Originally Posted by
rickseeman
All the numbers I posted were real. A hangar in California won't be cheap. We flew the GIII 40 hours. You said it cost us 24K an hour to operate, $960,000. No it didn't.
I said/guessed 24k a hour based off the limited information you have provided(which changes daily with you) and by providing a conservative number which you disagreed with only to say it was too low by $90,000. You first stated all the flights you did on the plane which would equal 20 - 26hrs of flight time. You now just stated you did nearly double that at 40hrs. Which is fine.
Numbers I used that where in my first post -
Jet 400k
Crew 250k
Fuel 50k --------- > goes up because we where using 20 hours and you said 40hrs 100k (still low fyi)
Fees/crew hotel 5k --------------> This number should increase but we will assume they where day trips.
hangar 10k -----------------------> which you say was wrong and was 100k
Need to add insurance so another 50k.
Total on "basic" cost with the Jet purchase removed because you said yo sold it for what you bought it for 400k is $505,000 divided by 40 hours = $12,625 a hour to operate. (charter brand new at that cost with no headaches)
So based off this very limited information. Yes, you where able to operate a GIII for around 500k.... but at a extremely high hourly cost and high risk of a major cost coming down the line.
If that is what you are into and you understand the risk do it. It is your money.
I do not think anyone on the forum would argue with anyone who came on here saying I know/understand the risk/cost to buy a old aircraft but I really want to do it because I like old spey engines or some bs but I'm willing to spend the money.
The issue is when someone comes on asking how they can bend the rules/cost to justify a old aircraft purchase to work like it is a new aircraft.