Long Angel Flight tomorrow

Peter R. wrote:
On 5/4/2007 8:28:45 PM, "Dan Luke" wrote:

Angel Flight was in a bit of a bind to fill this one, so I let them talk
me into it, even though it is 650 nm and will end up taking six hours or
so, ground time included.

Dan, I thought you were selling your airplane?

Awesome of you to take a flight of this duration for Angel Flight, in any
regard.


I agree. I only made one flight of that duration when I was flying for
AirLifeLine many years ago. I was based at ELM and most of my pickups
weren't local, but typically weren't too far away (Harrisburg, Erie,
Williamsport, etc.). However, I flew one flight that required me to
pickup up the patient in Cincinnati and fly him to Philly. By the time
I flew from ELM to Cincy, to Philly and returned to ELM, I'd used the
major portion of a Saturday. It was a great flight, however.

Matt

You have to apportion sunk costs to the hours you fly somehow or you aren't calculating the true cost of flying.

The issue isn't the cost of flying, it's the cost of flying more.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Nathan Young wrote:
On Sat, 05 May 2007 12:21:27 GMT, Matt Whiting
wrote:
...
Sunk cost doesn't matter. You have to apportion sunk costs to the hours
you fly somehow or you aren't calculating the true cost of flying. The
cost per hour of flying in a given year is total costs (fixed & variable)
divided by the number of hours flown that year.



So, the more you fly, the less it costs per hour (which is true even if you
don't include fixed costs like hangers, insurance, and stuff). He's saving
money by making this trip and, thus, reducing the cost per hour of the rest
of the flying he does, right?

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.

Jose wrote:
You have to apportion sunk costs to the hours you fly somehow or you
aren't calculating the true cost of flying.

The issue isn't the cost of flying, it's the cost of flying more.

exactly. It is called "incremental cost". It's the difference between flying
and leaving the airplane in the hangar. Assuming that the decision to own an
airplane was made independent from the decision to do angel flights, this
incremental cost is considerably lower for owners than for renters, true.

However, isn't it that the motivation for angel flights is largely "I want
to fly, and rather than just go for a 100$ Burger I could just as well help
somebody out while doing it". Viewed like this there isn't really much
difference whether you rent or own the plane you use for AF.

regards,
Friedrich

"Jose" wrote in message
t...
You have to apportion sunk costs to the hours you fly somehow or you
aren't calculating the true cost of flying.

The issue isn't the cost of flying, it's the cost of flying more.

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

For pilots who fly primariliy for enjoyment (ie: you don't fly mainly for
business
purposes or transportation, etc.) I'm sure that the number of hours you can
fly
is constrained by time or budgetary considerations whether you are an owner
or renter. So, I wouldn't think that donating some of your flying time to
such
causes should increase the overall cost of your flying habit. It would also
give
you an excuse to use up some of your self-allotted time and maybe bring
additional enjoyment or satisfaction. You still get to pursue your hobby and
since you are actually flying cross-country you could actually reduce the
overall
cost of flying since you are increasing the number of cruising hours with
respect
to the number of those pesky take-off and (shudder!) landing hours. You
don't
have to fly *more*. Like A Huffington says, "The plane was going somewhere
anyways".
TP

I'm taking the second of three legs. Flying from Mobile to Vicksburg, MS,
picking up a single pax and dropping her off in Marianna, FL, then back to
BFM.



I thought that BF was in "E". I didn't know there was also one in "M" !?!

Sorry, TP :-)

"Kobra" wrote in message
...
BS!!! How about engine amorization and maintainence amorization. You can add
about 17 bucks per hour for the engine and about 30 smackers for the
maintainence amorization. With fuel at 4.40 a gallon and 9 gph on average and
through in another dollar for oil you have about 87 to 88 dollars per hour
true cost.

You just concisely explained to the world why I rent.

Vaughn

"muff528" wrote in message
news:K74%h.674$wy2.278@trnddc03...
For pilots who fly primariliy for enjoyment (ie: you don't fly mainly for
business
purposes or transportation, etc.) I'm sure that the number of hours you can
fly
is constrained by time or budgetary considerations whether you are an owner
or renter. So, I wouldn't think that donating some of your flying time to such

Assuming that your Angel Flight expenses are deductible, a flight should be
considerably cheaper than an equivalent $100 burger flight.

That said, as a VFR pilot I would not want anyone's medical care to depend
on me actually getting to any particular destination on any particular schedule.
It seems like 30 to 50% of my burger flights are aborted or vastly modified due
to weather.

"Vaughn Simon" wrote

You just concisely explained to the world why I rent.

It depends on how much you fly.

Many people have said that it begins to be cheaper to own than rent at a
little under 200 hours per year.
--
Jim in NC

"Peter R." wrote:


Angel Flight was in a bit of a bind to fill this one, so I let them talk
me into it, even though it is 650 nm and will end up taking six hours or
so, ground time included.

Dan, I thought you were selling your airplane?

It's still for sale. In fact, the first leg pilot I met today is looking for
a nice Cutlass for his flight school, and might be a buyer.


Awesome of you to take a flight of this duration for Angel Flight, in any
regard.

I'm certainly no hero. I'm feeling pretty worn out right now, but it was a
lot of fun as usual.


--
Dan
C172RG at BFM