Budget Retracts - Anyone own a Sierra or Comanche 180?

wrote:
: status, In my case, the extra premium for RG runs about $500/yr.
: In other words, the cost of folding the gear is more than offset by the cost
: of the fuel needed to drag it through the air.

Ahh... but those are the *HIDDEN* costs. Fixed ones like insurance and extra
labor on the annual. The *direct* operating costs are lower. That's all I ever look
at when deciding if I'm going to go somewhere. The fixed costs all get cheaper the
more you fly.

Everyone has their own rationalization of why owning is better.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

When It really gets down to it, money isn't an issue. $100-200 here and
there isn't a big deal.
Having wheels that go up and down and the speed that goes with it, is.

If your worried about dollars and worried the cents that goes along with
it, you don't need an airplane let alone a retract.

Owning an airplane is a statement and a way of life for alot of people.

If you think that a retract is in your future, then buy one.
Don't bitch about it will cost you an extra $500 a year.

If you want to stay still legged, thats great, too. There is absolutly
nothing wrong with that.


wrote:
wrote:
: status, In my case, the extra premium for RG runs about $500/yr.
: In other words, the cost of folding the gear is more than offset by the cost
: of the fuel needed to drag it through the air.

Ahh... but those are the *HIDDEN* costs. Fixed ones like insurance and extra
labor on the annual. The *direct* operating costs are lower. That's all I ever look
at when deciding if I'm going to go somewhere. The fixed costs all get cheaper the
more you fly.

Everyone has their own rationalization of why owning is better.

-Cory

wrote:
On 5-Feb-2006, "Doug" wrote:


You will be paying a big price for retract, in initial cost,
maintenance and insurance. Extra speed for 1 to 2 hour trips doesn't
amount to much.



If you fly over 100 hrs/year the savings in fuel costs with RG compared to a
FG with similar performance will more than offset the added costs for
maintenance and insurance.
I'd really like to see some number to support your conclusion. By my
estimates 100 hrs * 11 gals per hour = 1100 gal per year. RG decreases
fuel need by 5% or 55 gal * $3.50 = 192.50 per year in fuel savings.
From the numbers throw about by my aircraft owning buddies the delta in
ownership costs for a retract are much more then that.

Assumptions in above: Fuel burn is about the same for 180HP engines in
Comanche 180 and 172s with 180HP engine. Increased speed reduces need
for fuel by 5% by higher speed in cruise, climb fuel burn is the same.
Big YMMV is added