Buying/Flying an N-Reg: Lots of questions!!!

[piotr]

Advice keenly invited!

SITUATION:
- Last year qualified PPL (SEP/MEP/Night)
- About 200 PIC
- Later this year I want to buy my own a/c - I have a business in Poland which is difficult to reach by scheduled (commercial) flights from UK, so the "pop into my own plane & fly over" option seems very sexy. The "as the crow flies" distance is approx. 1,000 miles, including some safety margin.

MY CUNNING PLAN IS....
- Go over to Florida this spring to get my FAA IR (and build some more hours/confidence of course)
- The FAA IR will effectively give me IMC privilage when flying G-reg in the UK anyway - AND give me full IR privilages when flying N-reg in UK/Europe
- So... I may as well buy a second-hand N-reg over there & ship it here (lots cheaper to buy in USA!) - again my understanding is that there is no reason why I can't fly/base an N-reg in Europe
- I may additionally go for the FAA Commercial Pilot rating (I understand it's relatively easy to get if you have an IR & over 250 hrs PIC), as I have been told insurance will be a lot lower

I am in the process of looking into the details.

My plea for advice is two-fold:

(1) Can you spot any glaring holes in or issues with my cunning plan? Has anyone done something similar? What are the (dis-)advantages of having an FAA IR and/or operating an N-reg over here?

(2) I did not mention this so far, but the other dilemma I have is what to buy - starting with SEP vs. MEP!! MEPs are much more expensive to run, and (personal observation only!) the safety advantage is questionable - esp. as on a given budget one can afford to buy a newer & better-equipped SEP. My current "best choice" is something like a Beech Bonanza - it seems to have (just) enough range to be useful, and has a similar sized cabin (though obviously less useful load capacity) as Baron 58 or Seneca, etc.
Apart from the SEP vs. MEP question, is there a SINGLE PLACE where I could compare different a/c (performance stats., etc.) and read opinions/reports from other pilots - i.e. get impartial advice? At the moment I am looking at many magazines, websites, etc., and it is really difficult to get any consensus of opinion. (Perhaps PPRUNE should have forums focusing on specific a/c models/types? Just a thought).

Phew.......... a lot of questions, sorry! Now over to the PPRUNE community to help steer me through the confusion!

[whirlycopter]

By no means an expert but,

Flawss in the plan;

I'm pretty sure that the Faa IR will not give you imc on a G reg and you can't take a g reg abroad on an faa ticket. But I do helicopters so don't go into clouds and as such really have no idea...

You need to set up a trust company in the states to own the aircraft which i believe can be quite expensive.

Advantages

As you say much easier and cheaper to get cpl
No type ratings!

Performance info available at

http://www.aircraftdealers.net/performance/search.stm

edited to have a stab at spelling at least some of the words correctly

[Julian]

Holding an FAA IR will give you an IMC rating on your UK licence and allow you fly IMC on a G, you just have to apply once you receive your full FAA IR and send the CAA the fee (£64) and its its added to your licence.

The easiest way to get an aircraft on the N Reg is to use a reputable company that already specialises in these matters. I believe that in order to set up a trust company in the US you actually need to be a US citizen, so not an option for most of us. Tom Hughston up at Norwich Airport was offering the service for about £300/Annum.

[Flyin'Dutch']

Hello Piotr

There are a lot of questions to be answered but lets start at the beginning.

1. Unless you are a US Citizen you can not 'own' an N registered machine. This can be circumnavigated by leaving the ownership to a trust. Various organisations offer this option read about it in the ad section in the various magazines.

2. If you import an N registered machine you will have to pay VAT if it is to stay in the EU for over 6 months. Trying to be clever about this will attract the attention or the C&E folk so best own up and bite the bullet.

3. Getting the FAA IR is a sensible way to proceed if you want to avoid the costly and arduous route of the JAR IR. It gives you the option to get a CAA IMC.

4. CPL etc; no particular reason why not to get it whilst you are at it. I have been informed that the flight test is not to arduous. Have a look at the entry criteria. Dont know about the insurance implications but you may well be correct.

5. SEP vs MEP. IF you want to fly in IFR conditions and all year round I think the only logical conclusion has to be that you will need to get a twin. A lot of people are happy to have very heated debates about this but if your mission profile is to have lots of longer trips whereby reliabiltiy of getting somewhere is important, reality dictates that you need the second engine and the systems (like deice) that go with it.

FD

[piotr]

Thanks guys, already useful feedback! Please keep it coming.

On the ownership side of things, I have spoken to a couple of Channel Isl. companies who specialise in setting up trusts to own N-reg (as well as financing) so that's probably the way to go.

Just a note on the MEP vs. SEP question - my point is that it is much cheaper to run a high-performance single than a twin (e.g. the rough US-based figures I have are $162 total/hr for Bonanza B36TC which has 200-mile top speed and 25,000ft ceiling, versus some $255 total/ph for a Baron 58, maybe a bit more range but cabin exactly the same). So - the key question is whether the extra "safety" is worth some 60% increase in costs?

Last year I flew into Winterhaven FLA fly-in and talked to a few US pilots - the consensus was that your "average" private pilot is more likely to get killed in an engine-failure in a light twin (especially if their assymetric skills are a bit rusty) than in a single - in the latter the only option is to pick a suitable field and put it down!

The only thing I thought of on return from Winterhaven though is that flying to Poland by most direct route would involve probably 100-200 miles over the North Sea, and I am not sure whether this is wise to do regularly in a single - though there is always the option of taking a longer but safer route by flying south and across the narrowest part of the Channel!

:)

[Oscar Duece]

Just don't forget that VAT issue.

If you intend to keep the plane in the UK. You WILL have to pay 17.5 % vat when importing it. But you will NOT be able to reclaim this on any business return. (because you don't actually own the plane, the trust does).

Also when you come to sell it. You can't charge vat on the sale, again because you don't own it. The Us trust does. which obviously can't be Vat registered.

So that lovely £ 100k bird will actually cost you £ 117.5 K

It is really worth it. For that money I would use a schedueld flight and keep a Porche the other end to speed me to my destination.
Would end up quicker, safer and cheaper.

But if you must buy something and its a twin. Theres a fully kitted out Beach Duke for sale in Ireland, on a N number. I think the last asking price was only about $125K and its been for sale for a while now.
Or if you want real engine redundantcy how about a Bn Trilander.
Got a nice one on the books, currently working in Canada. Only £ 125K, mid time engines and under 9000 ttaf. But no anti ice...
:rolleyes:

[Ace Rimmer]

Hmm the great single vs multi debate. Yes multis are more expensive to operate. Actually a good rule of thumb might be take the cost of a running a Bonanza double it and add another 20-30%. (that's what old man Rimmer reckons and he had various Barons over a number of years) . Twins have a lot more plumbing than the equivilant airframed single dual vac etc etc.

There are those that argue that singles are safer (this has been covered extensively in other threads...). I'm not sure that they are in a apples with apples comparision. Just a personal view but I reckon most asymetric twin accidents are as a result of, first up rusty skills (stall/spin or below MCA departure), but also a belief that a light twin will behave like a Perf A type. Seems to me that once you desend below your decision height with one out you need to have a single dead stick mentality - (ie it's better to put it anywhere within the airfield boundry at low speed under some kind of control than to be inverted and nose down and being just along for the ride...but I digress...)

I think you have to ask yourself the question what is my mission? As you've discribed it you are looking for year round ops to a timetable.
That means full airways and de-iceing are musts (or more acurately anti-icing capability - most heavy singles and light twins de-ice can't handle flight in prolonged icing). Evern if they don't hav it fitted all Barons are plumbed for boots whereas Bonanzas aren't

You want a high alt cruise (relatively) capability (I read somewhere that 95% of the weather is below FL150). In effect that means turbocharging and either pressurisation or an O2 system

You want to have long over water sectors so maybe there is peace of mind in having two donkeys either that, or it's chicken route time - for my money anyway.

If it was me and all other things were equal (ie money which of course it never is) I reckon your choice might come down to either a Baron 58TC or P58 then again maybe a Malibu Mirage. (though the latter would have me wanting to shorten the over water time).

Just my opinon though...

[Keef]

I eventually decided against doing the FAA CPL (too old to need it, basically). BUT ...

I asked if a CPL would save me on insurance when renting over there. The FBO boss laughed and said "No, if anything, CPL is a higher risk."

Might've been joking, but had a serious face on.

Others have said it: if you're going to fly to Poland on a regular basis and need to know you're going to get there and back, then there is really no choice. It has to be a deiced twin, and you have to fly it lots to keep in practice. There are single-engined alternatives (eg TBM700), but they cost a lot of shekels.

I came close to doing a twin rating years ago (it was a very pretty little twin), but was advised by a very wise CFI that I wouldn't do enough hours to keep safe. Subsequent years of experience have proved him right.

N-reg and FAA PPL/IR (they call it ASEL/IA or AMEL/IA over there) is far more practical than trying to do a CAA IR (unless you have the spare time). We're planning to put our G-reg Arrow back onto the N-reg when the CofA comes due for renewal. Then I can use my FAA IR to fly in Europe :)

[Flyin'Dutch']

Hi Piotr

What price your life.

Of course there is the debate about the EFATO in a twin but that exposure (time) is a lot smaller than the amount of time you spend over water in imc when the quitting of your single donk gives you a big problem.

On an EFATO in your twin you can always close the throttle and plonk it in the next field if you so desire.

I think Rimmers estimation re the cost of running SE vs ME is not far off the mark. I also think he hits the nail on the head by stating that by comparing SEs with MEs a lot of folk try to compare apples with pears.

You only have to look at bizjets. I think there is only one in development with a single jet engine. Jetengines are a lot more reliable and costly than piston engines. Now why do you think that virtually nobody develops a single engine bizjet? They would be so much cheaper to sell.

If you want to fly cheaply, dont expect to do most missions on time but fly a single in day vfr only.

But that was not what you wanted.

As always.

MHO

Have fun.

FD

[t'aint natural]

Couple of things...
There's a guy in Cornwall, Warren Chmura, who's been involved in this N-reg trust thing and could answer a lot of your questions. If you want to send me a private email I'll get you his number.
I've heard stories, however, that the CAA is investigating the possibility of closing off the N-reg option, and has figured out a way to do it. Anybody shed any light on that?
Might be worth investigating whether there are advantages to keeping your aircraft on the Polish register.

[A and C]

You also have to remember that the VOR/LOC recivers have to be FM immune and that 8.33 VHF coms are on the way in europe.

American mode "S" specs are not quite the same as europe.

I think that your plan is a good one but and it is a very big but do your homework because just because an aircraft is full IFR equiped in the USA it my well not meet european requirements and it will cost you about half the european cost to get the aircraft up to spec in the USA.

[englishal]

Hi Piotr,

Sounds like a great idea. Just some food for thought though.....Depends on how much you want to spend on an aircraft, but what about a Jet-A powered Twin, like the Diamond DA42 which should be out and about next year. You could get this delivered on the N register, and the running costs are tiny compared to a typical AvGas powered twin......

Cheers
EA

[aidanruff]

I am in the process of buying an N reg Cherokee six for similiar reasons. I have a CAA IMC and am off to sunny Florida to do an SEP FAA IR - you can, obviously, do an MEP IR if you want.

A new and recent change to CAA regs is that if you have an FAA IR you can do a "simple" conversion to a JAR version with about ten hours flying in the UK - a number of training organisations are now offering this.

From everyone that I've spoken to, the paperwork for for an N-reg aircraft is just lots less onerous than our own wonderful system. I'm told that once the aircraft is on the US register, it has the same basic maintenance schedule, but the annual is a little more thorough and it no longer requires a C of A every few years as this is covered by the annual - whether this is actually true or not remains to be seen!

The cost for the trust is variable, but the best price I've seen is £300 to set up and £300 per year to maintain - solicitors fees, basically.

I've also applied for an FAA licence conversion as it means that I can fly my N-reg aircraft anywhere in the world under IFR, in the airways, etc, etc.

[bluskis]

I think there are big savings on propellor and heater inspections on an American maintenance schedule. Do they have a three yearly strip down requirement for a Cof A? If not, another big saving.

[aidanruff]

I'm fairly confident that there's no equivalent of a notice 75 on the prop.

[Fuji Abound]

QUOTE

A new and recent change to CAA regs is that if you have an FAA IR you can do a "simple" conversion to a JAR version with about ten hours flying in the UK - a number of training organisations are now offering this.

Can you tell us more. Whats involved in the conversion - are you not still required to pass the JAR theory exams?

[rustle]

Fuji Abound

Whats involved in the conversion - are you not still required to pass the JAR theory exams?

Don't get too excited ;) It is the scheme we discussed in the obtainable PPL-IR thread a couple of months back.
(How's your lobbying going :D)

Rather than re-post the details have a look at that thread cos I posted the "requirements matrix" there :)

edited to add link: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=73102

[aidanruff]

I'm doing my FAA IR with Orlando Flight Training at Kisimmee in Florida. They are a now a UK owned (Cabair) outfit. I've spoken at some length with their CFI and I am paying $3995 (approx' £2500) for the single engine IR, inc' ground exams. I've got the study materials and if you've got an IMC rating, a bit of a brush up and getting your head around slightly different American terminology and procedures and bobs-your-aunty!

Cabair also offer the (twin) conversion in the UK for a JAR IR, which is actually 7 hours flying and three in the sim, apparently - but not cheap, i.e. over £2K, they aren't yet offering a single engined version which is probably to do with JAR in my opinion. In any event it's cheaper, easier and more appropriate to GA to take this route.

There's been no mention of taking the JAR exams, in fact exactly the opposite. BTW, I'm told that the reg's only changed last September.

However, you also need to get an FAA licence conversion in order to use your shiny new FAA IR, which entails filling in the application form for a (free!) licence conversion and posting or faxing it to the States along with copies of UK licence, ratings and medical certificates. You need to post or fax a release form to the CAA (form SRG1160) so that they will release information to the FAA to prove that you are who you say you are. The CAA charge £15 for this service - what little treasures (i.e. should be buried under six feet of earth).

(forms are available at http://www.parkwestair.com/foreign.html)

Maybe some sanity at last?

[rustle]

aidanruff

"...Cabair also offer the (twin) conversion in the UK for a JAR IR, which is actually 7 hours flying and three in the sim..."

"...There's been no mention of taking the JAR exams, in fact exactly the opposite. BTW, I'm told that the reg's only changed last September..."

Do you have a reference for this? CAA doc number or anything?

The last FCL doc was dated 21/10/2002 - still shows more than those requirements. (15 hours, plus 170A, plus IRT, plus IR or ATPL exam passes) :confused:

[bluskis]

Will a class 1 medical be required by the CAA for a PPL using this route?

[aidanruff]

I think that the problem is that all of this is still shaking down. However, since Cabair UK are offering the conversions, then they must be a reasonable source of information.

Regarding the medical, as far as I am aware a PPL IR only requires a class 2 certificate. If you were going down the commercial route then it would have to be a class 1, I imagine.

[Chimbu chuckles]

Piotr

FWIW my thoughts, based on 6000+ hours Multi engine/piston/turbine (+3000 jet) and a fair bit of C&Ting in those aircraft...and as a Bonanza owner.

1/. If you are going to be flying for your business regularly then you should have no trouble staying current on ME handling. Find a good experienced ME instructor and organise your own formal recurrent system every 6 months (max). Take him along for a reasonable number of trips, particularly early on...there's a rather massive difference between what you'll experience in sunny Florida under training and what you'll get on a bad weather trip from the UK to Poland.

2/. As lovely as the Bonanza is crossing Europe regularly and long overwater is dumb. Either you risk getting killed in an iced up aeroplane which can no longer sustain flight or being delayed so often that the aircraft becomes a liability. Note I don't view engine failure as the biggest risk you'll face!!

3/. As far as ME aircraft that would be suitable I would suggest something like a Cessna 414/421/425. The piston pressurised Cessnas are really nice aeroplanes and not at all difficult to fly...the 425 (PT6 powered 421) is the ducks guts. Remember that overhaul costs piston/turbine aren't that hugely different on a per hour basis, turbines are probably cheaper/hr when you take into account the REAL costs associated with turbocharged piston engines. The ability to cruise in the high teens/mid 20s will keep you above most weather/icing most of the time.

Another good aeroplane would be an early model C or E90...the E being the much better machine...again both easy to fly and the PT6 engines are VERY reliable and parts are VERY plentifull therefore not so expensive in relative terms.

We used to get 8000+ hrs between hot section inspections on our -27s and -34s (very similar to what's in an E90/C425) with a combination of Trend Monitoring and 'On Condition Maintenance'...I would think a privately owned/operated PT6 powered aircraft could get the same/similar...I think a hot section insp in those days was 100K. Even if it's 150K these days x 2 = 300K/8000 hours = < $40/hr engine maintenance...My 1 IO550b costs about AUD23/hr. assuming no mid life crisis. 'Power by the hour' is another way of operating a PT6/Garret engine which is tax effective. That means you pay a flat per hr rate and 'all' your engine maintenance is covered, including replacement engines when yours are away being maintained.

Yet another way of minimising costs...and depending on your projected utilisation would be to buy an aircraft through your company that could be utilised by a Charter company for X hours/mth thereby covering a proportion of your fixed costs. You could also, possibly, use them for your recurrent training and they might be prepared to supply, at some minimal cost, a suitable pilot to give you 'Line Training' in your own aircraft.

The absolute minimum aircraft I would consider for what you intend would be an E55 Baron with Turbonormalised IO550s + Gamijectors and an all cylinder engine monitor(+a course in how to use them)+ all the deice gear you can bolt on it +a good oxy system...up to about FL180 all you'll need is nasal canulas rather than the full O2 mask, which are uncomfortable. This aircraft/engine combo will give you SL MP up to FL200 without most of the added expence turbocharging brings (Note the difference between Turbocharged as opposed to Turbonormalised). You'll get at least 220 TAS and 1000nm should be a doddle. Same load as a Bonanza and reasonable SE performance at lightish loads as long as you stay current.

Operating an aircraft for your business is no different to any other piece of plant/ equipment. Effective use of the Tax Laws should allow you to operate a suitable aeroplane....if your business can't afford that then you are stuck with the Scheduled airlines I'm afraid.

Hope this helps,

Chuck.

[piotr]

Chuck,

Thanks for you for your full & very helpful reply. Food for thought....

An interesting point you make re Bonanza is "...you risk getting killed in an iced up aeroplane which can no longer sustain flight or being delayed so often that the aircraft becomes a liability. Note I don't view engine failure as the biggest risk you'll face!!" My hope was that as the turbo Bonanza cruises in the 15k-20k altitude range, this would put me above most significant weather and icing (though obviously I have to get up there and down again!). Is that realistic? I assume that most Bonanza's are not equipped for known icing (they are not plumbed for it as standard?), but presumably there are some second-hand models around thus equipped.

I am labouring the SE/ME question a little bit as obviously I am on a budget, and while I could stretch to a reasonable ME, as you suggest, for the same money (as I pointed out earlier) I could get a MUCH newer & better equipped SE.

The other interesting point you make is regarding clawing some of the fixed costs back by renting out the a/c when I am not flying it. As the main thrust of this thread is me running an N-reg, I wonder whether this would prevent me from renting the a/c out in the UK??? (I assume so!). If so, it's an important NEGATIVE against operating an N-reg.

Regarding "renting out when not using" - also I would be interested to hear people's opinion regarding the "rentability" of a high-performance/complex SE versus ME - my gut feeling is that it would be easier to rent out an SE than a twin, not least because it would be considerably cheaper/hr, and does not require an ME rating. I may be wrong of course!!!

Still :confused: !

[piotr]

While personally still not decided 100% on the high-performance SE versus light twin issue, I just came across these thoughts in a newsletter that other pilots may find interesting:

"Although one can legally fly just about anything as a new Private Pilot with a multi engine rating, the question is SHOULD THEY? Granted there are some "naturals" out there, but generally speaking working your way up the latter is best
for most of us. Going from a light single to a Piper 235 or Cessna 182 is very easy and usually enjoyable. Going from a Piper Cherokee 140 to a Piper Malibu is a big jump.
Going from a light single directly to a twin, in my opinion is not recommended. Why?

There is a lot to be said for good old fashion experience. I'm talking about the experience of creating and solidifying good flying habits. Without question, the best step after getting
your Private license is getting your Instrument rating. Once you get the Instrument, use it!
File IFR just about everywhere you go. Get used to flying in the ATC environment. Get used to flying in the clouds. Get used to making the different approaches. Get used to not fearing
the weather, but respecting it. YOU SHOULD BECOME COMFORTABLE FLYING IN THE REAL WORLD BEFORE YOU TAKE ON THE ADDITIONAL BURDEN OF A MORE COMPLEX AIRCRAFT. In my opinion, most pilots should think in terms of an instrument rating, multi and 300+ hours before operating a light twin.

Finally, it goes without saying that the more the complex the aircraft, the more it going to cost to buy and maintain. Figure on 2.5 to 3 times the cost of operation in a light twin over
the heavy single. Just remember, "it takes two things to fly an airplane, cash and airspeed. You run out of either and you're going to crash".

You can catch the whole newsletter on http://aircraft-airplanes.com/NL%2009.htm