I understand what you mean - nice looking TriStar on GPS for less than $500k. But it's just like with a car for which to be fixed one would have to pay way more that for a good running used one.
Look at the alternatives:
-727 plenty of planes around - the 200s have about the same mission profile - and look at the operation cost (
http://bit.ly/pVsymw - info a little outdated from 2000 but still huge difference -
- L1011-500 block hour w/o fuel $3075 - fuel cons. 1589 gph
- 722 - block hour w/o fuel $1874 - fuel cons. 1064 gph
And there are enough 727 around for about $1M.
Also there are tons of other alternatives like A300, A310, DC10 ... that are all up for grabs with enough pilots to fly them and still some spare parts and service programs.
- Other alternatives are former Soviet countries with plenty ACMI available Antonovs and Ilyushins operated for next to nothing due to cheap pilots and operators and clients who don't give the slightest s*it about safety.
Your project would reqire a lot of $$$ to accomplish for an aircraft that is way too outdated with a market of a lot of more fuel efficient aircraft coming along in the next few years and with a very limited amount of available airframes that have much time before reaching DSO time.
- The airline industry is waiting for a competitive long haul aircraft, so it can launch new business models on the long range.
- They are waiting for Boeing to fulfill its 777F orders and for the A350.
Boeing has recently decided to upgrade it's [sic] 737 with new engines
- You can't compare this to the TriStar - in 2010 Boeing had 376 deliverys of 737s while there were only 250 TriStars ever built. The difference in development cost overhead/delivered aircraft will be very high for your idea in comparison to the 737 MAX
So unless some really braindead wall street investor helps out with it (i.e. if the brochure is shiny and sparkly you may get a deal) - not a chance.