Now that I have done my PPL, should I buy a plane? Which one?

In fact I did some hours in 2 TB10, and I never achieved correct performances, although one of them had a 3blade prop. For a 180cv and 36l/hr plane, I expected more than 105 IAS whatever the load. The second achieved 110 but dashboard and avioanics was more than aged, breakers just sometimes poped for no reason, especially the BAT one when landing… I just gave up on TB10.

I would be way more concerned by TB10 takeoff performance in Italy (hot days & short runways), while sub-110kts cruise performance is a comfort question, sub-800m takeoff performance will be life & death question…

I was in that situation a few years ago with only Cessna 172 experience and decided to buy a turbo arrow although at that moment I had no instrument rating but for me for touring in Europe it was good for hot days and over the Alps and short strips. It was VFR only and that was the only problem since after two years I started my instrument training and upgrading it to IFR was quite expensive.
I took the risk of buying it with help of the company who was also going to do the import and maintenance. They helped me getting used to owning my own plane and I never regretted. I have an other plane now (IFR capable) and bought it the same way with help of the same company. As said before a maintenance company that you trust helps in buying and for me also in saving costs and hassle.

Well as an alternative to the C182 in terms of load carrying the Piper Dakota is pretty much unbeatable. It has a decent speed for a fixed gear plane, carries just about everything you can imagine and has also got a decent range. I’ve seen one advertized with Aspen and Stec 55x as well as a GNS530W for about 120k Euros.

The thing is, if the OP really wants a full glass panel then an Avidyne Cirrus is almost the only way to go in his budget. For me, it is also the only “real” glass panel which is comparatively easy to upgrade, as the nav and AP sources are outside the actual glass panel.

Personally I’d be cautious with this and rather go for a capable airplane with upgrades like Aspen, G5 and decent GNS/GTN boxes. And there is a lot more capable than an SR20 for that price.

William’s TR182 is a plane I’d have a serious look at in the OP’s place. To carry 4, to travel, to go from small grass places in Italy, not much within Budget will tick all the boxes. Alternatively, the Swiss Dakota is a very decent plane too.

G-HOLA is a really well sorted Turbo Dakota, it’s been on lots of IFR trips. It’s not cheap but it’s not dear either, compared to importing one. Capable aeroplane with a nice engine just back from Deltair.

breakers just sometimes poped for no reason, especially the BAT one when landing… I just gave up on TB10.

That’s not a TB10; that’s just a shagged plane which had seen many years of neglect. Those CBs cost very little.

What I would say is that the TB family are less tolerant to crude abuse than say a Cessna or a Piper. Not sure how exactly to say this, but this was one of the things which got me chucked out of the (mainly US dominated, after most Europeans left) Socata owners’ group There was a C182 owner there who went berserk… I think the “1970s car style interior” (which is actually looks super modern in today’s GA, amusingly) just doesn’t like having one of these kicked into it

Add to that the low sales of the TB9/10 models (due to uncompetitive pricing) during the 1990s and even lower in the 2000s (TB production ended in 2002, officially in 2005) means there are relatively few TB10s around in a good condition. And GTs are extremely rare. But for flying around the Alps and such, a TB20 is in a totally different class, and I benefitted from it hugely.

Not sure I would recommend a turbo engine to a newcomer, given that almost none of them make even 1k hrs before the cylinders get binned. For the Alps, get a good 250HP+ machine. A TB20 can do all that easily although, like all “four seaters” it won’t carry four adults with full tanks, unless most of them are slim… UK size 8 women or basically ~50kg. Or 2 adults and 2 children.

Domenico wrote:

Is it because of the maintenence cost?

I think I’ve answered that, but may have been in a different thread. As per our insurers (that’s in the US), almost ANY mishap with a Cirrus is treated as a write-off as apparently these plastic fantastic things cannot be repaired reliably enough. The issue is most likely liability for the repairer. OTOH a Cessna can just be ‘buffed out’ and lives to fly another day. There is something to be said for good old aluminum and rivets. To give you a real-world scenario: several Cirri that were based at our airport had runway excursions at smaller fields. From what I hear, typical Cirrus issue with badly managed energy on approach and landing. All were written off. The exact same mishap with a Cessna would have resulted in a repair.

Domenico wrote:

It seems that there are some planes that are easier to sell than other, and some that depreciate less than other,
this is why I ask myself why an SR20 20 years old has the same price of a 40 years old piper or Cessna with similar avionics.

Is it because of the maintenence cost?

Hi,
There are lots of factors at play. I can chat with you on the phone, or on WhatsApp and give you a steer on it. My WhatsApp details are here:

https://tinyurl.com/39socjya

William

Posting in the forum would help many others.

Is it because of the maintenence cost?

Depreciation is steeper on planes which are in production and which get a “facelift” every year. I know a guy who buys a brand new SR22, €1M+, every 2 years. He takes a ~200k hit on depreciation on every one but clearly finds it worth paying. The end result is that used prices fall faster.

There are some other factors; the owner community has a different profile and is much more likely to use a Cirrus dealer, which costs more than a “more owner managed” route.

Composite planes can be repaired but the expertise is not widely available.