Speeddemon651 wrote:G44 wrote:I did not get the impression MTV was being rude, he is just stating it like it is. Actually, his advice is spot on.
Possibly, but to assume someone is going to purchase an aircraft based on banter in a forum without a through pre-buy inspection is kind of obnoxious. It's counter productive actually.
Why? That happens all the time, that people buy airplanes without a pre-buy. For some, it works out pretty well, and they get a good airplane. For others, not so much.
One of the last lawsuits I handled before retiring was an example, a 182 with a very nice paint job, but which was in such sorry structural shape that it was going to take perhaps $30K or more to put into airworthy shape--and that didn't include firewall forward, which was actually pretty OK. The owner had paid top price for the airplane, because it looked so good to him. But as our expert witness said on the stand, "a nice paint job can disguise a lot of ills." There were many structural issues that could be only determined precisely by dismantling, and my client had made the mistake of agreeing to tackle the job.
The owner, however, remained under the impression that the airplane was fundamentally in good shape and became convinced that my client was trying to hornswoggle him. That 2 other shops on the field, including one which specializes in rebuilding wrecked airplanes, had refused to take on the reconstruction job because of what was found in a post-buy annual inspection by one of them, didn't dissuade him. The fact is, that airplane really was junk, and if he hadn't decided to file suit when my client was still in the dismantling stages of the reconstruction, the only way it was going to be a good airplane was with very expensive reconstruction.
Believe me, this is generally speaking one of the "kinder, gentler" aviation forums on the Internet. But if you ask questions, you have to expect answers, and most of the folks here aren't wired to tell you only what you want to hear.
Cary