5 Personal Airplanes You Can Buy For Less Than $20,000

[@mojogrip]

So sorry if my voice is not audible enough. Apparently I still suck very much at making KZbin videos 😛Pls turn the volume UP. You can redeem your experience by watching 5 personal planes you can buy on a car's budget here kzbin.info/www/bejne/f5KpoJ-omLBlgsk

[@doranjaffas9645]

MojoGrip Your voice was fine on my phone.

[@clutchcargo2419]

MojoGrip you did a great job - look forward to more of your videos !!!

[@clutchcargo2419]

Are these planes your showing recently refurbished - beautiful planes.

[@guyjonson6364]

MojoGrip it was Fine . Good info

[@ivanplazacic]

I wanted to make a comment on it, but then i saw this. Your videos are awesome. Just consider getting an external mic. It's a small investment, but it improves the quality quite a bit. Keep up the good work.

[@tjkoker]

I'm a retired private pilot on disability and just wanted to thank you for all the hard work you put in on making your videos. This one gave me hope again that I might one day own a small airplane. I am very partial to low wing aircraft, particularly the Ercoupe and the Piper line of aircraft like the Tomahawk. I got my license back in 1975 in an Ercoupe and Cessna 150. I miss the sky and live vicariously through your videos. Again, Thank you for your efforts. Cheers.

[@AB-kg6rk]

What he said!

[@jbanks67]

Cessna released both the 120 and the 140 in 1946. The 120 was the "economy" version, without electrical system, main wings without flaps, and side windows only in the doors. The 140 had an electrical system, a simple flap system, and aft quarter windows. Both 120/140 main wings were fabric clad. Many 120/140's have had the main wings re-clad in aluminum, and it's hard these days to find a 120 that hasn't had full electrics installed, as well as the rear quarter window. There are also certificates out there allowing upgrades to more powerful engines. The later Cessna 140A was introduced in 1949 with a brand new wing that was shared with Cessna's Military O-1/L-19 Bird Dog. This was an aluminum clad structure with squared wing tips, fowler type flaps, and a different profile than the older wing. The v-type under-wing struts of the 120/140 models was replaced by a single strut. It's the same wing that was used on the later Cessna 170, 150/152, 172 and 182. Landing gear geometry on Cessna 120/140 was such that it wasn't hard for inexperienced pilots to flip them on their back under hard braking conditions. A kit was available to move the wheels forward a few inches to reduce the risk of a tail-over. The Cessna 140A had it's main landing gear canted a few degrees forward to stave off this tendency. Any of them are sweet aircraft, easy to maintain, very simple, superb as teaching aircraft, and a lot of fun, allowing any pilot to build up hours while not breaking the bank. They are also very loud inside, even with a high quality headset, and in warm climates, can be hot in the foot wells. Side windows are opened in flight to help......note the 120 in the video!!

[@johnpatrickbishop]

I own a luscombe 8e and spent a long time researching this plane and similar planes. You can find super cheap ones but for anyone truly looking for a plane like this, if you bump up your price range to the 22-25k zone you will get a very presentable and flyable plane. And these taildraggers will teach you so much about flying.

[@catfishacademymasterclass6888]

How do I get one

[@maulanwong3841]

Im only 14 years old and i want a plane! I only have 150 dollars but im saving up Whoa: 276 likes?!

[@usaslastresort1126]

God bless your heart

[@junghoonkang2478]

Keep going bro !

[@haddadth]

Buy bitcoin

[@L0stEngineer]

It is good to know what you want at your age. First, you need to fly. Look up Young eagles and Eaa. Your first flight is free. Also, look into CAP civil air patrol. If you work the system you can get your glider wings.

[@pubgmaster5334]

Im 14 too and i got a fricking old car

[@blancolirio]

Haa! I know that dude hand propping the Luscombe! The later model Luscombe 8E and F have electric systems, but hard to find under $20k.

[@christopherbatty3837]

Tomahawk : I am a career aviator & engineer and worked on the first Tomahawks. As an instructor, I was more used to Kingair and the like. The Tomahawk is a GOOD surprise : anyone can fly de Havilland DH82a Tiger Moth (my initial type), a PA34 Seneca. BUT: fly these two WELL...and they will reward the pilot. The Tomahawk is the same. It is the best of the primary trainers - and I have used each one of them in this role, with students as young as 12 yr. The (low wing) visibility saved me from a mid-air when dumb C182 driver dumped his plane within one metre of my canopy. Had I been using a PA140, C150 etc, I would not be writing g this note of appreciation to a fine little trainer. CAUTION: nose u/c stroke is very long...but under-damped....prop strikes happen on rough/uneven surfaces.

[@avflyguy]

If the Piper PA38 is such a great airplane, why don't you see them anywhere in flight schools or even in GA that much anymore? The C150 rules in flight training. A good straight tail 150 and a little elbow grease and you've got a fine airplane. Much more standard 0-200 engine -- thousands still flying. My time in the Tomajoke was limited, by me, and for a reason. It's junk.

[@earlwright3613]

"cheap airplanes" I'm not sure if those 2 words go together very well !

[@Septiccatgaming]

Commercial planes are tens of millions of dollars, so that’s a cheap plane. It’s also cheaper than the car my mom has.

[@tak229]

planes go through extensive maintenance before they can take off, so i would say they go together pretty well

[@ronfullerton3162]

@@tak229 Flying these smaller planes isn't to expensive until repairs or majors come up when it needs to go to a licensed aircraft mechanic. Ouch!

[@Interdiction]

@@ronfullerton3162 You repair them yourself ...Sorted ..We fly yet not one among us has a license / insurance ...The wright bros did it so why not us

[@ronfullerton3162]

@@Interdiction I know ultralights are pretty much self service. I guess I have not learned all there is to know about the "sports license". Are those sports license planes still pretty much self service as ultralights since they are required to be so much self built? I just recently got to investigating private piolet's flying since retiring. I had ground school but no flight time back in the early seventies. At that time, professionally done power and airframe inspections needed to be done, and the cost would of been prohibitive for me costwise. I have been on several web sights about the sports license. But a really thorough in depth description is hard to find. Probably have just been on the wrong web pages.

[@JDBeastmode]

6:15 that’s a nice feature for dodging birds.

[@itscrono7073]

Haha

[@badgoy8439]

"it only costs $18,000 so it won't drain your entire bank account" heh, think again

[@Bartonovich52]

The purchase price is only the start for an aircraft. Fuel, oil, maintenance, insurance, hangarage or tie down, etc etc. Get stuck with an engine overhaul and you’ll spend more that you spent buying the plane. Caveat emptor.

[@rcbif101]

@@Bartonovich52 - Yep, I'm in the market for an experimental Kitfox now due to lower operational costs. I COULD buy a beautiful single owner Cessna 170 right now that has sat for a few years for almost half the price of the Kitfox at around 17K, but I could never afford it in the long run.

[@Femmpaws]

Hey Rcbif I'm building my own plane for that same reason... Because I'm building it I can do all of the annuals and repairs... The same is not true if you buy a used home built. You may want to look at the Avid Flyer as well.

[@rcbif101]

@@Femmpaws - Even getting a second-hand unfinished kit for a good deal and scrounging for the engine, avionics, ect, from my observational experience will still-end up costing me many thousands more than if I just bought a used experimental aircraft. That price difference is a LOT of annual condition inspections worth. However, I'm not worried about the cost as I have a few people that will do them for free or next to free for me. BTW - You can still do your own repairs if you didn't build the kit, they just have to be signed off on the next annual condition inspection. I've seen the Avid, but seems few if any have the 912, and 4 stroke is a must in my requirements.

[@overbuiltautomotive1299]

lol how they know if one took it apart built it bought it done them re did it or what ever receipts for new kit or rebuild it all in how one swings it ill bet grammer off but it hurry @@Femmpaws

[@charlesstrader3005]

I learned to fly in a Tomahawk 42 years ago. Seeing it made me smile! ;-)

[@scavenom2008]

How did it stall? I like the design for sure.

[@oktroutbum]

I di too, its a great trainer because it wont land unless you stall it. The 172 you can fly right to the runway. I will say on a sunny day the tomahawk gets warm in the cabin.

[@charlesstrader3005]

@@scavenom2008 I flew the 152 and the Tomahawk in those days. The Tomahawk was a bit more pronounced in that one or the other wing would fall over more quickly depending on the rudder, but it wasn't too much different from the 152.

[@scavenom2008]

@@charlesstrader3005 thanks for the feedback. I've only experienced a stall on a 152 and to me if felt like the airplane gave enough physical warning on the controls to avoid it. When the airplane finally stalled, it didn't show any snapping tendencies and was a smooth event instead of the abrupt one I had imagined.

[@wired-up]

I was training in a Tomahawk in 1978 but never finished, seemed ok but I didn't have anything to compare it to. Two years ago I rented a 172 and instructor and found that I could still fly after all these years but no plans to take it up again, just taking care of the bucket list.

[@ctbram0627]

I had a fairly old flight instructor when I was getting my tail dragger endorsement in my 1954 Cessna 170B. He called the ercoupe the scarecoupe. Apparently he managed to get one in a flat spin that went all the way to the ground. He survived but does not have fond memories of the plane understandably.

[@flatbill2]

At 5:00, am I super drunk, or is this airplane wiggling as you walk around it?

[@dieudonnemcful]

it looks as if it were dancing.

[@colinearl2166]

Yeah something's wrong with that last clip

[@NotFinancialAdvice]

That was actually a giant Jello Mold, not the actual plane. :)

[@charleswhite5634]

it's breathing !

[@Bryan-ws3yt]

There was something wiggling when he showed the T'craft.

[@oldamericaniron5767]

At almost 60 I purchased a1938 Aeronca Chief after only a few hours in a Cub. I flew it “home” with my instructor, took instruction in it and soloed in my own plane. I paid 14,000 for it and now have a total of about 17,000 total in it with new Slick mags. To me the experience of learning and soloing in my own plane is priceless. One drawback of a Chief is the low useful payload, about 350 lbs. Cruise speed is 90 and I don’t think I’ve ever burned over 4 gallons an hr, usually about 3.5. gallons per hr. It has an up exhaust continental 65 and I love it.

[@skyhigh6]

As a former aircraft owner (15 altogether) It is not how cheap they are it is how much it costs to keep them up. Parts all have to be FAA PMA certified (not cheap) annual inspection, hangers space, AD's that must be complied with, fuel and insurance cost. Not to mention engine overhauls. I have owned 3 Mooneys, 4 Pipers PA 28-140 one PA 28-160, 4 Cessna 172s, One Cessna 152. I am a retired FAA DPE and chief pilot for a large corporation. Before you purchase any aircraft look into the cost of owning.

[@Cre8tvMG]

My dad retired from captaining the 747-400 over the Pacific Ocean, and immediately went out and bought a Luscombe, that could take off from the wingspan of a 747. The hardest part was learning not to flare at 60'. :-) Also, add in the Piper Cherokee, with several good flying airframes for under $20k, and great gentle stall characteristics. Great video.

[@Astounding-News]

Piper Cherokee has had several incidents of catastrophic wing failure, with loss of pilots lives, look it up. When the wing breaks off an aircraft there's no hope for pilot survival.

[@bingosunnoon9341]

I paid 1,500 dollars for my first airplane, a J-3, in 1974. That was the going price then. Bought a Champ a few years later for even less.

[@ctbram0627]

I also did some flying in a Tomahawk back in the early 80's and after they changed the wing the plane still has some scary stall characteristics. Just as you approach the stall the plane can shudder violently and if you look back at the T-tail you will see it wobbling wildly. I had heard stories of it actually jamming the rudder and elevators during a stall.

[@dandahermitseals5582]

This is the airplane I learned to fly in and bought from my CFI. I loved it mine was a 1947 8 A with rudder pedals and a C 65. Sweet traveler. I paid $6500 for it. Cruised at 110mph to 120mph. Cesna 120s are rare. Tomahawk was a.sweet simple craft to fly but I didn't like the solar oven cockpit. My PA 28 modified to tail dragger was a nice aircraft. I always preferred the side by side with stats on the CG and nicer to communicate with passenger and also way easier to get in. The T craftsnwere hugely popular in the 60s and could usually be found in good airworthy condition for for 3 to 5 grand. Nearly as flyable as a cub. By the way, I'm in my 70s. That's why I know. Haha.

[@catfishacademymasterclass6888]

Really? How can I get one

[@doranjaffas9645]

Mike...excellent! Memories....tail wheel training in a Cessna 120 before the endorsement was required. Picked up an Ercoupe in Perry, Oklahoma and flew her home to Jenison, Mich. ( no rudder pedals) and a blast to fly with the sliding sides of the canopy open ( they drop into the fuselage sides giving you an open cockpit) Did my instrument training and spin training ( note..the rear fuselage/rudder reinforcement was installed) in the Tomahawk. Stalls are gentle..spins..right now..recovery standard. One can over rotate the Tomahawk and the nose will pitch up steeply causing an abrupt and uncomfortable situation but you really need to be out of sinc to do that. She is a wonderful bird to fly and as you can tell..I have fond memories in 93Papa. Thanks for posting this!

[@skooter2767k]

I currently own 2 Luscombes. Both have electrical systems. (E & F models) My E has a 115hp Lycoming O-235. They are great airplanes!

[@MalcolmRuthven]

During my first 200 hours of flying, almost 1/2 was in the Cessna 120/140. Fine plane for two people and fast enough to go places in.

[@alexgreychuck7605]

I love my Tomahawk. Had it for near 20years now. Some great STC's to upgrade it's performance. Best bang for the buck. I would add the Aeronca chief 11A as well to the list. Thanks for posting the video.

[@pappybo49]

My first ride was at age 8 in a 140. My brother took me up and I knew right then that I had had to learn to fly! Big difference in the C140 over the C120 is metal wings and flaps. The 140 became the Cessna trainer and the predecessor to the Cessna 150 and the 152.

[@ichhasseamerika]

My father had a Luscombe 8 when I was a kid in the 70s, n he used to take me up in it. It's a beautiful and elegant little buddy. now that I'm getting into flying myself, I'm taking a longer look at one. such simple construction with aluminum and fabric covered wings, and I'll never forget how he used to have to hand spin the prop to get it started, throwing one leg up in the air. it was something like out of World War II. :) man Those Were the good old days. Miss u Papa.

[@veanwhitcher7867]

Thanks Mike, this is stuff you just don't get to see that often! Amazing you were able to locate so much of it. Great video!

[@HyperShift]

Can you do a video on Bush planes for under 40K or kit / Experimental planes under 40 or 50k

[@mojogrip]

Noted!

[@williambailey5405]

No apologies needed. Your videos are fine. I watch them all. Keep them coming.

[@woodsman335]

I soloed in the Piper Tomahawk. The T-tail is used to prevent pitch change when throttle up or down. I easily moved to a Piper Cherokee afterward. I love flying both.

[@dave-in-nj9393]

love your videos. simple and to the point.

[@rongendron8705]

I took pilot lessons in 1963, when I was 17 (6 hours) but needed at least 8 hours to solo. We flew in a 1946 Piper Cub & an Aironca Champion (not sure of the spelling)! Ubfortunately, another student 16 year old Steve C. crashed the "Champion' & was killed & th school was shut down or went out of business ( BLAIRSTOWN AIRPORT, NJ! They offered to sell the PIPER for $1000. but I felt that it was too much money for a then 16 year old plane, but after seeing this video, I guess it would have been a very good deal!

[@COPDAD60632]

Good video, I had a ERCOUPE IN 1972, can't land in winds of 15 m.p.h. or more.

[@goldwinger5434]

Most small planes can't land in crosswinds in excess of 15 mph.

[@vishalverma5280]

Thanks mike, keep making precise and less noisy videos. Loved the music at the end.

[@drewbrown9888]

I love the Piper tomohawk, I learnt to fly in it and it is so much fun to just whip around in it. The landing on it is great too

[@lbbradley55]

Now I Really Enjoyed Watching this. Gives me a some insight I didn't have

[@Paiadakine]

That’s a nice Cessna 120. The one I flew in the 80’s had a pull starter! I needed a cushion behind my back so I could reach the rudder pedals. That taylor craft is a beauty.

[@entelin]

I'd rather get an ultralight, almost as fast, much less expensive, can be self maintained, could potentially have floats, lands at a slower speed requires less runway so in the event of an engine out you have more landing options.

[@pappybo49]

I’ve been lucky enough for to fly all these planes but the tomahawk and I would pay the going price for any of them. Very good video presentation. Thanks for sharing. I kinda stumped across your channel a while back and really enjoy your video. Keep up the good work

[@digital0185]

Excluding the requirements and monthly maintenance

[@jamesm.taylor6928]

By the way..high T type tail aircraft almost always have very nasty stall charateristics..I dont know of any that are certified for spins in fact. Even the aircraft that are aerobatic approved still are prohibited from doing spins. Wing drop really isnt that terrible. Some with high T tails become unrecoverable if spins are entered even...

[@Femmpaws]

The reason for the Tomahawk and Beechcraft's Skipper having the nasty stall characteristics is due to the GAW-1 airfoil that they were conned into using by NASA. NASA didn't tell them about the very narrow CG window the thing had.

[@Femmpaws]

Marty the Tomahawk could stall before the stall stakes were installed.

[@billgund4532]

@Randy Hodder A snap roll around a vertical axis?

[@teneretraveler5130]

As a former owner of a Tomahawk, I certainly understand it’s flight characteristics. It was a pure joy to fly and was better than the other trainers for several reasons. It had loads of room compared to the Cessna, had excellent visibility, was a little bit faster and it had a more modern style to it. Piper in the development of the Tomahawk, sent out surveys to flight instructors all over the country asking what they wanted in a trainer and what Piper built was the Tomahawk. Just for your information, the Tomahawk was designed to have great stall and spin characteristics, that was one of the features instructors wanted and they got it. The Tomahawk and the Cessna trainers are all capable of spins.

[@phils4634]

High T-tail gliders have no problems with stall or spin recovery. Many trainers are high-T tail configuration (and are VERY safe aircraft!)

[@DCGULL01]

Mike, thank you very much for all of your videos. Great work, and, appreciated by all of us aviation buffs. If you keep it up, you'll end up like Dan Johnson, with a huge library of videos about all sorts of planes- from LSA's to jet fighters! I too, notice that occasionally- it's hard to understand your running commentary, almost as if you are just a few inches to far away from the microphone. When you have music in the background- it's more noticeable tho. Keep them coming, and, I really liked the Merlin PSA review- it excites me to think that you could be flying, after building you own plane no less- in less than a year (without the builder assist program). I liked that the gentleman who was building his own, was incorporating many high end mods into his (IFR instrumentation, ham radio, etc...) just to give a builder an idea of what is possible in that single seat aircraft. Thanks again!

[@mojogrip]

Thanks David. working on the audio issues trust me.

[@markusthl]

Hey man, can I ask you where you got the footage from with the Cessna 120?

[@NavsTech]

Hey Mike, love your videos man. I’m a trainee pilot and I stumbled across your channel and all your videos are awesome. 👊🏽👊🏽

[@BlueBaron3339]

The Luscombe 8 came out in 1939 as the first stressed skin all-metal fuselage small aircraft. Most of the post-war models had an electrical system, C85 engines and were the model copied by Cessna to create the 120 and 140 series but outperformed them both. All models perform better than you state in this video. Plus they have great high altitude performance. They are an elite taildragger, however, and take more skill to land than a Cessna or any of the other aircraft featured in this video. The bonus, however, is that they handle extremely well and will make you a better pilot.

[@maxrudder6091]

All very true. I have a 120/140 (a 120 with 140 wings), but I think the Luscombe is a great little airplane. The problem is that I'm 6'4", and when I rode in a friend's 8A, my knees were in my chin. The 140 has a little more room, though I had to flip the control wheels upside down to clear my knees.

[@BlueBaron3339]

@@maxrudder6091 Agreed, Gary. Interior space was always an issue in these early airplanes. This is why among the most popular mods on Luscombes is Cessna 150 seats and seat rails rather than those horrid original fixed bench seats. Plus the 120/140 Cessnas had wider landing gear and less spartan interior appointments making them far more appealing to a broader market. Yes, lots of owners added those wheel extenders to move the wheels forward due to many nose overs but the Luscombe had more quirks 😉

[@warshipsdd-2142]

Left out the Air-knocker Aeronica Champ, 65HP engine tail-dragger. Learned to fly in one in a sod field. There are some made in the 80s as well as the original pre-war models out there.

[@JCMayPE]

My first ride was in my grandfather's 1947 cessna 140

[@Pink_Static]

When you spin a Tomahawk and turn your head around and look at the T tail flopping around you will understand why some of us call it the TraumaHawk....

[@rjeautomotive6545]

Why would you spin an aircraft that is not certified for it, it would be like trying t catch a tiger by the tail!

[@NikkyElso]

"You Don't have to spend your entire life savings" oh contrar, these airplanes would be my life savings and then some 😂

[@Dailymailnewz]

The piper goes into a spin and it is pretty dangerouse plane actually, the safest one is the old one with double wings one and those ones are heavy but are the safest.

[@marinepilot5723]

Fly a 120, so I'm biased......they are AWESOME!

[@riedjacobsen8620]

Fun bit of education I got in the Tomahawk; if you slide the seats all the way back, it will fly 2-3 knots faster. Of course you probably can't reach the rudder either so only do this in smooth air.

[@cameronc1385]

Excellent video thank you for sharing. Being from California it's so easy to end up paying for cars. Now I'd rather fly. For $18000 it looks so much more exciting to fly than have a car payment. To those who can fly enjoy.

[@sphlouge]

Had a 1947 piper supercruiser . Great plane . Fabric tail dragged. Almost impossible to stall , just mushed.

[@pjsministry7316]

Have you heard any chat above the FAA adding more aircraft into the sport category? Like the Grumman AA1 ,or the AA1C.

[@LuminescentPictures]

Looking for a cheap option with folding wings?

[@MeiseFlo]

MojoGrip You said the Luscombe 8 has no electrical. Well at one point you referred to the 8A correctly but most times you only spoke about the Luscombe 8. Just for example, I have a Luscombe 8E with standard C85 AND electrical system. Still not that many flight instruments though. Btw, it has a reputation of being a bit tricky on the ground but after a little over 500 landings I can say, it just does what you are telling it to do! So especially being new to tailwheel aircraft you have to stay alert! I did my endorsement on the 8E and so far never regretted it! Florian

[@mojogrip]

Right. I should have been more specific as the early models 8A had no electrical systems. The later 8E does. Thanks. How do you like the Luscombe so far?

[@MeiseFlo]

It is a wonderful airplane! It is low cost in purchase as you said, the 8A and 8E don't defer that much, and it costs almost nothing to operate. And with the 8E having not fuselage tank you lots of baggage space in there! The only disadvantage if you want to call it so is it's speed. At best I get out 85KIAS but on the other hand I try to get hours towards my commercial. So I don't care flying half an hour longer...

[@Waray25]

.

[@BadIdeas101]

I love old school planes with no electronics. So easy to deal with and makes you better

[@AgentB7]

Thank you pal, great review! As expected, the Piper and the Cessna are almost a full airplanes on the list, and even can do a minor paying tasks, especially a 120.

[@weketsu7299]

Hey could you do a video on ultralights? I have a feeling a lot of people would like to see that video too!

[@davidb.cutter4631]

Nice job on the video. Although the aircraft may be inexpensive, it's usually the upkeep that is the most expensive part of airplane ownership. Not to mention that some of these aircraft are more than sixty years old.

[@shujayethossain6554]

So can you own a cessna 150 or any kind of cheap aircraft,fly them and accumulate those flight hours in order to get into a commercial jet pilot job?

[@joshuaespinoza5082]

Great video brother. Thanks for giving us some insight.

[@omargordillo625]

Hello, can you please make an update of the plane prices? Thanks.

[@nyclassic4ever130]

Wanna buy one of these. But where do I learn about where I will store it and how much THAT will cost me? 🤔

[@mckeevb]

Sounds good but will they have metal fatigue and break up in the air ?

[@fhuber7507]

Ercoupe wings originally were fabric covered. The metal wing skins were an approved modification. The metal wing skins reduce useful load (pilot, passenger, baggage and fuel) but also reduces maintenance, since the fabric had to be replaced periodically Early Ercoupes all had fixed rudders. Initially the rudder "option" was done as an experimental modification, but became common enough to be an approved for non-experimental rated aircraft. Many had the rudders linked to the yoke, some have rudder pedals. (since few came from the factory with working rudders, there are assorted variations) I came very close to buying an Ercoupe. Wish I had bought it.

[@tomross7552]

just LOVE the look of the Ercoupe :)

[@Trvlrxxx]

You are misinformed about Ercoupes. They never had "fixed" rudders. The rudders have always been fully operational. They were simply interconnected to the ailerons so that all turns are perfectly coordinated without the need of rudder PEDALS. There's a great difference between not have rudders, and not having rudder pedals. I own an early model Ercoupe that has never had rudder pedals but, believe me, it has rudders. Pedals were a factory option from the beginning. Later models, particularly the Forneys and Alons, mostly hcame with rudder pedals though they are relatively ineffective. Metals skins adds about 40 pounds max to gross weight BUT it can actually INCREASE maintenance costs because the interior of the meal skinned wings were not getting thoroughly inspected as they would when fabric is replaced. More likely to find spar corrosion with metal covered wings which do not allow the wings to breathe, therefore hold in moisture from condensation, water leaks, etc. So... there are tradeoffs.

[@Bartonovich52]

Trvlxxx. Nobody cares.

[@kassidyryzer2909]

Great video! Thanks for the info, I love planes!

[@commonlife545]

Where to book for reservation?

[@lawyers9]

Informative and pleasant video! Good job!

[@davealexander7427]

How do I determine if a aircraft Is LSA or even glider

[@alienhuman]

Note: Many Ercoupes still have fabric wings. The good news is the C model is LSA approved. (without modes of course)

[@dennisbest4979]

1965 at 16 had a chance to buy 1947 Taylor craft for $800.00 The owner flew it from Concord Calif to Fremont, and pulled gliders all day long with a piper super cub. My folks borrowed my money and I never bought my airplane. Got my Certificate on my Birthday 1977. Dual training Anacortes Washington 1968 $20.00 per hour on Seaman pay of $137.50 month. Solo was $12.00 all with fuel included. Thank you John Zimba . Airplanes are similar to horses, weather you ride them or not , you feed them, shoe them, and stable them, sounds allot like aircraft maintenance to me. Buy block time and rent the best plan your qualified to fly. May the sun be at your 6 and no clouds in your way.

[@davealexander7427]

Thanks or info and it's very accurate I am 54 trying to get my LSA cert due to my positive experience in the army when should I buy my first aircraft

[@skooter2767k]

You left out other models of Luscombes WITH electrical systems. You can still get a electrical system Luscombe for $20k or just over. My favorite airplane, 3 time owner

[@ruialexandre6197]

Is the Aeronca Champ out of this list? Interesing video. If only I lived in the US.

[@johnpatrickbishop]

Rui Alexandre it’s a great country to be a pilot in.

[@Bartonovich52]

The Champ should be right in the middle of it. Roomier than the Taylorcraft and 120 because it’s tandem seating (roomier than the more expensive J-3 and PA-11, too). Good visibility, docile handling, etc.

[@JasonM69]

Ha I was wondering why there was no chief either

[@ptdi320]

Mike, thanks for publishing these videos for us all! May I suggest reducing the background music volume... it frequently tramples over your vocal narrative, making it difficult to understand your comments. Thank you!

[@josephkerkau2520]

Very good Mike very interesting. How about reviewing the Piper tripacer P22

[@shanekasper4587]

What a great video. Love the taylorcraft.

[@The_Real_Indiana_Joe]

This is a GREAT channel!!! Love it!

[@u.s.patriot3415]

Awesome of you to mention the Ercoupe M G! I may get a Mooney model for short cross country trips/burgers/camping.

[@KUBBI7488]

i wounder how much pilot license will cost?

[@davestarr7112]

Nice rundown here. But in your Luscombe segment, while you are talking about the lack of an electrical system, you show a cockpit scene shot in a Luscombe that clearly has a complete electrical system ... as the vast majority of Luscombes still around today do.

[@_AK-Penguin197_]

Can you do a video specificly on the Stinson 108? I was looking at your other videos and I didnt see anything about it, can you make a video on it please?

[@dsparamotor6538]

Hi Mike , I'm doing the training for microlights in uk and i was looking for a channel to learn more things i found your channel, I didn't have time yet to check all videos but I'm looking for tricks how to make the perfect landing, Congratulations with your channel take a lots of time and energy to.make all this videos .

[@PeteOLindstrom]

Your voice volume is fine. You need to turn down the music in the back ground

[@terrypen]

and turn off the video stabilization, unless it's one of the new Go-pro's that has really good stabilization that's not all wavy looking.

[@glennr9913]

Mojo, I enjoy your videos. You do a good job ( but do need to boost the volume a bit). Can you give us links to where you prefer to shop for planes? Thanks again & keep up the good work.

[@mojogrip]

Thank you. will def work on sound quality. I'm typically on barnstormers.com

[@josephsantana3094]

So how reliable are these planes? I've been thinking about getting into flying but these small planes seem to be notorious for reliability issues and lots of crashes.

[@Normalhowaboutyou]

What is one doing one of these planes if they have to go to the bathroom?

[@SirMasterJoe]

Mike Awesome Video. I am looking for a Tomahawk after watching.

[@emaheiwa8174]

The Piper looks so cool

[@anakinskywalker5363]

This video is so informative thank you so much I’ve been trying to find a cheap airplane

[@lioneluhlmann9200]

what was the first blue pin striped plane in the very beginning? love that set up, totally cool. small plane, hanger.....all in the back yard. I just flew in an ultralight class for the first time a few days ago and i imagine that maintenance wise these old planes seemingly could be reliable. they are incredibly simple in build and the quality i saw seemed solid.

[@sirjcurry2182]

Hi Mike; Great channel. My fam will be buying an airplane soon as I can get my training and the cheese. Keep sharing the wisdom.

[@dansavka6727]

Ide love to buy one of these.. buddy owns a small jet G6 I believe.. things great to take a long weekend to the coast

[@EliteClinicalResearch]

Just started listening and becoming interested in flying. How safe is it to fly your own plane? Compared to commercial plane safety?

[@chrisscott1547]

The Luscombe had pretty narrow gear, which could be nasty landing in a crosswind. On another note, in 1995 I bought a Piper for $15,000 - spent another 7K getting instruments and avionics, then broke a valve on take off which was exciting, and a year later spent $18.5k overhauling the Lycoming 4 cyl engine. I was paying $220/mo for hanger rent. Things are significantly more expensive now.

[@skooter2767k]

Chris Scott Luscombes perform much better than others in a crosswinds as they have much more control effectiveness compared to a C-120/140, Cub, champ etc. I routinely land mine in crosswinds of 20kts or more. It’s a pilot thing NOT the airplane! They AERN’T “squirrly”

[@Conn653]

Mike - What about the Piper Colt(PA-22-108) or Tri-Pacer(PA-22-150) for a good basic trainer or cross-country aircraft?

[@ahoneyman]

For a basic trainer you can't go wrong with a Cessna 150 unless you're over 6'2. The Cessna is simple, the all aluminum body will do OK outside, and there are thousands in the air. It's the Toyota Corolla of the sky. For real cross country work a Cessna 172 or a Piper Cherokee/Warrior has more room, more range, and more payload. Fabric planes like the Pacer are more a labor of love and need more care and feeding, much like a 70's muscle car.

[@baldy116hairless9]

Great video. Well done and very interesting.

[@jcnme2020]

Absolutely Excellent video Brother

[@pbellbell]

ive flown in 1946 aronca chef several times @i,llnever forget it.

[@raysills]

Back in the 70's, I used to fly a T-craft..., which was owned by a club. And, it was very inexpensive flying. It's interesting to know that nowadays, you need to be certified for tail-draggers. Back then, after your CFI OK'ed you for solo, that was all that was necessary... along with an annual check ride. Anyway, it was a fun airplane, and had a lot of "wing", and you could even climb using thermals, like a sailplane. The one I flew had a 65 HP engine, fitted with a "cruise" prop, which meant it would not climb fast, but used less fuel when going cross-country. I think the plane is still registered... (N-43910).