"Andrey Serbinenko" wrote in message
...
It is not the pure dollar cost that matters, but the effectiveness of
the money spent, i.e. cost vs. utility. It is especially true for
something requiring continuous money infusions like owning an airplane.

You would have to be doing a LOT of traveling, to places where you couldn't
fly your own airplane, AND renting airplanes at those destinations for your
scenario to have any relevance whatsoever. Like, on the order of one such
trip a week.

I'd be surprised if ANY of the 600,000+ certificated pilots in the US meet
that criteria, but if the number is non-zero, it can't be more than a
handful at most.

Otherwise, the question of owning is no different than the question of
engaging in any other hobby or owning any other property that cannot be used
while you're traveling. Do you worry about your inability to use your car,
or your house, or your bicycle, or your refrigerator, or your...?

[...]
Not that I'm trying to find a reason not to own, rather a sound
justification
to own.

The question of ownership comes down to just a handful of issues, none of
which have anything to do with the issue you present:

* Economics:
-- can you afford it?
-- would you spend more renting than owning?
* Non-economic benefits:
-- convenience
-- personal satisfaction
-- degree of control
* Non-economic drawbacks:
-- primarily, managing the ownership (maintenance, hangar/tiedown,
registration, etc.)

This is not an exclusive list...other issues do sometimes enter into the
picture (for example, wanting to regularly fly an airplane that simply
cannot be rented, like a seaplane). But the question of whether you can use
the airplane when you're not home or not is simply NOT a rational thing to
concern oneself with. Owning an airplane in no way creates any detrimental
situation with respect to that.

Pete