On July 15th, the medical reforms that AOPA and many other aviation advocacy organizations had pushed so hard for were passed into law. President Obama signed the medical reforms law on the 15th, but, before practical application of the law takes place, the FAA has to translate the law into regulations.
What do the new medical reforms mean for medical certificates and flying? First, you still have to get a medical examination at some point in your flying career. Student pilots will still need an initial medical examination. Initially, for pilots who have held a medical certificate at some point over the previous 10 years, a new medical examination may not be needed (this still has to be regulated by the FAA so exact details aren’t known yet).
So, if you’re medical certificate has expired but you have had one in the past 10 years, you qualify. But, if you have had your medical certificate revoked, suspended, withdrawn or denied, you don’t qualify.
Once that student pilot receives the initial medical certificate (or the experienced pilot decides to start flying again), all that needs be accomplished is to take a free, online course on aeromedical factors every two years and meet with a physician at least once every four years.
There are some operating limitations that will be put into place for folks operating without a third class medical. Pilot’s can operate aircraft with no more than 6 seats that weigh less than 6,000 pounds, can carry 5 passengers, and are able to operate in day or night VFR or IFR conditions. Pilot’s may not operate for hire, nor climb above 18,000 feet or fly faster than 250 knots.
It will take some time for the FAA to put the regulations in place, but the process has begun.
Texas Top Aviation is proud to announce that we now offer Piper PA46 Training in the Malibu and Mirage. Our Piper PA46 training is provided with the same excellent & professional approach that has become our hallmark.
The four-day format of this course allows time to answer all of your questions about your new airplane. The Texas Top Aviation Piper PA46 training course leaves you with a confidence and understanding that will help you enjoy your Malibu or Mirage even more.
New avionics have you scratching your head in confusion? No problem. Texas Top Aviation is well versed in the latest Garmin and glass panel instrumentation.
If you are in need of recurrent training in your PA-46, Texas Top Aviation would be proud to help with that as well. Consider us your one stop shop for Piper PA-46 training.
For more information, check out our Piper Malibu/Mirage Training page.
When I was doing my instrument and multi-engine training, we did a lot of circle to land approaches. As a student, I could never figure out why these types of approaches would ever be practical when you could an approach straight in to another runway. But, as a good student, I never asked my instructors the purpose of them, I just did them to the best of my ability.
Now, having been flying in the IFR system for almost a decade, I’m finally beginning to fully understand the practical purpose of a circle to land approach. I have actually elected to do an approach where I had to circle to land on several occasions in actual IMC conditions.
One important note to remember on circle to land approaches is that the minimum descent altitude (MDA) is always higher than on a straight in approach. The reason for this is that you are basically joining the pattern for a different runway and you have to be able to visually keep yourself clear of towers and other obstacles. So, you need a higher visibility and a higher ceiling than if you were just lining up to come straight in.
Here are a couple of practical circumstances where it would make sense to do a circle to land approach.
Airports with only 1 straight in approach
This one is easy. There are a number of airports scattered around the US that have only 1 straight in instrument approach published for it. Around my part of Texas, the first one that pops into my mind is the RNAV 31 at T85 in Yoakum, TX. Most of the year, the prevailing wind is out of the south, so 13 is the favored runway at T85. During the winter is when most of the IMC weather happens in South Texas, so that is why the approach is for 31.
Of course, especially this year during the summer, there are some IMC days where an approach to T85 would be necessary. When there is a strong wind out of the south, landing on 31 is impractical, so a pilot would fly the approach to 31, then circle to land on 13.
Approaching from the opposite direction
Take a look at the RNAV 19 at KBMQ, Burnet, TX. The two initial approach fixes (IAF) are IXANY and JIBAJ. If a flight is approaching BMQ from the west or north, this is an easy approach to join. If a flight is coming from Austin (directly the the east and a little south) or San Antonio (almost directly south), it would be a bit of extra flying to get configured properly for the approach. Especially coming from Austin, because the degree of turn to join at JIBAJ wouldn’t make the approach practical.
Well, how about vectors? Unfortunately, Houston Center doesn’t have this approach depicted so vectors aren’t a possibility. Center can give you vectors north to make the angle a little easier to join at JIBAJ, but they can’t vector you onto the approach.
Direct DLORA to join is another option, but again, if you are approaching from the southeast, the angle is wrong.
Insert the RNAV 01 approach with a circle to land. AMUSE is right on V163, so it’s really easy to join the approach there coming from the south. Coming from Austin, joining the approach at SUBIE works out great. Fly down to the MDA, join the left downwind for 19, and everyone is happy.
VOR Circle to Land Approaches
Every instrument pilot has had an instructor “force” them to do a VOR A or VOR B approach and no one enjoys them. I personally think they are good practice. With the number of RNAV systems and RNAV approaches out there, though, VOR approaches are becoming a bit archaic.
They do have a place in this discussion, though. A VOR approach is given an A or B designation when the angle of the final approach course is greater than 30 degrees to the runway (VOR A KLZZ), or the final approach course is lined up with the runway, but the MDA is too high to practically descend and land (VOR A KGRK or the VOR/DME C KASE).
So, there are practical uses for a Circle to Land approach. The next time you do some IMC work with an instructor, ask him/her if you can include one.
If you have been searching “Cirrus SR22T for sale” or reading up on the Cirrus Vision Jet, you are looking at genuinely excellent airplanes. Both have earned their reputations. This is not an article about why you should not buy one. It is about a third airplane that almost never shows up in a Cirrus search — and what the numbers look like when you set it next to the two you are already considering.
190 ktDA62 Cruise
762 lbFull-Fuel Payload
648 nmRange, 4 Adults + Bags
1 WeekTraining, No Travel
What the Cirrus SR22T Gets Right
Let us start where we should. The SR22T is one of the most successful piston singles ever built, and for good reason. Turbo-normalized power that holds performance up high. A Perspective+ flight deck that is about as good as glass gets in a single. Side-yoke handling most pilots fall for inside ten minutes. And CAPS — the whole-airframe parachute that changed how our whole industry talks about safety.
Add strong resale, a deep service network, and one of the best owner communities in aviation, and you have an airplane that is very hard to argue with. If you fly two people and light bags on 300 to 500 nautical mile legs, we would tell you to go buy one — and we would help you find the right one. We also teach Cirrus SR20, SR22 and SR22T training here in Texas, so this is not an outsider’s opinion of the airplane.
The conversation changes when the mission grows.
Cirrus SR22T vs. Diamond DA62: The Numbers Side by Side
The Diamond DA62 is a seven-seat, twin-engine, Jet-A-burning composite airplane that most Cirrus shoppers have never sat in — usually because it simply never came up in the search. Here is how the two line up on the numbers that matter.
Specification
Cirrus SR22T
Diamond DA62
Cruise speed
184 KTAS @ 85% power / 10,000 ft
190 KTAS @ 90% power / 10,000 ft
Fuel burn
18.3 GPH @ 85% (16.4 GPH @ 75%)
19 GPH total (9.5 GPH per engine)
Fuel type
100LL AvGas
Jet-A (~$1.75/gal cheaper)
Seats / rows
5 seats, 2 rows
7 seats, 3 rows
Useful load
~1,125 lb (3,600 lb MTOW)
1,341 lb (5,071 lb MTOW)
Full-fuel payload
~575 lb
762 lb
Range, 4 adults + 75 lb bags (835 lb)
~320–350 nm
~648 nm (45-min reserve)
Takeoff over 50-ft obstacle
2,080 ft
1,575 ft
Landing over 50-ft obstacle
2,535 ft
1,447 ft
Single-engine service ceiling
—
11,000 ft
Engine-out redundancy
CAPS parachute
Second engine
Recurring safety-system cost
~$20,000 CAPS repack / 10 yr
None
Rating required
High-performance endorsement
Multi-engine (~1 week, at home)
Cirrus SR22T figures are taken from the Cirrus SR22T G6 Pilot’s Operating Handbook (P/N 13772-007, Reissue A): cruise at ISA and 3,400 lb, takeoff and landing over a 50-ft obstacle at sea level, ISA and 3,600 lb max gross.
Read that speed line carefully, because it is closer than the marketing on either side suggests. At 10,000 feet the DA62 has about six knots on the SR22T — real, but hardly decisive. Climb higher and the advantage flips outright: the SR22T is turbo-normalized, so at 18,000 feet the POH shows 198 KTAS on the same 18.3 gallons an hour, comfortably faster than the DA62. If raw speed is what you are buying, the Cirrus has a genuine answer.
Where the DA62 separates itself is everything around the speed. It burns Jet-A, which runs roughly $1.75 a gallon under 100LL at most FBOs and is available at airports where AvGas gets harder to find every year. And the full-fuel payload gap is 187 pounds. Payload is where light-airplane trip plans quietly fall apart.
Four Adults, Bags, and the Range That Actually Matters
Spec sheets get written for two people. Real trips are not flown that way.
Load four adults and 75 pounds of luggage — call it 835 pounds — and the SR22T has to leave fuel on the ramp. On a typical G6 empty weight that leaves room for roughly 48 of its 92 usable gallons, and realistic range lands around 320 to 350 nautical miles with IFR reserves. Put that same 835 pounds into a DA62 and you are looking at roughly 648 nautical miles with a 45-minute reserve.
To be fair to the airplane: with full fuel and two people aboard, the SR22T is genuinely long-legged. The POH shows 763 nm at 10,000 feet and 791 nm at 18,000 feet on a 45-minute reserve. The range only collapses when you fill the seats — which is precisely the mission this comparison is about.
That is not a rounding error. That is one fuel stop versus none on a Texas-to-Colorado weekend. And the DA62 does it across three rows, with two seats still open behind you.
About the Cirrus Vision Jet G1
If your search has moved from the SR22T up to the Vision Jet, that airplane deserves real credit too. Cirrus did something nobody else managed: a single-pilot personal jet, with CAPS, delivered in volume, flown successfully by owner-operators. That is a genuine achievement in this industry, and we teach Cirrus Vision Jet training ourselves.
The G1 specifically, though, asks for a level of commitment that surprises a lot of first-time jet buyers.
Cirrus Vision Jet G1: What Ownership Actually Asks Of You
Acquisition: approximately $1.8 million.
Fuel burn: 60–70 GPH of Jet-A.
Full-fuel payload: only 300–400 lb — roughly two adults and a soft bag.
Range: about 800 nm on paper, but heavily payload-limited in practice.
Type rating: a full FAA type rating is required — roughly two weeks of initial training in Knoxville, Tennessee.
Insurance dual: 25+ hours of additional dual instruction beyond the type rating.
Recurrent: annual simulator recurrent training back in Knoxville, at $15,000–$25,000 per year, every year.
Runway: 3,192 ft takeoff / 3,011 ft landing over a 50-ft obstacle.
Climb: drops to 1,100–1,200 fpm at heavier weights, and loses thrust at high density altitude airports — exactly where you want margin.
Worth saying plainly: the G2 and G2+ are meaningfully more capable airplanes — better payload, better hot-and-high performance, updated flight deck. That is a different and more interesting conversation, and one we are glad to have. Everything above is specific to the G1, because the G1 is the airplane most often cross-shopped at DA62 money.
Compare that training path to the DA62. A multi-engine rating is all that is required — roughly one week, typically at your home airport, with no hotel and no travel. There is no annual sim requirement in another state, and no recurring five-figure training line item on the budget.
Runway Numbers Open Up the Map
Performance over a 50-foot obstacle is where your airport list gets long or short. The DA62 clears it in about 1,575 feet on takeoff and 1,447 feet on landing. The SR22T needs 2,080 and 2,535 feet. The Vision Jet G1 needs 3,192 and 3,011 feet.
That is roughly 500 feet less than the SR22T on departure and nearly 1,100 feet less on arrival — and against the G1 the gap is wider still. Practically, that difference is what gets you into the shorter ranch, lake and mountain-adjacent strips that a lot of the best flying runs on. That is not a spec. That is a different set of weekends.
The Parachute and the Second Engine
CAPS is a real safety system and we will not say otherwise. It has saved lives, and it deserves the respect it gets. It also carries a cost most buyers do not budget for: the rocket and canopy repack runs about $20,000 every ten years, and it is not optional.
The DA62 answers the same question a different way. Lose an engine and you still have one making power, turning counter-rotating props, managed by a FADEC that keeps it to a single lever per side. One number to know either way: the DA62 single-engine service ceiling is 11,000 feet, so on one engine it will hold altitude over most terrain but not over the high country. Neither answer is wrong — they are two philosophies about the same risk. The DA62 version just does not come with a recurring five-figure bill.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Diamond DA62 faster than a Cirrus SR22T?
Only down low, and only slightly. At 10,000 feet the Diamond DA62 cruises at 190 KTAS at 90% power on 19 GPH of Jet-A total, while the Cirrus SR22T G6 POH shows 184 KTAS at 85% power on 18.3 GPH of 100LL. Higher up the SR22T is the faster airplane — its turbo-normalized engine holds 198 KTAS at 18,000 feet on the same fuel flow. The DA62 advantage is fuel cost, payload and runway, not raw speed.
How much can a Diamond DA62 carry compared to a Cirrus SR22T?
The DA62 carries a 762 lb full-fuel payload across seven seats in three rows. The Cirrus SR22T has a useful load of about 1,125 lb and a full-fuel payload of roughly 575 lb. Loaded with four adults and 75 lb of bags — 835 lb total — the DA62 flies about 648 nm with a 45-minute reserve, while the SR22T is closer to 350 nm.
What training does a Cirrus Vision Jet G1 require compared to a Diamond DA62?
The Vision Jet G1 requires a full FAA type rating: about two weeks of initial training in Knoxville, Tennessee, plus 25+ hours of additional dual for insurance, plus annual simulator recurrent back in Knoxville that runs $15,000–$25,000 per year on an ongoing basis. The Diamond DA62 requires only a multi-engine rating — about one week, usually at your home airport, with no travel.
Can a Diamond DA62 use shorter runways than a Cirrus SR22T or Vision Jet?
Yes. Over a 50-foot obstacle the DA62 takes off in about 1,575 ft and lands in about 1,447 ft. The Cirrus SR22T needs about 2,080 ft and 2,535 ft, and the Cirrus Vision Jet G1 needs about 3,192 ft and 3,011 ft. The Vision Jet G1 also sees climb rate fall to 1,100–1,200 fpm at heavier weights and loses thrust at higher density altitude airports.
Does the Diamond DA62 have a whole-airframe parachute like Cirrus CAPS?
No. The DA62 redundancy is a second engine rather than a parachute. One practical difference in ownership cost: the Cirrus CAPS repack runs about $20,000 every ten years and is mandatory, while the DA62 has no equivalent recurring safety-system expense.
Most of us who have been through instrument training are familiar with the traditional view limiting devices. There is the original hood, which does a decent job of blocking a pilot’s view of outside, but there are still gaps that allow “peeking”, though that peeking doesn’t really help a pilot fly an approach. It does help them figure out which way is up, so it’s not a true simulation.
The other problem with a hood is the process of putting it on to begin simulating IFR conditions, then taking it off when it’s time to land. This process takes time and the instructor has to take the controls (or the autopilot flies), losing some of the realism of the simulation.
Overall, an IFR hood is relatively comfortable. The elastic band sits under your headset, doesn’t squeeze your heard, and doesn’t press underneath your ear cups of the headset, giving you a headache. Hoods are large and somewhat unwieldy.
Foggles are another way to simulate IFR conditions for training. Most of the time, these are safety glasses that have most of the lens blacked out or fogged out, leaving little slits at the bottom for the pilot’s eyes to see the instruments.
Foggles aren’t quite as good as an IFR hood at blocking the outside. Due to their shape, there are often cracks that allow more “peeking” then a hood. The process of beginning to simulate IFR conditions and ending the simulated IFR conditions is easier though, since all the pilot has to do is put the foggles on or slip them off, which can often be done one handed (putting them on can be more difficult one handed since they have to fit underneath your headset). Wearing them for a long period of time can get painful as your headset is probably going to start crushing them against the side of your head.
The best comfort and view limiting combination I have found, so far, is called the ViBAN. It’s very comfortable and does a really good job of simulating IFR by blocking a view of the outside.
What’s the whole goal behind a view limiting device? When a pilot starts instrument training, ideally, all the training would take place in the clouds, since that is why someone get’s an instrument rating. As we all know, this isn’t possible, hence the need to simulate IFR conditions. The problem with simulating IFR is, it’s not true IFR. True IFR conditions are different then what a hood or a set of foggles can simulate. This can lead to spatial disorientation if a fresh instrument pilot enters the clouds for the first time, having done all his training in simulated conditions.
I’ve even heard a story of a pilot who did all his IFR training with a hood, passed his check ride, went into the clouds the first time, and put the hood on because he was getting disoriented since he hadn’t ever experienced true IFR.
What about full motion simulators? How I wish every airport had a full motion simulator for instrument training. Full motion sims are truly the best way to simulate IFR conditions. A pilot can easily get spatially disoriented in a sim if he or she isn’t careful. It’s a great way to simulate IFR conditions, but, alas, this just isn’t possible.
Are we doomed to just do an okay job of training instrument pilots in simulated IFR conditions with a hood or foggles?
Nope, at least not anymore.
Enter the ICARUS Device. The ICARUS Device, which stands for Instrument Conditions Awareness Recognition and Understanding System, is an amazing piece of equipment which truly simulates IFR conditions in the training environment. The ICARUS is a plastic shield that uses a Polymer Dispersed Liquid Crystal film that allows the degradation of a pilot’s visibility. It clips on to a baseball cap and is attached to a battery. That battery is then bluetoothed to an iPad or iPhone App that allows the instructor to put the pilot into and take him out of simulated IFR conditions.
Originally designed for helicopter training, it’s an excellent tool for fixed wing IFR training too. I’ve been using it for the last month and a half and I am hooked. The customer’s that I have used it with truly say that they cannot see a thing outside. Because the plastic shield turns white, it really does give the view that the pilot is in the clouds. The inner ear certainly believes it. The curve of it fits the glare shield in most planes nicely (there is some custom cutting that would have to take place for specifically rounded glare shields, but it fits Cirrus and Piper Saratogas nicely, the two planes I have used it in), and it sits away from the pilot’s face, blocking out all windows, which is what clouds do.
The greatest thing from an instructor’s standpoint is the ICARUS Device app. The pilot puts the device on before taxi and I set the app to VMC. This completely clears the ICARUS Device so the pilot can see just fine for taxi and takeoff. Then, at about 400 AGL, I tap the <1/2 VIS button on the app, and boom, the pilot is in the clouds. I even have a time delay to slowly make the ICARUS Device opaque to simulate slowly entering the clouds. I do the same thing on an approach, except in the reverse order, simulating we are slowly exiting the clouds.
The ICARUS Device is a game changer for IFR training. It’s comfortable, easy to use, the battery lasts for a long time (though bring a standard USB charging cord with you in the plane because the battery failure mode makes the ICARUS Device opaque instead of transparent. You don’t want that to happen at 200 AGL!), and, most important, it truly simulates IFR conditions.
After using it, I believe all flight schools and CFII should get one of these, both in the fixed wing and helicopter world. It’s the best option for simulating IFR conditions.
Texas Top Aviation, LLC was given an ICARUS Device by the ICARUS Device company to test. Texas Top Aviation, LLC was not paid for our above opinion on the ICARUS Device (trust me, if it was terrible, I would have told you!).
I got the privilege of going to the EAA AirVenture at Osh Kosh this year. It was my first Osh Kosh experience. I’ll be the first to tell you, walking in the gate on the first day is mildly overwhelming. There are people and stuff everywhere. Airplanes, tents selling everything from airplane parts to mattresses (I wasn’t really sure how mattresses tied to flying), vendors, colleges, and loads of people.
Photo Courtesy of William Day, copyright 2018, All Rights Reserved
After I gathered myself from my initial shock, I set out to explore all that I could. I spent most of the first morning walking around the different manufacturer’s tents, getting a gauge on all the new airplanes I could never afford and only hope to ever fly.
The short of it is, the Cessna/Textron Denali is going to be stellar once it gets completed. The Epic E1000 (if it ever gets certified) might take a large market share from TBM, though they will have an uphill climb. The Cirrus Vision Jet is very cool and should be a relatively simple step up for SR22T owners. The Pilatus Jet is huge. Finally, the Diamond DA62 would be my below 12,500 airplane and the Piper M350 would be my pressurized plane. Money being no factor, of course.
Photo Courtesy of William Day, copyright 2018, All Rights Reserved
I decided to take in the entire airshow on Day 1, all 4 hours of it. Upon realizing I would be very stiff necked if I did that each day for the three days I was there, I decided on Day 2 to check out some seminars and learn something. I took a seaplane ground school course on Day 2, then listened to a NASA presentation on electric airplanes and low boom sonic jet technology (how to make supersonic passenger flight quieter).
The end of Day 2 at Osh Kosh had to be the highlight. I got to hang out with Cub Crafters at the 51WI grass strip just north of the OSH Class D airspace. There was a free BBQ and I got to take a ride in a Carbon Cub. My landing from the back seat was a bit rusty, but still a very cool experience. Buzzing the BBQ area in tandem was pretty neat.
Photo Courtesy of William Day, copyright 2018, All Rights Reserved
Day 3 brought some cooler temps and some clouds. We walked out to the vintage airplanes, spending the morning gawking at Cessna 195s and Wacos. Then I took the plunge to explore all the vendor hangars. My idea was to walk around and see if I can find some interesting and innovative technology. Well, after 2 of the 4 hangars, my head was spinning, so I decided to watch the rest of the airshow to let my brain drain out a bit.
Photo Courtesy of William Day, copyright 2018, All Rights Reserved
3 Days was a good amount of time to spend. I don’t think I could have stayed all week, but only a day or two wouldn’t have been worth it. I flew up with a former student in his TBM 700, which was a very nice way to travel. We landed and stayed in Green Bay (KGRB), which was super easy and low stress. Had a great tailwind on the return and made it to Houston non-stop.
A few closing observations:
The Stratos 716X Personal Jet
If Stratos Aircraft is ever able to bring this to market, it sounds awesome. 400 knots, single engine, single pilot, with 6 seats. Being a single engine jet, similar to the Cirrus Vision Jet, it’s 100 knots faster, plus with the airflow and engine technology, it doesn’t have that big V Tail in the back, thereby reducing drag. I have a feeling it would find a good market, but the certification process is a bear to get through. Just ask Epic.
The Lancair Mako
This is a legit airplane. Lots of thought was put in to the design of the Mako by the new Lancair organization in Uvalde, TX (KUVA). The airplane was extremely comfortable, capable, and pretty cool. The stick is in the center, with throttles on the side (where the stick would be in a Cirrus or Columbia). AC, full Garmin integration, and the cool factor of the nose gear retracting, but not having a gear handle. Higher useful load than a Cirrus or Columbia, it would be a great alternative (and cheaper) to one of it’s certified competitors.
Avionics
There is a lot of new avionics technology hitting the market. Dynon, beloved by experimental enthusiasts, is finding a foothold in the certified world with some neat panels. It will be an uphill battle to take on Garmin, but there is some potential in the retrofit market to offer a cheaper alternative to the Garmin TXi.
Speaking of the TXi, I played around with the 10.7″ panel at the Garmin booth. It is extremely intuitive. Garmin did a great job of making it a simple touch screen interface, easy to use, and easy to learn.
Avidyne is pushing their iPad integration with the IFD 100 iPad app. It ties via Wifi or Bluetooth to an IFD 550 or 440 navigator, giving an additional screen in the cockpit to work with. You have the ability to modify flight plans and such on the iPad and it will show up on the GPS units.
Photo Courtesy of William Day, copyright 2018, All Rights Reserved
All in all, Osh Kosh was an experience I’m glad to have finally experienced. I don’t think I would go every year like some folks, but every few years, especially when my sons are older, seems like just enough for me, but not too much.
All Photos Courtesy of William Day, copyright 2018, All Rights Reserved
In the realm of buying airplanes, navigating through the complexities of the market can be as challenging as piloting through turbulent skies. Whether you’re a seasoned aircraft owner or a new pilot looking to acquire your first aircraft, enlisting the expertise of an airplane broker can significantly streamline the buying process. Here are some compelling reasons why engaging an airplane broker is a smart move for buyers:
Expertise and Experience: Aircraft brokers are seasoned professionals with in-depth knowledge of the aviation industry. They understand what aircraft models fit different missions (you don’t want to have an expensive jet for 200 mile trips for 2 people), market trends, airplane values, and technical knowledge to help avoid “lemon” airplanes before even the inspection begins. Leveraging broker expertise can help buyers make informed decisions, avoid pitfalls, and secure the best deal possible.
Access to a Vast Network: Airplane brokers have extensive networks comprising sellers, manufacturers, and maintenance facilities. This network gives buyers access to the experts on the aircraft they are wanting to buy. Whether you’re in the market for a brand-new aircraft or a pre-owned gem, brokers can tap into their connections to make sure the airplane selected is a well maintained aircraft.
Time and Resource Efficiency: Searching for the right aircraft can be a time-consuming and labor-intensive process. From researching available options to arranging pre-buy inspections and negotiations, the tasks can quickly pile up. By entrusting these responsibilities to a broker, buyers can save valuable time and resources. Brokers handle the legwork, allowing buyers to focus on family, life and work while still staying informed and involved in the decision-making process.
Objective Guidance and Advocacy: When emotions run high during the aircraft buying process, having an impartial advocate can be invaluable. Airplane brokers act as trusted advisors, offering objective guidance and a high level of knowledge about different airplanes. That knowledge comes in handy when evaluating aircraft specifications, assessing market value and negotiating terms. Brokers provide valuable insights and ensure that buyers make well-informed decisions aligned with their goals.
Streamlined Transaction Process: Purchasing an aircraft involves navigating a complex web of legal, financial, and logistical considerations. Brokers are well-versed in handling these intricacies and can streamline the transaction process from start to finish. They coordinate with legal experts, financial institutions, escrow companies, maintenance shops and regulatory authorities to ensure a seamless and hassle-free experience for buyers, minimizing potential delays and complications along the way.
Cost-Effective Solutions: While some buyers may be hesitant to engage a broker due to concerns about additional costs, the reality is that brokers often help buyers save money in the long run. By leveraging their industry knowledge and negotiation skills, brokers can steer buyers away from airplanes that are potential money pits and toward airplanes that have excellent maintenance pedigrees. Brokers are often able to secure favorable pricing and connect buyers to other experts in maintenance, insurance, and other essential services.
Peace of Mind: Perhaps most importantly, working with an airplane broker provides buyers with peace of mind throughout the buying process. From the initial search to the final closing, buyers can rest assured knowing that they have a dedicated professional by their side, guiding them every step of the way and ensuring a successful outcome.
While purchasing an aircraft can be a daunting endeavor, enlisting the services of an airplane broker can turn the journey into a smooth and rewarding experience. With their expertise, industry connections, and commitment to client satisfaction, brokers empower buyers to make informed decisions, secure the best possible deal, and embark on their aviation adventures with confidence. So, whether you’re in the market for a single-engine propeller plane or a luxurious corporate jet, consider partnering with an airplane broker to navigate the skies of aircraft acquisition with ease.
Texas Top Aviation, LLC has 10 years of experience helping our customers purchase amazing airplanes. We specialize in TBM, Piper PA46, Cirrus and Columbia aircraft, but have extensive knowledge about a wide variety of piston and turbine aircraft. Contact us today to discuss our services for your next airplane.
