True costs of a light twin...

Hello. I'd like to get a better understanding of the true costs of
various light twins from people who have direct experience with them.
I've seen a bunch of opinions about how expensive twins are on here
from many different people ranging from 'not much more than comparable
single' to 'more costly that purchasing Western Europe'.

Before I bought my single-engine plane (a 1963 Beech Musketeer), I had
heard a similar range of numbers for this kind of plane. Several
people said since it was so old, it would cost $90 an hour when you
factored in maintenence. It didn't....it ended up costing about $47
per hour over almost 2 years, and that includes replacing a fair
number of parts (Carb, mag, brakes, tires, hoses, spinner...). The guy
who owns an even older Cessna 170 on the field near my tiedown says
the age of his plane has never caused him any problems at all, and
it's been cheaper than the much newer 172 a friend of his has. So I'm
not convinced yet about the old saw about older airplanes costing you
an arm and a leg in maintenence...it just hasn't been my experience
yet. I have a friend who owns an Apache and flys it about 200 hours a
year...he doesn't keep good records, but he guestimates it costs him
about $75 an hour. He said his maintenence bills over the last 10
years (he's owned it since 1985) have been very reasonable. But others
on here have said that they don't think it's possible to operate a
light twin for under $100 an hour. So what is the verdict? Does anyone
out there have some hard numbers that they could share? I'd like to
buy a reasonable older light twin (Apache, Twin Commanche, Travel Air,
Aztec). I'd really be interested in hearing from people who have
owned and operated these planes and who really know what they cost
over the long run.

Thanks,

Cap

(Captain Wubba) wrote in message . com...
Hello. I'd like to get a better understanding of the true costs of
various light twins from people who have direct experience with them.
I've seen a bunch of opinions about how expensive twins are on here
from many different people ranging from 'not much more than comparable
single' to 'more costly that purchasing Western Europe'.

Before I bought my single-engine plane (a 1963 Beech Musketeer), I had
heard a similar range of numbers for this kind of plane. Several
people said since it was so old, it would cost $90 an hour when you
factored in maintenence. It didn't....it ended up costing about $47
per hour over almost 2 years, and that includes replacing a fair
number of parts (Carb, mag, brakes, tires, hoses, spinner...). The guy
who owns an even older Cessna 170 on the field near my tiedown says
the age of his plane has never caused him any problems at all, and
it's been cheaper than the much newer 172 a friend of his has. So I'm
not convinced yet about the old saw about older airplanes costing you
an arm and a leg in maintenence...it just hasn't been my experience
yet. I have a friend who owns an Apache and flys it about 200 hours a
year...he doesn't keep good records, but he guestimates it costs him
about $75 an hour. He said his maintenence bills over the last 10
years (he's owned it since 1985) have been very reasonable. But others
on here have said that they don't think it's possible to operate a
light twin for under $100 an hour. So what is the verdict? Does anyone
out there have some hard numbers that they could share? I'd like to
buy a reasonable older light twin (Apache, Twin Commanche, Travel Air,
Aztec). I'd really be interested in hearing from people who have
owned and operated these planes and who really know what they cost
over the long run.

Thanks,

Cap


last year we spent 10,500 on insurance and maintenace on our 310.
it flew about 140 hours, making that about 75/hr plus fuel. we
usually cruise at ~55%, which burns 21 gph, so add another 55/hr
for fuel. so that's about 130/hr. everybody says that it costs
200/hr to fly a 310, and you can get to that figure if you add
in "opportunity costs" and a bunch of extra stuff. (realistically,
you should add about 20-30/hr for overhaul, but we have really
low time engines and figure that we'll trade up before we get
to o/h).

now the first year we had it, we flew 1.5 hours, then the right
gear collapsed -- mechanical problem. we sort of had it under-
insured, elected to fix it anyway, and paid about 15k out of
pocket. however, that did include o/h of the right engine,
which was past tbo and we knew we were going to have to do
anyway. but if you divide 15k by 1.5, the first year it costs
us ~10k/hr plus fuel :-)

g_a

"gross_arrow" wrote:
(realistically,
you should add about 20-30/hr for overhaul, but we
have really low time engines and figure that we'll trade up
before we get to o/h).

Doesn't matter. That money's spent anyway because hours on the engines
decrease the value of the airplane when you sell. You can't avoid
overhaul costs.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...
"gross_arrow" wrote:
(realistically,
you should add about 20-30/hr for overhaul, but we
have really low time engines and figure that we'll trade up
before we get to o/h).

Doesn't matter. That money's spent anyway because hours on the engines
decrease the value of the airplane when you sell. You can't avoid
overhaul costs.

But you can avoid the short term cash outlay.

To make a valid comparison, you have to know what your question is.

Are you interested in knowing the cost of two engines vs. one? Then you
have to get as close to apples to apples as you can to isolate the effect of
having two engines instead of one. Compare two similar airframes with only
the number of engines being different, like an Arrow to a Seminole, or
Saratoga to a Seneca. You will find that the difference is quite obvious,
twice as many oil changes, spark plugs, vacuum pumps, etc. will be
purchased. That's it. Having two of everything is why you bought that
twin, so it is no surprise that the engine maintenance costs are double.

Or if you are more interested in just knowing how expensive it is to own a
more complex airplane, then compare the cost of any simple plane to a
complex plane. Say an Archer to a Seminole. The more gadgets you have, the
more they break or need adjustment. That's where the maintenance costs
jump, and in my opinion where the myth that twins are unaccountably more
expensive than singles comes from. They are more expensive, but it is not
caused by the extra engine any more than would be expected..


"Captain Wubba" wrote in message
om...
Hello. I'd like to get a better understanding of the true costs of
various light twins from people who have direct experience with them.
I've seen a bunch of opinions about how expensive twins are on here
from many different people ranging from 'not much more than comparable
single' to 'more costly that purchasing Western Europe'.

Before I bought my single-engine plane (a 1963 Beech Musketeer), I had
heard a similar range of numbers for this kind of plane. Several
people said since it was so old, it would cost $90 an hour when you
factored in maintenence. It didn't....it ended up costing about $47
per hour over almost 2 years, and that includes replacing a fair
number of parts (Carb, mag, brakes, tires, hoses, spinner...). The guy
who owns an even older Cessna 170 on the field near my tiedown says
the age of his plane has never caused him any problems at all, and
it's been cheaper than the much newer 172 a friend of his has. So I'm
not convinced yet about the old saw about older airplanes costing you
an arm and a leg in maintenence...it just hasn't been my experience
yet. I have a friend who owns an Apache and flys it about 200 hours a
year...he doesn't keep good records, but he guestimates it costs him
about $75 an hour. He said his maintenence bills over the last 10
years (he's owned it since 1985) have been very reasonable. But others
on here have said that they don't think it's possible to operate a
light twin for under $100 an hour. So what is the verdict? Does anyone
out there have some hard numbers that they could share? I'd like to
buy a reasonable older light twin (Apache, Twin Commanche, Travel Air,
Aztec). I'd really be interested in hearing from people who have
owned and operated these planes and who really know what they cost
over the long run.

Thanks,

Cap

Unless you own a bunch of aircraft the law of averages doesn't mean
anything. It will cost you a little to a lot more or less than the
average to run your particular machine last, this or next year. To
keep your hourly cost down, buy what you can afford, fly a lot, put
the gear down always, keep it in a hangar, use mogas, take your own
cowls off, shop around for parts, fix things right away, pay your
mechanic on time, carry liability insurance only, get recurrent
training and don't lend your plane.
Anyway, knock on wood, it works for me and my Apache which purrs along
a couple hundred hours a year.


(Captain Wubba) wrote in message . com...
Hello. I'd like to get a better understanding of the true costs of
various light twins from people who have direct experience with them.
I've seen a bunch of opinions about how expensive twins are on here
from many different people ranging from 'not much more than comparable
single' to 'more costly that purchasing Western Europe'.

Before I bought my single-engine plane (a 1963 Beech Musketeer), I had
heard a similar range of numbers for this kind of plane. Several
people said since it was so old, it would cost $90 an hour when you
factored in maintenence. It didn't....it ended up costing about $47
per hour over almost 2 years, and that includes replacing a fair
number of parts (Carb, mag, brakes, tires, hoses, spinner...). The guy
who owns an even older Cessna 170 on the field near my tiedown says
the age of his plane has never caused him any problems at all, and
it's been cheaper than the much newer 172 a friend of his has. So I'm
not convinced yet about the old saw about older airplanes costing you
an arm and a leg in maintenence...it just hasn't been my experience
yet. I have a friend who owns an Apache and flys it about 200 hours a
year...he doesn't keep good records, but he guestimates it costs him
about $75 an hour. He said his maintenence bills over the last 10
years (he's owned it since 1985) have been very reasonable. But others
on here have said that they don't think it's possible to operate a
light twin for under $100 an hour. So what is the verdict? Does anyone
out there have some hard numbers that they could share? I'd like to
buy a reasonable older light twin (Apache, Twin Commanche, Travel Air,
Aztec). I'd really be interested in hearing from people who have
owned and operated these planes and who really know what they cost
over the long run.

Thanks,

Cap

Dan Luke wrote:

Doesn't matter. That money's spent anyway because hours on the engines
decrease the value of the airplane when you sell. You can't avoid
overhaul costs.

When I was researching things preparing to buy my first plane, I spent nearly a
year tracking prices in TAP. As nearly as I can tell from that, aircraft prices
are discounted only about half of what an "hour bank" should be. One that I
remember was a 150 with an engine well over TBO that hadn't been run in two
years. They asked (and got) $4,500 for the plane. An overhaul from a reputable
shop like Mattituck at the time ran about $12,000 installed. No way could you
have put a fresh engine in it and gotten $16,500 for that plane.

George Patterson
If you're not part of the solution, you can make a lot of money prolonging
the problem.

Have a look at http://www.planequest.com/operationcosts/default.asp

If you buy an airplane with an engine at or past TBO, the hours until
you have to overhaul it are essentially "free". If it is making good
compressions, no oil burn and no metal, making good power, then
chances are a past TBO engine will go another 500 hours.

The guy neglected annual and hangar/tiedown.
Here is a list.

FIXED COSTS
Hangar or tiedown
Annual (just the annual, NOT repairs)
Insurance

HOURLY COSTS
Fuel
Oil
Maintenance
Overhaul Reserves

The least expensive twin would probably be a Piper Apache, although a
Twin Commanche would not be far behind (and might actually be less).
They all seem to have a lot more things on them to go out than a
single, not just the extra engine.
"Tom S." wrote in message ...
"Dan Luke" wrote in message
...
"gross_arrow" wrote:
(realistically,
you should add about 20-30/hr for overhaul, but we
have really low time engines and figure that we'll trade up
before we get to o/h).

Doesn't matter. That money's spent anyway because hours on the engines
decrease the value of the airplane when you sell. You can't avoid
overhaul costs.

But you can avoid the short term cash outlay.

In article ,
G.R. Patterson III wrote:

When I was researching things preparing to buy my first plane, I spent nearly a
year tracking prices in TAP. As nearly as I can tell from that, aircraft prices
are discounted only about half of what an "hour bank" should be.

Same here. Planes with near new engines (cost of overhaul still fresh in
the owner's mind) were marked UP correctly, but planes near TBO were not
marked down enough. In many cases I could only guess that the prices were
not set with engine hours as a consideration.

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/