The Never Ending Fun Debate

[facthunter]

a
As a hobby it HAS to be about what YOU like a plane to be and COST. It's hard to have a really cheap satisfying flying experience. SOME of them can make a profit for the operator but there's usually easier ways of making money without the PAIN.  Nev

[Garfly]

34 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

 delivering copious quantities of lead to the atmosphere

Lead?!   Hopefully few 912's do. 

 

C02, maybe.

 

(But if you're up there for the view, a high wing is quite efficient  ;- )

[danny_galaga]

I hear Cirrus make fuel efficient planes.

[skippydiesel]

23 minutes ago, danny_galaga said:

I hear Cirrus make fuel efficient planes.

They may be,as in L/hr divided by number seats and trip/sector time. I have heard/read that some commercial level (very many seats) can be quite fuel efficient however as Nev said above - "As a hobby it HAS to be about what YOU like a plane to be and COST"

 

Not many people on this Forum are into commercial aircraft (as a hobby/personal transporter) or for that matter aircraft like the Cirrus range - big purchase and running dollars and if you can't fill the seats on a regular basis - may be hard to justify (assuming that justification might be on the owners radar😁).

[danny_galaga]

10 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

They may be,as in L/hr divided by number seats and trip/sector time. I have heard/read that some commercial level (very many seats) can be quite fuel efficient however as Nev said above - "As a hobby it HAS to be about what YOU like a plane to be and COST"

 

Not many people on this Forum are into commercial aircraft (as a hobby/personal transporter) or for that matter aircraft like the Cirrus range - big purchase and running dollars and if you can't fill the seats on a regular basis - may be hard to justify (assuming that justification might be on the owners radar😁).

OBJECTION!

 

(Am I doing it right? ) 😄 

[spacesailor]

I'll second your objection. 

As most on here , fly only one seat filled .

Insurance against losing your house & assets .

spacesailor

[danny_galaga]

forgot to add

 

 

[pmccarthy]

When I saw my first Carbon Cub I fell in love with it but thought $220,000 was ridiculously expensive.

[facthunter]

How closely did you look into the construction. What's a new C172 worth?

[Reynard]

A new C172 is approx AUD600k + GST ex works in the US.

Probably wouldn’t get much or any change out of $750k to get a new one to Oz and flying.

[kgwilson]

That must be without compulsory insurance that Yanks have to pay. The cheapest in the US is over 500k US including lifetime insurance.

[Reynard]

Fair enough - it’s been a while since I looked. It’d be interesting to see what multiple of the average pay that represents now vs say 1960 to buy the Labrador of the skies.

 

I recall the price of spare parts from Textron would also make your eyes water.

[Reynard]

An archive website suggests the list price of a C172 in 1956 was ~US$9,000.

[facthunter]

I flew a BRAND NEW on it about '64 and the NEW smell inside was something to remember. Also that one is never going to fly better than it does then.  Nev

[Deano747]

39 minutes ago, facthunter said:

 Also that one is never going to fly better than it does then.  Nev

Flew an airplane I had flown many times previously from new for 1st flight after repair (fairly major) and it flew way better than out of the factory. Tolerances, rigging etc new are "as long as it is in tolerance it's OK" whereas the repair put everything smack in the middle of where it should be. 

Edited April 9 by Deano747

[danny_galaga]

1 hour ago, Reynard said:

An archive website suggests the list price of a C172 in 1956 was ~US$9,000.

Apparently the average age of men in the US was $3600 in 1956.

 

Seems a new c172 is about $400000, and the average US wage is about 64000. So definitely more expensive now by roughly a factor of two.

 

I suppose it's not surprising for us since one of the attractions of ultralights etc is a lower entry price.

[spacesailor]

The lower entry price, is even lower , If , you can put your own labour 

into it , also your pride of workmanship vs the workmanship of a paid to produce 

Person.

Your, dream machine . Why cut corners if a little extra work fills you with pleasure of a job well done .

spacesailor

[Reynard]

2 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

Apparently the average age of men in the US was $3600 in 1956.

 

Seems a new c172 is about $400000, and the average US wage is about 64000. So definitely more expensive now by roughly a factor of two.

 

I suppose it's not surprising for us since one of the attractions of ultralights etc is a lower entry price.

and your safe, fuel efficient Cirrus has a list price of US$1m + goodies.

 

The appreciation in price of used aircraft over the last few years has been truly remarkable as well, possibly pulled up in part by the price of the newies.

[skippydiesel]

3 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

Apparently the average age of men in the US was $3600 in 1956.

 

Yeah! They always look young and well -healed on TV😁

 

[danny_galaga]

3 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

 

Jesus, this stupid 15 minute no edit thing on this site...

 

Obviously should say WAGE 🤪 

[spacesailor]

I thought it was meant to be .

Wage , not Age .

I read between the lines far to often it seems .

spacesailor

[skippydiesel]

4 hours ago, danny_galaga said:

Jesus, this stupid 15 minute no edit thing on this site...

 

Obviously should say WAGE 🤪 

Your no fun!!😈

[danny_galaga]

2 hours ago, skippydiesel said:

Your no fun!!😈

 

 

[BirdDog]

I have flown and flown in a few aircraft in this category, and I was sceptical before I bought mine, but a Bristell NG5 does it for me.  Fast, comfy and looks sexy as!!  😄 

Seriously though - one of the most roomy cockpits in its class, with adjustable pedals etc etc. 

If I had the tenacity, I would drop a 916 in it and try and tear the wings off!!  😂

[spacesailor]

Now with a new name " Bristell Classic ".

They also have an ' Electric trainer ' . The company should go far .

spacesailor