any help!

--
Doug
"Where am I to go/Now that I've gone too far?" -- Golden Earring,
"Twilight Zone"
(my email is spam-proofed; read the address and make the appropriate
change to contact me)

There is really not much to choose from that meets all of your criteria
in the under $100K category. Someone makes a real nice turboprop conversion
for the Cessna 210. I forget the manufacturer but I had a chance to gawk
at one when it stopped in for fuel a couple of months ago. Based on the
numbers that aircraft would fit your profile fairly well, except it
would exceed $100K.

kontiki wrote:
Someone makes a real nice turboprop conversion
for the Cessna 210. I forget the manufacturer but I had a chance to gawk
at one when it stopped in for fuel a couple of months ago. Based on the
numbers that aircraft would fit your profile fairly well, except it
would exceed $100K.

This: http://www.onaircraft.com/Silver%20Eagle.htm

Pathfinder/Dakota/Turbo Dakota may give you the most bang for your buck
while filling most if not all of your requirements. $100,000 will give you
several to pick from.
Jim

Pathfinder/Dakota/Turbo Dakota may give you the most bang for your buck
while filling most if not all of your requirements. $100,000 will give
you
several to pick from.

My thoughts exactly.

It's not *quite* 150 knots, (more like 140, in our Pathfinder), but it's a
true 4-place plane (1400 pound useful load) that can be landed on grass
comfortably.

If you have any detailed questions about the breed, fell free to ask.
(Also, check this site out: http://www.pa28.com/cherokee235/home.htm )
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 15:28:49 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Pathfinder/Dakota/Turbo Dakota may give you the most bang for your buck
while filling most if not all of your requirements. $100,000 will give
you
several to pick from.

My thoughts exactly.

It's not *quite* 150 knots, (more like 140, in our Pathfinder), but it's a
true 4-place plane (1400 pound useful load) that can be landed on grass
comfortably.

The PA28-235 is a great plane, but is this true in Colorado Springs?
In the summer?

My Cherokee 180 serves as a wonderful 2-place in the Midwest, but when
I visited Boulder in the summer, takeoff and climbout were less than
spectacular, and I was 200lbs under gross.

Thus why I also suggested the Turbo Dakota. It really depends on the
mission or what percentage of his missions would be 4 place/full fuel out of
CS.

Everything is a trade off and priorities need to be addressed. The $100,000
price limit would also limit the number of well equipped Turbo Dakotas
available but if my missions were mostly at heavy takeoff weights I would
definitely put my priorities in the Turbo column over the "well equipped"
column.

Once you get the engine/airframe you want, everything else is simply money.
Make it what you want after it meets your performance requirements. A glass
cockpit will never decrease your takeoff distance or increase your climb
rate.

YMMV.
Jim