I have two prospective partners that I am looking at to purchase something with. Both are very reliable and responsible people . We are looking for something in the 120/140 to 170 range. From what I have read I believe we would require a minimum 125 horse STC on one of the 120/140's as we are all around 190#'s. A 170 would be nice but the low fuel burn of the smaller engine is incredibly appealing. 2 of us (myself included) would continue getting our ppl in this plane and less gallons used is always an advantage. The other partner is a 1000 hour pilot looking to get a tailwheel endorsement and fly when he is here around 6 weeks a year.

Info:

-Mogas is readily available in all grades, a 90 Gal tank is easily available to our strip via a buddy's truck. Partners are conducive to mogas.
-Most missions will be close (under 200 miles) until ppl's are completed.
-A future aircraft upgrade is inevitable as we progress (assuming our partnership doesn't go to shit)

I have a few questions for you,

1) Partnerships? Is three too many? Our flying season where we are is typically so short that I could see some possible conflicts.

2) Not going to get into the whole "ticket in a taildragger" thing. Aside from the obvious advantages about burning less in the pattern, any thoughts on a lower powered possibly lighter alternative plane that might burn less? Just pull the trigger on a decent 170?

3) Our MSL is around 3100 feet. Not CO high but something to worry about in a lower powered plane like a 170 if not flying in reasonable DA?

Thanks for your input and I know, Just get a Maule!

JB

Steer clear of airplane partnerships!!!

This book was recommended in another thread. I found a used copy on Amazon for $4 shipped. Just finished reading the section on partnerships. Like 74 said above, tread carefully. Lots of pitfalls to partnerships....

There have been many successful partnerships, I was in one once. Do it legally, with all expectations written out. Pay attention to maintenance details and the section on want out buy out options.

It is time and money well spent up front.

I have been in a great partnership for 9 years. 6 people in a Cessna 182. It hardly gets flown, maybe 100 hrs/yr. I do cheat now by putting most of my hours on a plane of my own. It was a great way to start getting hours and a 1000% better than trying to rent an aircraft. Only let people schedule one trip at a time and don't expect to upgrade with every new gadget. Splitting a $35,000 engine cost is much better if it is not all coming out of one pocket.

soaringhiggy wrote:There have been many successful partnerships, I was in one once. Do it legally, with all expectations written out. Pay attention to maintenance details and the section on want out buy out options.

Absolutely, if you use the old adage of "fences make good neighbors" and parallel it to defined, agreed upon rules up front make good partnerships. Nothing will make you more miserable (and broke) than being trapped in a partnership where everyone isn't contributing equally. It's also a great way to lose friends.

Just my two cents. What other people say about having a good agreement also do what due diligence you can on the partners. Are all the partners all on the same page? Is one of them going to go nuts if you land on a road or a grass strip?

Is three too many??? Well, it depends. Are you all weekend fliers? Or are some weekday fliers? How much do you want to fly? For me, personally, I wouldn't go with more than one other partner if I was to do it again. I was in a partnership with 3 and the inconvenience factor vs the savings didn't pencil out as much as I would like. I try to fly at least 60-70 hrs a year and prefer going places for more than a day if possible.

Nothing beats the convenience of single ownership but sometimes I think it would be nice to get something a little bigger and safer like a 182 and, probably, end up spending a little less per year than I do now if I had one additional partner.

If getting three partners (or more) it's the only way you can go flying then, after carefully checking them out, I'd say go for it.

I know of a few people that have had great success with partnerships. Make sure everyone's expectations are crystal clear (and aligned) when it comes to things like cleaning after each use to maintenance. Also have agreements on scheduling.

Thank you all for your responses. I just ordered the book you mentioned papa foxtrot. Can't wait to read it.

A partnership is not going to be required to go fly but I could see it eventually allowing us to fly more. Our schedules are all pretty flexible for scheduling and we are all on the same page as far as our expectations (off airport strips ok for example).

I have been seriously considering a 182 more and more. It would be more money out of pocket but I think would be a more appropriate airplane for this area. If we could split one 3 ways it makes it even more appealing!

I will keep you all posted as to how this pans out.