Club Homepage Forums Classified Ads Buy & Sell - Everything But Airplanes Need advice

I'm trying to sell my Aerobat Texas Taildragger and am having difficulty trying to figure out what I can ask for it.

Can anyone in this forum give me their ideas on what this thing will sell for?

Chuck E.

I recently purchased a 150. In my search I ran across several aerobats and one aerobat taildragger. It seemed the aerobats were around $30,000 and the taildragger aerobat slightly higher. The taildragger aerobat I ran across was I beleive $32,000 or $33,000. Obviously yours may be worth much more than that based upon times, equipment and other stuff.

We'll need lots more info: TT, TSMOH, year, panel (avionics), prop, overall condition inside and out (scale of 1-10), photos .... etc. And, yes, you'll get lots of advice from this group.

Terry

"" We'll need lots more info: TT,------------

6668

TSMOH,131.2....Melinium cylinders..light starter....spin off oil filter

year, ---

1976

panel (avionics)-----

Cessna factory with mode C transponder...built in intercom....Anywheremap GPS.

, prop,----

5 hours since overhaul-----

overall condition inside and out (scale of 1-10),---

8 outside ...8 inside

photos .... etc.

photos are in my add in this forum.

And, yes, you'll get lots of advice from this group.

that is exactly why I came here...

Chuck E.

Chuck,
I have been in the market for 6 months. As long as you take what I'm writing with a very heavy grain of salt, I'll share with you my thought process.
I think there are two issues to consider
. First, it's Canadian registered plane. Obviously, for a US buyer, it makes the process more intricate, more expensive and more time consuming. While hundreds of plane goes through the very same process every year, it still remains a hassle. Hassle means that there must be a built-in incentive for a US buyer.
Second, once you get into the $40K range, you're also getting into Citabria territory. While it may not have the good looks the Cessna has it does what it is supposed to do well.
The Aerobat is a niche plane. You can either wait for the right buyer or you will find yourself having to discount it enough to entice a 150/152 buyer to step up to the plate. A couple weeks ago I saw an aerobat for $24k in Barnstormers. One is sitting at my airport for $28K. A taildragger configuration may be consider as a liability (not performance wise, just resale wise) because it usually eliminates low time buyers, pilots who have heard horror stories about groundlooping, non endorsed pilots,etc)

So in a nutshell, that's it through my eyes. (but then again, I may be blind )

Fast sale=discount, full price= longer wait.
Figure out which option you can live with best.

Thanks for the comments Frank, you are correct in what you wrote, the tailwheel Aerobat is an unusual airplane and will probably be difficult to sell.

Quote:

" A taildragger configuration may be consider as a liability (not performance wise, just resale wise) because it usually eliminates low time buyers, pilots who have heard horror stories about groundlooping, non endorsed pilots,etc)"

Yes, I knew that when I did the conversion, however at the time I did it I chose to convert the Aerobat rather than buy a Citabria...my reasonoing was that the Aerobat would be a known type as a lot of students learn to fly on 150's, however my reasoning was badly flawed because I forgot to take into account that most of todays flight instructors are very limited in their flying skills and even more limited in their understanding of the subject of how to fly.

So now I'm stuck with having made a bad decision and will just have to wait for the right buyer if there is one out there.

My reasonng for choosing the Aerobat over the Citabria was also based on the simple fact that they are both basic trainers and both do about the same job in teaching basic aerobatic skills...however the Aerobat in the Texas Tail Dragger configuration is quite a bit more demanding with regard to directional control during landing and take off.

It is about half way between a Citabria and a Pitts for yaw control on the ground.

Anyhow I forgot about the abysimal level of flight instructing today and must live with that error in thinking.

I still can't believe that flying a tail wheel airplane requires a special endorsement,how did aviation get this dummed down?

Wait, I resemble that remark ? I am one of the few instructors left who gives tailwheel instruction, and I?m leaning the other direction ? I believe that the tailwheel endorsement should become a rating and require an FAA checkride.

Pilots who transition from a nose wheel plane to a tailwheel plane tend to struggle and do indeed need specialized training. Those who learn to fly in a tailwheel plane tend to do much better and have no problem transitioning to a nose wheel plane.

The problem is that today there are far more nose wheel planes, pilots and instructors, and learning to handle a tailwheel plane is the exception. Not too many years ago it was the reverse. I think we?d see a significant increase in tailwheel accidents if we didn?t require special training and at least an instructor?s endorsement.

Terry

Quote:

" [color:"blue"] [/color] Wait, I resemble that remark ? I am one of the few instructors left who gives tailwheel instruction, and I?m leaning the other direction ? I believe that the tailwheel endorsement should become a rating and require an FAA checkride.

Pilots who transition from a nose wheel plane to a tailwheel plane tend to struggle and do indeed need specialized training. Those who learn to fly in a tailwheel plane tend to do much better and have no problem transitioning to a nose wheel plane. "

----------------------------------------------

Terry the last thing I want to do here is get ito a pi.sing match over flying simple training aircraft, but I'm puzzeled at your comments about teaching a licensed pilot to fly a tail wheel airplane and the need for a type rating on one.

How many hours would this type rating require, assuming you are not doing it on something like a B17?

And please, please ,please explain to me why an instructors endorsement would be needed??

What would be wrong with someone who is a good teacher with lots of tailwheel time doing the check outs as long as the pilot being taught has a pilot license?

Chuck E.

Hey Chuck, no worries ... I enjoy a healthy discussion and see no requirement for a ... how did you say it ... pi.sing match (that?s how simple folk settle issues when they don?t know how to debate!)

First, understand where I'm coming from ... in Alaska there are a disproportionate number of taildraggers and the accident statistics reflect poorly on taildragger pilots. Again, there are relatively few qualified tailwheel instructors out there, and I believe there needs to be more rigor in the tailwheel instruction that goes on. Tailwheel planes are more difficult to fly and there needs to be training specific to those differences.

Compare the tailwheel training to the SES (or float) rating ? almost the same concept, the FAR?s don?t require a specific number of hours, and there is no written exam, but the SES requires a checkride after the instructor feels the student is indeed ready for safe flight in a float plane. The difference is, the tailwheel training, and proof that the pilot will be safe and proficient, ends with the instructor.

With the SES rating, one more check is in order to verify the competency of the pilot, and the FFA (or its designee) gets one last chance to ride with the them ? the pilot understands that they have to demonstrate their competence to someone other than the instructor.

Unfortunately, there are instructors out there who will sign a tailwheel student off after 1-3 hours of touch and go?s in the pattern. Others will hold out for 18-20 hours of training. I believe that if the tailwheel training were subjected to the same rigor as the float rating we?d end up with fewer accidents and safer pilots (and safer passengers). I hate to say it, but the accident statistics support my case, at least in Alaska.

Terry

Just to add another point that was made during dinner by a flight instructor who has thousands of hours, many of which are tailwheel instruction hours:

It isn?t the experienced tailwheel instructors that are at issue in this discussion. It?s the young instructor who goes through an accelerated program and is a CFI after say 350 hours in a Cessna 172 (not picking on any specific make/model here) who gets his buddy who owns a Taylorcraft to give him 3 hours of tailwheel instruction and an endorsement.

In the eyes of the FAA, and according to the FAR?s ? he is fully qualified to give tailwheel instruction and to endorse the logbook of a pilot in a Cessna 185, a Cessna 152 Sparrowhawk Texas Taildragger, or a Supercub with a 180 horse engine. And that pilot is then free and legal to go out and land his airplane on a river bank.

If at least one more qualifed person had a chance to fly with the pilot before he goes full-throttle solo in his 185 and lands in a cross-wind on a paved runway ?.