A&C and there is the nub. I do see both sides, in fact I want to see both sides. The problem is the usual UK TAKE ON THINGS. To many trying to eak a living out of too few,who cannot afford to fly in the first place.Owning and operating an aeroplane is nuts, fiancially. Unless you do the hours, it is a very expensive exercise, and getting more expensive. No issues with this.We all know and acknowledge the pros and cons,it has been debated endlessly.However, safety, aka maintenance, is a very serious issue,therefore when you put it into the MO, you want the facts - transparency. If the MO takes a view,then you need to be in the loop. Not - have the plane back 'airworthy' ,neglect to tell.or record, several non conformancies, charge you an arm and leg,and then all of a sudden ****,what happened there.
Some years ago there was a great case of the MO who calculated how much the annual bill would be by dividing his operating costs and profit, by number of customers. It ended up with a dwindling customer base, who were paying more and more, in fact in the last year of his operation cusomers were reciving bills for annuals in the region of 27k. Mines that year was 14k, he quoted me 2.5k
It all ended in tears
Hows about three uk approved MO'S? Thats it. Closely monitored, transparent charging, monthly payments to them with no danger of them going bust,and them charging properly and sensibly. SATISFIED CUSTOMERS ALL ROUND
