Microlites? Aye or Nae?
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NW England
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Permit aircraft are 'generally' home built group A aircraft and all microlights.
However, your post brings up a valid point - it's not necessarily what you fly, but how you fly.
The training costs should now be roughly equal if you go down the NPPL route as the group A and microlight are type ratings of the same license (albeit with strange quirks and ambiguities). It seems strange that you can pay £100 to train on a microlight and roughly the same for a PA28 / C150 - anyway.
Flying microlights is far from cheap as you have to purchase your own aircraft - rentals are rare, require solo flight only and will generally be in a training aircraft that has a non useage window. This is hardly flexible and reality means that you will have to purchase a microlight to fly at the end of your training. We won't go down the road of the £20K + hotships, but lets look at an older and used Thruster TST for about £6,000 for example and look at what 5 years worth of flying might cost you.
5 years
Interest on £6,000 - £15,000
insurance - £4,000
hangarage - £2,000
Total non operating costs over five years £21,000.
Stats suggest that a typical PPL achieves 30 hours per year flying.
Direct flying costs for 150 hours (5 years) would approx. be:
maintenance £1,000
fuel £2,200
two stroke oil £400
Total approx operating cost £3,600 + non opearting cost (£21,000) = £24,600 / 150 hours = £164 / hour providing that you can sell the Thruster for the same £6,000 in five years time.
Even if you completely remove the 'interest' element because it doesn't suit your way of viewing the figures it still works out at £67/hour - NOT CHEAP
Expand these figures outwards with the costs incurred for 'hotship' micros costing £20K plus and you would have to wonder if these people did maths at school or just like wasting money.
Microlights and group A aircraft can be cheaper to operate if the pilot changes their attitude to things - for example very low cost and de-riggable flex wings save money on insurance, hangarage and of course on capital outlay. More expensive aircraft of both types can be flown cheaply via group and syndicate schemes and many, many of these exist whereby a lump sum followed by a monthly payment and a wet or dry cost per hour used means that all members of the group contribute to the upkeep of the aircraft in proportion to their useage.
Personally, I fly microlights quite cheaply because I am in an informal group of 3 who operate a CFM Shadow and we share the on going cost three ways. I am looking for a similar group A arrangement to make that equally affordable, but I don't object to the walk in/walk away cost of renting a PA28 Club aircraft at £85/hour which no doubt could be negitiated down a bit with guranteed useage.
Sorry about the length of the post
Cheers all
However, your post brings up a valid point - it's not necessarily what you fly, but how you fly.
The training costs should now be roughly equal if you go down the NPPL route as the group A and microlight are type ratings of the same license (albeit with strange quirks and ambiguities). It seems strange that you can pay £100 to train on a microlight and roughly the same for a PA28 / C150 - anyway.
Flying microlights is far from cheap as you have to purchase your own aircraft - rentals are rare, require solo flight only and will generally be in a training aircraft that has a non useage window. This is hardly flexible and reality means that you will have to purchase a microlight to fly at the end of your training. We won't go down the road of the £20K + hotships, but lets look at an older and used Thruster TST for about £6,000 for example and look at what 5 years worth of flying might cost you.
5 years
Interest on £6,000 - £15,000
insurance - £4,000
hangarage - £2,000
Total non operating costs over five years £21,000.
Stats suggest that a typical PPL achieves 30 hours per year flying.
Direct flying costs for 150 hours (5 years) would approx. be:
maintenance £1,000
fuel £2,200
two stroke oil £400
Total approx operating cost £3,600 + non opearting cost (£21,000) = £24,600 / 150 hours = £164 / hour providing that you can sell the Thruster for the same £6,000 in five years time.
Even if you completely remove the 'interest' element because it doesn't suit your way of viewing the figures it still works out at £67/hour - NOT CHEAP
Expand these figures outwards with the costs incurred for 'hotship' micros costing £20K plus and you would have to wonder if these people did maths at school or just like wasting money.
Microlights and group A aircraft can be cheaper to operate if the pilot changes their attitude to things - for example very low cost and de-riggable flex wings save money on insurance, hangarage and of course on capital outlay. More expensive aircraft of both types can be flown cheaply via group and syndicate schemes and many, many of these exist whereby a lump sum followed by a monthly payment and a wet or dry cost per hour used means that all members of the group contribute to the upkeep of the aircraft in proportion to their useage.
Personally, I fly microlights quite cheaply because I am in an informal group of 3 who operate a CFM Shadow and we share the on going cost three ways. I am looking for a similar group A arrangement to make that equally affordable, but I don't object to the walk in/walk away cost of renting a PA28 Club aircraft at £85/hour which no doubt could be negitiated down a bit with guranteed useage.
Sorry about the length of the post
Cheers all
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fly Stimulator
Re congested areas, doesn't this mean that a P2F aircraft cannot ever go to e.g. Cambridge, or Biggin ?
This is off topic a bit but I would partially disagree with
Unless they have full instrument ratings, pilots flying CofA aircraft, while they can fly over towns, still have to remain VFR at all times and so are still totally dependent on the weather
It is true that legally a non-IR pilot needs to be in sight of the surface, but in reality (and I've been to France/Spain a number of times) there is a world of difference between
1) being "legally VFR" (being able to see the surface), and
2) being able to fly somewhere on the very basic PPL-only VFR skills (aircraft control by ref to natural horizon, and visual nav)
Weather in which you can be 1) but not 2) is very common, especially in summer, and not just in the UK. This is an area where e.g. the IMC Rating comes in very handy despite not being valid outside the UK.
tonyhalsall
Interesting data... however can anybody fly "cheaply" on just 30 hours a year? A kite maybe?
For £164/hour you can self fly hire a fairly reasonable normal plane. The normal very rough figure for ownership v. self fly hire on CofA planes tends to be 200hrs/year+ ... of course you do get huge benefits through ownership which are hard to put a figure on.
Re congested areas, doesn't this mean that a P2F aircraft cannot ever go to e.g. Cambridge, or Biggin ?
This is off topic a bit but I would partially disagree with
Unless they have full instrument ratings, pilots flying CofA aircraft, while they can fly over towns, still have to remain VFR at all times and so are still totally dependent on the weather
It is true that legally a non-IR pilot needs to be in sight of the surface, but in reality (and I've been to France/Spain a number of times) there is a world of difference between
1) being "legally VFR" (being able to see the surface), and
2) being able to fly somewhere on the very basic PPL-only VFR skills (aircraft control by ref to natural horizon, and visual nav)
Weather in which you can be 1) but not 2) is very common, especially in summer, and not just in the UK. This is an area where e.g. the IMC Rating comes in very handy despite not being valid outside the UK.
tonyhalsall
Interesting data... however can anybody fly "cheaply" on just 30 hours a year? A kite maybe?
For £164/hour you can self fly hire a fairly reasonable normal plane. The normal very rough figure for ownership v. self fly hire on CofA planes tends to be 200hrs/year+ ... of course you do get huge benefits through ownership which are hard to put a figure on.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Chichester, UK
Posts: 1,650
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interest on £6,000 - £15,000
...
you would have to wonder if these people did maths at school or just like wasting money.
...
you would have to wonder if these people did maths at school or just like wasting money.
also assuming 30 hours/year really skews the figures - you're dominated by the fixed costs. A "typical PPL" doesn't own an aeroplane, so trying again with 100 hours/year makes it look much better at around £35-£40/hr incl (reasonable!) interest...
Carbonfibre-based lifeform
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Expand these figures outwards with the costs incurred for 'hotship' micros costing £20K plus and you would have to wonder if these people did maths at school or just like wasting money.
In my case, taking everything from loss of interest on capital (no loan involved), depreciation, fuel, landing fees etc. into account the CT costs me about £50-ish per hour to fly. And yes, I did maths at school and beyond.
The hourly rate is very dependent on hours flown - I do 150 to 200 per year in the microlight alone.
Evo, yes, I wondered about that too. Barclaycard perhaps?
Carbonfibre-based lifeform
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540,
I completely agree, but I was just making the point that legally the restrictions faced by permit aircraft overseas are not much more onerous than for 'vanilla' PPLs in any aircraft.
In reality, if I got caught out by the weather in France in the SR20 I'd use the instruments and my IMC rather than scud running whatever the law said. In the microlight I'd have fewer options, though the ability to land in quite small fields would be useful.
And yes, although there is an exception for takeoffs and landings, the 'congested areas' rule does put the use some airfields into a bit of a grey area for permit aircraft.
It is true that legally a non-IR pilot needs to be in sight of the surface, but in reality (and I've been to France/Spain a number of times) there is a world of difference between ...
This is an area where e.g. the IMC Rating comes in very handy despite not being valid outside the UK.
This is an area where e.g. the IMC Rating comes in very handy despite not being valid outside the UK.
In reality, if I got caught out by the weather in France in the SR20 I'd use the instruments and my IMC rather than scud running whatever the law said. In the microlight I'd have fewer options, though the ability to land in quite small fields would be useful.
And yes, although there is an exception for takeoffs and landings, the 'congested areas' rule does put the use some airfields into a bit of a grey area for permit aircraft.
Permits
A permit is Britain's way of allowing to fly something that can't have an ICAO compliant CofA.
So, homebuilts, some vintage aeroplanes, microlights and warbirds all fly on permits. CAA's rule (and not a popular one in some quarters) is however that if it can have a CofA it must - so you can't take a PA28 and put it on a permit. Likewise, a permit Piper Cub hasn't been operated to CofA standards, so getting it onto a CofA is virtually impossible.
But, a group A aeroplane needs the same pilots license(s) regardless of whether it's on a CofA or a Permit.
Costs
On another note, Tony's figures sound to me a bit wide of the mark. Hull insurance is around 10% of hull value per year, so I'd expect on a £6k machine to be spending well under £1000pa on insurance, not something close to the full replacement value each year. Third party insurance is a hundred pounds or so and all most of us have on a low value aircraft thats easy to fix.
Borrowing money to buy a £6k aeroplane over 5 years, sounds somewhat unlikely to me. Most people would save up, or pay it off over 1-2 years, so the interest at worst would be £1000 or so. Here's the rough economics for my flexwing, which I fly about 40 hours per year in...
- de-rigged hangerage = £25pm = £300pa
- Annual airfield fees = £50
- Annual permit fees = £160 (£75 BMAA + £85 inspector)
- Annual insurance = £85 (3rd party only)
- Radio licence = £15
- BMAA membership = £45 (or thereabouts)
- Annual parts and oil ~£200 (about 50 : 50 oil : parts)
So I've a fixed cost of £855, or about £21/hr
Fuel is about 15 litres/hr of unleaded MOGAS, which is roughly another £12, so the total hourly running cost comes out around £33/hr. Double my hours, and it would be around £25/hr.
Looking at purchase costs, well I paid £3,600 for it in 1997 and its value has never dipped below about £3000. This year I've had to replace the engine, which has cost about £1000 and increased the aircraft's value (bigger engine and much less hours) to around £4000, so in terms of asset value the engine was almost free. If you want to factor it into my annual running costs, well it puts my flying for the year up to about £58/hr, which is almost exactly what my PA28 share costs me to fly, but with the benefits of being the sole owner.
I'm not saying that microlight flying is the be-all and end-all, just that I don't agree with Tony's case about the cost of microlight flying, it is very cheap unless you choose for it to be otherwise.
Equally I'm not disagreeing with Kingy's case that PFA can give equivalent cheap flying, only his assertion that the PFA system is better and cheaper, it's pretty much the same if you pick equivalent size and performance aircraft. There's no particularly sane argument, unless you're hourbuilding for an ATPL, to stick with group A for your cheap flying.
G
A permit is Britain's way of allowing to fly something that can't have an ICAO compliant CofA.
So, homebuilts, some vintage aeroplanes, microlights and warbirds all fly on permits. CAA's rule (and not a popular one in some quarters) is however that if it can have a CofA it must - so you can't take a PA28 and put it on a permit. Likewise, a permit Piper Cub hasn't been operated to CofA standards, so getting it onto a CofA is virtually impossible.
But, a group A aeroplane needs the same pilots license(s) regardless of whether it's on a CofA or a Permit.
Costs
On another note, Tony's figures sound to me a bit wide of the mark. Hull insurance is around 10% of hull value per year, so I'd expect on a £6k machine to be spending well under £1000pa on insurance, not something close to the full replacement value each year. Third party insurance is a hundred pounds or so and all most of us have on a low value aircraft thats easy to fix.
Borrowing money to buy a £6k aeroplane over 5 years, sounds somewhat unlikely to me. Most people would save up, or pay it off over 1-2 years, so the interest at worst would be £1000 or so. Here's the rough economics for my flexwing, which I fly about 40 hours per year in...
- de-rigged hangerage = £25pm = £300pa
- Annual airfield fees = £50
- Annual permit fees = £160 (£75 BMAA + £85 inspector)
- Annual insurance = £85 (3rd party only)
- Radio licence = £15
- BMAA membership = £45 (or thereabouts)
- Annual parts and oil ~£200 (about 50 : 50 oil : parts)
So I've a fixed cost of £855, or about £21/hr
Fuel is about 15 litres/hr of unleaded MOGAS, which is roughly another £12, so the total hourly running cost comes out around £33/hr. Double my hours, and it would be around £25/hr.
Looking at purchase costs, well I paid £3,600 for it in 1997 and its value has never dipped below about £3000. This year I've had to replace the engine, which has cost about £1000 and increased the aircraft's value (bigger engine and much less hours) to around £4000, so in terms of asset value the engine was almost free. If you want to factor it into my annual running costs, well it puts my flying for the year up to about £58/hr, which is almost exactly what my PA28 share costs me to fly, but with the benefits of being the sole owner.
I'm not saying that microlight flying is the be-all and end-all, just that I don't agree with Tony's case about the cost of microlight flying, it is very cheap unless you choose for it to be otherwise.
Equally I'm not disagreeing with Kingy's case that PFA can give equivalent cheap flying, only his assertion that the PFA system is better and cheaper, it's pretty much the same if you pick equivalent size and performance aircraft. There's no particularly sane argument, unless you're hourbuilding for an ATPL, to stick with group A for your cheap flying.
G
Last edited by Genghis the Engineer; 18th Nov 2003 at 19:41.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NW England
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi All,
Sorry if I sounded 'sneering' or you feel like the figures were inflated. Of course the one very inflated figure was caused by trying to do this at work with ringing telephones, incpoming email and the like. One BIG mistake early on throws all other calculations VERY skew wiff. 5% interest on £6,000 over 5 yeras is of course £1,500 - not £15,000 - how ironic that my post contained a reference to maths - it is just as well us Brits are so good at making fun of ourselves!! What a plonker I feel now!
Anyway........................................
No sneering intended at all - and the figures were not inflated. I did say that buying chaeper a/c will save money on insurance as you would probably take a 'punt' by insuring third party only. I accounted for approx. £600 hull, passenger and third party costing £1000 year one and reducing with experience (unlikely) ie approx. £4000 over the five years.
The interest calculation is interesting because one way or another the capital cost comes from somewhere and is placed into a normally depreciating asset. Saved money loses invested appreciation interest and borrowed money costs direct interest charges. I used a rough 5% interest charges taking into account that some people would save up and use potential savings, others would take bank loans and others would re-mortgage at the rough average interest only rate of 5%.
The whole point of the post being that it is not cheap to operate a cheap microlight (even at the correct £70/hour) and is even less cheap to operate for example a £45,000 CT2K and anything in between.
Yours, most humbly and with severely slumped shoulders and bowed head
Tony (the mathematician)
PS - Only got back from a trip to Moscow last night and I blame the Vodka - sorry guys
Sorry if I sounded 'sneering' or you feel like the figures were inflated. Of course the one very inflated figure was caused by trying to do this at work with ringing telephones, incpoming email and the like. One BIG mistake early on throws all other calculations VERY skew wiff. 5% interest on £6,000 over 5 yeras is of course £1,500 - not £15,000 - how ironic that my post contained a reference to maths - it is just as well us Brits are so good at making fun of ourselves!! What a plonker I feel now!
Anyway........................................
No sneering intended at all - and the figures were not inflated. I did say that buying chaeper a/c will save money on insurance as you would probably take a 'punt' by insuring third party only. I accounted for approx. £600 hull, passenger and third party costing £1000 year one and reducing with experience (unlikely) ie approx. £4000 over the five years.
The interest calculation is interesting because one way or another the capital cost comes from somewhere and is placed into a normally depreciating asset. Saved money loses invested appreciation interest and borrowed money costs direct interest charges. I used a rough 5% interest charges taking into account that some people would save up and use potential savings, others would take bank loans and others would re-mortgage at the rough average interest only rate of 5%.
The whole point of the post being that it is not cheap to operate a cheap microlight (even at the correct £70/hour) and is even less cheap to operate for example a £45,000 CT2K and anything in between.
Yours, most humbly and with severely slumped shoulders and bowed head
Tony (the mathematician)
PS - Only got back from a trip to Moscow last night and I blame the Vodka - sorry guys
Carbonfibre-based lifeform
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice to see such good grace in a posting 
I think we can all agree that the word 'cheap' rarely applies to any form of flying, and we're really just talking about various shades of 'expensive.'
Worth it though.
I think we can all agree that the word 'cheap' rarely applies to any form of flying, and we're really just talking about various shades of 'expensive.'
Worth it though.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Bristol and Forest of Dean
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great post Genghis,
I just want to pick up on a few points.... first off, I agree that BMAA or PFA permit costs are broadly the same, but I would point out that the PFA system allows owners to fly their own permit renewal flight test with an obvious small cost saving. (unless like me you own several aircraft!)
Secondly, I do disagree the costs are the same for similar size and performance aircraft here's an example: Kingy's Scooter
Ok, this aircraft has a max AUW of 318KG but it is group 'A' not a micro. It was hand built by a craftsman over a period of 22years. It flies beautifully, cruises at 75mph and uses 12Lph mogas. It takes off and lands in less than 200m. Permit costs are £85pa, fuel costs about a tenner per hour.
My point I am trying to make that is this aircraft is a work of art compared to the average micro. It was crafted over many thousands of hours from plans, It out performs 70% of microlites and costs the same or slightly less to operate. Surely, all things being equal, this aircraft should be worth more than an average micro...? What £6,8K?? No, amazingly I bought if for £1500!! with a new permit and only 40hrs TT.
Now why is this? Well, the only reason is that the average PPL doesn't know about the PFA system and the Micro people can't fly it! One thing is for sure, if and when I come to advertise it, I'll get many, many calls asking if it is a microlite....
Best
Kingy
I just want to pick up on a few points.... first off, I agree that BMAA or PFA permit costs are broadly the same, but I would point out that the PFA system allows owners to fly their own permit renewal flight test with an obvious small cost saving. (unless like me you own several aircraft!)
Secondly, I do disagree the costs are the same for similar size and performance aircraft here's an example: Kingy's Scooter
Ok, this aircraft has a max AUW of 318KG but it is group 'A' not a micro. It was hand built by a craftsman over a period of 22years. It flies beautifully, cruises at 75mph and uses 12Lph mogas. It takes off and lands in less than 200m. Permit costs are £85pa, fuel costs about a tenner per hour.
My point I am trying to make that is this aircraft is a work of art compared to the average micro. It was crafted over many thousands of hours from plans, It out performs 70% of microlites and costs the same or slightly less to operate. Surely, all things being equal, this aircraft should be worth more than an average micro...? What £6,8K?? No, amazingly I bought if for £1500!! with a new permit and only 40hrs TT.
Now why is this? Well, the only reason is that the average PPL doesn't know about the PFA system and the Micro people can't fly it! One thing is for sure, if and when I come to advertise it, I'll get many, many calls asking if it is a microlite....
Best
Kingy
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Genghis
CAA's rule (and not a popular one in some quarters) is however that if it can have a CofA it must - so you can't take a PA28 and put it on a permit.
Surely this is purely a revenue maintenance measure on the part of the CAA! Otherwise, every Private CofA spamcan would head for a P2F
Fly Stimulator
Is there a difference in the strength of a microlight versus e.g. your SR20/22? I realise one could build a composite <450kg plane which would be extremely strong - at a cost of perhaps £100k... but those I have seen all appear rather flimsy. Maybe it is deceptive. It would be relevant in turbulence.
CAA's rule (and not a popular one in some quarters) is however that if it can have a CofA it must - so you can't take a PA28 and put it on a permit.
Surely this is purely a revenue maintenance measure on the part of the CAA! Otherwise, every Private CofA spamcan would head for a P2F
Fly Stimulator
Is there a difference in the strength of a microlight versus e.g. your SR20/22? I realise one could build a composite <450kg plane which would be extremely strong - at a cost of perhaps £100k... but those I have seen all appear rather flimsy. Maybe it is deceptive. It would be relevant in turbulence.
Kingy
Works of art exist in all branches of aviation, and I've no problem with acknowledging that yours probably is - as undoubtedly are others in any class. It however is probably a work of art compared to the average flying machine, regardless of category.
On the check-flight issue, BMAA check pilots aren't allowed to charge for the flight, and anybody with a good excuse can get permission to do their own annual air-test. Conversely BMAA doesn't (unlike PFA) require an inspector to sign-off engine maintenance, but since nobody in PFA bothers with this, that difference is moot too. Nor really does the licensing issue make much difference, since the upgrade from NPPL(microlight) to NPPL(SEP) is only slightly more onerous than the difference training from group A to microlight.
I think that both microlights and the PFA system should be forced down the throats out of far too many people spending too much money to hire dull aeroplanes. Arguing that either is better than the other is like comparing apples and pears - both are cheap, worthwhile and a huge improvement on CofA for private flying.
IO540
Without a doubt, and it used to be even worse dealing with a certain department head at the CAA who had to defend this position when we all knew that he owned a piper Cub on a Permit to Fly. (He's now left CAA, but the policy hasn't.)
The certification rules for an SR20 and a composite microlight are virtually identical. The airframe mustn't break below +9/-4.5g, the MTOW must be at-least empty + 190lb/seat + 1hrs fuel. Both will have a working flight envelope of about +4/-2, and a Vne must be at-least 13% above maximum level speed.
G
Works of art exist in all branches of aviation, and I've no problem with acknowledging that yours probably is - as undoubtedly are others in any class. It however is probably a work of art compared to the average flying machine, regardless of category.
On the check-flight issue, BMAA check pilots aren't allowed to charge for the flight, and anybody with a good excuse can get permission to do their own annual air-test. Conversely BMAA doesn't (unlike PFA) require an inspector to sign-off engine maintenance, but since nobody in PFA bothers with this, that difference is moot too. Nor really does the licensing issue make much difference, since the upgrade from NPPL(microlight) to NPPL(SEP) is only slightly more onerous than the difference training from group A to microlight.
I think that both microlights and the PFA system should be forced down the throats out of far too many people spending too much money to hire dull aeroplanes. Arguing that either is better than the other is like comparing apples and pears - both are cheap, worthwhile and a huge improvement on CofA for private flying.
IO540
Without a doubt, and it used to be even worse dealing with a certain department head at the CAA who had to defend this position when we all knew that he owned a piper Cub on a Permit to Fly. (He's now left CAA, but the policy hasn't.)
The certification rules for an SR20 and a composite microlight are virtually identical. The airframe mustn't break below +9/-4.5g, the MTOW must be at-least empty + 190lb/seat + 1hrs fuel. Both will have a working flight envelope of about +4/-2, and a Vne must be at-least 13% above maximum level speed.
G
On the general subject I just spottedthis for sale , I did my first solo on one of these and flew one for a few years thereafter.
Cheap, fun, very pleasant to fly, good on short strips, and what microlighting was supposed to be about. Shame I can't afford it, bloody good price.
G
Cheap, fun, very pleasant to fly, good on short strips, and what microlighting was supposed to be about. Shame I can't afford it, bloody good price.
G
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Norfolk, England
Age: 58
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a real cheap pilot 
I thought I'd contribute ...
PFA types can be just as cheap ... in fact IMHO cheaper than most microlights if performance is taken into account. Like Gengis says, they both have similar costs but PFA types tend to be cheaper to buy as they are in less demand.
I've just formed a group (along with at least two other members of this forum) to operate a very pretty little Falconar (similar to a Jodel 120). We have initially started with a fairly high monthly sub which is intended to build a good engine and maintainance fund quickly, pay for insurance and hangarage and leave just fuel and oil to put in. We may reduce the monthly fee later, but as it is, it's still less than hiring a PA38 from the local club for one hour! So you could easily say that any flying after that first "expensive" hour each month, flying only costs around £20/hr + landing fee... not bad for an aeroplane that carries 2 full adults at 100 knots for 2 1/2 hours with light baggage! The money needed to own the share is simply an investment that probably will earn little interest but is hopefully safer than stocks and shares, so it's easy to just think of it as "money in the bank" and disregard it to a certain extent.
Still too expensive? well I also have an Evans VP2 which I operate from a farm strip on the farm I manage. It cost £2500 to buy, I don't insure it (but may decide to) and I do my own maint as and when needed ... a bit like you would with say an old motorbike. I reckon my hourly rate for the 40 hours mentioned is about £25 all in. She's not pretty, doesn't climb well and will only carry a pilot and child (or two very light adults) at 75mph. But! she's real fun and real cheap!
Still too expensive? Well I bought a very early flexwing microlight a couple of years ago for £650 ... flew it a few times and frightened myself ( I guess I should have had lessons
) so sold it for more than I payed ... I reckon my flying in it worked out at £25/hr profit ('') ... but could have cost dear! (but I'll leave that to another thread!)
So flying can be cheap, be it in microlights or PFA permit a/c ... or even CofA for that matter.
As for finding ways to justify the money we spend on flying ... I reckon not smoking pays for my habit. If a packet of 20 costs £5? and 20 a day is a moderate habit then by not smoking I can spend about £150/mth and enjoy good health. Cheapness is all relative to what disposable income you have available anyway so who's to say flying actually is expensive.
Is this all flawed thinking? I don't think so, and if I one day discover it is ... well there are worse ways to blow your hard earned!
IM
I thought I'd contribute ...PFA types can be just as cheap ... in fact IMHO cheaper than most microlights if performance is taken into account. Like Gengis says, they both have similar costs but PFA types tend to be cheaper to buy as they are in less demand.
I've just formed a group (along with at least two other members of this forum) to operate a very pretty little Falconar (similar to a Jodel 120). We have initially started with a fairly high monthly sub which is intended to build a good engine and maintainance fund quickly, pay for insurance and hangarage and leave just fuel and oil to put in. We may reduce the monthly fee later, but as it is, it's still less than hiring a PA38 from the local club for one hour! So you could easily say that any flying after that first "expensive" hour each month, flying only costs around £20/hr + landing fee... not bad for an aeroplane that carries 2 full adults at 100 knots for 2 1/2 hours with light baggage! The money needed to own the share is simply an investment that probably will earn little interest but is hopefully safer than stocks and shares, so it's easy to just think of it as "money in the bank" and disregard it to a certain extent.
Still too expensive? well I also have an Evans VP2 which I operate from a farm strip on the farm I manage. It cost £2500 to buy, I don't insure it (but may decide to) and I do my own maint as and when needed ... a bit like you would with say an old motorbike. I reckon my hourly rate for the 40 hours mentioned is about £25 all in. She's not pretty, doesn't climb well and will only carry a pilot and child (or two very light adults) at 75mph. But! she's real fun and real cheap!
Still too expensive? Well I bought a very early flexwing microlight a couple of years ago for £650 ... flew it a few times and frightened myself ( I guess I should have had lessons
) so sold it for more than I payed ... I reckon my flying in it worked out at £25/hr profit ('') ... but could have cost dear! (but I'll leave that to another thread!)So flying can be cheap, be it in microlights or PFA permit a/c ... or even CofA for that matter.
As for finding ways to justify the money we spend on flying ... I reckon not smoking pays for my habit. If a packet of 20 costs £5? and 20 a day is a moderate habit then by not smoking I can spend about £150/mth and enjoy good health. Cheapness is all relative to what disposable income you have available anyway so who's to say flying actually is expensive.
Is this all flawed thinking? I don't think so, and if I one day discover it is ... well there are worse ways to blow your hard earned!
IM
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread is whetting my appetite for something cheap for pottering over the Cheshire fields on cracking days like today (curvature of the earth viz, with villages hidden in mist-filled hollows with just church spires sticking out) and warm summer days and evenings.
It would need to be hangared on a farm strip (not an airfield) and be a PFA type or microlight. It must also be capable of accomodating a larger and heavier than average pilot (but single seat would be OK).
Anyone know of anything that would fit the bill in the Cheshire or nearby area?
SSD
It would need to be hangared on a farm strip (not an airfield) and be a PFA type or microlight. It must also be capable of accomodating a larger and heavier than average pilot (but single seat would be OK).
Anyone know of anything that would fit the bill in the Cheshire or nearby area?
SSD
I think that you should try looking at a Whittaker, either an MW5 (nosewheel microlight) or MW7 (tailwheel PFA). Both are low performance single seaters, buy-able for around £3.5k, with a decent payload - neither is pretty, but what the heck.
There are usually a few on the market, try the usual suspects.
G
There are usually a few on the market, try the usual suspects.
G
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Bristol and Forest of Dean
Posts: 321
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or on the other hand...
How about a Corben Baby Ace or Junior Ace. The Junior is 2 seat or rather 1-1/2 with someone like you or me as P1!. The Baby is single seat with good load capacity. Both use an A65/75 and are conventional Steel tube, wooden wing construction with good support from the kit manufacturer.
There always seems to be a Aircamper for sale too at about £10k - Fancy one of them too!.
Ace Aircraft
Best
Kingy
How about a Corben Baby Ace or Junior Ace. The Junior is 2 seat or rather 1-1/2 with someone like you or me as P1!. The Baby is single seat with good load capacity. Both use an A65/75 and are conventional Steel tube, wooden wing construction with good support from the kit manufacturer.
There always seems to be a Aircamper for sale too at about £10k - Fancy one of them too!.
Ace Aircraft
Best
Kingy
