Owning an Aircraft

[CoastieM171]

Now, I'm only 23 years old, but I definitely know the cost of a dollar especially since I've been working already for 9 years of my life so far. Cars are expensive, boats are expensive, heck, having a wife and kids are expensive (that I know, but not dealing with haha). But good lord, aircraft are expensive.

Looking up for airframes I'm interested in (Commander), ones from mid 1970's are still selling for 80ish, and newer (2000) for 250. How do you afford something like this with a home mortgage/loan, car, and family without being a millionaire?!

I'm curious for statistical purposes and my own interest:
1) How much do you who own aircraft make on avg? (It's cool if you don't want to give that figure for safety purposes).
2) On average, how long do most owners keep their plane for?

I understand a plane is an investment and should be treated as such, with care and safety of course. But with a 20 year loan on 250k at 5.0% you're still looking over 1,000 per month for payments. I make decent money for my age especially being in the military, but that's waaaaaaay beyond my means. Of course I know I don't HAVE to get a Commander because they are top-end aircraft and I could go for Cessna or Piper even. I just want to fly MY plane after I receive my PPL.

Just looking for a little insight from all of you folks, any tips/hints and info provided is greatly appreciated!

- Chris

[Pilot DAR]

I bought my 1975 Cessna 150 M in 1987 for $7000. Since then, while maintianing it to a high standard, and flying 2600 hours on it, it's probably appreciated to be worth three to four times what I paid for it. What a super investment, I wish I'd bought a few at that time!

I fly a Commander 114 occasionally, nice plane - I'm glad I'm not paying the bills though!

[Genghis the Engineer]

For a decent aircraft, you really don't need to spend that sort of money - older types, anything with fixed gear, "experimental" types will all give you far more affordable flying.

Wherever you are right now, there's probably a branch of the EAA - Experimental Aircraft Association (or an equivalent non-US organisation such as the LAA). Go and join them, and learn about their fleet and way of flying.

Even if you are determined to have a 4-seat, variable pitch prop, retractable gear high performance tourer (although that's a lot more aeroplane than most people really need - I did my CPL in such a beast, but certainly don't pay my own money to fly such beasts very often), an early model Arrow will give you slightly less performance for much less money. But for a little less performance again, but a heck of a lot less money something like a Grumman AA5, or Cessna 172 will get you there - or think sideways to something that doesn't cost too much but has lots of performance and style, such as a LongEze.

Personally, I tend to share my aeroplanes - but that to an extent is a British habit, and certainly would be a problem for you if in a military career you are moving around a lot. However, you can also do worse than go and ask at the nearest Air Force Base (I assume you're in the US military?) and ask about whether there's a base flying club that may give you cheap flying in some reasonable aeroplanes. There is after all some truth in the old truism that if it flies, floats of f***s it's usually cheaper in the long run to rent by the hour!

My favourite aeroplane has adequate performance, 4 seats, good payload - and was very much the province of very wealthy businessmen. In 1947. Now it's quite cheap, and carries loads more airfield-cred than turning up somewhere in a newer and more expensive Commander would.

G

[wsmempson]

There are three different issues wrapped up in the same issue of aircraft ownership;

Capital outlay in buying an aircraft
Fixed running costs (parking, fuel, scheduled maintenance, insurance, periodic renewals of paint, interior, avionics and engine)
Contingency funds

In the case of Rockwell Commanders, as with nearly all of the "old technology" 30 year old C of A fleet, there seems to be quite a hefty re-adjustment in prices going on - driven to a great extent by the widespread availability of second-hand Cirrus's (Cirrii?) at reasonable figures. On planecheck there are currently several nicely equipped G1 and G2 SR22's that could be bought circa £100-120k, which is making a nonsense of the price structure of the 30-40 year old spam can market. (I speak as a PA32 owner, a dyed in the wool spam-can driver).

If you do a search of this forum, you'll find any number of threads running on the subject of the annual costs of maintaining an aircraft, cost of depreciation, the trade-offs made between owning say a new Piper Arrow and a 30 year old Piper Arrow, and LAA aircraft on an LAA permit to fly verses an IFR equipped old technology spam-can on a C of A. Suffice to say that with say, a Piper Arrow flown for 200 hrs P/A based at an airfield around the M25 you can reckon on the following rough figures;

Parking £2,000 p/a
Fuel (40 lph @ £1.70pl = £68 x 200) £13,600 p/a
Annual + 2x50hr & 1x150hr check £4,000 p/a
Engine fund (£7.50 p/h x 200) £1,500 p/a
Insurance £2,400 p/a

Total for the year £23,500 p/a
Cost per hour £117.5 p/h

On top of that you will have to have a contingency fund; that is to say that in aviaition, when things go wrong, they tend to be expensive. Even though that 500 hr engine has run like a swiss watch, it may start making metal tomorrow, and need replacing. Your annual inspection might reveal spar corrosion, which will necessitate a replacement wing. A factory A/D may result in all your seatbelts being replaced.

Similarly, we seem to be living in troubled times vis-a-vis legislation. If suddenly an item be comes mandated (like we were all told Mode-s was about to be mandated) you will have to dig into your pocket. If 100LL gets replaced by something different, you may have to overhaul your engine in order to allow it to run on fuel without tetra-ethyl lead. You need to have the ability to write a cheque for £20,000; sod's law says that if you have that ability, the chances are your bluff won't get called - if you don't, it will invariably be the next call you get!

Having said all of that, if you don't actually need that Rockwell/Piper/Cessna/Beechcraft spam-can, and will consider a new generation LAA 2 seater, the picture is entirely different.

Rod will be along in a minute with the figures....!:}

[pulse1]

I just happen to be looking at the implications of the new VAT rate on the costs of operating our old(er) LAA 2 seater which is hangared.

Based on wsmempson's model at 200 hours per annum it works out at £65 per hour before the VAT increase. Anyone want to buy a share?

[Rod1]

Chris

You need to have a very clear idea of the “mission” you wish you’re a/c to perform before you can have a meaningful discussion on costs. If you are looking to tour Europe two up then a modern “LAA VLA” is one option;

Typical cost £50k (low hour less than 5 years old)
Parking (depends on location)
Insurance 1000pa
Maintenance £500pa
Fuel for 200h at 18.5lph of mogas £4440
Another option would be a traditional LAA type like a Jodel, still capable of touring Europe, but not as fast and a much older airframe;

Typical cost £15k
Hangarage (depends on location)
Insurance £600pa
Maintenance £1000pa
Fuel 200h at 21lph of mogas £5000

Or if you are happy with a single seater;
Typical cost £6k
Hangarage (depends on location)
Insurance £300
Maintenance £500
Fuel 200h at 12lph of mogas £2900

You will notice that all the costings have fuel as the largest cost!
Rod1

[wsmempson]

QUOTE "Those wsmempson ownership numbers are ginormous"

Silvaire, unfortunately, welcome to the world of UK GA running costs. Running a C of A machine is expensive here. You could trim some of those back by being based at a strip further away from London or doing some of the maintenance yourself, but the way that Part M subpart g maintenance has been imposed means that generally, you end up paying sooner or later!

[IO540]

The OP is in Puerto Rico.

Hangarage in the UK can easily cost £7k ($10k) per year, for a 10m wingspan SE plane.

It's not cheap but flying is worth every penny :)

When you are on your deathbed, will you be wishing you spent less money on something you enjoyed so much? I discovered recently that a pilot I knew died, of cancer. He just stopped answering emails, and that was it.

[wsmempson]

Indeed, hence I was saying that these were UK figures.

I have a horrid suspicion that the figures from that end of the world will be rather less....:O

[Ultra long hauler]

Chris,

I am an LSA owner in Latin America.
I bought my first aircraft (Genesis) for $20.000,- with a Rotax 912 (80 HP) with 600 hours on it. The airframe was then 10 years old.

Slipstream Genesis, Slipstream Industries Genesis, Genesis light sport aircraft and two place ultralight. (http://www.ultralightnews.com/ulbg2/slipstream-genesis.html)

However I am now upgrading to a brand new MXP 150 Patriot, with glass cockpit (Dynon Skyview) and a 100 HP Rotax 912.

Patriot (http://www.can-zacaviation.com/patriot.htm)
Brilliant! But $75.000,-, all included!!

What you have to remember is the majority of aircraft owners are people that are "established"--> with the basics of education, house and vehicles all taken care of, before they proceed into private aviation.

The monthly salary is really not that relevant, it mainly depends on where you live and how you are dealing and you have been dealing with your finances.
I for one……..won´t have children--> the Patriot is my baby!!!
I earn okay, but a large part of my salary goes to aviation--> these are my priorities.

You´ll find that there is a plane for almost each budget as long as you´re committed……..but you have to ask yourself "why a Commander"?

Buying the plane is 1 thing, maintaining and / or running the thing is another!! 10 Gallons per hour……….you do the math!!
I fly around my whole country, at 4 gallons an hour at 200 km/ hour; I fly over the highest volcanoes while listening to my I-pod and enjoying a comfortable wide 2 pax cabin with luggage space in the back--> with a 5 hour fuel range.

What do you want??

###Ultra Long Hauler###

[Genghis the Engineer]

There is a common fault in many Brits and Americans that we assume everybody else sees things from our own local viewpoint.

Hence, presumably that several of my fellow Brits have posted figures that don't apply in the USA, nor the US dependency that is Puerto Rico (where our original poster's profile clearly says he's from), and then enthuse all about the benefits of the LAA - which has absolutely no relevance in the USA or Puerto Rico.

I think that we could all do the original poster the courtesy of either answering the question he actually asked, or getting properly and openly sidetracked into some interesting new discussion.

Unless Puerto Rico is a village in Somerset and I'm missing something obvious?

G

[Rod1]

Fair cop G, I did not notice his location till it was pointed out later.

Apologies for the confusion.

Rod1

[flybymike]

I discovered recently that a pilot I knew died, of cancer. He just stopped answering emails, and that was it.

That's the last time I don't answer an email...

[Jan Olieslagers]

the benefits of the LAA - which has absolutely no relevance in the USA or Puerto Rico
Reviewing the thread, I remember
-) fuel cost the main expense in private flying
-)10 gal./hr vs 4 gal./hr
No relevance?
Yes I know one gets a lot more of aircraft burning 10 gallons per hour - but to someone with budgetary concerns the difference might be an important point, even decisive.

[IO540]

Fuel cost is the biggest expense these days, by a big margin. At economy low altitude cruise (3000ft, 138kt IAS) I burn 11.2 USG/hr (42.3 litres/hr). At economy high altitude cruise (FL100, 140kt TAS) I burn 9.6 USG/hr (36.3 litres/hr).

Even the lower of the two above dwarfs the cost of servicing, the engine fund, etc. But that would not be the case if I flew an old wreck with a similar capability and performance, when £10000 Annuals are quite common.

The cost of depreciation is likely to be bigger still, but (together with cost of capital) the way this is accounted for, or indeed whether a private individual doing this for enjoyment should be accounting for these, varies greatly.

No doubt, nothing will beat a cheap little plane which uses little fuel (http://www.thruster.co.uk/) :) But none of those types have much capability. They are OK for bimbling around on nice days, not going far. If you want to do more, you have various tradeoffs open to you, but it will cost you more.

[IanPZ]

What about things like the dynaero mcr-01

It has a relatively good fuel economy, based around a rotax engine. It cruises at something like 145knots, and I believe its somewhere around 60,000euro new. (but I could be wrong)

Am I missing something? Doesn't this come under the LSA rating in the US?

[Rod1]

“But none of those types have much capability. They are OK for bimbling around on nice days, not going far. If you want to do more, you have various tradeoffs open to you, but it will cost you more.”

IO and I would obviously disagree on this on! In the UK we do have an artificial limitation on LAA machines limiting them to day VFR. In the US aircraft like the MCR-01 mentioned above (I have one) are flown IFR, but I have no idea of the local rules in your area. Faced with flying in IMC in my state of the art permit machine, in comparison with the aircraft I used to fly, I know what I would choose, but I do not make the rules!

The sort of local bumbling I do is midlands to Wick (north of Scotland) in 3 hours, or midlands to south of France in 4.5 (with a stop to clear customs). I tour France for a week two up most years, sometimes Spain etc as well. But I only fly for fun, and tend to attend big flyins with an emphasis on enthusiasts and interesting aircraft. I like 99% of European PPL’s, do not have an IR, but I do have a UK ½ way house which is not valid outside the UK.

Rod1

[IO540]

In the UK we do have an artificial limitation on LAA machines limiting them to day VFR.

And rightly so too, looking at some of the build quality ;)

I would also insist on a double-heater pitot tube, because some recent history of "weight reduction while airborne but not through burning fuel" has shown that some of the Vne figures are, shall we say, a little on the high side ;)

or midlands to south of France in 4.5 (with a stop to clear customs)

Not just to clear Customs ;)

like 99% of European PPL’s, do not have an IR

That bit is almost true. Curiously I think the figure is more like 97%, though it's hard to get exact numbers because most of the IR holders are N-reg aircraft-owners and not on any public database which shows the addresses/countries in Europe.

[SlipSlider]

Silvaire1, you have a pm
Slip

[CoastieM171]

Wow, thank you every for such a large number of responses. I didn't think that I would get nearly this many so far, so it is all greatly appreciated. It's also neat to see how things can very from region - region, much less country - country.

I believe if I were to get a plane prior to leaving PR the costs would be much lower, things here (other than food) are rather inexpensive. The fuel costs are about $5.40ish depending on where you fuel up, and I would plan for TJIG (Isla Grande).

Another question that's been pondering me. If 30 year old airframes with 5+ thousand TTAF on the frame are still selling for almost what brand new frames are selling for, is there any more chance of things going wrong with the frame itself (excluding engine and gauges)?

Also, thanks for the additional aircraft mentioned other than the pipers and cessnas, I hadn't heard of many of the others mentioned before :O

[Genghis the Engineer]

So long as the aeroplane you buy is N-registered, I doubt that it'll be significantly better or worse, nor much different in price to what you will get on the US mainland. If you are a US citizen serving in the US military, then I'd strongly recommend sticking to an N-registered aeroplane. If you can get the right aeroplane in PR, then best of luck to you.

Piper and Cessna are the most common light aeroplane types - and just as if you buy a GM or Ford car, you are going to get a reliable product that plenty of people know how to look after. But, just as you're unlikely to regret owning a Jeep or LandRover, you'd also get much satisfaction from owning a Grummman or Scottish Aviation aircraft, so long as that's the right aeroplane for you.

Cost wise, it's pretty unusual for a high year/hour aeroplane to be worth the same as a new one, and I'd look closely at anything being advertised for that sort of money. But there are two factors which can make a big difference. The first is the avionics, which can be a large part of the airframe value so if somebody has put a lot of money into fitting autopilots, stormscopes, glass cockpit systems and suchlike that can put the price up a lot. Nice to have, but even for a lot of touring you don't need it - you do probably want two radios, two VORs, a DME, ADS-B and a GPS - after that it's luxury items. The other very major factor is the engine life remaining: the figures vary between airframes and engines, but an old airframe with a just overhauled engine can look very expensive, whilst a newer airframe with few hours left on the engine has a massive bill coming up and that's reflected in its sale price.

For a comparison, I just set out to buy myself a share in an inexpensive touring aeroplane here in the UK. I ended up with a 25 year old high-hour Grumman AA5a - an American 4-seater that you'll get cheaply over there, as we can here. It'll give me with 2 people on board 6 hours flying at 110 knots (~120mph) at 8-9gph, and has the magic 2 radios, 2 VORs and a DME (plus an autopilot and ILS, I use a personal GPS), and has about 1000hrs before an engine overhaul is due. This came at an equivalent purchase price of about US$32k. I suspect that this is much nearer to what you are hoping for? (This is just one type, but there's owners club info here (http://www.grumman.net/) which you may find interesting.)

G

[CoastieM171]

G, I think you hit the nail on the head with that information and that's exactly what I was looking for. If I could find a relatively good aircraft that's at a decent price without too much maintenance issue but also serves as a mid-range a/c that I could bring a few friend along in every now and then is perfect for me. I understand that the higher priced a/c are like cars with their luxury and whatnot, but if you can find you something that gets from A to B to C with relatively few problems then that will also do the job just right.

Thanks for the insight!
-Chris

[Genghis the Engineer]

Ah yes, that was the other thing.

I really wouldn't worry about the age of the aeroplane - condition is everything, age is almost nothing. The nature of aircraft maintenance is that if an aeroplane has been properly stored and maintained then it really doesn't matter if it is 2, 20, 40 or 60 years old - it should still essentially be just as safe and capable.

Of course, some of the newer aircraft types offer capability that didn't exist in previous years, but on the other hand most of that is about avionics, and new instruments can be fitted at any time in an aircraft's life, whilst available engine life will go up and down as it's serviced or replaced from time to time.


One thing I would worry about however is payload. Forgive me if you know this stuff already (you've not actually said if you're already a qualified pilot or not), but every aeroplane has a maximum take-off weight (MTOW) and an empty weight. The difference between the two is the amount of fuel, people and baggage you can carry - THIS IS NOT NEGOTIABLE ! So, work out the nature of the trips you're likely to want to fly - how far, how many people, and if you'll need to carry baggage. This will be a major factor in determining what the right aeroplane is for you.

There's loads of experience here in this sort of thing, so if you can come back with the sort of numbers that will apply to your flying, there are plenty of people who can recommend the right aeroplane types to look at. As a starting point however, reckon on most of the common 4-seaters having about 700-900lb of useable payload, fuel burn about 8-9 gal/hr (at 6lb/gal) cruising around 100 knots, and fuel tanks somewhere between 35-60 gal total capacity. That'll give you a rough idea of what's normally achievable.

G

[IO540]

condition is everything, age is almost nothing

True if you know what you are doing, which most buyers don't - they are relying on somebody (hopefully competent) to give them an opinion.

[CoastieM171]

I'm not a qualified pilot as of yet, but with my job as an Operation Specialist (dealing with Search and Rescue/LE to include Migrants and Drugs) I was at least fairly aware of the need for weight vs. fuel payloads as we always need to ask, say a cruise ship, the weight of a passenger, height, and what the weight of equipment will be loaded into the Dauphin (HH-65) prior to them taking on passengers and possibly dumping fuel to compensate. However that's still great information for those who may have not asked the question yet and are reading the thread :ok:

The note of the age is good to know as well, as long as the airplane is properly stored in a hanger, paint re-done, engine upgrades, etc. etc. (minus the avionics). I would have figured that it would be like cars as well. You could have a 1928 Model T that still runs like a beaut' if the maintenance is kept up.

Silvaire1 - I was looking up the same differences as well and found the same "issue." It was quite odd to be that the later model still sold for more than the latter.

About having 2 radios for Caribbean flying, I'm not quite sure if that would help or hinder. I guess if I was out flying one day I could listen up to the USCG working freq and help out on SAR cases if it permits or if I wouldn't be a burden to the mission. That would be one thing to think about though for the future. Maybe like a Civil Air Patrol or Coast Guard Auxiliary. Speaking of which, the Coast Guard Auxiliary route would help get me hours for my logs as well as pay for fuel for a day out! Something for those on the other side of the pond to think about, though you would have to hold qualifications and do some further training.

IOS - That very point could be a bump in the road for me in purchasing my first plane since I have not had to deal with them before. However, I'm hoping that with adequate research and enough digging + a little bit of patience that I can come up with a plane that will serve me happily for quite a number of years :)

[Shoestring Flyer]

'I have never really figured out why the early 150 HP AA5 Traveller is so much cheaper to buy than the AA5A Cheetah...'

To answer the above question...
The main thing that makes the price difference is that Travelers (AA5)built between '74 and 77 had de-bonding issues due to a purple glue being used, nicknamed 'purple passion'. This de-bonding issue usually manifests itself with leaking fuel tanks and can be eye wateringly expensive to put right with the problem tending to re-occur and need re-rectification every few years.
The original late'72/73 Traveler used a vanilla glue that is much better. The manufacturer reverted to the original vanilla glue in mid '77 (Cheetahs(AA5A's). The final AA5A Cheetah was built in '79, so the youngest AA5A is now 31years old.
That is why late AA5A's are worth a premium over some of the early years.
The same de-bonding issues of course applies to AA5B's (180hp Tiger)) built in the '74-'77 years. The AA5B production of course has continued in in fits and starts and in various guises until fairly recently.

[Jan Olieslagers]

Off-topic linguistic rant:

as long as the airplane is properly stored in a hanger,

The word "hanger" can have several meanings, as can be seen from the wikipedia disambiguation page, but none have to do with aircraft storage. My own interpretation of the word isn't there, either, but goes back to Sir Thomas Mallory:
"for my lady Queen Morgan le Fay keepeth you here for none other intent but for to do her pleasure with you when it liked her". "O Jesu defend me, said Alisander, from such pleasure; for I had lever cut away my hangers than I would do her such pleasure".

[Genghis the Engineer]

I'm not a qualified pilot as of yet, but with my job as an Operation Specialist (dealing with Search and Rescue/LE to include Migrants and Drugs) I was at least fairly aware of the need for weight vs. fuel payloads as we always need to ask, say a cruise ship, the weight of a passenger, height, and what the weight of equipment will be loaded into the Dauphin (HH-65) prior to them taking on passengers and possibly dumping fuel to compensate. However that's still great information for those who may have not asked the question yet and are reading the thread :ok:

The note of the age is good to know as well, as long as the airplane is properly stored in a hanger, paint re-done, engine upgrades, etc. etc. (minus the avionics). I would have figured that it would be like cars as well. You could have a 1928 Model T that still runs like a beaut' if the maintenance is kept up.

Silvaire1 - I was looking up the same differences as well and found the same "issue." It was quite odd to be that the later model still sold for more than the latter.

About having 2 radios for Caribbean flying, I'm not quite sure if that would help or hinder. I guess if I was out flying one day I could listen up to the USCG working freq and help out on SAR cases if it permits or if I wouldn't be a burden to the mission. That would be one thing to think about though for the future. Maybe like a Civil Air Patrol or Coast Guard Auxiliary. Speaking of which, the Coast Guard Auxiliary route would help get me hours for my logs as well as pay for fuel for a day out! Something for those on the other side of the pond to think about, though you would have to hold qualifications and do some further training.

IOS - That very point could be a bump in the road for me in purchasing my first plane since I have not had to deal with them before. However, I'm hoping that with adequate research and enough digging + a little bit of patience that I can come up with a plane that will serve me happily for quite a number of years :)


Two radios just makes a lot of sense when you're doing any kind of long trips. For example, I may be working a sector frequency on a 100 mile leg, but it's really useful without potentially missing a call from them, to be able to call up an airfield I'm passing and ask for their weather, or listen out to what's happening on my next planned frequency. Plus the redundancy - a long sea crossing is not somewhere you want to be with no radio by and large. Similarly for navigation equipment: there are various systems available (VOR, VOR/DME, GPS, ADF) and which you use is less important than that you've got a backup.

When I fly a sea or mountain crossing, I'll normally have one set on 121.5 - particularly in case I have a problem and can't establish rapid 2-way with my controller, and partly to keep an ear out for anybody under me who might be in trouble and I can act as a communications bridge.

A handheld GPS and radio are particularly useful since they'll survive a complete aircraft electrical failure.

I imagine that the Coast guard will want you to have some reasonable flying experience before you start doing anything for them, above and beyond just being a qualified private pilot. But, everybody starts somewhere and speaking for myself - I work in aviation as an Professional Engineer, my pilots licences have opened up a lot of career opportunities over the years. Not necessarily as a professional pilot, although I eventually did that ticket, but employed in jobs where they wanted the aviation knowledge.

Your next stage is probably to start lessons somewhere - does the local military flying club have any instructors? Keep thinking and listening about aircraft ownership and types as you learn and it'll all probably come together. Even money you'll start on a basic Piper or Cessna - don't worry about which, they're all good training aeroplanes, and once you have your licence you won't struggle to convert to anything you buy: most post war American light aeroplanes have similar cockpits and handling qualities.

G

[Stephen Furner]

CoastieM171 in my view there is no substitute for paying up front for a good engineer’s survey of any aircraft you are planning to purchase. It may seem expensive but it is money well spent. Particularly, if after reading it you decide to walk away from the aircraft and not purchase it.

Reading up on potential aircraft and knowing the common problems and pitfalls is the right thing to do but it will not give you the experience and depth of knowledge of an engineer familiar with the aircraft type who knows where to look and how to interpret what he or she sees. An engineer will also typically inspect the supporting maintenance documents and be able to comment on their adequacy and the impact of current and future regulatory requirements – which is not a trivial issue on this side of the pond.

When you have got your PPL and are serious about a specific aircraft get an engineer to survey it before you decide to put your cash on the table and take the keys.

Stephen

PS

The auxiliary coastguard here in the UK is now known as the Volunteer Coastal Rescue Service (CRS) http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c4mca/mcga07-home/emergencyresponse/mcga-searchandrescue/mcga-volunteering.htm (http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c4mca/mcga07-home/emergencyresponse/mcga-searchandrescue/mcga-volunteering.htm) The Lifeboat service (RNLI) here is also a volunteer organisation http://www.rnli.org.uk/ (http://www.rnli.org.uk/) The CRS and RNLI are primarily maritime – although the Southend RNLI station does have a hovercraft – for volunteer air support in the UK the coastguard can call on Airsearch http://airsearch.co.uk/ (http://airsearch.co.uk/) Airsearch are also on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=h#!/group.php?gid=105030399561835 (http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=h#!/group.php?gid=105030399561835)

[Genghis the Engineer]

One small but important linguistic point. What in the UK is known as a Licenced Engineer, would in the USA normally be known as an airplane mechanic.

The term Engineer is more narrowly used in the USA, mostly only in the graduate branches of the Engineering profession, which is the wrong sort of person (mostly) to do a pre-purchase inspection.

G