Is a kit aircraft cheaper to maintain?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne
Age: 41
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is a kit aircraft cheaper to maintain?
Basic question, is a kit aircraft cheaper to maintain that's a factory built aircraft?
Can you carry out more maintenance on a kit that you can on a Cassna 150 say?
Can you carry out more maintenance on a kit that you can on a Cassna 150 say?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kit aircraft generally fall within the LAA's Permit to Fly regime, as opposed to the C of A system for certified aircraft such as the C150.
Yes, maintenance is cheaper, largely because you can do it yourself, or get a non certified company to do it for you, as long as it is then signed off by an LAA inspector.
You can expect to realistically have a cost of around £500 per annum maintenance with a Permit aircraft as opposed to between £1,500 and £10,000 (!) for a certified type.
These are ball park figures, but give a guide.
Yes, maintenance is cheaper, largely because you can do it yourself, or get a non certified company to do it for you, as long as it is then signed off by an LAA inspector.
You can expect to realistically have a cost of around £500 per annum maintenance with a Permit aircraft as opposed to between £1,500 and £10,000 (!) for a certified type.
These are ball park figures, but give a guide.
Cessna 150
A Cessna 150 has to be the best value for money aircraft on the market.
Although a bit slow you get a 'production' machine with a great spares back up, that can live outside with care.
They were developed from a 'taildragger' (120-140) so are as tough as old boots,and anyone can fly them.
I remember well that the Beagle Pup and the ARV (remember that) were going to see them off, but they never did,and there will be 100 year old ones still going if regulations allow.
Cessna 150 1+1
Cessna 172 2+ 1or two small
Cessna 180/182 4 + full fuel and luggage.
All the above assumes you need to climb after t-off.
If you want a single seater a Turbulent or RF4 takes some beating.
Plus the Jodel 112-150 range (but need hangars)
Although a bit slow you get a 'production' machine with a great spares back up, that can live outside with care.
They were developed from a 'taildragger' (120-140) so are as tough as old boots,and anyone can fly them.
I remember well that the Beagle Pup and the ARV (remember that) were going to see them off, but they never did,and there will be 100 year old ones still going if regulations allow.
Cessna 150 1+1
Cessna 172 2+ 1or two small
Cessna 180/182 4 + full fuel and luggage.
All the above assumes you need to climb after t-off.
If you want a single seater a Turbulent or RF4 takes some beating.
Plus the Jodel 112-150 range (but need hangars)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Cessna 150 has to be the best value for money aircraft on the market.
Although a bit slow you get a 'production' machine with a great spares back up, that can live outside with care.
They were developed from a 'taildragger' (120-140) so are as tough as old boots,and anyone can fly them.
I remember well that the Beagle Pup and the ARV (remember that) were going to see them off, but they never did,and there will be 100 year old ones still going if regulations allow.
Cessna 150 1+1
Cessna 172 2+ 1or two small
Cessna 180/182 4 + full fuel and luggage.
All the above assumes you need to climb after t-off.
If you want a single seater a Turbulent or RF4 takes some beating.
Plus the Jodel 112-150 range (but need hangars)
Although a bit slow you get a 'production' machine with a great spares back up, that can live outside with care.
They were developed from a 'taildragger' (120-140) so are as tough as old boots,and anyone can fly them.
I remember well that the Beagle Pup and the ARV (remember that) were going to see them off, but they never did,and there will be 100 year old ones still going if regulations allow.
Cessna 150 1+1
Cessna 172 2+ 1or two small
Cessna 180/182 4 + full fuel and luggage.
All the above assumes you need to climb after t-off.
If you want a single seater a Turbulent or RF4 takes some beating.
Plus the Jodel 112-150 range (but need hangars)
All homebuilt aircraft in the UK are LAA permit-to-fly or BMAA. Both will allow owner maintanance, which will save a LOT of money.
Some are from a kit, some are built from plans, with no kit. They will vary in how robust they are.
Some factory built aircraft are also on LAA permit-to-fly - e.g the Jodel DR1050 2+2 seater I fly and part own. We made great savings when we went from C of A to a permit - but lost night and instrument flying.
Some are from a kit, some are built from plans, with no kit. They will vary in how robust they are.
Some factory built aircraft are also on LAA permit-to-fly - e.g the Jodel DR1050 2+2 seater I fly and part own. We made great savings when we went from C of A to a permit - but lost night and instrument flying.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You will save a lot of cash by going for an LAA aircraft instead of a C of A. I had an AA5B on C of A which averaged out at about £5k per year; My MCR is averaging under £500 PA after 8 years. You do not save just the labor, the bits are less. A Rotax 912ULS is around £5k less than a Rotax 912ULS. The same engine, built on the same production line from the same parts but no certified paperwork and no certification cost to pay for. An uncertified glass panel like an MGL is around 1/10th of the cost of certified kit and even things like instruments are around ½ the cost.
Rod1
Rod1
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that simple !
As a general rule LAA types are cheaper to run but most LAA types are less capable in terms of range & payload.
Those LAA types that are more capable ( Vans aircraft spring to mind) are going to be closer to the price of a C of A aircraft.
What makes the LAA types cheap to run is the fact that you can do your own maintenance, however don't mistake DIY maintainence for an easy option your LAA inspector will expect your work to be up to the same standard that the best in the professional maintenance business. If you like getting your hands dirty the LAA is a good option, if not forget the idea because it will end in tears !
Those LAA types that are more capable ( Vans aircraft spring to mind) are going to be closer to the price of a C of A aircraft.
What makes the LAA types cheap to run is the fact that you can do your own maintenance, however don't mistake DIY maintainence for an easy option your LAA inspector will expect your work to be up to the same standard that the best in the professional maintenance business. If you like getting your hands dirty the LAA is a good option, if not forget the idea because it will end in tears !
Last edited by A and C; 23rd Feb 2013 at 23:22.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne
Age: 41
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys thanks for all the information. I'm hoping my skills will be upto scratch as I was an aircraft engineer for 12 years, carrying out repairs and servicing on aircraft.
The info about which kit to chose is useful also, thanks!
We are a family of 4 so 4 seats is a must as we holiday a lot in France and IoM!
Thanks again guys!
The info about which kit to chose is useful also, thanks!
We are a family of 4 so 4 seats is a must as we holiday a lot in France and IoM!
Thanks again guys!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Earth
Posts: 1,189
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you like getting your hands dirty the LAA is a good option, if not forget the idea because it will end in tears !
Many LAA owners pay engineers (retired and/or current) to carry out the work on their aircraft.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Peterborough
Age: 64
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not all maintenance work requires an LAA inspector sign off
See the LAA leaflet below which gives details of what work needs inspecting and what work can be signed off by the pilot/owner;
http://lightaircraftassociation.co.u...aintenance.pdf
Even where maintenance work needs to be carried out by an engineer, it's far far cheaper than the certified work required for a CAA type.
http://lightaircraftassociation.co.u...aintenance.pdf
Even where maintenance work needs to be carried out by an engineer, it's far far cheaper than the certified work required for a CAA type.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sth Bucks UK
Age: 60
Posts: 927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes. Owning an LAA aircraft is much, much cheaper that owning a certified one.
The ability to self-maintain and the lack of a requirement for certified parts are the key savers.
However, as already stated, the lack of night and IFR flying is a limitation although there's talk of that changing but who knows when or if.
I would also counter that in order to get the full benefit you need to be reasonably well-informed in the ways of making/fixing/repairing/maintaining mechanical things but even if you're not there are those that will do it for you at much less cost than it would be if done through the certified channels.
My annual on my Falco just cost me £350.00.
The ability to self-maintain and the lack of a requirement for certified parts are the key savers.
However, as already stated, the lack of night and IFR flying is a limitation although there's talk of that changing but who knows when or if.
I would also counter that in order to get the full benefit you need to be reasonably well-informed in the ways of making/fixing/repairing/maintaining mechanical things but even if you're not there are those that will do it for you at much less cost than it would be if done through the certified channels.
My annual on my Falco just cost me £350.00.
Last edited by stickandrudderman; 24th Feb 2013 at 08:16.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Monocock
You are misunderstanding me !
Those who pay for the aircraft to be maintaned are usualy OK..... it is those who think that DIY maintenance is the way forward and attempt it with little or no knowlage who get burnt.
As an LAA inspector I sometimes get asked to inspect aircraft maintaned by these people and it ends in tears when I wont sign for poor workmanship.
LAA aircraft usualy fall into two camps, the majority are very well maintaned and a credit to their owners .............. and the others !
Those who pay for the aircraft to be maintaned are usualy OK..... it is those who think that DIY maintenance is the way forward and attempt it with little or no knowlage who get burnt.
As an LAA inspector I sometimes get asked to inspect aircraft maintaned by these people and it ends in tears when I wont sign for poor workmanship.
LAA aircraft usualy fall into two camps, the majority are very well maintaned and a credit to their owners .............. and the others !
Last edited by A and C; 24th Feb 2013 at 13:21.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, I think like everything, it depends
I know of some CofA types that need only standard maintenance, that, to be honest is a little more than the cost of a Permit. However I also know of a number of real dogs of a kit-build. They will become moneypits.
So be very careful when buying a non factory-built. You don't know who originally built it and how good they were. Personally, having seen some real horror stories, I would never think of a kit-built, only a factory-built.
I know of some CofA types that need only standard maintenance, that, to be honest is a little more than the cost of a Permit. However I also know of a number of real dogs of a kit-build. They will become moneypits.
So be very careful when buying a non factory-built. You don't know who originally built it and how good they were. Personally, having seen some real horror stories, I would never think of a kit-built, only a factory-built.
Moderator
I second the sentiment presented by Robin and others. There's a lot of "depends" in this. If you have the experience, capability and facility to perform airworthy maintenance, and are willing to apply lots of your time at low value, you can make good advantage of none certified parts - if you can buy/make them in airworthy condition, to maintain a non C of A plane. My second plane is formerly certified, now "Owner Maintenance". It is cost competitive with my simpler C of A Cessna.
However, comparing the cost to buy a new, or used airworthy parts for a common Cessna or Piper, to the cost to fabricate a specialty part for the amateur built aircraft, which could be much more complex, or a whole higher assembly, there may not be a cost saving at all. Even if you choose to have a professional maintainer take care of your amateur built 'cause you recognize it's beyond your capacity, he may have to overcome maintenance and parts availability issues which would not be a challenge for the C of A type. You pay for that.
My experience has been that the common Cessna, Piper and like aluminum aircraft were designed for easy maintenance (access), an generally simple repair/replacement of common wear and damage parts. Designs for amateur built aircraft are often nowhere near as well thought out this way. For those that are, they are priced accordingly, and accordingly priced.
Take very good inventory of your capacity to maintain, before going DYI....
However, comparing the cost to buy a new, or used airworthy parts for a common Cessna or Piper, to the cost to fabricate a specialty part for the amateur built aircraft, which could be much more complex, or a whole higher assembly, there may not be a cost saving at all. Even if you choose to have a professional maintainer take care of your amateur built 'cause you recognize it's beyond your capacity, he may have to overcome maintenance and parts availability issues which would not be a challenge for the C of A type. You pay for that.
My experience has been that the common Cessna, Piper and like aluminum aircraft were designed for easy maintenance (access), an generally simple repair/replacement of common wear and damage parts. Designs for amateur built aircraft are often nowhere near as well thought out this way. For those that are, they are priced accordingly, and accordingly priced.
Take very good inventory of your capacity to maintain, before going DYI....
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“If you have the experience, capability and facility to perform airworthy maintenance,”
The facility that 99% of the LAA fleet require is the shed the aircraft is kept in on a daily basis. Previous experience is not a requirement. The LAA inspector system, other owners and the educational courses run specifically to help members learn how to look after LAA aircraft are all that you will need. None of this is new, it has been going on quietly all over the UK for 50 years plus and has kept pace with technology. You want to learn how to wire the latest uncertified glass into your machine, there is a course for that, etc etc.
This is really not as hard as the casual observer may think and as I have saved in the region of £70,000 over 8 years in total running costs compared with my old C of A aircraft I am very pleased with how the system worked for me.
Rod1
The facility that 99% of the LAA fleet require is the shed the aircraft is kept in on a daily basis. Previous experience is not a requirement. The LAA inspector system, other owners and the educational courses run specifically to help members learn how to look after LAA aircraft are all that you will need. None of this is new, it has been going on quietly all over the UK for 50 years plus and has kept pace with technology. You want to learn how to wire the latest uncertified glass into your machine, there is a course for that, etc etc.
This is really not as hard as the casual observer may think and as I have saved in the region of £70,000 over 8 years in total running costs compared with my old C of A aircraft I am very pleased with how the system worked for me.
Rod1