A good first aircraft Piper, Cessna or other?

[FlyAdventure]

I’ve recently finished my RPC through RAA and super excited. I have been thinking of the next steps. In the next 4.5 hours I will have my Passenger endorsement. I will then be working on my NAVS then possibly converting over to an RPL or PPL. But looking to the future I would be keen to buy an aircraft. I like Piper Cherokee but keen to hear what others think?

 

Like the piper tomahawk, but useable weight is to low. Need at least 300kg. Budget around $50k.

 

 

[pmccarthy]

$50k should get you a good Cherokee, 140 (160 hp) or even a 180. Probably will have 5000+ hours on airframe but that is ok so long as there is 500+ hours on the engine and prop which will probably last you 5-10 years. An equivalent 172 with SIDS may cost more. My preference is Piper but it is really a Ford vs Holden thing. But be aware annual maintenance will cost $2,000 plus either way.

 

 

[skippydiesel]

A common experience  - new pilot with all sorts of dreams/plans about flying a full loaded aircraft (family & friends) to exotic destinations.

 

Reality - after initial supportive enthusiasm family & friends have other things (than flying) to do and you find yourself alone in the air.

 

Yep! the occasional passenger comes along but that is an increasingly rare event.

 

Moral of the story - if you really want to purchase (& can afford the up front & ongoing running costs) go for a two seater and hire the 4+ when needed.

 

 

[kaz3g]

I’ve recently finished my RPC through RAA and super excited. I have been thinking of the next steps. In the next 4.5 hours I will have my Passenger endorsement. I will then be working on my NAVS then possibly converting over to an RPL or PPL. But looking to the future I would be keen to buy an aircraft. I like Piper Cherokee but keen to hear what others think?

 

Like the piper tomahawk, but useable weight is to low. Need at least 300kg. Budget around $50k.

 

Suggest you stay away from the Traumahawk...not one I’d recommend. The Cherokee is a super stable little aeroplane and the Lycoming O-320 is probably the most reliable old engine around. Cheaper flying in a C150-152 but has its limitations. High wing much better for off airport ops.

 

 

[facthunter]

Get it fully inspected for corrosion. I've seen a few shockers. They were not well proofed at the factory. No one expected this stuff to be in service  for so long.  Nev

 

 

[old man emu]

Be careful of buying a Cherokee without going into its airframe maintenance. y now, every Cherokee owner, from the earliest PA-28-180 to the most recent Arrow, has heard about the inflight wing separation that occurred April 4, 2018.

 

https://www.piperflyer.org/maintenance-technical/item/1161-pa-28-pa-32-wing-spar-cracks-what-you-should-know.html

 

The FAA published Airworthiness Directive 87-08-08,  only 36 days after the wing separation. Aircraft with less than 5,000 hours total time in service (TIS) had to comply before reaching 5,050 hours; aircraft with more than 5,000 hours TIS had to comply within the next 50 hours of flight time. The AD required that both wings be removed.

 

Complying with this AD is expensive, so factor that cost into a purchase price. If the inspection finds cracking you will be up for a new wing, and a 2nd hand one still has to pass the inspection before it can be fitted.

 

In applying "What's good for the goose is good for the gander", it would be a good idea to inspect wing attachments on any aircraft you were thinking of buying, especially if the TIS is getting high.

 

 

[skippydiesel]

Purchase a composite RAA aircraft - you will have better performance on less fuel (& cheaper), far less maintenance, quieter operation and  all for a lower acquisition cost - nothing to lose and everything to gain.

 

The old GA spam cans look great  (I lust love the look of a C 160) but will hit your wallet big time no matter what the initial purchase price is.

 

 

[facthunter]

IF you go RAAus  you are still currently involved with the uncertainty that has been there for the past 12 years. That unfortunately has to be a disincentive. if you need to know soon, just where it's at. IF you buy a BAD GA plane, the first service may exceed the purchase price  There's much at stake in a game where money can disappear  very quickly..Nev

 

 

[Litespeed]

Don't forget a lot of four seaters are marginal with four on board. Add full fuel and your over the limit for weight.

 

A Cherokee 140 should be avoided for anything but two up. They are gutless at best. .I would only consider one for flying flat areas in cool weather. And only if basically free, they are often abused, overworked and costs are huge for the performance. Climb is more feet per hour than minute.  Just Don't.

 

Unless you absolutely need four seats all the time, do yourself a big favour and hire when taking family.

 

Rarely will you need the seats.

 

 

[FlyAdventure]

A common experience  - new pilot with all sorts of dreams/plans about flying a full loaded aircraft (family & friends) to exotic destinations.

 

Reality - after initial supportive enthusiasm family & friends have other things (than flying) to do and you find yourself alone in the air.

 

Yep! the occasional passenger comes along but that is an increasingly rare event.

 

Moral of the story - if you really want to purchase (& can afford the up front & ongoing running costs) go for a two seater and hire the 4+ when needed.

 

Agreed, but seating is not an issue I don’t think there would ever be a time where I would want to fly with more than two people. I’m not looking for the biggest I can afford just something that has decent usable weight giving some flexibility. The main issue is that being 6,3ft and 100 kilo with passenger around the same my usable weight is chewed up pretty quick particularly in RAA. Even with the weigh increase I would have to look beyond the usual fleet. My thoughts on the pipers is that they offered decent cabin space along with carrying capacity I would need to achieve my goals. Plus they are relatively affordable. 

 

 

[SSCBD]

If you look for a share position in aircraft and how about jab or sling 4 seat.

 

 

[FlyAdventure]

I have been learning in the Jabs, the best one for space and usable weight has been the Jabiru 170 at 320ish empty kilos it gives enough for fuel and passenger  but the storage is limited. The jabiru 230 has the same MTOW the added weight of the engine makes fuel capacity along with passenger marginal. 

 

I don’t mind the slings and a four seater may be the trick. I think shares have their benefits but always wonder how well those arrangements go. Heard some horror stories with different personalities in share arrangements. 

 

 

[Possum1]

Mrs Possum and I have owned a 1974 Piper Cherokee Cruiser(PA28 - 140) since 2007. We have just returned from a five day stay at Stanthorpe where climb performance and altitude capability are a must for a smooth and safe ride over the 4,500' peaks in the intersecting ranges of the MacPherson Range and the Great Dividing Range. This was a smooth flight today of 57 minutes to Archerfield at an average speed of 110 knots with a nice little 10 knot tailwind most of the way.

 

Our little Cherokee has the ability to cope with much worse weather than this by either climbing to an altitude above the mountain waves or maintaining an altitude if we are in them. Having said that, in this part of the world, a combination of low cloud and high winds are a no-go.

 

We also did a nice easy take-off and climb-out out of Stanthorpe's 3000' altitude runway with 2 POB, a ridiculous amount of luggage and 90 litres of fuel.

 

1. The proposed wingspar AD is by no means law yet and with US AOPA and Piper dead against it, it is unlikely to succeed in its present form or at all. The similar 1987 AD was cancelled after 6 months.

 

2. Costs. I think $2000 for an Annual is a bit hopeful. You are expecting that there will nothing to fix on a 45 year-old aircraft! Our annual this year was $5,000 which included 7 additional items including surface corrosion removed and a new throttle cable installed and we were happy with that. The best is around $3,500 and the worst was $17,000(wings removed and corrosion removed and both forward spars replaced!)

 

3. The 160 HP engine is a must. If your Cherokee does not have this conversion, do it properly(and legally) at your next overhaul with a RAM STC.

 

4. Met-co-aire wingtips or other Hoerner type scallopped wingtips which mimic the Warrior wingtips give very nice balanced aileron response, less drag and a slightly improved stall speed.

 

5. This is a two seater in reality with a huge amount of room for luggage on the rear seats and in the baggage area. The rear seats otherwise are for short joyflights with primary school-age children only.

 

6. We plan at 32 L/hour and get it with leaning. BEW for this aircraft is 630kg and MTOW is 975kg. Archerfield to Melbourne(Essendon) is 7.5 hours with one fuel stop at Dubbo.

 

7. Avoid the cheap 60s and early 70s Cherokees. They do not have a standard instrument panel. You will also have difficulty sourcing parts whereas 1974 onwards Cherokees have a strong parts commonality with Warriors and parts are much easier and cheaper to find.

 

8. Have some use for this plane other than joyflights with your friends. We have a rental property to maintain at one destination and a caravan by a runway to maintain at another and an annual trip to Melbourne to do because Mrs P is an ex-Melbourne girl.

 

9. Even though this is a cheap aircraft to run, relatively speaking, we can do this because our house is paid off and we both work and go halves in all the costs.

 

10. On long trips, I do miss not having a constant speed prop and an auto-pilot even though Mrs Possum is a great smooth weather autopilot!

 

Hope the above helps.

 

 

[FlyAdventure]

Thanks Possum ? 

 

That advice is golden and exactly what I am after it really give me a good idea around of ownership and flying is like. Seems they are a good option and as you say there will always be something to maintain but that is part and parcel of the age of the aircraft. 

 

I appreciate the comment and will start looking in to some of your points.

 

Thanks 

 

 

[Thruster88]

Be careful of buying a Cherokee without going into its airframe maintenance. y now, every Cherokee owner, from the earliest PA-28-180 to the most recent Arrow, has heard about the inflight wing separation that occurred April 4, 2018.

 

https://www.piperflyer.org/maintenance-technical/item/1161-pa-28-pa-32-wing-spar-cracks-what-you-should-know.html

 

The FAA published Airworthiness Directive 87-08-08,  only 36 days after the wing separation. Aircraft with less than 5,000 hours total time in service (TIS) had to comply before reaching 5,050 hours; aircraft with more than 5,000 hours TIS had to comply within the next 50 hours of flight time. The AD required that both wings be removed.

 

Complying with this AD is expensive, so factor that cost into a purchase price. If the inspection finds cracking you will be up for a new wing, and a 2nd hand one still has to pass the inspection before it can be fitted.

 

In applying "What's good for the goose is good for the gander", it would be a good idea to inspect wing attachments on any aircraft you were thinking of buying, especially if the TIS is getting high.

 

Ad 87-08-08 the one from 1987 was cancelled after a short time.

 

The current proposal if it gets up is far less draconian. Remove the two outer bolts from the lower spar on each side so an eddiy current NDT can be performed. One must remember that more than 30,000 pa-28's have been produced. 

 

 

 

 

[skippydiesel]

Agreed, but seating is not an issue I don’t think there would ever be a time where I would want to fly with more than two people. I’m not looking for the biggest I can afford just something that has decent usable weight giving some flexibility. The main issue is that being 6,3ft and 100 kilo with passenger around the same my usable weight is chewed up pretty quick particularly in RAA. Even with the weigh increase I would have to look beyond the usual fleet. My thoughts on the pipers is that they offered decent cabin space along with carrying capacity I would need to achieve my goals. Plus they are relatively affordable. 

 

Hmm! - this makes RAA a little difficult but certainly not impossible. There are 300 kg composites with 600 kg max, so you will still have 100 kg for fuel & a toothbrush or two. Cost might be an issue however as the ones I represent start at about $110,000 but you can get $135 knot cruise on a Rotax 912 ULS using  about  18 L/h ULP

 

 

[pmccarthy]

I have similar weight issues and have tried carbon fibre RAA but the PA-28 works for me at present.

 

after selling my “ plastic fantastic” and buying a Piper Archer I had $50,000 in the bank for fuel and maintenance.

 

 

[antonts]

Moral of the story - if you really want to purchase (& can afford the up front & ongoing running costs) go for a two seater and hire the 4+ when needed.

 

+1. And not an ordinary 2seater, but something capable to do something interesting. Aerobatics, bush flights, seaplane (there are some LSA amph seaplanes), speedy touring - not just a flying (old) ordinary holden! Explore new places (where usual plane can not land at all), new things, new possibilities. Use it as great toy!

 

Like a (second or even 3rd) fun car - it may be historic rarity or race bullet, 4*4 or campervan, bus or truck, but never an ordinary sedan, too young to be in museum but too old to be a toy by itself.

 

 

[skippydiesel]

I have similar weight issues and have tried carbon fibre RAA but the PA-28 works for me at present.

 

after selling my “ plastic fantastic” and buying a Piper Archer I had $50,000 in the bank for fuel and maintenance.

 

Fair enough but at

 

• about the same cruise; 100 -135 knots 
   
  
• 32 + L/h ; 16-14 l/h (ULP) more than a 912 at the same/lower cruise ,
   
  
• range 465 nm; composite/912 range 600-670 nm
   
  
• corrosion & fatigue issues; unlikely in a composite airframe
   
  
• 660 ft/min anemic climb; my  912/composite will easily do 1000 + ft/min & 80 knots
   
  
• my composit has a take off role, on short grass, of 100 m, with full fuel - much less on a sealed runway.
   
  
• 45 knot stall; about 27-12 knots faster or less safe if you like
   
  
• you have about a 100 kg payload advantage with the PA-28
   
  
• PA-28 very much noisier in & out than a 912 powered composite.
   
  
• maintenance ; I suggest you will need all of the $50K +.
   
  
• After all that the PA-28 is a classic for sure - enjoy!
   
  

 

[pmccarthy]

All true, and the RAA aircraft is more fun. I miss the short field capability and climb rate. But a 20 litre per hour penalty is $30 per hour ( my PA-28 runs on MOGAS) so at the 50 hours per year most people do it is $1500 per year and it will take many years to make up the difference. I haven’t found annuals a big cost in five years so far.

 

 

[Thruster88]

I have similar weight issues and have tried carbon fibre RAA but the PA-28 works for me at present.

 

after selling my “ plastic fantastic” and buying a Piper Archer I had $50,000 in the bank for fuel and maintenance.

 

The other advantage is the hidden cost, depreciation. Some "plastic fantastic's" appear to suffer horribly from it like 50k or more in ten years. Your Archer is obviously a good one with a steady or increasing value.  

 

 

[skippydiesel]

The other advantage is the hidden cost, depreciation. Some "plastic fantastic's" appear to suffer horribly from it like 50k or more in ten years. Your Archer is obviously a good one with a steady or increasing value.  

 

My maths is poor however this statement seems to be lacking somewhat. Very roughly indeed-

 

- you purchase your average a GA single engine occasional/minimal 4 seater, aircraft for somewhere between $300,k & $500, k - it costs you an arm and a leg to maintain & run every year and is worth may be & $25 k- $100 k in $20 - 30 years.

 

- you purchase your RAA composite for betweem $100k & $200k, minimal annual operating costs and its worth $25k - $100 k in 20 years

 

What's so hidden & who has the greater depreciation ??

 

A very small number of recognised "classic" aircraft may indeed be slowly appreciating as is their cost of ownership ( parts become harder & more costly to find, metal corrodes wood & fabric degrades). The vast majority end up as scrap!

 

 

[kaz3g]

Mrs Possum will also appreciate the smoother ride in the PA28, compared to those lighter jobs. And the ability to pack more than knickers and bra for a trip away.

 

 

[facthunter]

 IF you are serious about tripping about Australia get a good used C-180 and learn to land it. Some of them are built to seaplane standards of corrosion proofing and are stronger in some places also. Planes operated near the sea and left unhangared are very suspect long term. Most conventionally built planes can be repaired pretty successfully if damaged and if it's commercially worth doing. The hiwing Cessna's are one of the best for getting out of hot and high(er) places. Definitely one of the best flaps (fowler) in the game. Nev

 

 

[skippydiesel]

Mrs Possum will also appreciate the smoother ride in the PA28, compared to those lighter jobs. And the ability to pack more than knickers and bra for a trip away.

 

True - the low wing loading of RAA types does make them a bit twitchy at times. My boss & I are on the more compact side of the curve, so packing everything needed for a 3-4 day camping trip is doable (just) with care.

 

Its a bit like comparing a motorcycle with a 4x4  - both have their supporters.