How common are aircraft partnerships compared to outright ownerships?

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

"xyzzy" wrote in message
...
Newps wrote:

Besides currency, there's initial checkout. I.e, the need for several
dozen members who are current and checked out in Warriors, to have to do
a
one-time club checkout in the 172 (most likely a written quiz and 3-5
hours of dual) in order to get back the availability they had when it
was
an all-Warrior fleet. You may think it's trivial to transition from one
to the other, and I would agree, but for insurance purposes the club may
need to require more.



If you are current in a Warrior and anybody REQUIRES 3-5 hours checkout
in a
Skyhawk they are just making money off you.

I think the pertinent question is what model 172 requires this 3-5 hour
checkout?

A fuel injected 172 does not require priming on a normal day. Ever sit
and
watch unfamiliar pilots try to start a 172SP? Prime, grind, grind,
grind,
grind pause grind, grind, grind, grind pause grind, grind, grind.

How many seconds should a 172's starter be engaged before a cool-down time
is needed? How many minutes should one wait to attempt a restart?
Mixture lever in or out when attempting to start?

The flight school where I trained actually had a CFII (not from that
school) recently get "stuck" at a nearby airport because he could not
start
a 2003 C172SP equipped with a new battery, new starter, and full fuel. He
killed the battery trying to start it! Upon speaking to the flight
school
manager, he claimed that the aircraft and maintenance were to fault, not
him. The flight school sent maintenance and a CFII to the airport to
recharge the battery and rescue this person (who, somehow convinced the
school he didn't need a complete checkout). The aircraft fired right up.

What about the new 172s equipped with Garmin G1000 flight displays that
are
beginning to appear at US flight schools? You will need probably a
minimum of 10 hours of check-out time to fly one of those.

I have about 450 hours in a C172SP and I would probably need a couple of
hours of instruction/flying just to become familiar with carb heat usage
if
I hypothetically needed to rent an older C172 model.



Since the OP did say they were buying older model 172's the G1000 is a none
issue as far as this thread is concerned. Both of the other items your
mentioned could easily be covered in a pilot orientation meeting followed a
1 hour MAX check ride. In that case if the check pilot saw that the checkee
had a problem it would be easy have them not sign off and give the further
instruction as needed.

And Peter if it would really take you a couple of hours of flight time to
figure out how to use the carb heat I have to ask... How long did it take
you to solo?

Is 200 members and 4 airplanes really a club? Can you ever keep
it overnight or more than 2 hours? I went the partnership way 3 years ago and recently
bought my partners out of our 235. I got to fly more airplane in
the partnership than I could afford on my own. But I decided I
wanted it all so I have it all. But 200 members?! WOW!


Trip


In article , says...

Roger wrote:

First, partnerships and clubs are probably the predominant way of
owning an aircraft or at least part of one.
You might look into local flying clubs as well as partnerships. They
are *usually* more flexible, less expensive, and may have more
available aircraft.


I fly in a large club (200+ members) and a couple of times in the last
year I have seriously looked into buying, both solo and partnership, but
quite frankly the club is such a good deal I can't justify buying.

In the club I pay dues of $45/mo, and $80/hr wet to fly 160 hp Piper
Warrior II's with Apollo GPS and coupled autopilot. The club has a
fleet of four of them. That is the sum total of my airplane expenses and
includes a very good insurance policy (all club members are named
insureds), access to a hangar with offices that the club owns, and
social events. Since joining the club I've been flying on average 6
hours a month, which is 72 hours a year. I know exactly how much it has
cost me and I also know exactly how much it will cost me in the future
to fly.

I ran the spreadsheet on buying a low-end plane by myself, and also on
buying into a 3-way partnership on a little bit nicer plane. I never
could make it work out without significant fudging, even leaving out the
unknowns like how long before I need an overhaul, repairs, etc.

My perception of the advantages and disadvantages of club vs. ownership:

Advantages:

1. Cheaper
2. Absolutely predictable and controllable expenses (don't want to
spend as much this month? Don't fly as much).
3. No financial risk (unexpected maint, value-killing ADs, sudden
medical problem that makes an owned plane a white elephant, etc)
4. Maintenance not all my responsibility (members chip in to do
maintenance but it doesn't all fall on one or two people). Financially,
each squawk doesn't mean more $$$ out of my pocket.
5. With a fleet of four basically identical planes, not completely
grounded by squawks, annuals, overhauls, etc.
6. I fly planes with better avionics and more capability than I could
afford to buy myself
7. It's easy to figure exactly what it costs me to fly (yes this can
also be a disadvantage .

Disadvantages:

1. Availability -- don't count on being able to fly on a nice weekend
day unless you reserved well ahead. This is the flip side of advantage #5.
2. Don't totally control my own fate. For example: Accidents or
negligence by other members could affect the club's insurance situation
(partnerships have this problem too, but with a club there's more
people, therefore more variables). Another example: if the club board
decides to sell or replace an airplane or change aircraft types, or
specify different avionics from what I like, I have very little say in
the matter.
3. Even though it's cheaper in the long run, it's emotionally hard to
write a large check when returning from a long trip. More flying means
you pay more, whereas when you own more flying means it gets cheaper (on
a per-hour basis, anyway)
4. Must follow club SOP's, for example minimum runway lengths, required
preapproval for grass strips, etc. For me this is not a problem because
it ameliorates the first concern in disadvantage #2, plus my own
personal mins exceed the SOPs but others might find it too restrictive.
5. Some clubs may restrict flexibility for long trips (though mine is
pretty liberal on it and it hasn't been a problem for anyone as far as I
know).
6. Easy to figure exactly what it costs to fly
7. No pride of ownership.

I've concluded that I'd like to own a plane someday, but it will have to
be when I have a lot more money than I do now. C'mon, stock market!

Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

Since the OP did say they were buying older model 172's the G1000 is a none
issue as far as this thread is concerned.

OK, I got a bit carried away there.

Both of the other items your
mentioned could easily be covered in a pilot orientation meeting followed a
1 hour MAX check ride.

Are you are saying that a pilot orientation meeting and 1 hour MAX is all
that is needed to transition from a Warrier most likely equipped with basic
avionics and no AP to a fuel injected C172SP equipped with an autopilot and
IFR GPS? I totally disagree.

However, if you remind me of your flight instruction qualifications and how
many students you have successfully transitioned from a Warrier to a C172SP
within this one hour familiarity flight, then I will concede since my
opinion is only based on my familiarity with this model Skyhawk.

And Peter if it would really take you a couple of hours of flight time to
figure out how to use the carb heat I have to ask... How long did it take
you to solo?

LOL! What's in your pants is bigger than mine? Is there some correlation
between number of hours to solo and the aptitude, skills, and proficiency
of a pilot post-solo?

My point was that given my unfamiliarity with something that has caused a
lot of pilots grief (based on the high number of suspected carb ice
incidents and accidents in the NTSB reports), I certainly recognize my
limitations and would want to be sure I completely understood the usage of
carb heat before launching on an X/C flight in IMC with my family.

But, to answer your question, it took 16 hours for me to solo.

--
Peter























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Peter R. wrote:

But, to answer your question, it took 16 hours for me to solo.

In a?

Newps wrote:


xyzzy wrote:
Newps wrote:



xyzzy wrote:
I personally don't

like it because unless a pilot is willing to stay current in both
types (which is an added expense and hassle),



If you can figure out how to open the door you are current in a 172.


True, but will the insurance company and the people who write club SOP's
agree?

Then you better define current, because a 172 only requires a BFR. I
have never seen an insurance policy be more restrictive than that for a
172. A flying club might have a one year currency policy, any more than
that is just money grubbing.

Where I rent has their own definition of current based on their insurance
policy.

To be "current" for insurance and to be allowed to fly solo you have to
have flown in the last 60 days in a particular aircraft type or higher
similar type. Time in a 172RG or 182 counts for a 172 but not for
Pipers for example.

Once around the pattern is sufficient to check off the square.

If you are not "current" by these standards it is around the pattern at
least once with a CFI (or more if you hose up).

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Darrel Toepfer wrote:

But, to answer your question, it took 16 hours for me to solo.

In a?

A 2001 C172SP.

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

Since the OP did say they were buying older model 172's the G1000 is a
none
issue as far as this thread is concerned.

OK, I got a bit carried away there.

Both of the other items your
mentioned could easily be covered in a pilot orientation meeting followed
a
1 hour MAX check ride.

Are you are saying that a pilot orientation meeting and 1 hour MAX is all
that is needed to transition from a Warrier most likely equipped with
basic
avionics and no AP to a fuel injected C172SP equipped with an autopilot
and
IFR GPS? I totally disagree.

Nobody but you mentioned 172SPs. The OP certainly didn't and again I wans't
talking about SPs



And Peter if it would really take you a couple of hours of flight time to
figure out how to use the carb heat I have to ask... How long did it take
you to solo?

LOL! What's in your pants is bigger than mine? Is there some
correlation
between number of hours to solo and the aptitude, skills, and proficiency
of a pilot post-solo?

My point was that given my unfamiliarity with something that has caused a
lot of pilots grief (based on the high number of suspected carb ice
incidents and accidents in the NTSB reports), I certainly recognize my
limitations and would want to be sure I completely understood the usage of
carb heat before launching on an X/C flight in IMC with my family.

But, to answer your question, it took 16 hours for me to solo.


I'd be willing to bet that a significant percentage of the accidents caused
by carb ice were with pilots who trained and flew aircraft with carb heat.

Peter I really don't think it would take you one our of training to figure
out carb heat. Actually I don't think it would take you ANY flight time to
figure out. Actual flying time is really a terrible place to learn things
like that. On the ground you can learn when carb icing is an issue and then
you have to remember when you are in a plane that has a carburetor that it
is an issue. No number of hours IN an airplane with an instructor is going
to help with that.

And for the record the transition time for me from 172 to Archer was 10
minutes on the ground playing with the radios and a 10 minute hop from one
air port to another.

wrote in message
...
Newps wrote:


xyzzy wrote:
Newps wrote:



xyzzy wrote:
I personally don't

like it because unless a pilot is willing to stay current in both
types (which is an added expense and hassle),



If you can figure out how to open the door you are current in a 172.


True, but will the insurance company and the people who write club
SOP's
agree?

Then you better define current, because a 172 only requires a BFR. I
have never seen an insurance policy be more restrictive than that for a
172. A flying club might have a one year currency policy, any more than
that is just money grubbing.

Where I rent has their own definition of current based on their insurance
policy.

To be "current" for insurance and to be allowed to fly solo you have to
have flown in the last 60 days in a particular aircraft type or higher
similar type. Time in a 172RG or 182 counts for a 172 but not for
Pipers for example.

Once around the pattern is sufficient to check off the square.

If you are not "current" by these standards it is around the pattern at
least once with a CFI (or more if you hose up).

Which is completely sensible.

("xyzzy" wrote)
5. With a fleet of four basically identical planes, not completely
grounded by squawks, annuals, overhauls, etc.

We also have 152's, which are such low-end trainers that hardly any
non-student pilots fly them, and Mooneys, and there are some members
that fly both Warriors and Mooneys. Most members just fly one type
though, because each type caters to a different market.


200+ members - 4 wariors. Hmm, something's not right.

Now I see 152's and Monneys. Ahhh, better :-)

Got a club link?


Montblack

Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

Nobody but you mentioned 172SPs. The OP certainly didn't

Don't get hung up on my mention of the SP model. The OP mentioned "newer
(but not brand new)" C172s. Thus, I assumed post-1998 models, which are
all fuel injected and most contain more advanced avionics than a typical,
older Warrior.

In order to accurately reflect my experience, I used SP since that was what
it was, but I certainly could have included the R model in my assumption
about how long a checkout would take when going from a Warrier to either of
these models.

and again I wans't talking about SPs

You weren't? Then why didn't you say so when you first stated, "If you are
current in a Warrior and anybody REQUIRES 3-5 hours checkout in a
Skyhawk they are just making money off you." Instead, you made a blanket
statement that seems to imply all 172 models.

Given the "newer (but not brand new)" quote from the original post, you
were no more at liberty (and therefore no more right or wrong) to assume a
pre-1998 model than I was to assume a post-1998 model.

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----