cost of ownership

"The Weiss Family" wrote in message
...

I'm trying to figure out how much renting I have to do before it becomes
plausible to own.
Any advice as to insurance, fixed and variable costs, etc.

If you do an honest assessment of the cost to own an airplane, virtually no
airplane owner can operate his airplane cheaper than he coudl rent the same
airplane. This is particularly true for a C172-class airplane which is
unlikely to be used on a very regular basis for practical transporation
except in some very specific regions of the country which almost always have
VFR weather, i.e. the Southwest.

Reasons to buy an airplane include not having to deal with restrictions on
keeping a rental airplane for a week or so trip, having access to an
airplane not available for rental, having control over maintenance, having
control over modifications/avionics, and simply pride of ownership. These
are all fine reasons to buy an airplane -- do not think that it will be
cheaper than owning, however.

If you do buy an airplane, consider that the cost of a surprise engine
overhaul can easily be 25% of the value of the airplane. Imagine one day
getting a call from your mechanic with the bad news that you need to do an
unexpected early engine overhaul. If you would not be able to handle that
financially, then either do not buy the airplane or else seek a partner to
buy the airplane with you.


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

www.flyimc.com

In article m,
Richard Kaplan wrote:
If you do an honest assessment of the cost to own an airplane, virtually no
airplane owner can operate his airplane cheaper than he coudl rent the same
airplane.

Mainly because virtually no renter would fly as many hours as an owner.
You can make the cost per hour work out better (assuming you don't
botch the prebuy and the airplane market doesn't collapse while you
own it) but the *total* annual cost will be higher.

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

"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.

Take a look at Trade-A-Plane and see how many airplanes you find with more
than 100 hours per year since they were made.


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

www.flyimc.com

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

"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.

Take a look at Trade-A-Plane and see how many airplanes you find with more
than 100 hours per year since they were made.

I wonder what's the rates between those who have it for "personal" use as
opposed to "business" use.

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

"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:

If you do an honest assessment of the cost to own an airplane, virtually no
airplane owner can operate his airplane cheaper than he coudl rent the same
airplane. This is particularly true for a C172-class airplane which is
unlikely to be used on a very regular basis for practical transporation
except in some very specific regions of the country which almost always have
VFR weather, i.e. the Southwest.

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.

In the winter, late fall, and early spring, I have to cancel flights
sometimes because of the risk of icing in IMC, but that would be true in any
plane without full known-ice certification (i.e. most singles and many
twins). I've added a Stormscope for peace-of-mind in summer IMC.

Reasons to buy an airplane include not having to deal with restrictions on
keeping a rental airplane for a week or so trip, having access to an
airplane not available for rental, having control over maintenance, having
control over modifications/avionics, and simply pride of ownership. These
are all fine reasons to buy an airplane -- do not think that it will be
cheaper than owning, however.

I agree with your point, but in fact, the cost of owning hasn't been too far
off for me -- I paid a bit more per hour in my first year (who doesn't?),
but my second year is shaping up to be much less expensive, even with used
Stormscope installation, so I'll probably be slightly ahead (that includes
amortization for the engine, etc.).

Still, I agree that it's not cheaper in absolute terms: I doubt I'd be
flying 120 hours/year as a renter, so I'd probably be spending much less.

If you do buy an airplane, consider that the cost of a surprise engine
overhaul can easily be 25% of the value of the airplane. Imagine one day
getting a call from your mechanic with the bad news that you need to do an
unexpected early engine overhaul. If you would not be able to handle that
financially, then either do not buy the airplane or else seek a partner to
buy the airplane with you.

I agree entirely, and it doesn't even have to be an overhaul -- as Richard
knows, there are lots of other little things in even the simplest plane that
can break and cost you anywhere from $500 to $5000 and beyond.


All the best,


David

"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

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

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