Light Twin Operating Costs

[djf777]

Hi

I have been asked to number crunch a couple of possible types for an indigenous organisation based in the NT. At present they have easy access to SE and twin service's from various operators but want their own aircraft and have a good case to justify utilisation. It will be charter op's within 300nm but mostly within 150nm. Remote location will mean ferrying to a maintenance facility, but I can factor that in.

I am thinking either a B58 Baron or Chieftain. Can anyone help me out with an idea on average hourly operating costs of these aircraft? I am assuming 500hours per year.

Thanks
D...

[Jabawocky]

Think of a cost and then double it! :ooh:

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

dont qoute me on this but baron is about $300/hour

In ya dreams!

Dr :8

[Fonz121]

like I said, dont quote me on this. Fortunately I don't own one and therefore I don't have to work out things like that. Obviously closer to $400 is a more realistic price.

[MagicalLeoplurodon]

Baron (very roughly).

$200.00 - Aircraft long term dry lease
$240.00 - Fuel (120LPH @ ~ $2/L for 'remote' location)
$90.00 - Pilot (NO - IT DOESN'T ALL GO ON THE PILOTS POCKET - [IE. PAY ROLL TAX, WORK COVER BLAH BLAH BLAH)
$30.00 - Public Liability and other insurance (budget ~$15000PA)

Up to $560 per hour and there is still
MAINTENANCE to come
PROFIT to come
...and a couple of other things to come that I may not have thought of.

How much money do ya wanna set aside for maintenance?

How much money do ya wanna set aside for profit?

How much money do ya wanna set aside for uexpected things such as tyres popping, cracked cylinder heads, diversions due weather, flat battery 3 hours flying away yaddda yadda.

It is a mugs' game.

As Owen Stanley insinuated - I doubt it matters :D

[Fonz121]

We own our aircraft (baron), and it goes out for less then $600 an hour and we make a healthy profit.

[Jabawocky]

Post #4 X Post #7 = Your answer

J:ok:

Torres will eventually come along and confirm or deny the above!

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

We own our aircraft (baron), and it goes out for less then $600 an hour and we make a healthy profit

No you don't - you just think that you do!

All up it costs me about $300/hr to operate the Bonanza. A Baron is just two Bonanzas flying in close formation!

Dr :8

[MagicalLeoplurodon]

-4x4
-Boat
-High performance car or bike
-Aeroplane

"You'll never own one, it'll own you". - Dad

HAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA :}

[Jabawocky]

PB

A 182 at 160ish knots and the same payload?:rolleyes:

Yes, they are cheaper per hour but times the extra time etc etc.....the 160 knot machines make an awful lot of sense.

When you add up the WHOLE cost........ you will get a surprise!:eek:

I can justify to my wife how little it costs..... its like journo's, and poloticians, its what you dont say that costs!:sad:

[VH-XXX]

Fonz, you aren't comparing apples with apples. The example included $200 an hour dry hire, but you claim you own the aircraft so there's your explanation before you even start detailed cost comparisons.

Age usually = wisdom

Jabba the speed argument is always a good one and often has surprising results. Mate with an rv 7 is often telling me that based on his speeds his rv is more economical to run than his mates little jabiru.

[AussieNick]

anyone who has flown a P68 can tell you that will 6 bums on seats at average 70kg will = no fuel onboard. Hell we took one seat out from the partmarfia I did my MECIR in

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Why Bother when you can hire a 182/mooney for ~250/hour

Oh! Be still, my beating heart!

Dr :8

[baron_beeza]

like I said, dont quote me on this. Fortunately I don't own one and therefore I don't have to work out things like that. Obviously closer to $400 is a more realistic price.

So where did the answer of $300 come from then.

The guy was expecting an informed answer........
We all could work out in seconds that 2 x50 litres per hour =100.
It has to be $150 in fuel alone

I doubt $300 would cover the direct operating expense.
The engine/prop fund would have to be in the order of $50 per hour.

Indirect costs:
hangarage
Insurances
Bank loan
Calendar inspections
and it just goes on.......


I reckon a private owner would be paying around $300 per hour for a C172
and yes I am an owner also.
As an IA I get to see many low utilisation aircraft. I also see the size of some of the bills.
Aircraft ownership really is frightening stuff.

[Torres]

djf777. It is a bit of a worry if you don't know whether you need a Baron or a Chieftain as they are totally different classes of aircraft. You can't simply "assume 500 hours per year"; as annual utilisation impacts very significantly on operating cost, you must define the task, identify the most suitable aircraft type and then calculate accurate minimum annual utilisation.

Operating costs are calculated from two primary components:
Indirect Operating Costs: the costs you incur even if the aircraft does not fly: and
Direct Operating Costs: the costs directly related to flying the aircraft.

Indirect Operating Costs:

Debt servicing costs;
Hull depreciation;
Hull and passenger insurance;
Provision for exterior/interior refurbishment; (min $5,000 - $8,000 pa)
Pilot salary plus on-costs plus costs (IFR renewals etc);
Hangarage;


Direct Costs:

Fuel & oil;
Scheduled maintenance; (100 hourlies)
Provision for unscheduled maintenance;
Engine overhaul provision;
Prop overhaul provision;
Radio, Electrical & Instrument maintenance;
Maintenance parts, (scheduled and unscheduled);
ADs and other mandatory directed maintenance;
Landing and parking fees;
Enroute navigation fees.


Divide Indirect Operating costs by minimum projected annual utilisation and add to the total Direct Operating Costs.

You may also need to add regulatory and compliance costs: the cost and time to obtain an AOC, regulatory documentation etc. You also need a business plan, budget and cash flow forecast.

The above list is not exhaustive. It has been 20 years since I played with piston engine aircraft operating costs and I've probably missed a number of cost components. I am far more familiar with turbine aircraft costs.

Total operating costs vary significantly between operators and are greatly affected by annual utilisation; operation type; fleet size etc. It is ludicrous to think you can "guess" your specific operating costs, or come here to PPRuNe and expect pilots to give you any real idea of accurate operating costs. With due respects to those who post here, the last person I'd ask for operating cost advice would be young starry eyed CPLs who has never had the pain of ownership.

Only successful aircraft owners who know the pain of real costs - think I've owned seven aircraft and managed a fleet of almost seventy aircraft - can give you accurate operating costs. Ask Chimbu Chuck, Jabba, FTDK etc.

It has been twenty years since I had anything to do with Baron or Chieftain operating costs (and on the basis of maintenance costs, I was never a Piper supporter), don't know current fuel and maintenance costs, but I would be very surprised if accurate Baron total operating costs were less than $600 per hour and Chieftain total operating costs were less than $800 per hour, based on 500 hours per annum.

You then add a realistic profit margin.

In a remote location, a wild guess would be a Baron charter rate of $750 - $800 per hour or Chieftain charter rate of $1,000 - $1,050 per hour. Anything less and you're probably joining the world of Australian aviation dreamers!

(I have another very rough "rule of thumb": An aircraft should earn a minimum of at least it's capital cost each year.)

Over the years I've owned aircraft, cruising yachts and classic sports cars, the rest of my income I spent foolishly. I can assure you with aircraft, yachts and sports cars the two greatest days in your life will be the day you buy and the day you sell! :E

[djf777]

Thanks for the "informed" responses. The idea is to determine whether a twin is justifiable in the area given differing requirements. My preference is a smaller twin, such as a Baron or C310, but the boss wants something bigger such as a Chieftain. The Chieftain, if we went that way, would be for longer regular (not RPT) Darwin runs but the Baron would be for work closer to home w/- 150nm. If the operating costs for the Chieftain add up then this will be feasible given this organisation is already paying up big time for seats on an RPT service every week. So having a larger twin carrying staff in and out makes sense in this case.

I like the idea of a 12month Dry Lease to prove the business, so if you have any more realistic Dry Lease figures let me know.

Maybe in time two aircraft for different areas of operation will be the answer. We already have access to singles but need/want the IFR capability for the Wet season.

The boss hasn't yet decided which way to go and this is based on the number crunching, hence the reason for the question.

Hope this helps define my question a little more.
Thanks.

[the air up there]

Also dont forget to work out payload. No point getting a P68 and finding out that you can only carry 3 pax if the average load is 4-5. This will be reduced in the wet season also as a smart pilot doesn't just carry TEMPO fuel, a few en-route diversions in the wet around a CB's and you might find you get to your destination with only 30min holding.

[The Green Goblin]

The Chieftain, if we went that way, would be for longer regular (not RPT) Darwin runs but the Baron would be for work closer to home w/- 150nm

The Baron will get you and your passengers a lot further and faster than a dirty old Chieftain. With a load on the Chieftain will get you 165 minutes with full mains including reserves.

My only recommendation, and you can take this or leave it, is to forget the baron (far too expensive for what you get), and look into something along the lines of a P68 Partenavia.

Much better value for the same no. of bumbs on seats.

If this were the case there would be a lot of P68's in the charter realms.

A P68 is good for 135 knots, noisy as all hell and with max endurance will get 3 pax on board. A Baron will do 180 knots and carry 4 with max fuel a hell of a lot further.

300/hr to operate the bonanza?

Why Bother when you can hire a 182/mooney for ~250/hour, or a brand new 172 (with G1000) for ~ 180/hour??

It's ready when you want it at a moments notice which gives you flexibility. It's faster and can carry a greater load than a M201/C182 at a greater TAS.

Its like comparing a Hyandai to a Rolls Royce. It doesn't feel the same, sound the same, or give you the same satisfaction as a 520 spluttering to life then some time later at full song down a runway bound for the heavens.

[Section28- BE]

I can assure you with aircraft, yachts and sports cars the two greatest days in your life will be the day you buy and the day you sell!Ah- that old axiom that you hear from wise/r heads comes to mind- should it Fly, Float or Fornicate......................... RENT IT/ POWER BY THE HOUR the sucker :E:eek::suspect:......., unless there is a bloody good reason.

In the interests of pragmatism- Make sure the "reason", requirement/work/contract or whatever won't evaporate or move on after you have saddled the reason with the joys of Aircraft ownership and operation...., as pending the machine if the music stops there may or may not be a market (/alternate work) to dispose of it and offer a financially realistic exit strategy on the sunk costs.

I believe, there maybe/have been some operators 'apparently' enjoying trying to find alternative work at the moment to support shiny tubes that were acquired for a purpose that is not now the great hope it was once purported to be.........

The kicker being (as mentioned above, or as you say unless you Lease it initially) the joys and cost don't stop because you've had enough fun and want to leave it on the ground and hope the pain goes away...., though they can be moderated if you "own" them and don't need to use the brass.

Good luck and hope it all goes according to plan.
Off now...... hat, coat- door ;):cool:.
Rgds- S28

[aseanaero]

PlaneQuest (http://www.planequest.com/OperationCosts/op_cost_info.asp?id=29)

Fuel (GPH): 27.00
Fuel Costs/Gallon:3.65
Fuel Costs/Hour:108.18
Oil Costs per Hour:2.37
Maintenance Cost/Hour:61.90
Hourly Engine Reserve:33.94Prop
T/R Reserve 8.35
Total Variable Costs/Hour:214.74
Average Speed (MPH):200.74
Cost/SM:0.93
Annual Insurance 8,861.16
Annual Hangar/Tiedown:5,162.43
Training:4,012.18
Total Fixed Costs:17,934.68
Hours/Year:423.26
Fixed Cost/Hour:87.34
Total Variable & Fixed Costs/Year:141,168.75
Total Costs/Hour:302.07
Total Cost/SM:1.42


Operating costs for a B58 Baron , fuel costs need to be recalculated and these figures are US dollars.

For an aircraft flying 250 to 500 hrs a year 3 times the direct cost of fuel gives a good rule of thumb

[djf777]

Thanks for everyone's feedback. I'll go and sift through the info.

[Torres]

Aseanaero. I am very cautious of those on line operating costs as they tend to be "salesman's figures".

For example:
Hourly Engine Reserve: US$33.94 x 2,000 hrs TBO = US$67,880 for two IO520 or IO550 overhauls???? I don't think so - I'd be very surprised if a quality overhaul with new cylinders etc was less US$115,000 for two engines today?

Their maintenance costs, labour and parts, may be close on a new US$1 mill aircraft but are very low for an average 10,000 hour Australian airframe.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Total cost per hour of US$300 for a 58 Baron!

Where do I sign?

Dr :8

[aseanaero]

Aseanaero. I am very cautious of those on line operating costs as they tend to be "salesman's figures"


Agree, I'm not saying the US numbers are right but it's a guide and useful for comparing cost differences between different aircraft as a quick guide even if the numbers are low balled.

As I said before price out the fuel cost per hour (I don't know what avgas is per litre in Oz anymore) then times that by 3 and that's a good rule of thumb for operating cost for a mid utilisation operation.

As an example 30 US gph x 3.78 x A$2 (?) = $226.80 fuel

$226.80 (fuel) x 3 = A$680 per hour

The only way to do this properly is to do a spreadsheet and price out the major components and fixed costs locally and add a margin on for avionics and unscheduled maintenance.

Another factor is where the US$ is compared to the $A as most spares are priced in US$. This can really blow a hole in the budget when the A$ devalues against the US$ like it did late 2008.

ps. you guys are lucky you can still buy avgas in Oz , it has to be purchased by the drum here in Indo now and is between US$3 to $4 per litre when available. Anything that can be converted to mogas has been done and anything turbo , high compression / injected has been parked (and slowly being sold off) as they can't get fuel at remote locations without a lot of headaches. We should be delivering another C402C to Oz next month (1984 model TT 6,100hrs) , most piston twins here averaged 200 to 300 hrs a year utilisation so a lot of low time airframes but they need to be totally gone over due to erratic standards of maintenance, original radios and avionics and none of them have been hangared.

-

[bordeaux]

182 at 160 kts? Yeahhh.

[PA39]

here here Torres. No truer words were ever spoken!! and well done on the operating costs !! You are undoubtedly like me....stood back from various aircraft and thrown your wallet at it !!

[baron_beeza]

If the aircraft is to be maintained in the Territory, that will need to be factored in also.

The labour rate is much higher than figures commonly quoted. possibly even twice.

I would have thought the true rate would be along the lines of;
think of a figure and treble it.
I am sure that in the long term you will find that to be the most accurate.

All the operating costs mentioned will only increase...... and then the hidden extra expenditure just goes on and on.

high utilisation is the key, - and buying a good aircraft in the first place.
So many operations are doomed the minute the Ops manager or equiv buys the machine.
You need and independent engineering assessment. Yes, by a LAME.

And don't buy a cheap twin,..... ever.
I think everyone here knows how they work out.

Operating a fleet of one aircraft is never easy also. Sometimes the losses can be almost halved by adding an extra one.

All the best with it, I am sure we are all watching with interest.

[Arnold E]

I wonna buy any 182 that does 160Kts, thats nearly as fast as an rv7:E
I dont think so!!!

[Jabawocky]

Not Wrong Arnold......

I have to go LOP to get that slow, and so much so the engine almost quit's on me! :}

J

[kingtoad]

We're maintaining a C414A here at the moment. Each 100 hrly is working out at about $10K for scheduled and unscheduled maintenance over the past 2 years and 1000 odd hours. (not including engine & prop o'hauls of course - no SIDs either). I don't think a PA31-350 would be that different maintenance cost wise. There have been a few expensive "in between" items (starter adapter, fuel px transducer, hyd px switch etc). So I'd allow about another $2K per 100 hours for more unscheduled maintenance.

I hope this helps with your number crunching.

[baron_beeza]

Kingtoad..
Those costs are more in keeping with what I am seeing in the hangar also.

As you said it does not include SID's or similar.
It is what I would expecting the bill to be for an average routine 100 hrly though.

That is up to about $100 per hour to your maintenance provider.... a fair figure.

[Jabawocky]

So there you go, Maintenance and engine/prop overhaul allowance has hit $180 per hour, fuel will be $180 and $240 per hour, and we have yet to hit the fixed cost of insurance and the cost of financing the thing.....so assume 500 hours a year, what do ya reckon ? allow another $90/hr absolute minimum.

So here we are at $500+/ hr and we have not looked outside the obvious. Plenty more fees and nav charges and.........and........

Will be $600 before you know it and thats without any radio work, new bits, heck even your Jepps charts etc.

Anybody want to by a new plane.....nice inetrior new everything.....even faster thana FTDK (even if he is in denial).......I am not sure woning one is such fun now....:ooh:

Tail Wheel .... shut this thread before someone hurts themselves :ouch:

[Joker 10]

And on top of all that you have to fund ADSB another $100 an hour

[Jabawocky]

.......were not real good with maths and business accounting were we:hmm:

[bushy]

I noticed one post which said the P68 cruised at 135 knots. The ones I flew for several years cruised at 155 knots. The manual figure is 157 knots. I also calculated that they could legally fly six pax from Alice Springs to Ayers rock, provided a couple of them were small women and an extra seatbelt was fitted in the rear. We never did it though.

That poster was not the only one to have limited knowledge about the P68.

I also had a CASA FOI phone me when I was putting a p68 on our AOC. He told me the p68 "would only get 120 knots if it was going down hill" and I should modify the performance figures I had submitted. I advised him that both the makers manual and my own experience confirmed the figures I had submitted. The figures remained the same.

The P68 is a much maligned aircraft that has six seats, cruises at 155 knots burning 77 litres per hour and can go anywhere a 206 can go. It's not a King Air, but it's a very useful aircraft.

[bushy]

Here we go again. Rubbery rules.

[Howard Hughes]

A Baron is just two Bonanzas flying in close formation!

Or half a Kingair...;)

[The Green Goblin]

I noticed one post which said the P68 cruised at 135 knots. The ones I flew for several years cruised at 155 knots. The manual figure is 157 knots.

You must have a pretty straight one then with the wheel fairings still attached!

The P68 is a much maligned aircraft that has six seats, cruises at 155 knots burning 77 litres per hour and can go anywhere a 206 can go. It's not a King Air, but it's a very useful aircraft.

Punters hate them, the cockpit is hot as hell on the ground with no airflow and parts are expensive.

Did I mention they are bloody noisy having a donk next to your ear? The noise an IO-360 makes is not even a nice one.

Gimmi a 206/210 anyday!

[AussieNick]

bushy, the one we used to fly was planned at 140kt and 80lph. It did have a hard life though, was an old C model from memory.

GG, i'll agree with you about them been hot as hell on the ground, but it'll always hold a special place in my heart as the first twin i was endorsed on

[Arnold E]

Why would you fly a slow twin with six bums when there is a 210 available?:E

[Checkboard]

... for the twin time! :ok:

[bushy]

Maybe that's why some of them fly slowly.

[Jabawocky]

especially if its OPM you are burning!

[djf777]

So... in the end; three times the fuel cost is a pretty good approximate of the operating cost then! It is close to what the two singles I currently fly are worth and we're paying $2 - 2.50/L right now.

[baron_beeza]

After all these replies, and we have come back to this ...... a guess, - an approximation.

Okay, for an older aircraft operating in the territory, - I am sure you will be losing at that. And big time.

To really cover your costs you need to have the spreadsheet as the guys here have suggested.

The maintainers won't tolerate an operator trying to fly an aircraft on an unrealistic budget for too long. The industry is very small and whispers of 'unpaid bills' spread very quickly.

Many hangars will refuse to accept a job if they suspect there may be money issues, or if the owner tries to dictate maintenance standards.

You really do need to do your homework...... I think you can see the range of answers you get when you ask a bunch of wannabes. Don't forget that a few of the guys here have never owned an aircraft.

If you end up buying a POS aircraft, and/or, employ a pilot with no idea how to operate one............ the costs could be crippling..
How do you factor that into your calculations and end up with a figure that looks half reasonable ?

[aseanaero]

three times the fuel cost is a pretty good approximate of the operating cost then!

As a rule of thumb it works pretty well on piston engined aircraft

To work out a ball park fuel consumption figure per hour I divide engine horsepower by 20

[chiefyah]

So who are you working for now????

[tail wheel]

To work out a ball park fuel consumption figure per hour I divide engine horsepower by 20

In US gallons - not liters! :=

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

To work out a ball park fuel consumption figure per hour I divide engine horsepower by 20

285 hp/20 = 14.2 US gal = 54 L/hr

Bit low for the Bo - but close!

I flight plan 60 L/hr and generally average about 55 L/hr depending on the length of the flight.

Dr :8

[aseanaero]

In US gallons - not liters!

Sorry Tailwheel , I'll quote the units in future :ok:

[CitationJet]

The rule of thumb I learned and have used is HP/20 = Imperial Gallons/hr

[aseanaero]

Hi Citation,

I didn't learn it from anyone , I figured it out myself looking at a few flight manuals that I'd collected when I was starting to learn to fly and I worked it out in US gallons as a rough check for flight planning to make sure I hadn't screwed up when jumping from different aircraft types.

One type of aircraft this HP/20 rule doesn't work too well on is the older supercharged (rather than turbo) engines , they're about 20% more thristy.

Your imperial gallons would give a better margin for taxi , climb etc. :ok:

[Wanderin_dave]

I'm a youngster, so for the young'ns out there here's my rule of thumb:

HP/5= L/Hr

eg. For a PA-32-300

300/5 = 60

Works a treat.

[pill]

At last, someone has mentioned a suitable aircraft for this guy. A cherokee 6. Or let me guess, your clients, the ones our taxs fund require two engines. I can get hold of an old toyota troop carrier for them.

[the air up there]

Cherokee 6 is a good aircraft, if he is operating from long runways with heaps of clearway because they dont perform as well as the 200 cessna's in that respect. If he is operating into and out of strips of 1000m, stick to a 206 or even a 210.

If the clients require a twin, you cant beat a 310 or a Baron. If they wanna fill 5 seats to go a long way I just add a diversion for fuel to the cost.:ok:

[bushy]

You will find that the 206 and pa32 are similar despite what the sales people tell you.

[The Green Goblin]

You will find that the 206 and pa32 are similar despite what the sales people tell you.

Maybe so, but a high wing aircraft as a utility beats the pants off a low wing especially on bush strips.

I know what I'd rather fly!






A beechcraft :E

[the air up there]

You will find that the 206 and pa32 are similar despite what the sales people tell you.

hmmm, ive seen the books. And Ive seen a half loaded cherokee 6 take the same RWY and shallower climb gradient than a MTOW 206. I know what I'd rather fly.

[Arnold E]

Me too, A 210:ok:

[the air up there]

210's good for 100nm plus flights. But for shorter hops in and out of dirts strips consistently, a 206 carries the load better. Plus in the wet, don't have to worry about mud a stuff getting into the gear wells and messing with switches and gear locks. Unless you like washing your aircraft every day.

There's not much that can go wrong with a 206. And if you look around and get lucky, you might find a quick one. I've seen a couple that stand up well against a 210 (albeit a slowish 210).

[djf777]

Last time I looked C206, C210 and Cherokee 6 were all singles.

What about IFR passenger charter, over water flights without the life jacket or coast hugging hassles...and of course there's the Wet Season without wondering if you'll get home that night?? I'm over scud runs at 500 ft agl...but most importantly, the need for the operation being considered, is for a twin!! :ugh:

[the air up there]

djf777, yes there was some thread drift there, and I'm aware of it and somewhat agree with all you have said. My point was that in my opinion and experience of ops in remote NT, the 206 or 210 was better than a cherokee 6.

Back to the original question, cross hire a 310 or a baron if you really want a twin. Everyone else uses them and if you need a chieftain or a 400 series cessna, then you will soon know after 8-12months of operation. So get one then.

By cross hiring you are taking a large initial cash outlay out of the equation. Then there are only a couple of other costs you need to factor in eg, fuel, wages, insurance etc.