cost of ownership

I have got to start typing/spelling better!



"Dude" wrote in message
...
Forget it, never listen to someone who has absolutely no business posting
this....



Forget it. You will never make a leaseback work. Plus it is the same
as
renting a plane. You now have to schedule your own damn plane. You
would
need commercial insurance. It is at least three times regular
insurance.



Seriously, there are a thousand stores of bad leaseback situations. You
will not here the happy owners screaming at the top of their lungs. My
leaseback works okay. The key is to have a plane that can get the hours
you
need it to. If yo uneed 40 plus hours/month, the plane needs to be a
primary trainer (or the only plane that fills the complex trainer role),
and
needs to be something that fits in with the fleet (you don't necessarily
want to be the only low wing or high wing in a fleet).

You have to evaluate the fleet hours they are getting, who owns the other
planes, what will likley happen to the hours on the fleet from your adding
a
plane (will it just spread the same renters thinner, or will it fill a
need,
or what). Also, you need a rainy day fund.

You will likely be placed on the FBO's fleet insurance.

Elwood,

I was thinking about updating to the new aviation consumer book. Why do you
recommend the older ones? Has there been a change? The one I have from the
eighties seems fairly written.


"Elwood Dowd" wrote in message
...
Glad to hear! Keep us in the loop.

More advice: don't forget about the non-CessnaPiper planes out there,
or even some of the lesser known models of brand C and P. There are
some fantastic deals. Cessna Cardinal RGs and Mooney M20C and -E, for
example, all go 145 knots on 9-10gph. The Cardinal comes in a
welded-leg version as well.

Mooneys are great planes if you can fit into them. In my experience, if
you are comfortable in a Cherokee you can squeeze in.

I feel claustrophobic with small cabins and only one door, so we bought
a Beechcraft Sierra, same engine as the Mooney and Cardinal RG but only
135kt or so---but a cabin nearly as big as our station wagon. The fixed
gear version is a Musketeer or Sundowner. Not all have two doors, but
some even have a kid-size bench seat in the baggage area.

We decided that cabin size and ease of egress were more important than
speed, so we ended up with a Beech instead of a Mooney. It was a toss
up between the Sierra and the Cardinal RG---the Sierra was about 4/5 the
cost.

Best thing to do is to get Ron Wanttaja's book, one of the Bill Clarke
anthologies, or an older edition of Aviation Consumer's guide to used
planes, and look through the stats. Figure out what's important, and go
from there. When you have it narrowed down, join the type club mailing
lists. Both the Cardinal list and the Musketeer list have been
fantastic resources.



The Weiss Family wrote:
Thanks for the info Elwood.
I get excited thinking about ownership, but like buying a car, it's best
not
to get emotional.
Your post helped me get a decent perspective on the ups and downs of
ownership.

I put over 100 hours on my plane last year, and renters added to that.

I agree about what you are saying though. If many folks were really doing
more than 100 hours a year on a plane, they would likely look into a faster
plane for those long cross countries.

I have been adding ratings, and doing cross countries, so I am getting lots
of hours. I would definitely do less flying if I rented.


"Richard Kaplan" wrote in message
s.com...

"David Megginson" wrote in message
e.rogers.com...

That's a bit excessive. I agree that a C172/Cherokee class airplane
isn't
the fastest way to get somewhere against a headwind, and it's definitely
not
a coast-to-coast plane, but it's a perfectly reasonable IFR platform. I
fly
my Warrior quite a bit in IMC in central Canada and the U.S. northeast.

It is fine as an IFR platform as you say except for icing conditions or
situations where headwinds limit your alternates and as long as you plan
trips of reasonable distance for the airplane's speed.

Altogether, that is why I say that few owner-flown C172/Cherokee airplanes
fly more than 50-100 hours per year. It is rare to have a typical
aviation
mission to use the airplane more than this given the airplane's abilities.

Do you fly more than 100 hours per year in your airplane? If so, you are
an
exception. How many pilots here fly a C172-class airplane over 100 hours
per year?


--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

Dude wrote:
Forget it, never listen to someone who has absolutely no business posting
this....

Forget it. You will never make a leaseback work. Plus it is the same as
renting a plane. You now have to schedule your own damn plane. You would
need commercial insurance. It is at least three times regular insurance.


Seriously, there are a thousand stores of bad leaseback situations. You
will not here the happy owners screaming at the top of their lungs. My
leaseback works okay.

snip

Good job, Dude. My leaseback worked ok, too, when I had it. It was an excellent
way for me to break into airplane ownership.

Dave
Remove SHIRT to reply directly.

Richard Kaplan wrote:
"Ben Jackson" wrote in message
news:PRwsc.109351$536.19458583@attbi_s03...


Mainly because virtually no renter would fly as many hours as an owner.


Owners typically think they will fly 150-200 hours per year but very rarely
do owners fly more than 50-100 hours per year.

That's a fair point. I planned on 120 hours/year myself -- my logbook tells
me that I flew 144 hours in the first year I owned my Warrior and have flow
64 hours in the first six months for my second year (though much of that was
winter--the hours will get higher in the nice weather). My plan is to keep
aiming for 120 and to take on a partner if my annual hours drop below 100 a
couple of years in a row. I cannot imagine going back to renting. I might
also look for a partnership if I need a bigger or faster plane some day.

I agree that we see lots of planes just sitting on the field in the same
spot, week after week, month after month. This is completely unscientific,
of course, but it feels like there is an inverse correlation between the
ownership cost of a plane and the amount you fly. The Bonanzas and Barons
seem just to sit around most of the time, the 182s fly a bit more often, the
Cherokees and 172s fly a lot, and probably the most-flown privately-owned
plane on our field is a little 152.


All the best,


David

Richard Kaplan wrote:

Do you fly more than 100 hours per year in your airplane?

I flew 144 hours last year, most of it cross-country. A typical
cross-country flight for me is 250-500 miles, within my non-stop range (with
reserves), usually cruising between 7,000 and 10,000 ft to stay above the
turbulence.

If I needed to make longer trips frequently, I'd probably look at a faster
plane, but I have an awful lot to fly to within 500 miles (all of the Great
Lakes cities as far west as Sault Ste. Marie, New York, Philadephia, Boston,
Toronto, Montreal, Quebec City, etc.), and 126 ktas is quite fast enough for
that range. The plane is particularly useful for short business trips that
would be a major pain on the airlines, though the majority of my flying is
personal rather than business-related.

If so, you are an
exception. How many pilots here fly a C172-class airplane over 100 hours
per year?

On the Usenet groups, probably an awful lot do, but we might not be
representative of 172/Cherokee/Musketeer owners in general.

Again, as I think you mentioned earlier and others have mentioned as well,
the trick to ownership is to make sure that the *plane* flies, say, 100
hours/year, not necessarily that the pilot does. Two 50 hour/year pilots
will get just as much economy out of ownership as one 100 hour/year pilot.


All the best,


David

"David Megginson" wrote in message
t.cable.rogers.com...

hours/year, not necessarily that the pilot does. Two 50 hour/year pilots
will get just as much economy out of ownership as one 100 hour/year pilot.

Agreed.... if you can find a compatible partner or two, that is an excellent
way to reduce ownership costs while still retaining most of the advantages
of airplane ownership. Scheduling does not typically seem to be a problem
in partnerships of 2-3 pilots, and partnerships not only reduce the fixed
expenses but also provide a nice cushion to manage the cost of a surprise
maintenance bill or to help fund airplane upgrades.


--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"David Megginson" wrote in message
.cable.rogers.com...


ownership cost of a plane and the amount you fly. The Bonanzas and Barons
seem just to sit around most of the time, the 182s fly a bit more often,
the
Cherokees and 172s fly a lot, and probably the most-flown privately-owned
plane on our field is a little 152.

I think this may be true, but to the extent that it is due to economics I do
not think the owners are saving that much money by not flying. I believe
very much that between the range of flying 50 hours per year vs. 200 hours
per year, maintenance is due not to tach hours but to calendar hours. The
Bonanza or Baron sitting on the ramp will probably require as much -- if not
more -- maintenance in a year of flying 50 hours as in a year of flying 200
hours.

Part of your observation may also be due to the fact that it is easy to find
a qualified pilot to borrow or rent a C152 or C172 but the more rare or
complex an airplane gets it gets harder to find a qualified/insurable pilot
to share its use.

Supporting your original observation, I have made an anecdotal but
interesting observation among pilots who schedule IFR recurrent training
with my flight school. I encourage pilots to plan on a combination of
instruction in their airplane and my simulator, and single-engine pilots
almost always readily agree to this as long as there are not weather or
maintenance concerns. Yet twin-engine pilots are often reluctant to use
their airplane for training -- not just for engine-out work but even for
basic instrument approach practice. Their reasons are usually not directly
stated but I get a sense that the cost of flying the airplane is a major
factor.


--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com

"Richard Kaplan" wrote:
How many pilots here fly a C172-class airplane over 100 hours
per year?

I fly 120+ hrs/yr, most of it IFR xc.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...

I fly 120+ hrs/yr, most of it IFR xc.

And you have a 172RG, not a 172... that makes it a bit more practical
dealing with headwinds.


--------------------
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com