Shoe on the wrong foot...
 

Keven,

That TOO is a misnomer! It 'may' be required, but there is always a work around. Besides, who in their right mind would accept one of those 'standard' attorney written lease agreements with all of the cookies in THEIR basket? Ever hear of 'NEGOTIATING' a lease agreement? Lopsided, or one-sided agreements are for the misinformed, not someone who thinks on their own two feet.

[Off topic content removed by webmaster.]

SkyKing

SkyKing:

Perhaps your local aviation community doesn't suffer from a shortage of hangars like mine does. There are hundreds of people on waiting lists to get a hangar. Those folks who want to "negotiate" the terms of the standard lease simply don't get hangars. Take it or leave it. It truly is that simple around here. If you were ever in a position of having too much demand for whatever you were supplying, you would probably deal the same way. Supply -- Demand, and Market Forces. They even out and find a balance of what people are willing to pay, and do, given certain economies, circumstances, etc.

Concerning flouride, dementia, etc., those are just bizarre comments not well suited for this board.

Keven
________
No2 vaporizer

The same is true in this part of the country. In GRR, AZO, BTL, don't like the terms, don't want to comply, step aside, we got lots more people who are willing to comply with our terms. on the sunny west coast, it's probably not a big deal, but here, where snow, hail ( I say that because it was just hailing outside and thunder too!!) are regular features of our weather, it is a big deal

What do you do?
 

Removed. Let's talk about the airplanes folks.

Kevin

Re: re low time pilot and skymaster
 

If you are that low time and don't have an instrument rating all I can say is a PA-28 can kill you as fast as a 337. I'm not saying this to be critical but remember JFK jr. what happend to him, and why. low time and in over his head it's very easy to find your self in that situation. My best advise is go get an instrument rating. and should you find yourself in a situation like that again what's wrong with slowing down??. But do us both a favor and go get the instrument rating, it's a different (and safer) world.

good luck

jfk jr was a bozo, a lot of people think they are the center of the universe, but they don't kill three others (what a jerk). i went from at pa28 to a "p" without a problem (also had a lot of help from a lot of great cfii's (50hrs or so). i knew my limitations but they shrank them. so it's really how you approach the next level; am i mr. big who can't pass the bar or a little morew humble and learn from the one who proceeded you.

Engines
 

There hasn't been any activity in this subject for a while so i'll relate a discussion I had with a local pilot last week.
My man had just been to look at an airplane that was really a terrible wess and he decided against it, He then mentioned that he was going to maybe look at an airplane with 2100 hours TT on airframe and both engines.
As we talked it occurred to me that, since 2100 hour engines still running without problems could be considered in the realm of miracles, the seller would have to GIVE him the airplane in order to make the transaction reasonable.

Bob

engine time.
 

Not so! I own my second Skymaster. It is a P337G, 1975. I just got the front engine rebuilt at 2500 hours. The rear engine now has almost 2600 hours. I intend to get that engine rebuilt this summer. My engines on my first Skymaster which was a 1971 F model had 2200 hours on them before rebuild. I fly a lot and I think that is one of the reason why I get good times on the engines. Miracle..no! Others have experenced the same thing.

Point of fact. The TSIO-360 CB engines in my P337G plane is the same engine used in the Seneca V plane. In the Skymaster the TBO is 1400 hours. In the Seneca it is 2000 hours. Make any sense?

Jerry
N34EC:confused:

Hi-Time Engine
 

I agree with Jerry, my airplane, 1967 337B, has 3200 airframe & 2200 on both engines, unlike Jerry I don't fly mine much, they are still good strong engines.

BTW docbob where is this "High Time" airplane located, I might be interested in it !
Thanks
Fred N358

Docbob,

There is more than one school of thought on high time engines. Although it may make me unpopular with Jerry, Fred and others, I belong to the other school of thought. A 337 with two 1800+ hour engines is a dual runout, and is worth $50,000 less than one with two engines overhauled by the factory or a reputable shop. Therefore a normally aspirated early years 337 would have quite a low value to me as a purchaser. You would have to decide that it had good enough airframe/systems/radios/paint/interior to make it worth the investment.

But there are certainly airplanes out there that would be well worth that investment. Just not a scratched up, antique radio, needs interior etc. uncared for older airplane.

In my opinion anyway, there are lots of them. (One per pilot.)

Kevin

It depends
 

I ran both front and rear engines past 2100 hours. It was not a problem for me because I knew how the engines were running, the compressions, performance numbers, etc. So, it was never a big deal to me as an owner operator. In fact, I never had a serious problem with an engine until I changed my rear one out.

However, if I were going to purchase a different bird, I would stay away from high time engines unless steeply discounted because I would not have first hand knowledge of how they had been running and the performance numbers for the last 4-5 years.

FWIW

Keven
________
BODY SCIENCE

Hight Time
 

Kevin & Keven are right about lowering the price of an aircraft with high time engines. The only thing I have going for me is the photo ports in the belly(if someone needs that). If I wanted to sell my plane I would have to set the price pretty low or replace the engines (new or used). I will just keep flying it !!!!!!!!!!!!!
Fred N358

On the hunt...
 

Fred: I'm on the hunt for a P337 and found one that has very nice avionics but it looks like it hasn't been flown too much. I test-flew it last week. It flew fine but looked tired. The paint looked original and oxidated. The interior was original and not in bad shape except for a badly cracked right instrument panel and some loose overhead lights. The front prop took 3-4 tries to cycle properly during the run-up but finally did.

The avionics were outstanding but the database hadn't been updated since last year which again led me to believe it hadn't been flown much. The autopilot flew fine except it always seemed to overshoot (or under-bank) turns so we never rolled out on course (with GPSS).

I'm tempted to write an offer for it but my spider-sense is tingling. I haven't looked at the logbooks yet. What should I be looking for?

I don't want a project plane. This one looks like it HAD some TLC but recently it's been sidelined. Getting the logbooks will be my next step. Dale...

I don't know if this was for Fred alone, or if you want other inputs, but here goes my views.

Much of what you describe does not, by itself, lead me to worry. An owner who has not spent a lot on cosmetics (paint, interior) may have spent it on taking real good care of the rest. And the modern avionics may attest to that. Also, a one-year-old database card is not, to me, much of a sign. My experience is that a lot of pilots who do limited IFR flying or who fly the same route on most trips, might update the database every 2 or 3 years. Also, if it's got the Cessna/ARC autopilots, anomalies like the ones you describe are common and often easy to remedy.

I would read a lot of what's in this Message Board, using the "Search" feature to look for specific topics. I would get a 337-savvy A&P (Fred is a good one) to do a thorough pre-purchase inspection of both the aircraft and its records. I would then base my decision on the total package, with emphasis, of course, on such things as engines, propellers and landing gear.

Ernie

Sorry...all contributions welcome!
 

Didn't mean to exclude anyone. Please, any and all suggestions welcome!