Shares in aircraft
"Trust Me"
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Egham, UK
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Half the battle with shared aircraft groups is if you've got somebody who is quite. .interested in the groups future to run it, and secondly if all the guys/girls in group. .respect other members and are pleasant to each other"
Absolutely EGCC. We're lucky in that respect. One chap who didn't fit in a few years ago was bought out and evicted from the group. We've now even incorporated a 'kick-out'/awkward b*gger' clause!!
Rgds. .DOC
Absolutely EGCC. We're lucky in that respect. One chap who didn't fit in a few years ago was bought out and evicted from the group. We've now even incorporated a 'kick-out'/awkward b*gger' clause!!
Rgds. .DOC
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On condition engines are not a good idea in the short term you may get some "free" engine hours but I,v seen no end of groups try to keep an old engine going and all that happens is they end up with newish cylinders on a run out bottom end.
Now i know that some cheapskate out there will tell me about his 2900 hour on condition engine but when this engine goes for OH you can bet that the crank and cam will be scrap and the cost of replacment of these items will far out strip the cost per hour of a OH engine.
Doc400 befor you go down this expencive road give me a call as there is far more to this than i have time to type here.
To return to the topic of this thread i cant see how you can run an aircraft for less than £30/hr in technical costs plus fuel , parking , insurance and all the other nif-naf and trivia that goes with aircraft.
[ 10 February 2002: Message edited by: A and C ]</p>
Now i know that some cheapskate out there will tell me about his 2900 hour on condition engine but when this engine goes for OH you can bet that the crank and cam will be scrap and the cost of replacment of these items will far out strip the cost per hour of a OH engine.
Doc400 befor you go down this expencive road give me a call as there is far more to this than i have time to type here.
To return to the topic of this thread i cant see how you can run an aircraft for less than £30/hr in technical costs plus fuel , parking , insurance and all the other nif-naf and trivia that goes with aircraft.
[ 10 February 2002: Message edited by: A and C ]</p>
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can I just add. I've got a share in a PFA aircraft. Its a very, very cheap aircraft, very basic. There are 6 shares, they cost under £1000 each. We pay £30 per month and no hourly rate. The £30 a month covers all hangarage, 50 hour checks (done ourselves, but covers parts), and the annual check. It also leaves a bit spare. I think in the last 3 years I have probably had to pay an extra £100 in total, for things like a new prop, engine work, etc. Usually the £30 per month also covers insurance, but it depends if anything nasty has happened to the plane during the year. We have someone allocated as "secretary of the group" in charge of admin/ finance/ sending letters out etc. and also someone allocated for maintenance/ keeping log books up to date, etc. Although they can rope in who they like!. .So. 3 points. . .1. You can find aircraft for £15 per hour wet. (Ours uses around £6 fuel per hour and that is all we pay for).. .2. If the group is well run it doesn't need to cost the earth.. .3. Always know what you are getting into. Check the aircraft isn't about to need a major overhaul. Check the group is well run, has a good booking system, etc.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Grandad as a PFA inspector i fully suport your efforts towards cheap flying , but most people dont want to get there hands dirty doing the maintenance and there are some who you would not let within 50ft of an aircraft with a spanner this is why i find that PFA aircraft have vastly diferent maintenance standards , mostly very good but once in a wile i find a real dog.
How meny hours do you and your group do a year ? How much fuel do you burn per hour ? and do you have an engine fund ?
I ask these questions because i am trying to get a true picture of your type of group memership.
I have seen a number of group set-ups and some are not co-opperative efforts but are time lease opperations that run using the monthly fees to cover all the costs and with some groups the costs to the owner go up once the aircraft flys because the selling point of the group is a low hourly rate that wont cover the maintenance passed 150hr/year ,these groups rely on the british weather and low aircraft usage to to make a profit for the owner.
How meny hours do you and your group do a year ? How much fuel do you burn per hour ? and do you have an engine fund ?
I ask these questions because i am trying to get a true picture of your type of group memership.
I have seen a number of group set-ups and some are not co-opperative efforts but are time lease opperations that run using the monthly fees to cover all the costs and with some groups the costs to the owner go up once the aircraft flys because the selling point of the group is a low hourly rate that wont cover the maintenance passed 150hr/year ,these groups rely on the british weather and low aircraft usage to to make a profit for the owner.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Niort
Posts: 1,235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what is it about engines that brings out the witch doctor approach? The idea that an 'on condition' engine is some kind of hand grenade or bottomless hole in a bank account is complete garden fertiliser.
All engines are essentially 'on condition'. In other words if it fails the compression checks, losses oil pressure, burns an excessive amount etc etc you have to fix it. Amazingly that doesn't suddenly happen at 2001 hours. In the majority of lightly used aircraft it happens long before 1000 hours.
Regularly and considerately using an engine will allow it to easily exceed its recommended tbo. My Continental C90 (tbo 1800 hours) did 2600 hours with a single cylinder replacement. I sold it and within 120 hours the engine was a near write off - why? Because it no longer got a gentle warm through before flight, clean oil, slow temperature changes and cruising at 65%. Instead the ace jumped in took off, boosted about the 100 knot cruise and the amazing descent ability - and paid for it.
The other bits of this thread that the camshaft and crankshaft will be k****ered shows how little people know about 're-built' engines. Only the manufacturers zero time engines actualy have new internal components - all the others have the old components, carefully checked and inspected, sometimes refinished, but put back in-service. It is by no means unusual to find a 'zero-timed' engine with 3rd or 4th run crankcases, 2nd or 3rd run rotating parts. Remember the bearings are supposed to wear - not the rotating components. Camshafts - particularly on Lycomings rarely last beyond the 1st run, but that is just a symptom of the loads on them.
The secret to long engine life is use it often and considerately - the only problem from groups is there is usually a number of people who cannot or will not.
All engines are essentially 'on condition'. In other words if it fails the compression checks, losses oil pressure, burns an excessive amount etc etc you have to fix it. Amazingly that doesn't suddenly happen at 2001 hours. In the majority of lightly used aircraft it happens long before 1000 hours.
Regularly and considerately using an engine will allow it to easily exceed its recommended tbo. My Continental C90 (tbo 1800 hours) did 2600 hours with a single cylinder replacement. I sold it and within 120 hours the engine was a near write off - why? Because it no longer got a gentle warm through before flight, clean oil, slow temperature changes and cruising at 65%. Instead the ace jumped in took off, boosted about the 100 knot cruise and the amazing descent ability - and paid for it.
The other bits of this thread that the camshaft and crankshaft will be k****ered shows how little people know about 're-built' engines. Only the manufacturers zero time engines actualy have new internal components - all the others have the old components, carefully checked and inspected, sometimes refinished, but put back in-service. It is by no means unusual to find a 'zero-timed' engine with 3rd or 4th run crankcases, 2nd or 3rd run rotating parts. Remember the bearings are supposed to wear - not the rotating components. Camshafts - particularly on Lycomings rarely last beyond the 1st run, but that is just a symptom of the loads on them.
The secret to long engine life is use it often and considerately - the only problem from groups is there is usually a number of people who cannot or will not.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Half truths once more ........the reason that going much passed the TBO on an engine is not a good idea is that the crankshaft wears below the overhaul limit (normaly in ovality) because the clearance between the bearing shells and the crank has worn to large.
As for cams warming of the oil befor running at high RPM is critical to long life as once they start to break up the steel particals from the cam become embedded in the pistons and so it is a race between the cam and the compression to see which drags the engine to the hangar because of low power first.
but of course what is the point of putting new cylinders on a high time engine as the chances of getting your moneys woth are remote.
As i posted above some one will all ways have an engine that has run for hundreds of hours over the TBO but across the fleet of engines you will find that going over TBO by more than 15 to 20% is expencive in the long run ,only you can decide if it is worth the financhal and saftey risk.
As for cams warming of the oil befor running at high RPM is critical to long life as once they start to break up the steel particals from the cam become embedded in the pistons and so it is a race between the cam and the compression to see which drags the engine to the hangar because of low power first.
but of course what is the point of putting new cylinders on a high time engine as the chances of getting your moneys woth are remote.
As i posted above some one will all ways have an engine that has run for hundreds of hours over the TBO but across the fleet of engines you will find that going over TBO by more than 15 to 20% is expencive in the long run ,only you can decide if it is worth the financhal and saftey risk.
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A and C, in answer to your queries.. .I understand that some people can't be bothered with maintaining their own aircraft, personally I have no problem with doing relatively easy stuff. Once I have been shown how to do it, that is fine. But then our aircraft is not too difficult to work on. Stuff like 50 hour checks are OK. We also encourage group members to come and "help" which usually involves them getting their hands dirty and finding out how to do things. Generally people are very keen at the beginning and this is the time to do this!
We are lucky to have engineers, PFA inspectors, etc. to ask for advice if we need it. Our regular "annual" inspector knows our work now and is happy with how we maintain our aircraft, which is good.
As for the other questions, we do not have an engine fund, we do build up a small surplus in the bank each year which has so far covered general work, but our engine is not that old and so at present the current members would prefer not to build up an engine fund.
The hours it flys vary alot. At present it is not doing that many hours, low hundreds, but it has in the past been flown very regularly. It uses around 2 gallons of fuel per hour, depending on how economically it is flown.
We are lucky to have engineers, PFA inspectors, etc. to ask for advice if we need it. Our regular "annual" inspector knows our work now and is happy with how we maintain our aircraft, which is good.
As for the other questions, we do not have an engine fund, we do build up a small surplus in the bank each year which has so far covered general work, but our engine is not that old and so at present the current members would prefer not to build up an engine fund.
The hours it flys vary alot. At present it is not doing that many hours, low hundreds, but it has in the past been flown very regularly. It uses around 2 gallons of fuel per hour, depending on how economically it is flown.
