Airplane hours

I like to browse airplane ads. (The SO said, ‘Why don’t you just sell all of your stuff and buy one already?’) One thing I notice about '70s Cessna 172s is that many of them have 10,000 hours or more. But '60s-vintage ones tend to only have a couple thousand hours on them. One would think that older airplanes would have the higher number of hours. I have a hypothesis and would like to see if anyone agrees or if I’m completely wrong.

Up until the '80s there were thousands of airplanes being made. IIRC the peak was reached in the late-1970s when something like 15,000 planes were being made in a year.
When I was growing up my mom worked for Gibbs Flight Service in San Diego. Most of the aircraft there seemed pretty new. One, N6228T, was eight years old when it crashed, and it was so ‘old’ that they called it ‘Shaky Jake’. Dad bought his first plane there when it was six years old with a couple thousand hours on it. It had been used as a traffic plane for a local radio station and was considered a bit long in the tooth. It seems that during that time flight schools and others – at least in metropolitan areas – would sell their old planes and buy new ones when they were ‘old’. Good business at the time. Pilots liked to fly new aircraft with that ‘new plane smell’.

I posted a table of Cessna 172 prices in The Great Ongoing General Aviation Thread. I graphed it yesterday, and the curve is parabolic. With prices the way they are, people just can’t afford airplanes anymore. Up until the airplane manufacturers stopped making piston singles, the price increases were gradual. After the long hiatus (11 years in the case of Cessna) the prices skyrocketed.

So here’s my hypothesis: Airplanes are often bought by flight schools, which use them for training. Consumers tend to buy used airplanes, often from flight schools. Private owners put fewer hours on their planes than flight schools do. In the '60s and early-'70s, flight schools kept their aircraft for a shorter time, and thus they had fewer hours when they were sold. When The Great General Aviation Collapse happened, flight schools using Cessnas were equipped primarily with N-model Skyhawks. (I think that is the most-produced model.) Since no new Skyhawks were being built, flight schools held onto the ones they had. Those airplanes racked up five-figure hours, and are still being used by flight schools. So '60s airplanes have fewer hours on them because they were turned over more frequently, and mid-to-late='70s models have more hours on them because they are retained in commercial service longer.

Am I close? Or entirely off base?

That sounds reasonable to me. I guess back then aeroplanes of that size were a bit like cars and if you could afford it you’d get a new model every few years.

Well, in boating, the best boats have the most hours.

Boats that work get used.

Boats that don’t need excessive TLC get used.

Boats from the 70’s have more hours per year of life than any boats… EVAH.

**In the 70’s, technology ( I use that term loosely) and simplicity crossed paths. ** The engines were sloppy enough to be reliable and not finicky, but their simple design means you cannot kill them (not even to this day). Technology was advanced just enough, but not so much so that it killed simplicity.

The version of the plane you are talking about exists in boating and was built by numerous builders with basic 2-stroke outboard engines. Those boat were ubiquitous in the 1970’s. They were too rough in the 60’s and too advanced in the 80’s forward.

So…maybe the same could be said for aeroplanes. File this under ‘Food for Thought’.

.

I know my dad sold his piper ostensibly because with 2 kids he needed a larger plane, but it was really because I hurked up used milk on the way home from the hospital in it.

Hey, I was 3 days old and he hit a patch of turbulence … :stuck_out_tongue:

Cessna was sold to General Dynamics in 1985, not long before they stopped production of piston-singles. GD sold Cessna to Textron in 1992. Textron restarted production in 1998 – with a huge price increase. It strikes me that neither conglomerate is particularly interested in ‘private planes’ (i.e., personal-use airplanes that families might buy).

Since so many '70s-vintage airplanes have so many hours on them, there must be some demand for this type of aircraft. But since the prices of new ones exceed the means of the target market, few people can buy them. Personally, I ascribe to the Henry Ford model – produce a product on such a scale that the people who build them can buy them. If production goes up, prices come down.

I think Textron Cessna would rather build business jets. More profit in them than on low-production pistons. Also, the pilots are more experienced than piston fliers. Lower liability. Let the newcomers build airplanes for the proles. Too bad. I think their business model is killing the industry.

Just guessing, but this may explain in part why the home built aircraft industry seemed to take of from the late 1980’s on. Not the same as buying a factory built plane, but a lot of people have taken to it and some of the kits don’t require much but assembly it seems.