Today’s Top Pick is a 1979 Mooney M20K 305 Rocket.

While the long-running Mooney M20 series of four-seat retractables is known for efficient aerodynamics that allow them to post impressive performance numbers with relatively little horsepower, there are always certain pilots who want more.

Rocket Engineering is among a number of companies that perform conversions on Mooney’s that include larger, more powerful engines, and other systems aimed at boosting climb performance, cruising speed, and service ceiling.

The aircraft for sale here was converted in 1999, swapping its 210 hp Continental TSIO-360 engine for a 305 hp TSIO-520. The additional power made a big impression. Mooney M20Ks were fine performers, but the Rocket-modified versions did most things faster and better.

Additional modifications make this airplane well-suited for fast, high-altitude travel. It is also an ideal vintage platform for competing with modern speedsters like the Cirrus SR22T.

This 1979 305 Rocket has 2,650 hours on the airframe, 940 hours on its Continental TSIO-520-NB engine, and 705 hours on its McCauley three-blade, full-feathering propeller. The aircraft is certified to FL 240 and is equipped with a TKS anti-ice system, speed brakes, and Monroy long-range tanks giving a total usable fuel capacity of 101 gallons. The Mooney received new paint earlier this year and a new interior in 2001.

The panel features dual Garmin GNS 430W GPS/Nav/Comm radios, MX20 MFD, Garmin GMA 340 audio panel, GTX 345 transponder with ADS-B In and Out, KFC200 autopilot, flight director, and engine monitor. 

Pilots who are attracted to Mooney aircraft because of their efficient design but would like a bit more power inside the cowling should consider this 1979 Mooney M20K 305 Rocket, which is available for $189,000 on AircraftForSale.

If you’re interested in financing, you can do so with FLYING Finance. Use their airplane loan calculator to calculate your estimated monthly payments. Or, to speak with an aviation finance specialist, visit flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: BendixKing to Offer Autopilot for Mooney M20-series Airplanes
• FLYING Magazine: STC Approved for Hartzell Propeller Three-Blade Mooney Bravo Prop
• FLYING Magazine: Air Compare: Grumman AA-5 vs. Mooney M20 Series
• The Aviation Consumer: Used Aircraft Guide: Mooney 231/252
• The Aviation Consumer: Mooney Missile
• AVweb: Mooney Under New Management

The post This 1979 Mooney M20K 305 Rocket Is a Souped-Up ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The Baron is being used as a test bed to compare the performance of General Aviation Modifications Inc.’s (GAMI’s) G100UL unleaded avgas with 100LL. The stains are on the wing with the tank holding G100UL, but it has not been determined that they came from the fuel.

• READ MORE: GAMI Responds to Cirrus G100UL Service Advisory

“We have scheduled a mechanic to determine the cause of the leak coming from the left wing of the Baron, which should happen in the next few days,” AOPA senior vice president for media Kollin Stagnito told AVweb. “We are not yet sure what the substance is, nor where it is coming from.”

Word of the stains has been a hot topic on various forums, and speculation is rampant as to their cause.

• READ MORE: Unleaded Fuel Debate Heats Up in Oshkosh

GAMI chief engineer George Braly told AVweb the cause is most likely a faulty or improperly installed fuel cell bladder or patch inside the bladder. Braly said the bladders in the Baron may be more than 40 years old. He said G100UL has been tested for compatibility with the bladder material and there were no problems. He also added that fuel bladder leaks are a relatively common issue with Barons.

Editor’s Note: This article first appeared on AVweb.

The post Stains Reported on Wing of AOPA Aircraft Fueled by GAMI G100UL appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Imagine being past the hard part and turning your nearly finished airplane over to McCormick and his well-trained staff to put the cherry red on your sundae. Finally, it’s time to fly—and turn some heads.

What started as a desire to offer more elaborate schemes has since become Evoke Aviation and Evoke Aircraft Design, the graphic design portion of the business. Evoke’s portfolio includes more than 50 EAA AirVenture award-winning homebuilts, such as Steve Thorne’s (“Flight Chops” on YouTube) Van’s RV-14.

“I would say our customers are people who want to be able to show off a little bit of their personality,” McCormick said.

• READ MORE: Why Are So Many Airplanes Painted White?

When meeting the Evoke team at AirVenture in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, I was greeted by youthful faces and tattooed limbs. These folks looked like me, and I was excited to learn about additional career opportunities in aviation. There are more obvious routes, such as becoming a mechanic or delving into engineering or marketing, but graphic design was something I’d never really thought about, let alone aircraft painting.

“It’s very cool to be able to not only design the airplane, but work in a facility on-site where that design is then put on the airplane, and you can have input as it’s all being created and basically coming to life,” McCormick said. “I think it’s a very cool niche for the designers to get into.”

The Prep

McCormick was able to establish the foundation for what would become his own design company and paint shop—located at Northeast Alabama Regional Airport (KGAD)—by aiming to fill a need and taking every necessary step to do so. He’s always been entrepreneurial. He started a DJ business in high school that he worked all throughout college, where he studied auto collision repair. He knew that focus would be a gateway to custom painting.

After graduating with a technical certificate, he landed a job at International Jets, an aircraft paint facility in Gadsden. He fell in love with airplanes and worked to fine-tune his skill during a time when paint schemes weren’t all that exciting.

“I always knew that I could do better,” he said. “I was always so frustrated by what I was painting, and I just knew I could create better designs. And so that’s where the idea started.”

Around 2011, work sent McCormick to Nigeria for a year to manage a project. During his downtime he created a business plan for his own design company, Plane Schemer, which was rebranded to Evoke Aircraft Design in 2021 to better align with his paint shop, Evoke Aviation. Upon his return, he launched a website and put together enough money for a booth at the Sun ’n Fun Aerospace Expo in Lakeland, Florida. He didn’t have a lot of designs to show, but was able to persuade a few people to work with him. Shortly after, he was able to quit his day job of painting airplanes and focus on building his own brand.

• READ MORE: Giving Your Airplane a Face-Lift and Tummy Tuck

A few years later, International Jets went out of business, and McCormick acquired its hangar, allowing him to offer not only schemes but paint jobs as well. Now with complete control over the quality of the finished product, he could focus on taking Evoke paint jobs to the next level by using the highest quality materials and procedures.

“The majority of our labor hours goes into the body work and the prep and getting it ready for paint, and actually the paint is one of the easiest parts,” he said. “So 65 percent of the budget goes into the actual prepping of the airplane, and then the rest of it goes into the paint and the finish work and the reassembly.”

The Primer

McCormick manages 20 employees across both businesses—five designers and the rest paint-and-body-work technicians. He said he hires people who take pride in their work and want to do better for themselves. That positive company culture has attracted capable employees who produce quality work, and McCormick feels this is what has allowed his business to grow so quickly.

As with every aviation business, hiring and retention has proven difficult at times, so Evoke does a lot of recruiting to combat those challenges. This is the main reason its employee average age is low. Additionally, McCormick believes it’s easier to hire and train from scratch, rather than try to retrain experienced designers and technicians.

“We can teach exactly the way we want everything done from the very beginning, and there’s no bad habits to get rid of,” he said.

Sammy Davis, one of McCormick’s first employees, now serves as Evoke’s senior designer. Davis set out to study graphic design in college but switched her major from art to business after her first year.

She was originally hired to help from a business standpoint as she not only majored in it but had interned at a software and systems engineering company, where she absorbed a lot of valuable information that would help make Evoke scalable for the future. Davis went to Sun ’n Fun with McCormick for his big debut and got to ride in an Aero L-39 Albatros.

“That was my first-ever plane ride, and I was like, ‘OK, I would like to be a part of this, please,’” said Davis, noting the Lakeland trip served as her introduction to aviation and she is now the only pilot on the Evoke staff.

Due to an increase in sales and McCormick being pulled in different directions, Davis decided to learn scheme design. She said she watched McCormick and asked a lot of questions.

“You have to be patient and a little bit hardheaded,” she said.

Davis pointed out that repetition was key, and eventually she got the green light to start working with clients. She’s been at it for seven years, but said a lot has changed in that time.

“Schemes back then were not as elaborate as they are now for the most part because the trend hadn’t quite kicked off yet,” she said. “So back then it was just like, OK, well here’s a really simple prompt, maybe a two-tone. Someone wants a white base and like a red bottom with a stripe in the middle. OK, well that’s easy enough. You do that and then you send it off to them, you do your edits, and then you try a top view. OK, well now you try the wings, and you would think something shaped as a rectangle wouldn’t be as challenging as it is, but there’s a lot of curves and 3D forms to think about.”

Customers initiate the design process by filling out a survey that covers preferred styles, colors, and paint finishes. They are also asked to send in reference photos of what they like. In addition, it’s helpful if designers know at what stage their customer is at in their build and what their mission is—do they want to win an award, or are they looking for something more practical? The designers work with their clients, whether it be over the phone, through Zoom calls, or in person, to finalize the scheme. This can take weeks, months, or years, and sometimes upward of 50 renderings to complete.

At any given time, designers can host a Zoom meeting with their client to talk through design changes. Both Davis and McCormick called this a fun activity because clients are impressed by how quickly Evoke’s designers can make changes—since they know all the shortcuts—and it’s exciting for the customer to see them carve out their airplane’s final form. Customers can also invite friends and family to join. Screen sharing also saves Evoke a lot of phone calls.

“You can cut down so much time,” Davis said. “You can cut down weeks of back-and-forth by doing a Zoom session, honestly. Because they can see their ideas in real time, and they can visualize it, and they can also ask technical questions that they might not think of when they’re dialing a response back.”

Evoke also reduced the number of checkup phone calls it receives by developing an online portal for customers to track lead times.

“Once you initiate a design with us, you get on the paint schedule, you get a Signature Series number assigned to you, and then as the airplanes are completed, we have an online portal that you sign into,” McCormick said. “It has your number, where you’re at in line, what your current wait time and estimated drop-off date is, and then you can also see the planes that are in progress, and you see the planes as they’re being finished. So it’s like this interactive system that you have access to once you get on the schedule.”

The Paint

Dakota Jennings, another one of McCormick’s first hires, works as a paint technician, having gotten his start studying auto collision repair, just like McCormick. Jennings was able to perfect his craft under McCormick’s tutelage, working through unfamiliar tasks diligently until he got it right.

“He showed me how he does it, and then he let me do it,” Jennings said. “He never wanted to do it for me. And once I get it, I’ve always got it,”

Jennings enjoys everything about his job, from hand-striping lines to creating his own colors for fades. Like many of the other team members, he fell in love with aviation and was excited to tell his college peers he works on airplanes.

“It was like my calling to be in the aviation industry,” he said. “I really could be doing something else, but I really enjoy being here and being…I guess you could call it an artist.”

When asked what makes a good aircraft painter, McCormick said it’s all about a strong skill set rather than just having the right tools.

“I believe that to paint to the quality that we’re doing is a 100 percent skill,” he said. “At Oshkosh I do a seminar and I tell exactly how we do every single step of our paint process. There’s no secrets. There’s nothing proprietary about the way we do things. We just do everything to a degree and with the skill set that is almost impossible to replicate without having the team of people we’ve been able to build and put together here.”

The Finished Product

Your airplane is painted. Now how do you maintain it?

Evoke has created a line of cleaning products, called the Signature Shine Series, that allows customers to take a little bit of luxury with them when they leave the facility. McCormick worked with one of his clients who owns a company that specializes in product development, manufacturing, and packaging to create the line of supplies for Evoke.

“It’s not meant to be a really big sector of our business, but it is very cool when we’re finished with an airplane to be able to continue our involvement in their paint job,” he said.

At AirVenture, Evoke brings a team to detail airplanes all week, so if your homebuilt was painted by Evoke and you fly it to Oshkosh, you’ll get the royal treatment.

Now that McCormick has built his empire, he works seven days a week to maintain it.

“Not to micromanage, but just to manage to a degree where we’re never compromising our quality,” he said. “That quality, attention to detail, and pride in what we do is the biggest reason our product has grown to become so popular.”

He’s proud to be quite involved in every aspect of the company. So how does he continue to improve?

“I think I’m intuitive, but I also try to learn from people who have done it before,” McCormick said. “It never hurts to pick up a book about business management and [study] how to communicate more effectively as a leader. It’s worth going through books, even if there’s one sentence or phrase in that entire book that becomes valuable, and it’s something you can implement in your day to day, and just stacking those skills and learning to communicate better and to be a more effective leader.”

For more information on Evoke Aviation, call 256-490-1541 or visit www.evokeaviation.com and www.evokeaircraftdesign.com.

This feature first appeared in the Summer 2024 Ultimate Issue print edition.

The post Ultimate Issue: Specializing in Works of Art appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

These are the kinds of things one learns when one must beg friends for a ride home from a distant rural airport immediately following EAA Airventure in Oshkosh, Wisconsin.

Fortunately, this discovery did not stem from mechanical woes or becoming stranded due to weather. It was simply a function of playing musical vehicles as I dropped off my plane for its annual inspection on my way back home after a week of festivities at Oshkosh. Not wanting to leave my mechanic with 207 pounds of cargo with which to contend during the inspection, I carefully loaded all of my gear into the Crosstrek with little room to spare.

• READ MORE: When Unforeseen Circumstances Threaten to Derail Amazing Experiences

This year, the entire AirVenture experience was a study in cargo and packing. While I’d done it before, this year was perhaps the first in which my gear selection was completely dialed, with a proven selection of items to ensure my week in Oshkosh would be the best ever.

From tents to cots to power supplies to food, every piece was carefully considered and calibrated, making for a fantastic week. Besides creating a top-notch AirVenture experience, this also reinforced my philosophy that it’s best to purchase an airplane you’ll grow into rather than out of.

I didn’t always feel this way.

Early on in my journey toward aircraft ownership, I had nearly settled on the trusty yet tiny Cessna 140 or its simpler, flapless cousin, the 120. I loved the way they flew, and they were among the least expensive options available. They seemed to check all the boxes.

Eventually, however, I decided that for me the ability to take that epic, once-a-year trip was worth the higher purchase price and increased fuel burn throughout the rest of the year. Two years of pinching pennies and working massive amounts of overtime eventually enabled the purchase of my larger, four-place 170.

And even though I never carry more than one passenger, and even though I only fully utilize the cabin volume once a year, the effort was entirely worth it. Had I settled for the smaller 120/140, every one of my Oshkosh experiences would be completely different.

For one, the additional space allows for luxuries that can completely transform any camping trip.

Years ago, in my motorcycle days, I learned firsthand that while it’s possible to pack extraordinarily small and light, this comes with significant compromises. The lightest tents and sleeping pads on the market, for example, function fine but prioritize minimalism and utility over comfort.

Now, with my roomy 170 made all the more voluminous via the removal of the rear seat, I could afford to upgrade my Oshkosh trip accordingly.

Going through my mental list of past annoyances, I addressed each individually. Thin sleeping pad that leaves me aching in the morning? Guess I’ll just go ahead and order the plush cot. A few extra changes of clothes that allow me to present myself at evening get-togethers as a civilized person rather than a shipwreck survivor? Don’t mind if I do.

The extra space and payload also enabled me to bring two laptops and a second monitor, so I could work remotely in the days leading up to the big event. Suddenly, I was able to live and work from the airplane. All it took was some careful weight-and-balance calculations and a bit of strategic positioning of the heavier items.

• READ MORE: EAA AirVenture 2024 in Photos

The extra space transforms the Oshkosh experience for friends, as well.

Two years ago, one friend found herself sleeping in a pool of rainwater when her cheap tent succumbed to passing storms. This year, an airline pilot friend came straight to Oshkosh from a work trip without a tent or sleeping pad. In each case, the 170’s cabin allowed me to toss in an extra tent and sleeping pad from my aforementioned motorcycle camping days. For the cost of an additional 2.5 pounds of gear, each friend enjoyed their trip immensely.

It often makes sense to expedite one’s entry into ownership by selecting a small, inexpensive type to begin with. If, for example, one is certain one’s mission will always be limited to short local flights.

But sometimes, buying an airplane capable of something more—even if that something occurs only once a year—can make it all worthwhile.

The post EAA AirVenture: A Study in Cargo and Packing appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1974 Cessna 172M Skyhawk.

Pilots shopping for their first aircraft after receiving their private pilot certificate often overlook the Cessna 172 even if they trained in one as students.

Often they are in a hurry to “step up” to a complex, high-performance airplane and start traveling long distances at greater speeds than the Cessna can muster. 

For many, though, simply flying as pilot in command is a significant promotion. It can take a long time to adjust to flying regularly without an instructor on board, and having a familiar aircraft can be a big advantage.

There are also those pilots who consider the 172 a classic and among the best aircraft ever designed. For them, the choice of a 172 as a personal airplane makes sense because they love most of its traits and features, from its forgiving handling and reliability to the fabulous original factory paint schemes and interiors one can find on the market.

If you learned to fly in a 172, there is a good chance that you feel a particular affection toward that model. While demand has driven prices up lately, the 172 overall remains an economical aircraft to own and operate.   

This 1974 172M has 2,524 hours on the airframe, 813 hours on its 150 hp Lycoming O-320 E2D engine since overhaul, and 2,524 hours on the propeller since new. The aircraft carries 38 gallons of usable fuel and has a useful load of  853.8 pounds.

The IFR panel includes a garmin GMA 340 audio panel, Garmin GNS 530W GPS/Nav/Comm with localizer and glideslope, Garmin SL 30 Nav/Comm, GTX 327 transponder, S-Tec 20 autopilot with GPSS, GDL 88 receiver with ADS-B In and Out, and Electronics International engine analyzer.

Additional equipment includes wheel pants, engine monitor alarm, Brackett air filter, dual shoulder harnesses, Hobbs meter, and arb ice detector.

Pilots who enjoyed training in Cessna 172s and might consider one for long-term use as a personal aircraft for travel or building time should consider this 1974 Skyhawk, which is available for $119,900 on AircraftForSale.

If you’re interested in financing, you can do so with FLYING Finance. Use their airplane loan calculator to calculate your estimated monthly payments. Or, to speak with an aviation finance specialist, visit flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine:Cessna 172 Annual Maintenance and What It Will Cost You
• FLYING Magazine: How Far Would You Fly a Cessna 172?
• FLYING Magazine: Cessna 172: Still Relevant Today?
• Plane & Pilot: Cessna 172: Secrets of the Skyhawk
• Plane & Pilot: Hacienda: A Legendary Modified Cessna 172
• The Aviation Consumer: Used Aircraft Guide: Cessna 172

The post This 1974 Cessna 172M Skyhawk Is a Winged Family Car and an ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1941 Boeing​/​Stearman PT-17.

Many pilots dream of owning a vintage biplane, complete with open cockpits, fabric covering, bracing wires, and other details that characterize the classics.

In the end, though, they decide that such aircraft, lightly built with thin struts and spindly landing gear, are too delicate to be practical. While this notion might hold true for many biplanes designed during aviation’s golden age between World Wars I and II, it does not apply to the Boeing/Stearman PT-17.

Stearman Aircraft Inc. began turning out biplanes for commercial and personal use during the 1920s and by the mid-1930s had the eye of the U.S. Army Air Corps, which was looking for a new primary trainer.

The Stearman A75, later known as the PT-17 was a near-perfect candidate for the job because it was generally easy to fly yet still demanding enough to differentiate aspiring pilots with potential from those who would be better off pursuing a different specialty.

Perhaps most important was the aircraft’s ruggedness. This is one well-built biplane that was capable of bouncing back from the many mistakes that student pilots make.

The characteristics that made the Stearman a great trainer more than 80 years ago make it a wonderful personal airplane today.

The 1941 model for sale here offers pilots a window into aviation’s past, when airplanes had round engines and fabric covering. It also gives us a new way to see those familiar stretches of earth that we fly over regularly—from an open cockpit.

This 1941 Stearman has 3,749 hours on the airframe, 330 hours on its Continental W670-6A radial engine since overhaul, and 210 hours on its Sensenich propeller since overhaul. The VFR panel includes a King KLX 135 digital GPS/Comm, KT 76C transponder and intercom in addition to traditional analog flight and engine instruments

Pilots searching for a vintage biplane that is robust enough to handle frequent modern-day sorties including fly-ins, vacation getaways, and occasional formation flying with the owner’s club should consider this 1941 Boeing/Stearman PT-17, which is available for $155,000 on AircraftForSale.

If you’re interested in financing, you can do so with FLYING Finance. Use its airplane loan calculator to calculate your estimated monthly payments. Or, to speak with an aviation finance specialist, visit flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: Restoration Nation: The Stearman Next Door
• FLYING Magazine: Taking Wing: Stearman Patrol
• FLYING Magazine: Tuskegee Airmen Stearman Flies Into History
• The Aviation Consumer: Antiques and Classics: Owning and Operating
• AVweb: National Museum of the U.S. Air Force Acquires PT-17
• AVweb: Pilot Completes U.K.-Australia Stearman Flight

The post This 1941 Boeing/Stearman PT-17 Is a Tough, Two-Winged ‘Aircraft For Sale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

“You’ve got the coolest job in the world,” a customer would exclaim.

I’d smile.

To quote Ernest Hemingway, “What a pretty thought.”

“I don’t know how you do it. I’d last two weeks.” I heard that too, accompanied by sympathetic eyes.

What was my job? What “it” did I do?

I provided airframe and engine assembly, operation, and maintenance support to aircraft homebuilders, pilots, owners, and mechanics via phone and email. I supported those who claimed to have never tightened a bolt and actual rocket scientists, those who loved every moment of their project and those who seemed to endure under duress from the first. Those who ran their engine without a prop while making carburetor adjustments to try to lower cylinder head temperatures, and engineers prone to overthinking.

Sometimes they were one and the same. Subsets in each category included those with a can-do spirit, those with a can’t-do spirit, those wanting to learn, those wanting to complain, those who embraced challenges, and those who shouldn’t be in aviation at all.

There were those who abused me and those who brought me a cold six-pack from various Californian microbrews every EAA AirVenture. They all called me “Tech Guy.” Except one, who called me an “ass—-” and demanded I be fired.

Monday Morning, the Phone Rings…

Caller: “I sent you an email three days ago. I still don’t have an answer.”

Me: “I see it arrived Friday at 4:37 p.m.. That was 45 work minutes ago. How can I help you?”

Caller: “I have N12345.”

Me: “I don’t know what that is.”

Caller: “It’s the green Onyx.”

Me: (Ah, the green one.) “OK, how can I help you?”

Caller: “The Piston Banger engine makes a…”

Me: “I’m sorry, we don’t support Piston Banger engines. You’ll need to contact them.”

Caller: “But that’s what’s on the Onyx I just bought.”

Me: “That may be—by the way, it’s pronounced One-X—but we can’t help with that. Piston Banger probably can.”

Caller: “Do you have a phone number or anything for them?”

Me: “Hang on, let me Google that for you.” (I emphasize Google.)

The call winds down with, “How are things there?”

“Great! I have to let you go, I have another call to take.”

The coolest job in the world, indeed.

After a call like that, it’s hard to imagine why I’d want to do anything else. I stare at the phone. “Please,” I think, “let the next one be about low oil pressure.” But it’s not.

After a lengthy monologue on how hard I am to get a hold of, it’s mostly about the weather until the caller gets sidetracked and queries me on a bolt substitution. I dispense the local weather conditions—both current and forecast—and address their question.

While doing so I think of a friend, a professional musician who plies his trade in Nashville, Tennessee, recording studios and on stages around the world and my heart sinks. Thank goodness I never had guitar lessons or I might be slogging through life like him. The call ends with, “How are things there?”

“They’re great. I need to let you go. Someone else is calling.”

The third call begins, “You’re hard to get a hold of…” On the way to their question, they ask how the weather is and regale me with stories of flying cargo over the Himalayan Mountains.

Where Do Tech Guys Come From?

Support personnel in a field as unique as homebuilding don’t come from Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University and aren’t found through local staffing agencies.

Hands-on experience with a specific airframe and a lack of other employment options is the primary career path. That, and the belief working for a kit aircraft company is the coolest job in the world.

We come from garages, basements, unused bedrooms, and leaky T-hangars. We build our résumés one part at a time, one mistake at a time. Our graduation is our first fight. Our internship is flying off the flight test hours and successfully sorting the bugs.

From that pool of candidates, a company needs a person interested in both the job and moving to the factory’s location (have you seen where some kit companies are located?). A person capable of troubleshooting (without touching) and communicating the corrective action—maybe to someone who doesn’t know how to pronounce the name of the aircraft they’re building. A person capable of dealing with…people. Angry people. Worried people. People whose dream, financial investment, and literal life may hinge on what is said and how it is said.

They must do this while building and guarding a company’s reputation and, sometimes, advocating for a customer by arguing against a company’s policy.

But, no pressure.

Supporting the Product or the Customer?

Strictly speaking, my job was less about supporting customers than it was supporting products.

To support a customer is to open the door to infinite questions. It’s a door I’d step through, though seldom farther than the threshold.

“What kind of paint is on the factory airplanes?” I could answer that. “What kind of paint should I use?” I couldn’t answer that. “How do I wire the AeroVee?”  I could answer that—it’s a Sonex product. “How do I wire the intercom to my radio?” It wasn’t my place to say. I didn’t support third-party products and hoped other companies weren’t advising Sonex builders on aileron rigging.

It may surprise you, after a two-decade career, how little of my knowledge would transfer to another kit company. The expertise to effectively support a particular product comes from knowing the product. I could look at the plans of any airplane kit and see where slot A engaged tab B, but so can every builder, if only they would. I could advise on bolt length substitutions, removing bad rivets, bending parts and CG calculations, but you shouldn’t need factory support for that—that’s general homebuilding knowledge.

What Is a Company’s Support Obligation?

A kit company expects customers will bring a level of mechanical ability, resourcefulness, and desire to learn to their project.

For some, knowledge and skills acquisition begin when the kit is delivered. For others, it has been accumulating since childhood, as they absorbed the pages of KITPLANES and other homebuilding magazines, and their personal copy of the Aviation Maintenance Technician Handbook. (Please tell me I wasn’t the only eighth-grader with a tattered copy of that classic.)

What support should you expect? If pressed, I’d say a company owes you support to assemble and use the parts and products it provided in the manner it intended. If a hole needs to be drilled, it owes you the location of the hole and its size. The company does not owe you an explanation on why that hole is there or how to drill it. It doesn’t owe you an electrical schematic if it provides nothing that needs wiring. It doesn’t owe you advice on fitting alternate brakes, supplemental fuel, or increasing the size of the panel. And it certainly doesn’t owe you a way to salvage parts you’ve damaged beyond airworthiness.

The role of Tech Guy gets muddled when a project becomes a flying airplane. The factory didn’t deliver a finished airplane. Thousands of individual decisions go into turning a pallet of parts into an airplane, each unknown to the factory.

Here’s one example: Sonex recommends a specific Sensenich propeller for each airframe/engine combination it supports. Propellers from other manufacturers may share the same pitch and diameter specification, but in execution it varies.

One customer, who fitted a propeller from an alternate manufacturer, couldn’t get their airplane out of ground effect. In time, I persuaded them to borrow the recommended prop from another Sonex. That solved the problem. If I hadn’t pursued that, or if the builder had ignored my advice, they would have remained ground bound, chasing the wrong fixes, and Sonex could have taken heat within the builder community for the poor performance. “Those AeroVee engines are crap.” “Toss the AeroInjector and fit a Brand-X carb.” “You need a Rotax.” I saw it more often than I can count.

In the end, it’s your airplane and your problem. That’s blunt, and more than a bit true. Don’t get me wrong, it’s not a phrase to be tossed about by Tech Guy so they can go to lunch early, but the help you seek may not be help they can provide.

Imagine taking a British sports car that someone stuffed with a Ford 302 to a Ford dealer when it doesn’t start. The dealer would turn you away faster than you can yank the positive battery cable off  to stop an electrical fire. (My personal best is 3.2 seconds.) The car’s factory-provided manual was rendered useless by someone with a vision and the desire to tinker. Maybe the modifications were documented, but probably not. You’ll have to trace wires—all of them white, none of them labeled.

I just described homebuilt airplanes. Tech Guy may try to help—I did, if I could—by providing common sense diagnostics: “Did you hit the starter with a hammer? That worked on my girlfriend’s Pinto.”

Supporting a product that is delivered as a collection of parts—or only as plans—to be interpreted into an airplane by a cross section of the general population is different from supporting a GA aircraft that is factory-assembled and maintained in strict compliance with its type certificate. When you embrace homebuilding, you have to embrace that you have a one-of-kind airplane whose problems, ultimately, are yours. Even small modifications can render factory support of kit aircraft difficult.

As a Tech Guy, when things didn’t add up, I had to coax modifications into the light. “Is it wired exactly per the schematic,” I’d both ask and emphasize.

“Yes, but…”

You’d be surprised how many shades of meaning “exactly” has.

Support By Committee

A customer’s email to me: “I try and help [on the builder forum] but rarely do any good. They come looking for help and then argue and tell you you’re full of crap. I’ve got to hand it to you guys. You do a darned good job of doing the almost impossible.”

As a product matures, the population of builders with opinions does as well. More builder modifications—“improvements,” in builder-speak—creep in. In time the number of people giving advice grows into a chorus of individuals singing different songs and singing them loudly. I increasingly received questions prefaced by “so-and-so says…”

Multiply that by thousands of builders and you see where the need to support the product, as designed, becomes critical. I saw dangerous modifications implemented and copied. When I’d point them out, it was common to be told, “That’s why it’s called experimental.”

Fair enough, but the outcome of some experiments can be foretold. Many builders put blind trust in the often-anonymous posts on builder forums. Think about this: The same ignorance and knee-jerk answers you see in online groups for topics you know very well (for instance, split-window Corvettes or how to bake cinnamon bread) exist in the online communities for topics you may know little about, including homebuilt airplane groups. While you may not have the knowledge to recognize them, Tech Guy does.

‘I Know You Have to Watch What You Say’

That whispered statement was sometimes invoked to solicit the “honest” answer to a question. My answers were informed by the engineering and testing that had proven the product, by my firsthand experience, and by the knowledge I accumulated from others’ experiences. They were never influenced by attorneys (the only attorney I spoke to was a customer. That’s who called me an “ass—-” and demanded I be fired) or the need to toe a company line. They were in a builder’s best interest, and sometimes not in the company’s financial interest, whether a builder believed it or not. Builders shouldn’t want it any other way.

Even after I’d warned of a dangerous condition, some forged ahead, as was their right in the Experimental/ Amateur-Built (E-AB) category.

A few times I urged pilots to ground an airplane until a problem was resolved. Not everyone listened. At least one will never read this. It was common for the FAA or National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to contact Sonex as part of an accident investigation. It wasn’t the factory it was investigating, it was the specific airplane’s history.

Sometimes the path between a customer’s last email and the accident was direct and only days old—“My engine seems starved for fuel.”

The Support Relationship

Your relationship with Tech Guy can last years or decades. For everyone’s sake, it should be a “we’re in this together” relationship.

Treating factory support as an adversary is not in your interest. I advanced my retirement a week because one more week of employment wasn’t worth the sarcastic, blame-laden emails I was getting from one particular builder. In contrast, within weeks of retiring I embarked on a road trip that included overnight stays at the homes of four of my best friends. Each entered my life when they needed the help of Sonex Tech Guy. Today, those friendships, and many more, transcend aviation.

By the time I retired I had supported thousands of souls who got 650 airplanes flying and another 2,100 airframes underway. I supported 1,000 AeroVee engine deliveries and a host of accessories.

In November 2023 Van’s Aircraft website stated that 11,278 RVs had been completed and an average of 1.5 were hatching each day. I estimate its full-time builder support staff to be three to four folks. I put the number of Tech Guys in the kitplane industry at one per 3,700 registered E-AB aircraft, or one per 9,000 kits/plans delivered.

At the same time, there are an unlimited number of questions any builder can ask, and secondhand sales reset the counter. The farther a kit or finished aircraft travels from its original owner/builder, the less familiarity each new owner, and Tech Guy, has with what they’ve purchased.

With that lengthy preface, I offer these suggestions to streamline the support experience for all involved. Before contacting Tech Guy, run this checklist:

• Is this a question for the product’s manufacturer? I answered a lot of generic building questions and some unrelated to the products I supported. I even served as Siri from time to time: “Kerry, what is Aircraft Spruce’s phone number?” “Kerry, what is the best fire extinguisher for a Sonex?”
• Have you utilized the manufacturer’s printed and online resources? In other words, don’t be lazy. “I’m sure the answer is in the plans, but they are in my basement and I’m in my hangar.”
• Are you the person that should make the call? A friend calling on behalf of an owner often couldn’t answer my follow-up questions, and I knew my answers got muddled in their delivery.
• Have you prepared for the call? Have the construction documentation available as well as pen and paper for notes. Referencing parts with the manufacturers’ nomenclature is more precise than calling something “that bracket thing that’s riveted to a channel.”
• Are you asking the company to comment on what another builder said or did? Don’t.
• Don’t call, email. The answer you want may not be immediately at hand. I often had to dig into a problem and I preferred giving accurate answers to fast ones. Coincidentally, many times someone would have gotten an answer faster if they had emailed rather than waited for business hours to call. I routinely answered emails during nonbusiness hours.
• Would you write a letter (and include an SASE) or pay long-distance charges to ask the question if it were 1980? Email, cell phones and free long-distance calling have made it easy for some to stop thinking for themselves. Don’t burden Tech Guy with your laziness.
• Don’t argue the answer. You can take it or leave it, but don’t argue about it. You should, however, challenge an answer that doesn’t make sense. Sometimes my answers were off base because I misinterpreted a question.
• Support those who support you. A customer who purchased engine parts elsewhere, to save money, called when they didn’t fit to compare the manufacturer’s numbers on his box to what we sold. He went on to complain that people used to get a price from him and then order online, for less. (You can’t make this stuff up.) If you value or use factory support, order your parts from them.
• Use an app to get the factory’s weather conditions, and assume things are going well for them.

One final thought: My job was to support a person’s hobby. I stood in an odd crossroad—under observation by those who paid me and often wanted me to do other things, things that looked more like making money, while those I supported wanted to share their experiences with me. I enjoyed hangar flying—it was relationship building—but Tech Guys only have time for a touch-and-go or two.

I Was You. Few Were Me.

Before I was Tech Guy, I was a guy building an airplane in a garage. I knew what it was like to want an answer when it seemed I may have ruined critical parts.

As a Tech Guy I was acutely aware of my impact on a customer’s success. When the workday ended, unresolved issues went home with me. They ran with me, showered with me, ate with me, watched TV with me, vacationed with me, and celebrated holidays with me. Many slept with me.

I knew someone’s lifetime dream could hinge on my answer. I knew the company’s reputation was earned, confirmed, or diminished with each answer I gave. For better or worse—and years of nightly aviation nightmares, which subsided after I retired, would indicate for worse—I took on a builder’s problems as if they were my own. Tech Guy was my world. It is a world few in homebuilt aviation occupy. It’s a world few would want to occupy.

“You’ve got the coolest job in the world.”

What a pretty thought.

Help Yourself

Many of the questions I was asked and answered never needed to be asked of me or anyone in a tech support role. Homebuilding encompasses a wide range of skills and knowledge that each builder must acquire on their own.

To use an analogy, paint manufacturers aren’t expected to teach their customers how to scrape paint, hold a paintbrush, or climb a ladder.

The good news is learning the basic knowledge, often framed as “best practices,” pays dividends in speeding your project along and building your confidence. A kit’s manufacturer, however, should always be your first stop for design-specific questions.

Here are a few tried-and-true resources builders should avail themselves to:

• AC 43.13-1B, Acceptable Methods, Techniques and Practices—Aircraft Inspection and Repair
• FAA-H-8083-30A, Aviation Maintenance Technician Handbook
• Aviation Mechanic Handbook
• Homebuilding publications, such as KITPLANES magazine
• The FAA, for licensing and registration questions
• Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) and its vast homebuilder resources, including local chapters and technical counselors.
• The four-volume collection of Tony Bingelis’ homebuilder reference manuals
• Fellow homebuilders
• Skill-building classes at local schools
• Aircraft-specific builder workshops
• Skill-building seminars offered at fly-ins or through EAA

This feature first appeared in the Summer 2024 Ultimate Issue print edition.

The post Ultimate Issue: Welcome to My ‘Tech Guy’ World appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1973 Cessna P337G Skymaster.

Pilots who wish to step up to multiengine aircraft from high-performance piston singles have options that offer a range of improvements in safety and performance.

While many private pilots looking for a boost in power will find turboprop singles more attractive than piston twins, having the redundancy of a second engine under certain conditions still means a lot to cross-country travelers.

Cessna designed the Skymaster series of twins with centerline-mounted engines that avoid the challenges of asymmetric thrust that come into play when an engine fails on a traditional light twin. As with any unusual configuration, some people love the Skymaster’s styling, while others are less enthusiastic. I imagine fans of the 1988 film Bat*21 would be absolutely stoked to fly a Skymaster.

The pressurized, turbocharged version for sale here makes the most of the aircraft’s performance potential by enabling it to take advantage of greater cruising speeds and favorable winds available at higher altitudes. Pilots who travel regularly with passengers, especially family members, are well aware of the advantages of a pressurized cabin.

This 1973 Cessna Skymaster has 2,500 hours on the airframe, 800 hours on the front engine since overhaul, and 12 hours on the rear engine since overhaul. The aircraft is equipped with Continental TSIO-360 engines. The front propeller has 800 hours, and the rear propeller has 12 hours. 

The panel features dual King KX 155 Nav/Comms, King audio panel, intercom, transponder and HSI, S-Tec 60 autopilot, Garmin GPS, and JPI 760 engine monitor.

Pilots who are interested in the advantages of twin-engine aircraft for long-distance travel, including the ability to continue flying if one engine fails, should consider this 1973 Cessna P337G Skymaster, which is available for $120,000 on AircraftForSale.

If you’re interested in financing, you can do so with FLYING Finance. Use their airplane loan calculator to calculate your estimated monthly payments. Or, to speak with an aviation finance specialist, visit flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: Ampaire’s Hybrid Skymaster Completes First Public Flight
• FLYING Magazine: Smaller, Lighter Cessna 327 ‘Mini Skymaster’
• FLYING Magazine: Adam A500: First Flight
• Plane & Pilot: Cessna 337
• Plane & Pilot: Twin Cessnas
• The Aviation Consumer: Used Aircraft Guide: Cessna Skymaster
• AVweb: Electric/Piston Skymaster Tested in Scotland

The post This 1973 Cessna P337G Skymaster Is a Push-Pull Pressurized ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

It’s no secret that pilots of complex and high-end aircraft have been dealing with the trend of higher rates and even non renewed policies, especially older pilots and those with limited experience in type. But that doesn’t necessarily mean you have to sunset your flying career once you reach 70—the point in life where underwriters consider you a “senior” pilot. Moreover, with a savvy approach, some compromises and hard training requirements, insurance can be available for younger and green pilots stepping into tailwheels and turbines.

Plus, insurance pros unanimously say to find an insurer you’re happy with and stick with them for the long term because loyalty matters. At the same time, show the underwriter you’re doing everything possible in the name of safety, and that includes sourcing quality flight training and on a regular basis.

Here’s a general insurance guide, with tips and advice from those who write the policies and pay out the claims.

Old Plane, Older Pilot

Making matters worse is that companies are putting limits on insured value. Just because you have $350,000-plus invested in your refurbished piston single typically valued at $125,000 doesn’t always mean you’ll be able to insure it for its full upgraded value without solid proof it has all the upgrades. These days, with avionics, paint, and engine upgrades, it’s easy to get upside down from an insurance standpoint.

Marci Veronie from Avemco Aviation Insurance said the company writes policies based on what it calls “stated” proof of equipage.

“If you can prove to me you have it in what you want covered, and we can agree, that’s what we’ll write the policy for,” said Veronie, noting that clients send photos, videos, and equipment specs that are cross-checked against the company’s reference guides.

• READ MORE: Aircraft Insurance Market Has Stabilized—Somewhat

Essentially, do your best to prove what you think the aircraft is worth. If you sold the aircraft tomorrow, what would you get for it?

The other issue is maintainability. The parts availability issues for some older airplanes are trickling down to the insurance market, which means you’ll be paying more out of pocket for repairs.

In the insurance world this is called a component parts schedule, which means insurers will only pay out a percent of the loss of a flap or wing or tail section, as some examples. It’s a snag for uncommon experimentals and certified aging aircraft alike.

Scott Smith from Iowa-based Scott “Sky” Smith Insurance said that these days it’s not just the age of the pilot but the age of the aircraft that concerns insurers.  Some companies have stopped insuring Cessna piston twins older than 30 years—a major chunk of the fleet. Others have walked away from turbine conversions.

There are a few underwriters who say claims can sit in limbo for many months because of parts shortages. For others, where it’s impossible to source parts, the aircraft becomes a loss, the insurer pays it out and unloads it to the highest salvage bidder. Part of the reason for rate increases is the increasing cost of replacement parts. Think about that before buying something rare, exotic, or classic.

It has taken a while for the underwriting world to sync up with the huge jump in value of used aircraft, though prices do seem to be stabilizing. Still, while an older Skyhawk might sell for big money, that doesn’t mean an insurer will write a policy with limits that match the value. Good insurers will routinely ask what improvements were made to the aircraft, including the big ones like avionics upgrades. Plan on providing proof of equipage (make sure all equipment is registered with the manufacturer) and keep tight engine logs.

Speaking of engine time, one FAA inspector advises that insurers deny claims if the aircraft’s engine is beyond TBO and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) report cites engine failure as a probable cause of the crash. We call that nonsense. Engine TBO is not a requirement in Part 91 ops, but instead a suggestion from the manufacturer.

Who Is This Guy?

Part of the problem that’s frustrating for aging pilots is the stereotype. Not all senior pilots are hobbling around with a cane and short of breath, because in general, aviators tend to keep themselves in reasonably decent shape.

Insurance pros agree that for an underwriter sitting at a desk in Big City USA, it is difficult to evaluate an aging pilot’s risk. As one insurer put it: “How do you know if you are writing [for] the 60-year-old 80-year-old, or the 80-year-old 60-year-old?” The companies really don’t because people age at different rates. Some lag behind their chronological age, and some are way ahead of it. Some are fit enough to compete in endurance events, while others can’t walk a mile without falling over.

Some also argue that with age comes more sound aeronautical judgment, and for career aviators, lots of real-world experience. That may be true, but is it canceled out with declining situational awareness and reaction time? The low-hanging fruit is accident history. Almost every company did tell us that they experienced a slightly higher accident rate among the senior pilot customers. As a result, a 77-year-old pilot with two gear-up landings in the last three years, or who ran one tank dry and made an off-field landing with 40 gallons in the other tank, is probably not a good bet when it comes to risk.

• READ MORE: Airplane Insurance Trend Could Be Bad for Us All

Two areas of human thinking that researchers say suffer the most and the soonest from aging are working memory and reaction time. Working memory is defined in different ways, but we use it here to mean the part of transient memory used to temporarily store and manipulate information, such as reading back an approach clearance or running a checklist from memory. Underwriters have relied upon medical certification to give them some reassurance about the physical fitness of their clients and in some cases require additional FAA medical exams because it’s more data that they can put in the pilot’s files. The annual FAA medical including electrocardiogram (EKG) has been a favorite for years.

Another clue that underwriters look at is how much time a pilot has in the same type of airplane in which they are looking to be insured. Some aging pilots can easily tackle the challenge of a different airplane with lots of new features and complex systems, but many cannot. One underwriter said that while his company insures many older pilots, it tends to avoid older pilots who were making transitions, especially large ones—such as from a piston to a turbine. The required learning of new systems may be a challenge—and insurers know it.

What Scares Them?

Insurance underwriters consistently tell us that assessing the risk factor is easy simply because they have years of data, proving that pilots continue to bend aircraft the same way they always have, despite huge leaps in tech with layers of automated backstop.

We concur. Over at sister publication The Aviation Consumer magazine, we’ve been studying monthly NTSB accident reports for more than 50 years and come up with the same stats, again and again. Whether it’s runway loss of control (RLOC), continued VFR into IMC, loss of control in IMC, botched instrument approaches, low/reckless flying—the list is long—crash patterns are predictable, especially for taildraggers.

For prospective tailwheel owners and current owners 70 or older, the hard market means doing some homework before applying for insurance or renewing an existing policy.

Mike Pratt, an aviation insurance broker with Foundation Risk Partners, a large brokerage with offices in 14 states (he’s been a tailwheel owner and pilot for years) had some good advice. According to Pratt, a high number of claims because of careless prangs and the lack of pilot training are what is driving the insurance market for tailwheel airplanes above and beyond the hard market. There are only about a dozen insurance companies that write for aviation and not all will insure tailwheel airplanes, so it’s up to the owner to put their best foot forward when seeking insurance.

What are red flags to underwriters? In the tailwheel world, it’s little airplanes with very high hull values. That means that if you haven’t yet obtained a tailwheel endorsement, don’t buy a brand-new Husky, Scout, Maule, or XCub, to name a few, and expect to get insurance with one simple phone call. If you can get it at all, it could cost at least $15,000 for the first year.

Moreover, get time in the type of airplane you intend to buy—even if it’s only five hours—before you apply for insurance. Putting down a zero in the time type box in the insurance application means that some of the companies will not even look at you. Also, plan on completing as much dual instruction as the insurer requires in your new airplane before you fly it solo. It’s amazing that some owners don’t want to part with a couple thousand dollars for training after spending a couple hundred thousand for the airplane.

Pratt said he sees pilots become cheap about training way too often and believes it’s one of the most foolish things they can do. Truth is insurance companies have had their financial faces rubbed in the value of training for years. They know it keeps claims down. Plus, do you want to deal with having to repair your new bird when quality training might have avoided it altogether?

If you are 70 or older and have been able to get insurance for your tailwheel airplane, don’t rock the boat. Do not change insurers. Don’t get huffy in response to a big premium increase—the odds are that no one else will insure you, and the insurance company that has been loyal to you may drop you. We hear from senior pilots on a regular basis faced with nonrenewals, regardless of their claim histories. The bottom line with taildraggers is get an insurance quote before making a deal on one, while accepting that at some age, if you want insurance, you’ll have to switch to a nosewheel airplane.

Underwriters also look at what kind of airplane their older customer is flying and the amount of liability coverage they carry. Bear in mind that the insurer has in effect promised to pay for the airplane, and the limit of liability, if things go really badly—as it certainly sometimes does. Underwriters treat this as very real money. So, the older pilot in a Cessna 172 insured for $90,000 who carries $1 million of liability coverage limited to $100,000 per passenger causes an underwriter much less concern than the older pilot flying a Piper M600, as one example, worth $4 million and toting liability limits of $5 million.

Last, senior pilots flying retracts and twins seem to be attention-getting for many underwriters, even though the available evidence is confusing and even contradictory. Many of the studies based on accident analysis include only NTSB-reportable occurrences, which are only a fraction of all aircraft insurance claims. And how do we tell whether a gear-up landing is just an “oops’’ or was caused by age-related factors? Plenty of youngsters have committed the $60,000 slide, and plenty of younger pilots do some pretty stupid things.

Training, Currency, Medical Certification

This includes earning a new rating or two, which underwriters see as a good thing. So is the client who goes out for additional recurrent training on their own. Currency can be a good gauge for risk because the pilot who is flying 100 hours a year, getting periodic training and proficiency checks, plus maybe doing an FAA WINGS phase, should look good to an underwriter concerned about that aging pilot keeping his head in the game.

On the other hand, insurers have said that the mere issuance of a medical certificate does not provide the underwriter with much information about either gradual deterioration of a pilot’s skills, nor does it provide much ability to predict sudden medical incapacitation—as rare as it may actually be. So it’s easy to wonder how belt-and-suspender safety backstops (including Garmin’s Emergency Autoland and other autopilot-based equipment) will affect the insurance underwriting landscape. From what we can tell, it helps sell airplanes to aging pilots.

Avemco offers sizable discounts for pilots who go the extra mile in the knowledge- and skill-building department.

Seaplanes, Turbines, Experimentals

Unanimously, insurance pros admit that rates for these aircraft can be extremely high, and some might not be insurable at any cost. Avemco said it can help ease the pain if the floats are taken off and wheels installed during the offseason, if you operate in northern climates. Yes, skis are the same as wheels in the eyes of Avemco and most insurance companies, so they won’t alter the cost.

Got a fresh seaplane rating in your wallet? Resist going out and buying a high-performance model like a Cessna 206 or big-engine Maule on amphibs. Instead, consider something you can insure yourself for any physical damage. Maybe something pretty simple, such as a Luscombe or even a Cub on floats, until you get some time in your logbook.

Building an airplane from a kit? The advice is to stick with ones with large fleet sizes. Almost every underwriter recognizes models from Van’s, Sonex, and Zenith as being good choices. Replacement parts are a big concern for underwriters, and so is complexity, so it might be best to build a fixed-gear airplane (with a tricycle configuration) and avoid rare or one-off kits. Unless you have serious amounts of turbine time in your logbook, an experimental turbine will have your underwriter laughing.

Speaking of turbines, they’re certainly doable, but be realistic. As one underwriter put it, “the owner-flown jet and turboprop market is where all the hand-to-hand fighting is. Liability limits are being cut in half, premiums are doubling, and it’s sort of a failure of the insurance business to get this far behind the curve that we can’t provide the product at a reasonable price.” Another made a good point: “High-performance aircraft, including turbines, may be the big-buck business insurance companies want, but they may not want the pilot that goes along with the policy.”

Stepping into the world of an owner-flown turbine means you’ll need to spend quality time with your insurance broker to find out whether you can get a policy that covers you in the airplane and limits of liability that you need to protect yourself, as well as the conditions and its cost. Accept that your age and experience are the two drivers that determine your insurability when stepping up to turbine machines.

It may be that you will be unable to buy insurance to fly a dream airplane single pilot at any price. We’ll say it right here: If you are over 65, the current market means there’s little likelihood that you can get insurance for a first-time step-up to a turbine.

Wrapping It Up

Who knows when we’ll see another soft insurance market, but for now the best thing anyone—old or young—can do to stay insured for the long haul is simply don’t crash. That could mean piling on extra layers of training, being realistic with yourself on your skill set, and for aging pilots staring down age 70, accepting that downgrading to a simpler aircraft is the simplest way to keep flying. No matter what you fly, show your insurer that you’re serious about training and proficiency with a well-kept training log.

And simply prepare for the payout. By that we mean keeping all of the aircraft’s maintenance paperwork in order, including sign-offs for annual inspections and airworthiness directive (AD) compliance. While insurers will police it before writing a new policy, you don’t want to be scrambling to get the paperwork in order after an accident.

Last, if you’ve been a longtime customer to one company, keep it that way. Now is not the time for aging pilots to jump carriers, because in a hardened insurance market, loyalty matters.

This feature first appeared in the Summer 2024 Ultimate Issue print edition.

The post Ultimate Issue: Staying Insured Encompasses Training, Loyalty, and Downsizing appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1967 Beechcraft V35 Bonanza.

More than 75 years have passed since Beechcraft’s V-tail Bonanza entered the market, representing a swing toward all-metal modern design that would redefine the GA fleet.

The Bonanza was strikingly fast and efficient compared with other private aircraft of the late 1940s, making it an effective cross-country machine. The aircraft became a status symbol for well-to-do pilot owners and an object of desire throughout the aviation community.

The V-tails were popular for decades, so there are still many of them in the fleet, and they change hands regularly. There also is a significant range of condition and equipment levels among the Bonanzas operating today. The aircraft for sale here has a generously upgraded panel and received new paint in 2022 and a new interior in 2021.

This 1967 V35 has 3,519 hours on the airframe and 662 hours on its 285 hp Continental IO-520-BA engine. The new instrument panel features an Avidyne AMX-240 audio panel, Avidyne IFD-540, NGT-9000 transponder with ADS-B In and Out, Garmin GNC-255A Nav/Comm radio, Garmin GI-106B CDI, Aspen Avionics EFD-1000 PFD and MFD, S-Tec 20 autopilot, and Guardian Avionics 553 CO detector.

Pilots looking for a fast, capable four-place traveling aircraft with a combination of vintage styling and modern avionics should consider this 1967 Beechcraft V35 Bonanza, which is available for $229,000 on AircraftForSale.

If you’re interested in financing, you can do so with FLYING Finance. Use their airplane loan calculator to calculate your estimated monthly payments. Or, to speak with an aviation finance specialist, visit flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine:Air Compare: Beechcraft A36 Bonanza vs. Bonanza V-tails
• FLYING Magazine: Used Airplane Report: Bonanza vs. Baron
• Plane & Pilot: Beechcraft Bonanza, 1947
• Plane & Pilot: Beechcraft V-35 V-Tail Bonanza
• The Aviation Consumer: Used Aircraft Guide: Piper Aztec
• AVweb: E-35 Bonanza Restoration

The post This 1967 Beechcraft V35 Bonanza Is a Timelessly Stylish ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.