The real costs in GA and can we lower them?
Moderator
Whisky Oscar Golf,
My CASA compliance costs (renewals, audits, medicals etc) are a fixed cost and constitute 0.001% of my annual turnover.
Other costs such as landing fees are variable, and passed directly on to the customer, they do not affect the gross margin.
Good post Sunfish, amazing how the uneducated think that all customers are good customers...and are prepared to give them an indefinate interest free loan (ie extend credit) then moan and groan "so and so owes me X thousand dollars since a year ago so I can't pay the my bills"
as they lean out of their $60 000 car window.
Which leads me to another "cost" directors taking unrealistic amounts out of the business for themselves, rather than a commission or dividend; or financing assetts that don't produce an income (such as brand new cars) when their aeroplanes are falling to bits.
My CASA compliance costs (renewals, audits, medicals etc) are a fixed cost and constitute 0.001% of my annual turnover.
Other costs such as landing fees are variable, and passed directly on to the customer, they do not affect the gross margin.
Good post Sunfish, amazing how the uneducated think that all customers are good customers...and are prepared to give them an indefinate interest free loan (ie extend credit) then moan and groan "so and so owes me X thousand dollars since a year ago so I can't pay the my bills"
as they lean out of their $60 000 car window. Which leads me to another "cost" directors taking unrealistic amounts out of the business for themselves, rather than a commission or dividend; or financing assetts that don't produce an income (such as brand new cars) when their aeroplanes are falling to bits.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Usually Australia
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CASA compliance costs
CFI
It isn't the minor compliance costs that impact upon an operator, it is the major costs to add additional equipment when the regulations change. Admittedly some lead time may allow negotiation or budget review but sooner or later compliance hits.
I'm referring to major cost items such as TAW-B or EGPWS for example. I wouldn't be surprised if GNSS goes through some sort of a revamp requiring more ergonimically enhanced equipment to gap the early installations into something more akin to the Proline 21 base on new turbo fans/props. Probably an over-exageration but I'm sure you get my drift.
I guess brand new executive cars at least come with a warranty ... not so a thirty year old meat-tray! I thought most executives would salary sacrifice into a fleet lease arrangement and enjoy a tax saving as well.
It isn't the minor compliance costs that impact upon an operator, it is the major costs to add additional equipment when the regulations change. Admittedly some lead time may allow negotiation or budget review but sooner or later compliance hits.
I'm referring to major cost items such as TAW-B or EGPWS for example. I wouldn't be surprised if GNSS goes through some sort of a revamp requiring more ergonimically enhanced equipment to gap the early installations into something more akin to the Proline 21 base on new turbo fans/props. Probably an over-exageration but I'm sure you get my drift.
I guess brand new executive cars at least come with a warranty ... not so a thirty year old meat-tray! I thought most executives would salary sacrifice into a fleet lease arrangement and enjoy a tax saving as well.
Any ideas of real operating cost of TBM 700's and the like?
Anyone with operating experience on them in Oz?
What about the Airvan??
It seems that these are the sort of machines that will be around in 20 years time.
If they can get a 400 hp Turbine or Diesel into the Airvan, they could be real handy in the airwork field, although I haven't flown one of the current models.
Anyone with operating experience on them in Oz?
What about the Airvan??
It seems that these are the sort of machines that will be around in 20 years time.
If they can get a 400 hp Turbine or Diesel into the Airvan, they could be real handy in the airwork field, although I haven't flown one of the current models.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: back to the land of small pay and big bills
Age: 50
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Theres still no getting around it..Aircraft parts are way over priced. Maybe not the main aircraft structure..built in a smaller scale factory. But a huge amount of nuts bolts washers generators/alternators etc are just generic automotive stuff that is available at supercheap auto for one ten the price of the Cessna dealer. I worked for three years in GA and the owner operator of my company was constantly tearing his hair out over ridiculous prices. Especially for seals.
Remind me never to fly in an aircraft maintained by you or your fellow believers in supercheap auto.
Without wishing to rant, just because it looks the same doesn't make it the same. there are an infinite variety of mechanical properties, let alone design properties, metallurgical properties and tolerances in even a humble washer to provide an almost infinite number of ways something can be different from something else.
For the record, a very great deal of automotive products are of tighter tolerance than aircraft stuff and of excellent quality, and at very cheap prices because of economies of scale. For all I know, Cessna, Piper and others may indeed by their fastening or whatever from Bunnings, Wal Mart or Supercheap Auto and charging us zillions for them - but you and I don't know that, and we cannot see into the minds of the engineers to discover why they specified certain parts.
However if you replace an aircraft part with an automotive part, (apart from it being illegal) you are now an instant test pilot. Even if your "high tensile bolt" from supercheap has exactly the same "load rating" (leaving aside the obvious question of how this rating was arrived at), you have absolutely no way of knowing if it's performance is going to be identical in an aviation environment.
While someone may like to correct me, the item may have an equivalent tensile strength but be different in hardness, ductility, fatigue resistance, elasticity, corrosion and temperature limits and so on.
The properties of materials can be quite subtle as unfortunately demonstrated by this accident. You can even bugger things up by using a higher performance (or so you think) substitute item.
http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/...303579_001.pdf
Without wishing to rant, just because it looks the same doesn't make it the same. there are an infinite variety of mechanical properties, let alone design properties, metallurgical properties and tolerances in even a humble washer to provide an almost infinite number of ways something can be different from something else.
For the record, a very great deal of automotive products are of tighter tolerance than aircraft stuff and of excellent quality, and at very cheap prices because of economies of scale. For all I know, Cessna, Piper and others may indeed by their fastening or whatever from Bunnings, Wal Mart or Supercheap Auto and charging us zillions for them - but you and I don't know that, and we cannot see into the minds of the engineers to discover why they specified certain parts.
However if you replace an aircraft part with an automotive part, (apart from it being illegal) you are now an instant test pilot. Even if your "high tensile bolt" from supercheap has exactly the same "load rating" (leaving aside the obvious question of how this rating was arrived at), you have absolutely no way of knowing if it's performance is going to be identical in an aviation environment.
While someone may like to correct me, the item may have an equivalent tensile strength but be different in hardness, ductility, fatigue resistance, elasticity, corrosion and temperature limits and so on.
The properties of materials can be quite subtle as unfortunately demonstrated by this accident. You can even bugger things up by using a higher performance (or so you think) substitute item.
http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/...303579_001.pdf
