Aircraft Owner Operating Costs?

[ClearedTakeOff]

Im currently hiring aircraft from various clubs and schools in the Midlands, UK, and am looking for cheaper ways of getting my hours to the requirement for the CPL.

There is a possibility of buying an aircraft (most likely a C172 or PA28), keeping it for a couple of years whilst I do my hour building and then flogging it when Im done with it. Ive never owned before and am looking for any guidance before taking the plunge.

What costs should I factor in on top of buying the a/c outright? Does anybody have a list of recent costs of ownership, say for the last couple of years, that would help to estimate what outlay I should plan for (and whether its actually cost-beneficial for me to buy instead of rent)?

Thanks!

[sharpend]

This is far too complex to answer from my point of view as all circumstances are different. My present outlay has been £22.5K purchase, £70K refurbish. Things to take into account:

1. Purchase price
2. Insurance
3. Basic servicing costs
4. Hourly running costs.
5. Admin fees: Clubs, CAA etc.
6. Annual costs (Permit of C of A), radios, fatigue meter (if you have one) etc.
7. Hangarage or parking.
8. Landing fees.

etc etc

It all depends of what you have, what you do with it etc. Have a look at other threads on this forum. Have a word with the LAA.

Incidently, my basic costs (not incl fixed) are in excess of £200 per hr. As they say, if it floats, flies or f**ks, then rent it!

[Capt Kremmen]

Clearedtakeoff

I've been down both routes. Go for LAA Permit. Don't go for EASA certification and all the hideous expense unless money is no object and even then I'd still plump for LAA Permit,

With two others I run a two seat STOL a/c at an hourly cost all in of about £45 -50 pounds per hour inc. fuel. We are on an outside tiedown. Fuel burn about 13 liters per hour at cruise of 80kts.

You can buy a Permit a/c for as little as 12K or less. Budget for 15 - 20K and you'll get a much wider choice.

[TheOddOne]

Assume a C172 and that you'll get back your purchase price less engine depreciation when you sell it.

Also assume you do 100 hours a year (quite a lot if you're also in full-time employment with a family)

Hangarage, an annual and 2 x 50 hour checks, insurance and engine depreciation are the thick end of £9k, that's £90 per hour. fuel in a C172 is 30 lit an hour, that's £60.

That's £150 an hour. Most folk struggle to do 50 hours a year, that's £180 plus fuel or £240 per hour. As you say, if it flies, floats......

The Odd One

[150 Driver]

It's the unexpected costs that will get you.

e.g. If a mag drops out on a hired plane on power checks you taxy back, shut it down and report to the owner. If you own it you reach for the already depleted chequebook...

Having said that, with a busy life I find that owning makes me find time to fly - after all, it is costing me money to sit there. I'm not sure I'd still be flying if I had gone down the hire route.

For me it was purchase £12k but then around £50k shortly thereafter on refurbishing, unexpected engine rebuild, incompetent mechanic taking it apart and unable to put back together (I kid you not)

[Mark 1]

The cheapest way of getting good availability and minimising cost is with a group-owned syndicate. A permit aircraft will cut the costs even further especially if you're willing to use your own time with things like 50 hour checks.

That way you share the cost of hangarage, insurance, annual inspections etc which form a large chunk of overall operating costs.

Have a check on the notice boards at local airfields and ask around. There are often a lot of shares going that you don't see advertised elsewhere.

[ChickenHouse]

Calculating the TCO is not that easy done, as you have to decide how to treat certain things in calculation. For example, you could build surplus funds for OH every month, or you depreciate and distribute the purchase price over a certain period. In first case you have the funds saved when OH comes, in second case a plane with book value zero.

Comparing charter with own plane is also not that easy, as it is not 1:1 match. A charter plane is operated commercially with no on condition parts, a thing you most probably will do when operating your own plane. Assume cost savings is not the big issue for an own plane, longterm cost differences are not that tremendous.

The big decision is: do you WANT your own plane? This is feeling and weighting the balance between always availability and labor to spend as well. If you are willing to spent hours caring for the plane, buy one. If you are bored from caring, don't.

From calculation the crucial point is how many hours a years are you going to fly? If you do 50h I wouldn't recommend, 100h is fine, more an own plane plays it's availability card.

I was wondering about the total costs and started with an excel sheet since I bought my current plane.

[Flyingmac]

If your location is still N Yorkshire then you don't have to look far for a 172 at £70 per tacho hr or an Archer at £80 per tacho hr. No initial outlay. No hangarage, maintenance costs or home landing fees. £65 per month standing charge covers both aircraft.

If you are hour building, that (tacho) cost can constitute a significant saving.
Wiping out the monthly in short order.

There's also the Day VFR requirement with a Permit aircraft which, with our weather, you might find limiting. I do.

[JW411]

Put very simply:

I bought a PA-28 for £42,000.

I sold it seven years later for £42,000.

During those seven years I spent another £42,000.

[funfly]

Allow between £7,000 and £10,000 a year to run it.
That will include hangerage, T/O and Landing fees at the airfield you keep it, club membership, fuel, insurance and small maintenance jobs.
Not all are profitable (I lost £20,000 in three years when I sold my last one), but I agree that best purchase is Cessna or PA which will keep value.
Repair to my prop at one time came to £7,000.
That's 10 years ago.

[Pirke]

Flying on a Rotax on mogas will allow to offset the deprecation cost of a newer airplane, compared to running on avgas.

With 100 hours/year @ 20 liters/hour for 2 euro/liter, or 30 liters/hours for 3 euro/liter, that's a saving of 5000 euro/year on fuel. You get a different type of aircraft, but if money is a concern, a small rotax 912 aircraft can keep the running costs down. If you buy for 50k euro, and fly for 10 years, the fuel savings paid for the aircraft. Anything you get for it when selling is then pure profit.

Many run mogas as well on the lyco/conti engines, but there's always the increased risk of vapor locks. The STCs all specify a temp and alt limit.


So assuming a 50k purchase price for a fairly modern 2 seater rotax, 20 liters/hour mogas at 2 euro, and 100 hours, the cost picture will be something like:

variable cost:
fuel: 4k
engine fund: 2k

fixed cost:
hangar: between 0 and 5k (depending on location), say 2k
maintenance: 3k (everything except engine)
insurance: 2k
cost of capital 5% of 50k = 2.5k

So that's about 6k + 9.5k = 15.5k/year, or 155 euro/hour

Renting is cheaper, but now you're the owner (with all benefits + risks).

When flying more than 100 hours it's financially more wise to own, and when flying less you really have to want to have your own plane, because renting will be a lot cheaper. At 50 hours/year you pay 250 euro/hour. At 150 hours/year you pay 123 euro/hour.

Deprecation is not taken into account here...

[ClearedTakeOff]

Can you actually use a Permit LAA for hour building though? Im not sure you can.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Can you actually use a Permit LAA for hour building though? Im not sure you can.

You can - it's just private flying at the end of the day and hours are hours.

G

[Steevo25]

I am not paying anywhere near those costs for an LAA permit aircraft.


I have a 2-seater and do around 50 hours per annum. My breakdown of costs are as follows:


Purchase price £20k (the price seems to stay around that mark so likely to get £18k-£20k when I eventually want to sell).


Site Fees (landing fees included) are £95 per month.
Insurance £735 per annum which is third party, passenger and hull.


I use 13litres of Mogas per hour and a complete engine overhaul will cost £2.5k (Jabiru Engine). Engine TBO is 1000 hours. I have 500 hours to go.


My permit renewal each year costs £270 (LAA fees and inspector).


The 50 hour service (I do myself) costs £89 in materials.


Yes, there could be unexpected bills of which I did have one of 4 new cylinder heads and that was £1100 for parts (fitted by myself).


An LAA permit aircraft can be used for hour building.


So basically my annual cost based on 50 hours with no unexpected bills are £2790. That's including a £5 per hour engine fund (I have 500 hours left and it will cost £2.5k when I need a complete overhaul).


If I was to hire the club Cessna then it would cost me £5600 per annum to do the same number of hours and I wouldn't have the flexibility I have now.


Obviously unexpected bills can come but the worst case scenario would be a new engine which can be had for around £6k. Everything else is fairly cheap to maintain.

[Pirke]

MLA hours don't count

[Capt Kremmen]

What are MLA hours ?

Someone made the point about limitations of use on Permit a/c.

Not for much longer. We expect to leave VFR/daytime behind and get approval for night/IFR very shortly.


Pirke

Our per hour costs are one third of those you quote

[A and C]

If you think an LAA aircraft cost one third of a C of A aircraft that will fly the same mission you have a screw loose, it will be cheaper but not by two thirds.

[Pirke]

MLA = microlight airplane



How can the hourly rate be 1/3 of my previous calculation?

Rotax 912, 20 liters/hour at 2 euro/liter. Those are the actual prices here at the moment. This comes down to 40 euro/hour for fuel. If you fly slow, you can manage 15 liters/hour, saving another 10 euro/hour, but that's about it...

Engine fund: 20k engine / 1500 hours = 13.33 euro/hour. You can skip on the engine fund, but one way or another you're gonna pay 20k for a new engine after 1500 hours.


Add the yearly fixed costs on top of that, divided by amount of hours you fly. That's the real hourly rate compared to renting.

So 9.5k yearly divided by 100 hours = 95 euro/hour for the fixed costs, plus the 55 euro/hour for the variable cost = a total of 150 euro / hour.

The fixed cost can be higher or lower depending on hangar fees. Tiedown is cheap, but will require some extra maintenance costs. On popular fields the hangar prices may be as much as 500 euro/month.


Of course, if you calculate a fixed monthly fee, then you can exclude the fixed costs from the hourly rate. But in the end, the real hourly rate is "variable cost + (fixed cost / number of hours flown)".

[Rod1]

"If you think an LAA aircraft cost one third of a C of A aircraft that will fly the same mission you have a screw loose, it will be cheaper but not by two thirds. "

If the mission is hour building I agree you do have a screw loose if you only save 2/3, you could save far more than that if you fly a single seater.

You can run a traditional LAA single seat for around £2.5k per year. Cost price around £8k, value after two years, £8k

You can run a Rotax powered machine for £4k a year for 75 hours all in costs - I have been doing something similar for the last 8 years. If you go for a Europa you would pay about £25k, value after two years, £25k

Equivalent for C of A numbers anyone?

Rod1

[Capt Kremmen]

A & C

If you're going to debate on an open forum, don't be abusive ! All my screws are greased and wire locked, so no problem there.

The going rate for hiring a club single seems to be anywhere from £150 - 200 per hour.

I can hardly even guess at a rate for group owned singles of the same type as a club. It depends naturally on how many in the group and where you're based but, I imagine a group member will pay at least about £120 the a/c being a PA28/C172 or suchlike.

I fly a Permit STOL a/c which does everything that the a/c mentioned above do but, a little slower. The costs are shared three ways. The costs include fuel (mogas) Tiedown, insurance, maintenance, Permit renewal, engine fund, fuel costs by car to and from the airfield (120 mile round trip).

Without giving you chapter and verse on the breakdown of costs - I can, nothing is hidden, I fly for about £50 per hour. That's it.

And that is why there is a steady migration from certified a/c to Permit.

[Rod1]

“How can the hourly rate be 1/3 of my previous calculation?”

Well lets look at some real uk numbers against yours;

You are paying £1.60 pl for fuel, I am paying £1.27 (based on today's prices)

You are burning 20lph on an std 912 80ph Rotax – that is mad. The Book figure for a 912 ULS 100hp is 18.5lph, my engine has averaged 17.8L over the last 300h.

1500 hours you are having a laugh – most Rotax engines get north of 2500h many to 3500 – no restriction on running on condition in the UK under the LAA. For hour building you will not have a significant impact on second hand value over a few years so engine fund is zero.

“plus the 55 euro/hour” really – my maintenance cost is running at an average of £472 per year all in (over 8 years).

“The fixed cost can be higher or lower depending on hangar fees”. - I pay £1k per year for my own hanger.

I think you will find the average UK LAA owner is paying much less than you are.

Rod1

[Capt Kremmen]

For the sake of comparison. Throttled back to 4700/4800 in the cruise my 80hp guzzles 13 liters per hour average.

Throw away your outdated spamcans. Bring a smile to your bank managers face. Join the LAA !

[maxred]

For the sake of comparison. Throttled back to 4700/4800 in the cruise my 80hp guzzles 13 liters per hour average.

Throw away your outdated spamcans. Bring a smile to your bank managers face. Join the LAA !

Well if you want to go everywhere at 40mph, cannot take off when it's windy, cannot take off when the temp hits 20degrees due thermal activity, feel free.....

Oh, and in fairness, when not flying, it cuts your grass, and will dry your hair.

That should make the bank manager smile. Makes me:p

[Mariner9]

My err "hairdryer" will do 130kts at 18 litres/hour, has landed in a 35kt crosswind, and has flown in the Atlas mountains with an OAT of 42C. If you flew in it Maxred, you would certainly be smiling :ok:

[tecman]

And my all-metal EASA certified 2-place, Rotax powered, hairdryer manages 105-110 kt on 16 lph; gives me about 6 hours endurance; has a demonstrated cross-wind (POH figure) of 22kt; has flown from NZ to Australia and around Australia; and spends much of its life operating above 35C here in WA. LSAs and their relatives are not for every mission but a few actual facts help in making a fair comparison with more traditional alternatives.

[S-Works]

Oooh, I do love the Lycosaurus verse permit hot ship discussions. As an LAA coach I have flown rather a lot of the LSA types and have yet to see one perform in the combinations of speed and fuel flows described by many owners. It tends to be one or the other.

Our training base operates a couple of PS28 LSA mind they have not lived up to expectations on pretty much anything. They are certainly very Gucci and modern But built from tissue paper due to the need to keep them light from both a certification standpoint and from the lack of power to push them along.

Notwithstanding this, I would probably buy one as personal run about if and when they get IFR approval. Just not a good sharoplane or trainer.

[ChickenHouse]

For the now typical sunshine sunday traffic pattern hopper with occasional 15min flights to the next coffee field a LSA is totally sufficient. Even long flights are possible - if you have a friend flying alongside with a certified plane taking all the luggage ... What keeps me from these light variants is: too light for me, not sufficient range, restrictions everywhere (the most fields I fly into are not allowed for the little ones).

When I talk to the fellow pilots and compare the figures, the only big difference is: their flying material is 40-50 year younger and they spend about 10-15% less money TCO per flight hour - unless like one of them flying about 800 hours a year in a Tecnam, but that is another story -> I keep my old Cessna.

[Pirke]

I'm not sure about the Dutch regulations of running a permit Rotax on condition. Certified Rotax engines are not allowed to run on condition here, I assumed that would also hold for permit, but assumptions are the mother of all f*ck ups, so I could be wrong on that one :)

I don't own an aircraft yet, I'm still looking for one in a good state that matches my needs and budget. The fuel prices are higher in The Netherlands than almost everywhere else. Hangar fees also. The other costs (including maintenance) were based on information from many different people. Note that I don't have the time or skill to do all my own maintenance due to a busy job and family, so that'll increase the maintenance bill compared to your £500.

What if my assumption is correct and I can't run a permit Rotax on condition, but it's allowed in the UK. Could I keep a permit plane on G registry, and do maintenance here (probably mostly by a part M and some other letters I can't remember (F/G/?) who can sign off stuff). Or would I need to visit the UK every year for that?

[tecman]

Bose, I have no interest in fudging the figures - I fly both the P2002JF (which is a certified version of an LSA) and a range of GA aircraft regularly. The figures I've given are those I see routinely.

LSAs are not for every mission but I think the point being made by some posters is that if there's a discussion going, we can at least get the facts right.

The training experience I see varies widely: one school I know of here has been using P2002s for several years without incident. Another has had problems with Sportstars and nosewheels. I hesitate to draw any generalizations as the statistics are small. But there's a general recognition that GA pilots in LSAs are accident prone in the familiarization stages. I could elaborate but if you fly LSAs, you are probably quite aware of the traps.

By the way, I see the P2002JF is now NVFR approved but, frankly, I wouldn't regard any LSA as a great instrument platform. That said, I enjoy having a full panel in my own aircraft - habit I guess.

You can't have it both ways on the power/weight criticism: yes, they are leanly built but the typical 100 hp Rotax gives a sizeable performance gain over a similar power in a heavier C152 etc. That's noticable in cruise but, in my case, the really big difference is the climb performance in elevated ambient temperatures.

[sharpend]

See my earlier post. I looked at all the new 'plastic' ultralights from Aquila to SportsStar. Though they are fun the fly they don't actually do much for me. I need an aeroplane to tour, IFR, to play with and for aerobatics. It also has to be special.

So I bought a Bulldog. Rugged, capable, fun, only downside is that it is not cheap to run! 40 litres per hour at 100 kts! Spares too are not always easy to find.

But horses for courses. I love it!

[Rod1]

“For the now typical sunshine sunday traffic pattern hopper with occasional 15min flights to the next coffee field a LSA is totally sufficient. Even long flights are possible - if you have a friend flying alongside with a certified plane taking all the luggage “

Odd – I just got back from a week touring France (visiting the RSA etc) 2 up with bags no problem. Been doing it for years. Generally fly 2 hour legs at around 130kn, but could extend that out to over 3 hours with reserves if required.


“I'm not sure about the Dutch regulations of running a permit Rotax on condition. Certified Rotax engines are not allowed to run on condition here, I assumed that would also hold for permit, but assumptions are the mother of all f*ck ups, so I could be wrong on that one.”

Under LAA rules you are.

“I don't own an aircraft yet,”

I would recommend you look for a share and learn the ropes before going it alone.

“What if my assumption is correct and I can't run a permit Rotax on condition, but it's allowed in the UK. Could I keep a permit plane on G registry, and do maintenance here (probably mostly by a part M and some other letters I can't remember (F/G/?) who can sign off stuff). Or would I need to visit the UK every year for that? “

Almost certainly not allowed to do this. TBO on Rotax 912 / 912s etc is 2000h.

If anybody in interested in real numbers you will notice that Mariner9 and I are quoting similar numbers. We have different aircraft but the same engine and similar performance. Both our actual aircraft have also been flight tested by Flyer and have appeared in the mag;)

Rod1

[ChickenHouse]

As usual, much talking, few real numbers.
What about a short survey to collect figures?

Such as:
Aircraft (Type) # figures drawn from x hours total # flight hours per year # operational cost per hour (only direct related to flying) # total cost per hour (including replacements & upgrades) # depreciation purchase price over x years # bought new or used # registered


C172 MOGAS # 250h TCO # 126h p.a. # 117 EUR/h # 166 EUR/h # 10y # used # D-E reg

[Rod1]

ChickenHouse - you have come onto the forum and posted that an entire class of aircraft cannot be used for long distance touring without a backup aircraft. I built my aircraft specifically to do long distance touring and have been doing it and posting about it for most of the last decade. Many other posters on this thread have been doing the same. I have zero interest in criticising your 172 - I am sure it is the panicle of light aircraft design, and does everything you want, but please give some of us some credit for actually owning and operating the aircraft you criticise.

Rod1

[Steevo25]

I cannot understand why there is an argument between owning a permit or CofA aircraft. As far as I see it, they do indentical things. I fly a Cessna 152 CofA and own a Jabiru. I can do identical things in both. The Jabiru is a bit more weight limited than the Cessna but for my purposes there is nothing I cannot do in the Jabiru that I can do in the Cessna.


The Cessna carries me at around 85-90kts and the Jabiru carries me between 90-95kts. My aircraft has been from the UK to Spain and back and has carried a passenger and luggage flying 3 hours without being overweight. The Cessna uses about 24litres of avgas per hour and the Jabiru 13litres of mogas per hour. The Cessna costs me around £112 per hour to rent and the Jabiru costs me around £55 per hour to own and fly. I have no wish to fly IMC or at Night so for me it is purely down to costs.


Without a doubt, a permit aircraft has a significant cost reduction over a CofA aircraft but if your mission is just to go from A to B (no matter what the distance) then there is really no difference between the two other than cost.


Obviously, if you want to have 4 or more seats then your choice of permit is very limited and , at the moment, if you need to fly IMC or at Night then permit is ruled out.


But I really don't see an argument other than that. There are many very capable permit aircrafts out there that, in a lot of cases, can out perform their CofA counterparts.

[Heston]

Does anybody else find the use of the word "mission" in connection with flying as a leisure pursuit a bit, well... ...pretentious?


Can't we just say "what I want it to do" or something like that?


Apology 1: Steevo25 I'm not singling you out particularly :)
Apology 2: I'm feeling grumpy cos the weather is pants and I haven't flown for a few days

[tecman]

Our self-deprecation eludes you, Heston :). I feel your pain and hope the grumpiness passes.

[Steevo25]

It's because 'What I want it to do' is more typing than 'mission'.

[tecman]

Following Rod's comment, I'd add that not all of us want to fly something that handles a bit like a white van. I've owned or co-owned a number of aircraft over the years, including a much-loved C172. But following a recent 172 touring mission...err..discretionary outing..I realized that I'd never go down that ownership path again - the smaller, more responsive, aircraft is just too much fun. The trade will be different for each individual and their needs, but obviously a number of us are quite deliberately choosing the new generation aircraft.

[Capt Kremmen]

Maxred

My very pretty (to my eye) lawnmower come hairdryer, cruises at 80kts, fuel burn (mogas) up to 15liters per hour, will take off and land on what seems like half a postage stamp, carries 45lb of luggage, stowed with ease, stores 90 liters of fuel - enough for 6 hours to empty, has a crosswind limit of 24kts, has no discernible stall and is stressed to +6 -4.

I've flown almost forty different types so have a little experience of what different a/c have to offer. That's why I fly Permit.

All of this is probably why my Bank manager seems always pleased to see me.

Always have a look at what the 'opposition' have to offer.

[Silvaire1]

My very pretty (to my eye) lawnmower come hairdryer, cruises at 80kts, fuel burn (mogas) up to 15liters per hour, will take off and land on what seems like half a postage stamp, carries 45lb of luggage, stowed with ease, stores 90 liters of fuel - enough for 6 hours to empty, has a crosswind limit of 24kts, has no discernible stall and is stressed to +6 -4.

Other than the "no discernible stall" part, which is perhaps what creates the slightly lower cruise speed, that's a good description of a 1946 Luscombe 8A with wing tanks, designed over 75 years ago and a certified aircraft.

The current distinctions between aircraft regulatory categories are just that... In reality they are all aircraft, designed to do different things and with different priorities, often with good reason. The real issue is the ridiculous regulatory and tax framework for European/UK aircraft that creates paranoia, divides and thereby conquers. I think the energy spent bickering like teenagers over the merits of their favorite pop groups would be better spent confronting the real problem.

[Pirke]

LAA permits can be bought in many different price categories.

What would be your recommendation then for a budget of 20k/40k/60k euro?

[Rod1]

"What would be your recommendation then for a budget of 20k/40k/60k euro? "

That is a very hard question because I for one have no idea which aircraft are approved in your area.

Rod1

[Capt Kremmen]

Silvaire1

With respect, you've misunderstood the debate. It isn't a question of 'Yah boo' mine's bigger than yours or, words to that effect, it is about COST.

Those of us who fly Permit have all, for the most part, also flown certified a/c. Because we've paid the bills, we all understand and appreciate the quite staggering cost divide.

I'm familiar with the cost of flying in certified a/c be it a group share or club hire. I know that many who go this route struggle to fly sufficient hours as to maintain a satisfactory and SAFE degree of currency.

And that really is the nub of the argument. I do not claim that my present a/c will outperform the club Archer I used to hire or the T67 Slingsby group a/c of former acquaintance. What it will do, which is of major importance, is keep my a/c handling skills sharp and on the ball because I fly more cheaply and therefore more often.

I'm quietly amazed and at a loss to explain why it is that more pilot/owners don't go down the Permit route. One explanation could be that many haven't heard of Permit a/c and, when they do, assume it is some esoteric and arcane aspect of GA that requires special aptitudes.


Pirke

If you PM your postal address, I'll mail you a couple of back copies of the LAA magazine. The back pages feature classified ads which will add to your information.

[Pirke]

PM sent, thanks


For me it was very much the unfamiliarity. After getting a PPL on a C152 and C172 those were obvious the first choice. Flying an experimental was not safe, they are not certified. It's all in the name really.

[Rod1]

Pirke - Monday I will do some digging and see if I can find out more about the situation in the Netherlands.

Rod1

[Genghis the Engineer]

PM sent, thanks


For me it was very much the unfamiliarity. After getting a PPL on a C152 and C172 those were obvious the first choice. Flying an experimental was not safe, they are not certified. It's all in the name really.

You are missing a lot of far more interesting aeroplanes.

Look at the UK and Germany primarily if you are that concerned - both have robust "sub-ICAO" airworthiness systems for microlights and homebuilts. Not called experimental.

If in your country there is a type that is approved in the UK or Germany, and you can reasonably verify that it's in a similar build standard to those countries, you can be pretty comfortable.

BUT, it won't necessarily fly like a C172 (that's generally regarded as a Good Thing), so to keep it safe, get some instruction on it from an instructor who properly understands the aeroplane.

G

[maxred]

CK, I was having a bit of a laugh, and in a sense getting the debate going. Obviously it succeeded.

Look, horses for courses. I have the luxury of being able to fly an L4 Cub, permit, my Bonanza, on N reg, because frankly, no one in CAA land could maintain it properly, and I fly a number of other mixed types, between permit and CofA.

The OP questioned ownership costs, and the old, how long is a piece of string, comes in. The mission question, is a correct question, because, I missed LAA permit type flying, when I flew larger, more complex types. Hence, my Cub flying, getting back to strip flying, and bimbling about. Any type of flying has to be good, and if the individual gets out of it, what his current requirement is, then great. If it costs 2 bob an hour, super, if it costs 500.00 quid an hour, then so be it.

My Bonanza makes no sense financially. I realize that. But so what. I love it. If it were to go tomorrow, and I was left flying the Cub, great. I have saved myself some dough, but I would miss flying it.

Getting into flying has to be budget led, but some great flying can be had, whether LAA, or Cof A.

Anyway, I lost my hair years ago, so the LAA types would be of no use to me....

[Pirke]

Well, I almost bought a used Diamond DA20 before I really started thinking about permit aircraft as well, but it turned out to need too much maintenance directly after purchasing, so it got above my budget and the deal was off. And currently I'm renting a SportStar RTC, which is also fun to fly.

For a purchase I like the running cost perspective of a Rotax 912. These planes have a good enough performance for me, and I can rent a 4 seater when necessary. When I took lessons in a C172 it was fun to take my wife along when going on an international navigation flight, but now i don't need the 3rd seat for that anymore :) And in the meantime I've come to prefer the low wing planes for their visibility in a turn. I do find it more of a hassle to climb in/out of, but as my wife put it nicely: "what do you do more often: climb in/out of it, or make turns with it?" Gotta love such a woman! :)

So currently I'm open for any tri-gear bubble canopy low wing 2 seater with a 912 up front and a stick between my legs, and there are many aircraft that fit this description. And the cheaper to buy, the better. Why spend 60k euro if 30k also brings me pleasure in the air? I don't need a glass cockpit, I can buy a tablet for the ease of navigation. All steam gauges is fine. I do want a 8.33 radio and mode S transponder, and a roomy cockpit with good useful load in the 250kg area. I don't need 130kts, 90 will do fine for me. Anything more than this package would simply be a bonus.

But it seems like I'm hijacking this thread, although it is kind off on topic for this being a cost of ownership thread. Value for money is usually something these topic starters want, and so do I :)

[Silvaire1]

My Bonanza makes no sense financially. I realize that. But so what. I love it. If it were to go tomorrow, and I was left flying the Cub, great.

I feel the same way about my planes, and actually both of mine are relatively cheap to own because N-registration means I could select them with an eye towards their intrinsic practicality and costs, not artificially warped costs. Ridiculous over regulation of certified types is the thing that largely creates the 'cost divide' between planes in different EU/UK regulatory categories. The debate between 'C of A' and 'Permit' types is artificial and divisive, inflicted on people by ineffective and self serving government without benefit to anybody in the real world. That is the source of the costs and unfortunate debate, not the planes themselves, or their economics.

PS Both my planes combined cost €42K and both annuals combined cost a few hundred € at today's exchange rate.

[S-Works]

I don't fly anything cheap....:p
My daily ride uses about £600 an hour in fuel. But it's big and quick..... :)

[robin]

Ridiculous over regulation of certified types is the thing that largely creates the 'cost divide' between planes in different EU/UK regulatory categories. The debate between 'C of A' and 'Permit' types is artificial and divisive, inflicted on people by ineffective and self serving government without benefit to anybody in the real world. That is the source of the costs and unfortunate debate, not the planes themselves, or their economics.

Couldn't put it better

I've owned Permit types and currently flying CoA types.

Yes there is a cost differential, sometimes a big one. But that is factored into my decision to stay with my current steeds.

I do find the statements from proponents of the LAA route a bit one-sided.

If you want to build one of the new breed of Permit aircraft and, like Rod1, are able and willing to do it, and base yourself on a farm strip where hangarage costs pence, then fine.

Only some of the Permit fleet will be able to fly Night or IFR - certainly not all, and you can bet it will not be the lower-end.

The most important thing is not whether the type is Permit or not. It's whether it is right for you and the only way you can tell that is to fly lots of different aircraft before committing to a purchase

The OP made a reasonable request. He's into hours building and, I guess, that is his focus.

My suggestion is not to buy. Get a share in an IFR-equipped C172 or PA28 and all options are covered. Buying outright just bleeds money, whether it is on CofA or Permit.

[India Four Two]

But it seems like I'm hijacking this thread,

Pirke,

Don't worry about that. Some of the best PPRuNe threads often drift from the original post.

I like threads like this, particularly since I will be retiring next year and buying an aircraft.

I'm having trouble with making a decision and threads like this help me consider my options, which range from a share in a Tecnam on the one hand to a share in a Stearman on the other. :ok: