What aircraft would best fit...

[Murrgh]

Flying from NJ to VA?

The situation I'm in is this.. I'll have my PPL VFR by Mid May and will be commuting from VA to NJ monthly, which is a ~275nm trip, one way. I currently am training in a C172 equipped with a G1000 and is the only aircraft I have flown (There's about 6-8 C172/G1000 each with different features, we rotate flying each one)

Flying commercially is roughly $800 for one person, I may have another passenger which would double the cost. Trains are not an option, seeing as it isn't much cheaper than flying commercially.

This is where I need advice...

I can rent a C172, which would work for the weekend trips, but they're $169.99/hr, and I can't keep them with me while I'm in NJ for weeks or longer.

So what aircraft would you recommend using for this? I am relatively new to Aviation and would love to hear advice from every prospective. I would like to fly something as new as the 172's with G1000's, but that's not a requirement.

Thanks,
Murrgh

 

[Jim Logajan]

Pretty much any simple 4-seat fixed gear 150-180HP airplane would do the job nicely, including the Cessna C-172/177, Piper PA28-150-181, Grumman AA-5/5A/5B, and Beech 19/23. The 180 HP planes would be faster, and cost only marginally more to operate, but would like cost at least $10K more than their 150-160HP cousins (that's the balance of market supply and demand at work). All are excellent choices for a first ownership experience due to their simplicity and good support. They'd all also be excellent platforms for your instrument training, as you're really going an IR to need to be making that run routinely.

No doubt plenty of folks will tell you need something with retractable gear or a much bigger engine, but that simply isn't so, and you'd be paying a lot more up front as well as in operating and ownership costs for capability you aren't planning to use. Given your current level of experience, a nice simple 4-seater makes the most sense for you and your mission. Fly that for a few years including getting your IR and some serious IFR experience in such a plane, and then you can decide if a bigger, faster, more complex, more expensive airplane makes sense for you.

The above is good solid reasoning (because it matches what I worked out myself :wink2: )

Additionally, when you throw in the commute time to and from each airport, pre-flight and fueling time, you'll have enough over-head time you can't rid yourself of that the time saved between a "fast" plane and a "slow" one is going to save only a small percentage of the total travel time. But the cost for speed doesn't go up linearly - a 180 kt airplane cost way more than twice a 90 kt airplane, all else being equal. (The purchase prices seem to increase roughly as the square of the speed, or more. That is true of the physics, where the energy cost increases with the square of the speed and the engine power has to increase with the cube of the speed.)

If you didn't have a passenger then even a C-152 with long range tanks could do the job! Consider, using "book" numbers to fly 275 nm:

C-152: 106 kts, 2:36 flying time
C-172R: 122 kts, 2:15 flying time
C-182T: 145 kts: 1:54 flying time

How much is that 42 minutes worth to you? What is the cost differential between the C-152 and C-182T? The C-152 takes 37% more flight time. That doesn't include the following which would reduce the percentage savings further:

Preflight, taxi, runup: :15 to :20
Landing taxi, shutdown, and securing airplane: :05 to :10
Commute to/from airport: ?
Fueling time: ?

 

[Jim Logajan]

Now, refigure those numbers with a 30kt headwind, and an additional 10-15 kts from a Bo or Co that hold nearly 7 hours of fuel.

Against the lowly C-152:

130 kts vs 76 kts:
2:07 vs 3:37

1:30 (71%) faster.

If you always run into 30 kt headwinds, even at low altitude, and then both ways, why yes that might be a reason to go for a faster plane.

Long distances or perpetual headwinds: yes, I'd consider a faster airplane.

 

[Jim Logajan]

Three things a pilot has never said about a cross country plane.

1. I wish it was slower
2. I wish it had less horsepower.
3. I wish it had a simpler panel.

Get the most speed, HP and panel you can afford. All three are much cheaper to buy up front. I burned quite a few $1000 bills learning that lesson.

Do you work for the government? I ask only because you sure seem at ease spending other people's money. The OP mentioned $150k - possibly more. You should have it spent in no time.

The physics and engineering of airplanes has conspired to make the cost of speed go up very quickly as one tries to make them go faster. I submit that many people simply don't bother to do all the math about what those marginal speed increases cost.

Since the OP presumably has the ability to spend the budgeted amount, they are no doubt equally astute enough to consider the highly non-linear cost for that speed - once it is pointed out. After that it is a matter of subjective preference.

 

[Jim Logajan]

My suggestion to OP was to buy all the speed, HP and avionics he can afford, and I get accused of being a government worker for that

Sorry - that was mean of me. But at least I didn't accuse you of being a (shudder) politician.