Navions

[NookyBooky]

Who likes them, who hates them and why? I'm thinking about buying one of the older L-17 style Navs made by North American, preferably with a Lycoming in it. Are they all they're cracked up to be? The only bad things I've heard about them is that they're ugly and most have Continental engines, is there anything else I should look out for?

 

[Metro752]

I think they look pretty neat, personally. Ive sat in one, never flew in one.

 

[Jump Pilot]

When I flew jumpers, there were two Navions at the airport. One of them was rumored to be own and flown by an old Navy aviator.

I'm flying jumpers one Saturday afternoon when some nice Texas thunderstorms come rolling in. I just finished tying down my ratty 182 jump plane when the Navy guy with the Navion fires her up. I figure the guy is going to move her from the patio hangars to the metal hangars. No such luck...he taxis to the end of the runway for some pattern work. Unbelievable. The DZ owner, FBO manager, the field mechanic and me hunker down under the FBO roof to witness the rodeo that is about to take place.

He manged to get two circuits in before giving up a PIREP over Unicom consisting of "there sure is a lot of wind and lightining up here." No duh. On his third landing, he gets blown off the side of the runway and sticks the right main. Shuts her down and calls out over the radio for a tow.

Other than that, I know nothing about them.

 

[NookyBooky]

b u m p

 

[gern_blanston]

Pretty slow, and all hydraulic, so there's a bit more maintenance than, say, an old Bonanza. Nice flying airplanes, though. I've flown 'em with the original C-185, C-225, O-470N. Got a buddy with a 550 hung on the front (after de-mating the wing to beef things up for the mod) that should be entertaining to fly. They're good short-field airplanes, but with the under-cambered wing and all that weight and girth, they're all quite slow for the horsepower.

 

[BD King]

Oh, Wow. Trust me, I know Navions, and have never flown one. Let me say this, there are SO many mods and STCs that your average mechanic could never figure them out, and that is good. Slower than dog poop on a December day, and stronger than the Brooklyn Bridge, and for that part I can attest to.

www.bdkingpress.com

 

[TDTURBO]

You better get one with a roll cage, no way I would fly in one after seeing this at my airport. The POS was tied down during a storm and it STILL flipped because the attachment sites ripped loose from the airframe. If you ground looped one of these, you would be DEAD MEAT!

Just take a look at this!




http://photos.yahoo.com/tdturbo2001


BTW: The Garmin is in my 182RG, not bad huh? Sure we had a bit of a tail wind but I made it from MDW to KEYW in 4:55.



​

 

[TDTURBO]

Top..........

 

[fr0g]

Having worked on a particular navion for the last 1.5 years, my advice would be to have a through pre-buy inspection. Look over the hydraulic system, make sure everything is working in the "power pack" (valve unit behind panel). Ideally, jack the plane and check the play in all the landing gear linkages. Check out the tail section, specifically where the horizontal stabilizer attaches - there are a few nasty AD's on that part. Also look at the aft bulkhead where the tailskid connects. They are almost always cracked. If the airplane has the original windows held in with the rubber molding, be advised that it is no longer available, and you'll have to get updated windows at some point.
Get someone that really knows Navions to look at it!
If everything looks good, they can be a really nice plane. However, they can also turn into a money pit, more-so than other light aircraft.
From a flight standpoint, I enjoy flying the navion, and find it has a very solid feel to it. Not exceptionally fast, but fun to fly nonetheless.

 

[TDTURBO]

Having worked on a particular navion for the last 1.5 years, my advice would be to have a through pre-buy inspection. Look over the hydraulic system, make sure everything is working in the "power pack" (valve unit behind panel). Ideally, jack the plane and check the play in all the landing gear linkages. Check out the tail section, specifically where the horizontal stabilizer attaches - there are a few nasty AD's on that part. Also look at the aft bulkhead where the tailskid connects. They are almost always cracked. If the airplane has the original windows held in with the rubber molding, be advised that it is no longer available, and you'll have to get updated windows at some point.
Get someone that really knows Navions to look at it!
If everything looks good, they can be a really nice plane. However, they can also turn into a money pit, more-so than other light aircraft.
From a flight standpoint, I enjoy flying the navion, and find it has a very solid feel to it. Not exceptionally fast, but fun to fly nonetheless.

Until you flip it upside down while parked, get a wind gust, and get crushed to death, aside from that little minor detail, it's a fine aircraft.

 

[erj-145mech]

What'd they do, tie the Navion down with bungee cords? Those straps shouldn't have stretched out like that.

The rubber window mouldings are available, they're the same as automotive, along with the lock strip in the middle.

 

[fr0g]

I'm sure I could find lots of pictures of other aircraft destroyed by wind.

Until you flip it upside down while parked

That's something I'm not really so worried about.

The Automotive rubber strips are designed for much thicker windows and especially frames. If you were to use those, you run the risk of your rear windows popping out...

EDIT:

TD TURBO: In all fairness I would certainly recommend a 182 RG over the Navion - I just feel like your evidence is inconclusive.

 

[erj-145mech]

The Automotive rubber strips are designed for much thicker windows and especially frames. If you were to use those, you run the risk of your rear windows popping out...

.

These weren't. They weren't the ones from J C Whitney, they were from an auto restoration supply house. When I put the plexiglass panes in the channel, they were tighter than socks on a rooster. I ended up using almost a half tube of DC-4 lube.

 

[TDTURBO]

I'm sure I could find lots of pictures of other aircraft destroyed by wind.

That's something I'm not really so worried about.

The Automotive rubber strips are designed for much thicker windows and especially frames. If you were to use those, you run the risk of your rear windows popping out...

EDIT:

TD TURBO: In all fairness I would certainly recommend a 182 RG over the Navion - I just feel like your evidence is inconclusive.

Evidence being inconclusive?

These are recent untouched pictures for christ sake, I don't care what kind of glass you use. the cockpit collapses if upside down, killing anyone inside. You better take a closer look at the pics.

Note to other poster with the Bungie cord comment.

This plane was tied down with CHAINS, they were ripped loose from their attachment points at the AIRFRAME. The tiedown you see in the pic is rope and was put on after the roll-over.

 

[EDUC8-or]

I have a friend who lost his medical for 2+ years after he was a PAX in a Navion and they ended up ditching in the ocean.

 

[NookyBooky]

That is interesting about the weak topside on the Nav. I wonder how it compares to a bonanza, cherokee, or other low-wing plane in that regard. They may be built like tanks but that weakness is something that I'm definately going to have to think some more about.

What are some of the more interesting mods out there?

 

[TDTURBO]

I would think to get that thing certified it would have to have a roll cage. You bring up some good points with the other aircraft types, makes me even happier I have a high wing.

 

[FlyJordan]

What business do you have being upside down on the ground anyway? I bet you cant see a thing while taxiing for that dam panel.

 

[TDTURBO]

What business do you have being upside down on the ground anyway? I bet you cant see a thing while taxiing for that dam panel.

It saves on tire wear.

 

[NookyBooky]

Anybody have any pics or links to pics of other low-wing aircraft on their backs, or have first hand knowledge of how the held up? I really wouldn't give a chit about the canopy strength issue if it wasn't for the fact that I'm going to be flying my father, sister, niece, nephew etc. If it was just me, then I would have already bought it. It's proabably safer than what I do in a Pitts anyway, but its my responsibility to make sure the precious cargo is in the safest situation possible. You would probably have to do some pretty stupid chit to get a tricycle gear plane on its back, but stranger things happen.......

 

[NuGuy]

Hi Nooky,

From the sounds of it, I would almost guess that you are bottom fishing for an airplane.

At any airport, there are always odd-ball airplanes, usually off in the weeds, that people are looking to pawn off on some unsuspecting soul for a seemingly low, low price. Navions, old V-tail Bonanzas, Luscombes, beater Apaches and Beech Sierras with the goofy Continental IO-346-A in it (this can really trap people).

Sometimes it's something more subtle, like a 1977 172 with a spalled out engine (the only way to catch this is a teardown).

At first blush, it seems like a super cheap way to get into ownership, when in fact, it is a financial nightmare waiting to happen. If some guy/gal is letting a plane go cheap, run, don't walk.

If you arn't bottom fishing, then still, watch out for the oddball aircraft. Some have near fanatical owner support networks, and others don't. If it's not something you see every day (heck, even a Cessna 177 falls into this category), check out the type specific club (there almost always is one) to get the gouge. You can get the low down on parts, support and other items that allow your investment to do something other than keep the tie-downs off the ground.

Nu

 

[BD King]

The Continental engine mentioned before, was not in a Sierra but rather in the original -19. They were goofy.

www.bdkingpress.com

 

[NuGuy]

The Continental engine mentioned before, was not in a Sierra but rather in the original -19. They were goofy.

www.bdkingpress.com

BD,

Right you are. I looked that up while I was writing it, and forgot the change it.

Yep, goofy engine and NOT supported. You break it, your done.

There's a -19 at the local field here minus the engine. Owner can't get a STC for anything else....he's trying to get a field approval, but I think he's sunk. Buyer beware!

Nu

 

[avbug]

Nothing wrong with the navion, so long as it's well maintained. Hydraulic hoses, like fuel lines, should be replaced every 5 years, regardless of their condition...look at a lot of navions around the field, and you'll see old lines, old seals, and leaks. For an aircraft that's well maintained and that's regularly flown, you'd be buying into a beautiful, classic airlplane.

Remember that the hardest thing on an airlplane is sitting in the tiedowns. The longer an airplane sits, the more expensive it gets.

As far as maligning the airplane because one was damaged in the wind...what an utterly ridiculous notion. Drop any aircraft upside down...see how well you turn out. Just don't do that...it's not rocket science. If indeed the airplane was uprooted from chains (tough to swallow, unless the chains weren't anchored properly or the wind was a F3 tornado), this makes absolutely no statement about the airplane, but rather the owner...or an act of God.

 

[NookyBooky]

No, I'm not bottom fishing. I would rather have a Navion then a 172 for the same reasons I would rather have an old Cessna 195 or Stinson Reliant rather than a brand new T206, or an A-26 rather than a King Air, etc, etc, etc,....
It's a classic. Flying is more than just going from point A to B for me.

I need some dirt on this airplane. I've heard for years that they're one of the most under rated planes around, now I want to know all the disadvantages and downsides.





ps thanks for all the replies so far

 

[AlbieF15]

I've got a 62 Rangemaster that has been a blast.

I looked at 182s, 182 RGs, Cherokee sixes, and a host of other planes. I needed 5 seats or more so my options where limited.

A36? Couldn't afford it. Bonanzas are great planes, but Beech isn't known for inexpensive parts. 182 RG or older 210? 182 was out of my price range, and while I've flown some 210s I really enjoyed I wasn't paying for the mx at the time, and I had always heard you really had to be careful with old 210s and make sure you got a good one. That "cherry" 64-67 model just never came along for me. The cherokee 6 is a solid plane, but if you want one that isn't just doggedly ugly you will likely pay over 100k for either a 260 or 300. You will also be, well, slow! Ditto the Beech Sierra....which has a 5th seat too.

So...when I found my rangemaster at about 1/2 the price of an average 182, I thought it was a solid choice. If I were stacking aircraft verses aircraft, without any regard to price, an A36 with the turbonormalized conversion and GAMI injectors woudl be a dream plane. However, I have to make budget tradeoffs, and Navion allowed me to not only be able to own my own plane (without partners) but also to buy a hanger and fly it enough with the money I saved to enjoy it! If money wasn't an object I'd could buy my own F15 and fly it around, but we all have our own ideas about just how much discretionary funds we have for our hobbies.

If you want a Navion, there are some good folks at the American Navion Society who can help you find an experienced mechanic for a pre-buy as well as a some CFIs to get you checked out and signed off on your insurance. The ANS and a few other sources still have access to parts and supplies. A few issues back in Private Pilot, the "group annual" process was mentioned in an article. A well respected A&P comes into the hanger for 2 weeks of work, and about 10 plane's worth of owners fly in and work together (with the A&P) to get the airplanes through the annual inspection. Not only do you save a bit of money, but the guys involved learn a tremendous amount about their aircraft in the process, as well as having a nice little social event as well. Strategies like these help reduce your costs.

As for Navion specifics--I get about 140-145 knots at 12-13 gph with an IO-470. That won't be me blowing past you in your 210. Some Navions and Rangemasters have an IO-520 (285) or even lately an IO-550 (300+?), but of course they will burn more fuel. What I do get is a rock solid feel, a very spacious and comfortable cabin, and some takeoff and landing performance that is awesome. I have a 1200 pound useful load and can carry 108 gallons of avgas, so for many of my 2-3 hour range flights I have the ability to fly all the way back to my original departure point if my destination weather is bad, or continue another 500+ miles to a better alternate. The hydraulic system is a low pressure system for the gear and flaps and has been trouble free for me. The cowling opens on both sides making preflight inspection of the engine a breeze (verses the oil access door on the 210 I flew). Other than speed, there really isn't much I'd change except for adding an air conditioner for ground ops (and no...I don't think its an option). For my trips (300-400 miles or less typically) a faster Bonanza might shave 10-12 minutes off the trip. To get my kind of capability (with a low time engine and nice airframe/interior like I have) in a 210 or A36 or 182RG would have cost me another 50-75k, or about twice what I ended up spending.

TD...the fastest I've seen in my Navions GPS was about 210 MPH, but if I'd have had a camera that day I would have taken a picture too!

 

[E46_guy]

If you end up getting into Navions, you'll want to check with the folks at Classic Aero in Aurora, NE (AUH). From what I've heard, this is THE place for Navions... I guess the owner bought up a couple of truckloads of Navion parts back when the factory closed and now runs a full restoration/repair business out of AUH. Nice folks too. I'm sure they'll be able to get you any information you need (402) 694-0171 - ask for Jeff, he's the owner.

TRB