Buying and owning a lightie - costs involved?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gold
There is some gold out there. Australia was flooded with new GA aircraft two or three decades ago, and most of these aircraft are still here. Some are in good shape and some are not. Those that have been properly looked after are still very good. Engineers can assess their condition, but too many have learned to accept low standards, and cost pressures over the years have produced some rattly machines. When a LAME signs an MR, that means he considers the aircraft will be safe to fly for another year, or another 100 hours. It does not mean it is perfect.
However, there are many aircraft out there that have only flown two or three thousand hours, maybe five. There are quite a few aircraft out there that have flown over 20,000 hours, and still going. I read recently that the first C172 that was ever built is still flying in the US. When I went to visit the Pacific aviation factory in NZ they told me that the first Fletcher AG plane they ever built (in the sixties) was still flying, doing survey flying, with about 25,000 hours. I think it has a turbine engine now.
Most GA aircraft in Australia have realistic life of about 10,000 hours, with routine maintenance if looked after properly, and about double that if you do some structural work when it is needed. Some can go much further.
If you are one of those who have to have the flashest car in the carpark, and would not be seen dead in last years model, then maybe these are not for you. But a 30 year old metal aircraft in good condition that's flown 20% of it's useful life, is about as old as our military aircraft, and flown a fraction of the hours that the Qantas aircraft have, is pretty good value. If you get a good one.
However, there are many aircraft out there that have only flown two or three thousand hours, maybe five. There are quite a few aircraft out there that have flown over 20,000 hours, and still going. I read recently that the first C172 that was ever built is still flying in the US. When I went to visit the Pacific aviation factory in NZ they told me that the first Fletcher AG plane they ever built (in the sixties) was still flying, doing survey flying, with about 25,000 hours. I think it has a turbine engine now.
Most GA aircraft in Australia have realistic life of about 10,000 hours, with routine maintenance if looked after properly, and about double that if you do some structural work when it is needed. Some can go much further.
If you are one of those who have to have the flashest car in the carpark, and would not be seen dead in last years model, then maybe these are not for you. But a 30 year old metal aircraft in good condition that's flown 20% of it's useful life, is about as old as our military aircraft, and flown a fraction of the hours that the Qantas aircraft have, is pretty good value. If you get a good one.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: OzMate
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2dotsright
Having just sold my lovely little 4 seater recently, after having it for around 12 months, I gotta say that as an economic proposition it is a disaster, but as an old mate said once, you gotta have one at least once. I only did about 10 or 15 hours in a year so divide that into the insurance and all the rest of the maintenance cost etc, it works out at about $4-500 an hour for a Cherokee.... Aaaaahhhhhh!!
However, if I didn't own that plane I wouldn't have had that nice time flying around as I wouldn't have gone out and hired one so it was worth it. Remember, some people pay lots to join golf clubs etc so you can't put a price on it. Only live once so if you wanna do it then 'Just do it" Happy Flying
However, if I didn't own that plane I wouldn't have had that nice time flying around as I wouldn't have gone out and hired one so it was worth it. Remember, some people pay lots to join golf clubs etc so you can't put a price on it. Only live once so if you wanna do it then 'Just do it" Happy Flying
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C172 V Jab/Tecnam
Mr Budgie says
I'll take the 172 over a Jabiru or Technam any day. The 172 will do stuff that a Jabiru or Technam simply can't. It needs more horsepower to do that, which means it'll have a higher fuel burn.
Now first recall I said about horses for corses, and experimental cat. may be the go...well lets get serious. And i am sure Squawk will back me here. the Tecnam is lovely and more expensive than the Jab, but its slower and is 2 seat and costs more than my Jab J430, which is almost IFR...it is not and will not, but hey, its pretty damn sexy. So lets take the slower less capable Tecnam out now.
Back to J430 V C172/Warrior. Speed 10-15knots more with 20LPH V 35LPH burn. Climb rate with identical load (jab will take more if identical fuel range on board)....mate the Jab will dissapear before your eyes and by 3500 feet you will have lost them completely. Speed and climb are way better. Same useful load, in fact we can caryy more, further faster for less fuel.
Ok we are not a type certified plane.
next is in flight comfort....more room...yes MORE, and no yoke, throttle and mixture etc to get in the road of maps being folded, ERSA being opened or even a drink of water being passed around. Comfort in my a/c is way better.
Is the C172 a bad plane....NO way, I loved it, but I tell you for sure, I love owning the J430 a whole heap more. And its nice to fly. And its got nice colour TV's instead of 38 year old technology that keeps costing a fortune to fix. How do I know..............I do, but ask around, its true.
Would I fly either, yes I have, but really for the purpose of private VFR flight for work or pleasure at around $38 to $40 max per hour plus fixed costs of hangar and insurance....say $70-$80 Per Hour if you do fly it a bit....and when its so much cheaper you will fly it more, its hard to justify double that or more that many are paying. If you want a C172...rent it from the aeroclub.
Cheers and just enjoy whatever you are blessed with being able to fly. Hang the cost!!!!
J
I'll take the 172 over a Jabiru or Technam any day. The 172 will do stuff that a Jabiru or Technam simply can't. It needs more horsepower to do that, which means it'll have a higher fuel burn.
Now first recall I said about horses for corses, and experimental cat. may be the go...well lets get serious. And i am sure Squawk will back me here. the Tecnam is lovely and more expensive than the Jab, but its slower and is 2 seat and costs more than my Jab J430, which is almost IFR...it is not and will not, but hey, its pretty damn sexy. So lets take the slower less capable Tecnam out now.
Back to J430 V C172/Warrior. Speed 10-15knots more with 20LPH V 35LPH burn. Climb rate with identical load (jab will take more if identical fuel range on board)....mate the Jab will dissapear before your eyes and by 3500 feet you will have lost them completely. Speed and climb are way better. Same useful load, in fact we can caryy more, further faster for less fuel.
Ok we are not a type certified plane.
next is in flight comfort....more room...yes MORE, and no yoke, throttle and mixture etc to get in the road of maps being folded, ERSA being opened or even a drink of water being passed around. Comfort in my a/c is way better.
Is the C172 a bad plane....NO way, I loved it, but I tell you for sure, I love owning the J430 a whole heap more. And its nice to fly. And its got nice colour TV's instead of 38 year old technology that keeps costing a fortune to fix. How do I know..............I do, but ask around, its true.
Would I fly either, yes I have, but really for the purpose of private VFR flight for work or pleasure at around $38 to $40 max per hour plus fixed costs of hangar and insurance....say $70-$80 Per Hour if you do fly it a bit....and when its so much cheaper you will fly it more, its hard to justify double that or more that many are paying. If you want a C172...rent it from the aeroclub.
Cheers and just enjoy whatever you are blessed with being able to fly. Hang the cost!!!!
J
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Straya
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just reviewing my spreadsheet for the year.
150* hrs per year ( 2 seat 110 KIAS RAA Aircraft) [EDIT: *Note: these were the actualhours flown for the year, all private]
Fixed (Hangar, Insurance) = $6380 p/a or $43/hr
Hourly Costs (Dry)] = $22/hr or $3300 p/a
[Provision for 50/100 hourly]
[Provision for COM/NAVAID Service]
[Provision for Refurbishment]
[Provision for Spares]
[Provision for Engine Overhaul]
Hourly Costs (Fuel) = $28.50/hr or $4275 p/a
So, annualised hourly rate is abour $93/hr or total of about $14,000 p/a.
Pretty close to some of the figures in the above posts.
By the way if you think fuel burn is a big component, if you DOUBLE the fuel cost on this basis, the hourly rate only goes up by 30%!
Applying this to a 30 year old PA28, I came up with the following figures,
150 hrs per year ( 4 seat 105 KIAS PA28 Aircraft)
Fixed (Hangar, Insurance) = $4075 p/a or $27/hr
Hourly Costs (Dry)] = $52/hr
[Provision for 50/100 hourly]
[Provision for COM/NAVAID Service]
[Provision for Refurbishment]
[Provision for Spares]
[Provision for Engine Overhaul]
Hourly Costs (Fuel) = $53/hr
So, annualised hourly rate is abour $132/hr or total of about $19,800 p/a.
I have got some really good data on R22 Helicopters too......droool (uh-oh!)
150* hrs per year ( 2 seat 110 KIAS RAA Aircraft) [EDIT: *Note: these were the actualhours flown for the year, all private]
Fixed (Hangar, Insurance) = $6380 p/a or $43/hr
Hourly Costs (Dry)] = $22/hr or $3300 p/a
[Provision for 50/100 hourly]
[Provision for COM/NAVAID Service]
[Provision for Refurbishment]
[Provision for Spares]
[Provision for Engine Overhaul]
Hourly Costs (Fuel) = $28.50/hr or $4275 p/a
So, annualised hourly rate is abour $93/hr or total of about $14,000 p/a.
Pretty close to some of the figures in the above posts.
By the way if you think fuel burn is a big component, if you DOUBLE the fuel cost on this basis, the hourly rate only goes up by 30%!
Applying this to a 30 year old PA28, I came up with the following figures,
150 hrs per year ( 4 seat 105 KIAS PA28 Aircraft)
Fixed (Hangar, Insurance) = $4075 p/a or $27/hr
Hourly Costs (Dry)] = $52/hr
[Provision for 50/100 hourly]
[Provision for COM/NAVAID Service]
[Provision for Refurbishment]
[Provision for Spares]
[Provision for Engine Overhaul]
Hourly Costs (Fuel) = $53/hr
So, annualised hourly rate is abour $132/hr or total of about $19,800 p/a.
I have got some really good data on R22 Helicopters too......droool (uh-oh!)
Last edited by Shitsu_Tonka; 11th Jul 2006 at 00:15.
I don't want to put a downer on any of this but, I think you ought to work your figures out on 50-100 hours per year, instead of 150. most private owners that i know are flat out making even 50 hours per year.
that will make your fixed cost cost seem worse when translated into an hourly rate, or at least, much more conservative.
A rough snapshot of expenses follow for a working(500 hours year) cessna (300hp), based at a country Field, hangared at no cost.
that will make your fixed cost cost seem worse when translated into an hourly rate, or at least, much more conservative.
A rough snapshot of expenses follow for a working(500 hours year) cessna (300hp), based at a country Field, hangared at no cost.
- admin-$1500
- avionics upgrades-$660
- Insurance-$8000
- landing fees-$700
- minor plant-$700
- repairs airframe, engine, avionics and 100 hourlies-$25000
- Fuel and Oil-$40000. (edited)
- engine and Prop provisions-$20000
Last edited by 185skywagon; 11th Jul 2006 at 23:38.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crickey you lot are talking some massively high figures for GA!!!
No wonder the RA-Aus fraternity is expanding and quickly heading for over 6,000 members and looking to take over the 750kg mark.
My 1,000 + hours of private flying in several years haven't even come close to some of the figures posted here.
I think you'll find that ownership in RA-Aus is far more economical than for GA hence the ever increasing popularity. $$$thousands of hours for 100 hourlies is totally unheard of in RA.
I think you'll also find that many if not most of the RA aircraft are self insured, thus bringing costs down significantly. RA-Aus membership carries it's own liability for external 3rd parties as part of the $145 cost.
Hopefully the LSA category will open the doors a little more for those of you who are GA operators and you'll realise the benefits of flying light.
XXX
No wonder the RA-Aus fraternity is expanding and quickly heading for over 6,000 members and looking to take over the 750kg mark.
My 1,000 + hours of private flying in several years haven't even come close to some of the figures posted here.
I think you'll find that ownership in RA-Aus is far more economical than for GA hence the ever increasing popularity. $$$thousands of hours for 100 hourlies is totally unheard of in RA.
I think you'll also find that many if not most of the RA aircraft are self insured, thus bringing costs down significantly. RA-Aus membership carries it's own liability for external 3rd parties as part of the $145 cost.
Hopefully the LSA category will open the doors a little more for those of you who are GA operators and you'll realise the benefits of flying light.
XXX
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: -28.1494 / 151.943
Age: 68
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I work full time for around 120K pa thats 10 K per month, if I spent the time required to build anything it would add at least that figure per month (plus tooling up for the project) in lost wages to pay for it. That aside I would have as much interest in building an aircraft as I have in wrestling polar bears. As before not everyone is in the same circumstances.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK Here is a trick
Now this makes it all more economical, GA RAA or whatever, find a really good aircraft partner. Not a syndicate of 3-12, just one other.
The costs for my plastic plane are based on say 75hrs/yr single owner $98/hr all up. However, when the fixed costs are split 50/50 and the same 75 hours are applied the cost is $68.83......as of todays fuel/oil/overhaul allowance etc. Yes that includes evrything including the TBO time which many do not save up for. And it leaves a bit of change in the kitty for unexpected repairs.
No matter what you want to fly, look at it this way. We never have a conflict over times of use, so pick the right person and fly for less.
Cheers
J
The costs for my plastic plane are based on say 75hrs/yr single owner $98/hr all up. However, when the fixed costs are split 50/50 and the same 75 hours are applied the cost is $68.83......as of todays fuel/oil/overhaul allowance etc. Yes that includes evrything including the TBO time which many do not save up for. And it leaves a bit of change in the kitty for unexpected repairs.
No matter what you want to fly, look at it this way. We never have a conflict over times of use, so pick the right person and fly for less.
Cheers
J
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: -28.1494 / 151.943
Age: 68
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The amount of salary has only a significance when calculating how long you spend at home to be able to build an aircraft or do your own plumbing for that matter .... if you stay at home enough you have all the time in the world.
Usually find that lower to no salary group are either retired or home every night (with exception of IT people who seem to be able to make plenty and stay at home) this then will give them the TIME to do it. Thus if I was interested in building my own Jab/Tec etc (refer polar bears) I would have to give up a large portion of that income which then (fairly) would have to be added to the building cost.
This also explains why some manage to do relatively small hours flying time each year.
cheers
Usually find that lower to no salary group are either retired or home every night (with exception of IT people who seem to be able to make plenty and stay at home) this then will give them the TIME to do it. Thus if I was interested in building my own Jab/Tec etc (refer polar bears) I would have to give up a large portion of that income which then (fairly) would have to be added to the building cost.
This also explains why some manage to do relatively small hours flying time each year.cheers
Hello Sunny W
78.2 hrs to be precise.
Lots I'd reckon. Funds weren't put aside for any of the above.
Your kidding me aren't you? Why on earth would you want to do that?
The aircraft is the best preserved and best looking 172N I've seen in the last 5 years. It presents as new. Would I get back what I paid for it? In the last two years the market has moved back about 15 to 20%. That low time 182R that you would have payed $200k's for two years ago can be picked up for around $160 to $165k's today (there are some exceptions to this, good low time late 210's for example). So to answer your question, no. I'm still having fun though!
As a matter of interest, how many flying hours did you do for your $9,500 in costs?
How much higher would that figure be if you added provisions for: possible top overhaul, possible cylinder replacement, engine overhaul, prop overhaul, instrument and avionics overhaul, repaint each five years or so, ditto internal refurbishment etc etc etc.
repaint each five years or so
Or do you propose to run our engine and prop hours and try to sell it with chalky paint and scruffy interior - and wonder why you can't get the same money for it as you paid for it?
