Aircraft as mobile homes

Sylvain writes:

I thought about something like that: aircraft big enough to carry a
motorbike and be self sufficient; then I ran the numbers:
turns out to be a heck of a lot cheaper to get the smaller aircraft
that fits your travelling needs, and rent a car/bike and a hotel
room at each destination (and you'll be a lot more confortable
overall). Actually, I wonder if the same holds true for the large
RV as well.

If many FBOs offer courtesy cars or you can get rentals at a decent rate, you
wouldn't need a land vehicle.

This all presumes that you'd be _extremely_ fond of flying, enough to want to
fly practically every day. But given that, it seems like it might be
practical. An RV-sized aircraft would probably be a lot more expensive than
an RV new, but an older aircraft refitted to behave like an RV might be more
affordable.

I'd want a decent bathroom and shower and a galley, but I don't know how
practical that would be unless one had a great deal of money and quite a large
aircraft (the BBJ2 would be great for that).

I recall the rich guy in _Contact_ living out of an aircraft (a 727?), but I
can't remember if anyone is doing it for real. Lots of people have offices
aloft, but it isn't normally their primary residence.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Kev writes:

Not to mention, the old Piper ads from the 60's showing a shiny new
plane parked on a grass strip next to a river, with several happy-
looking fisherman / pilots fly-casting in hip boots :-)

Sounds like they had it backwards. I can see someone wanting to fly and
using
a $100 hamburger as an excuse to do so, but wanting to fish and getting a
private pilot's license just to get to the lake? I don't think so.

--

Well don't tell that to the folks in Alaska. They would have to retire a
whole bunch of world class aircraft.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Sylvain writes:

I thought about something like that: aircraft big enough to carry a
motorbike and be self sufficient; then I ran the numbers:
turns out to be a heck of a lot cheaper to get the smaller aircraft
that fits your travelling needs, and rent a car/bike and a hotel
room at each destination (and you'll be a lot more confortable
overall). Actually, I wonder if the same holds true for the large
RV as well.

If many FBOs offer courtesy cars or you can get rentals at a decent rate,
you
wouldn't need a land vehicle.

This all presumes that you'd be _extremely_ fond of flying, enough to want
to
fly practically every day. But given that, it seems like it might be
practical. An RV-sized aircraft would probably be a lot more expensive
than
an RV new, but an older aircraft refitted to behave like an RV might be
more
affordable.

I'd want a decent bathroom and shower and a galley, but I don't know how
practical that would be unless one had a great deal of money and quite a
large
aircraft (the BBJ2 would be great for that).

I recall the rich guy in _Contact_ living out of an aircraft (a 727?), but
I
can't remember if anyone is doing it for real. Lots of people have
offices
aloft, but it isn't normally their primary residence.

--

No way. The operating cost of any aircraft large enough to compare to the
smallest RV, far out weigh benefit of having sleeping and eating quarters
when you get there. Sylvain is right, it just doesn't ad up. Besides, their
are dozens if not hundreds of excellet vacationa fly-n spots in the US that
don't require ground tranportation when you get there.

Maxwell writes:

Well don't tell that to the folks in Alaska. They would have to retire a
whole bunch of world class aircraft.

Alaska is a special case. Even there, I don't think anyone learns to fly or
buys and airplane _only_ to go fishing.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

On Mar 24, 7:26 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Maxwell writes:
Well don't tell that to the folks in Alaska. They would have to retire a
whole bunch of world class aircraft.

Alaska is a special case. Even there, I don't think anyone learns to fly or
buys and airplane _only_ to go fishing.

Dunno about that :-)

Besides, no one said it was 'only'. That's like seeing an ad for a
car next to a beach and thinking people only learn to drive to get
near the ocean. But I can think of better aircraft than a low-wing to
get to un-improved grassy clearings in the woods. Not that the Piper
can't do it, but... (ducking responses from Cherokee owners).

Kev

On Mar 24, 10:07 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Kev writes:
Not to mention, the old Piper ads from the 60's showing a shiny new
plane parked on a grass strip next to a river, with several happy-
looking fisherman / pilots fly-casting in hip boots :-)

Sounds like they had it backwards. I can see someone wanting to fly and using
a $100 hamburger as an excuse to do so, but wanting to fish and getting a
private pilot's license just to get to the lake? I don't think so.


Clueless ****.



Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote:
Kev writes:


Not to mention, the old Piper ads from the 60's showing a shiny new
plane parked on a grass strip next to a river, with several happy-
looking fisherman / pilots fly-casting in hip boots :-)


Sounds like they had it backwards. I can see someone wanting to fly and using
a $100 hamburger as an excuse to do so, but wanting to fish and getting a
private pilot's license just to get to the lake? I don't think so.


On the contrary - that is a far better and far more common reason than
to buy hamburgers.

Mxsmanic wrote:
I was thinking today, first about independent truck drivers, then about those
people who sell (almost) all they own and buy a huge RV. In the case of truck
drivers, they often have expensive, fancy rigs complete with bed, television,
and other amenities that make their trucks a kind of home away from home--or
perhaps even their primary domicile, if they really enjoy driving around the
country. In the case of the RV owners, they give up a fixed residence and
live directly in the comfort of their RVs, as they roll around the nation,
constantly visiting new places.

Then I thought to myself: Why can't an airplane be used the same way? Suppose
you sold your house and various other goods, and bought yourself a really nice
aircraft. Suppose you outfitted it with RV-style amenities (as space
permits), such as a bed, TV, tiny stove or microwave, refrigerator, PC, and so
on. In theory, with the right kind of aircraft (obviously something larger
than a Piper Cub, but it need not necessarily be a Boeing Business Jet), you
could live out of it, flying periodically from place to place and visiting the
country from above (rather than from the highway). You could sleep over at an
airport right in your aircraft, then start out the next day for a new
destination.

Has anyone done this? Is it a practical project, or are there things that
make it impractical or impossible to use an aircraft as a camper or RV?

I know that if you have a really large aircraft, such as your own 737 or 747,
you obviously can live out of it, if you want, but I wonder if this would also
be true for smaller aircraft--the kind many people might be able to afford if
they were committed to using an aircraft as their domicile.



I know of at least one case of a couple using a plane for travelling the
world - like a flying RV.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Kev writes:

Not to mention, the old Piper ads from the 60's showing a shiny new
plane parked on a grass strip next to a river, with several happy-
looking fisherman / pilots fly-casting in hip boots :-)

Sounds like they had it backwards. I can see someone wanting to fly and
using
a $100 hamburger as an excuse to do so, but wanting to fish and getting a
private pilot's license just to get to the lake? I don't think so.


From the "bad" old days and maybe still.....

The bank at Rio Vista, Texas (SW of Fort Worth) had its own airstrip and the
occasional fly-in customer (but no fly in/drive by window service.

Back in the early 60s, there was a well known steakhouse near San Angelo,
Texas, at the tiny crossroads of Lowicky (sp?), which had its own strip (and
all sorts of diners from across West Texas, long distances and much general
aviation, who flew in for lunch and dinner.

The old Texas Power and Light, now TXU, power generating plants all had
cooling lakes, all pretty good fishing because of warm winter water (warmed
as it cooled the generating systems and recondensed used steam). Brown &
Root, now KBR, a part of Halliburton, built most of the newer plants, and
included a runway and "clubhouse" in the deal, grand and near secret "fly
in" weekend fishing/drinking/gambling/unmentionable etc. spots for company
execs plus state and local politicians. The one at "Trading House Creek" is
3,000' or so, paved and long enough for most light twins.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Sylvain writes:

I thought about something like that: aircraft big enough to carry a
motorbike and be self sufficient; then I ran the numbers:
turns out to be a heck of a lot cheaper to get the smaller aircraft
that fits your travelling needs, and rent a car/bike and a hotel
room at each destination (and you'll be a lot more confortable
overall). Actually, I wonder if the same holds true for the large
RV as well.

If many FBOs offer courtesy cars or you can get rentals at a decent
rate, you wouldn't need a land vehicle.



Why would you need one? Can't you just levitate yourself around in
fantasy land?

bertie