Best combo for starting a flying club
 

If you were going to start a flying club and Wanted an aircraft for training/hour building and an aircraft for touring what combo would you go for? Cessna 152 and PA28 or Cessna 150 and Cessna 172. Any thoughts?

Also, would you go for a grass strip or airfield with concrete and lighting as an operating base?

Why not C152 and C172?

Much against my personal choice, for the aircraft you are probably slightly better off going Cessna, though Pa 28 is also not a bad choice. I would love to be putting forwards an aircraft that handles decently but most of these will end up costing.
For location you are probably over simplifiying it, there are so many factors to take into account. Given other factors being equal then you are obviously better off with a hard surface as a grass runway will mean you lose days when it is too soft, but then you need to take into account how much you pay in lease costs/hangarage/landing fees etc. where your engineering will be done, how much competition is in the area and where your customers will come from, when you have taken all this into account you may find a hard runway is a bigger or smaller part of the descision.

foxmouth, wow, thank you for all the information which was very informative; full of factors and variables to consider. I agree, I think it comes down to PA28 vs Cessna. I am particularly interested in farm strip and short field training with one aircraft and hiring out the other aircraft for touring and rental.

Which region of this fair isle are you in?

Census, the same as your good self, East Mids.

How about a PA28 Warrior for rental and a Cessna 150 for farm strip training and hour building. Based at either Nottingham or Derby.

172 and 172, unless you've got a light instructor and don't accept heavy students?

In which case you also need to consider how close your base is to any farm strips you may have available plus it reduces the penalties of having a grass runway at your base. The ideal would be an airfield that has both grass and hard but that can be hard to find.

Thanks, I like the Cessna 172 and have noted that CC Pocock used it for Bush flight training in South Africa. But, I think you hit the nail on the head when you raised the issue of weight. Hence I'm thinking PA28 as one of the combo.

I'm thinking of dual basing at Derby and Nottingham so I can have the grass and concrete both available. Found a nice Cessna 150 for under 13k, but finding a PA28 is harder, although found a Warrior for under 60k. Not looking at PPL training. Really farm strip, hour building and rental.

To make economic sense, each aircraft needs to do at least 350 - 400 hours per year, in fact you shouldn't look at acquiring a second aircraft until you're looking at 350 hours on the first. The only way of getting up to those sorts of hours is to operate ab initio training with Trail Lesson sales. That means starting as an ATO, with all the paperwork etc and probably paid staff.
It also means sensibly, a 4-seater, to lift enough load for the +16 stone that many folk seem to be these days (and the blokes are even more!!). Finding either a PA28 or a C172 with an engine in calendar and clock hours that's presentable enough is going to be somewhere well in excess of £40k at the moment.
Sooo, if you're thinking C150 or 152, then for heavens sake look at Ikarus C42. MUCH cheaper to operate with similar mission profile. No hassle with having to set up an ATO for ab initio, though you might struggle to find one that's legal to rent out and an instructor who isn't already working elsewhere.

TOO

Theoddone, thank you. Very informative. You've got me thinking now. Maybe one Cessna 150 from Derby with trial lessons, hour building, and farm strip could do 350 hours per year. Ik C42 interesting, but I really want to rent out, although it could do farm strip flying!

What about a DA20C?
125HP, 5 US gallons/hr fuel burn and a lot more useful load then a C150/152.
Great little tourer and it will fly circles around an Arrow even...:ok:

http://www.chinaga.com/uploadfiles/2...0024565835.jpg

The question posed was "If you were going to start..." Is this a hypothetical exercise or are you intending to start a club? If you are actually intending to start a club, with only one or two aircraft, what is your back up plan when your primary training aircraft becomes unavailable and you have bookings?

I don't know what length or surface your farm strip has, but I'd suggest a C150/152 isn't the best choice, nor anything with small wheels.

I wouldn't think the likes of the DA20 would be much chop as a strip machine either.

I'd be going for a PA28 or C172 especially if this will be the initial and likely only aircraft to start with.

The PA28 and C172 give you versatility and performance. They can fill the training, 3 to 4 seat, and touring roles. While being slightly more expensive to run that a C150/152 the better utilisation you're likely get will likely mean your operating costs will not be much different than if you had a C150/152.

Some people will advocate the C172 as being a better strip machine than a PA28. While the high wing can offer advantages with respect to wing clearance around fences etc, the PA28 is still a good strip machine when flown accurately.

PA28's in my opinon are a cheaper airframe to maintain.

If you're concerned about back up for one aircraft, look around to see who might have a similar type that you can lease at short notice.

Then once you have the work to justify two aircraft get another one the same as the first. Common types/models have several advantages. e.g. it doesn't matter which aircraft you use for any particular job, one can be the back up for the other, as an operator you only need to become familiar with the quirks of one type, students can fly either one meaning you can be doing dual in one and the other is being used for solo training.

If you're not looking to flight instruct the 172/Pa28 are fuel hogs compared to the DA20 series..just sayin'

Fuel isn't everything plus you've only got 2 seats in the DA20.

Interesting, let us know how you get on.

Think about a Eurostar. It will pay for itself in short order. http://www.flybyhire.co.uk/default.html

Don't forget about post PPL flying.... Something interesting to keep members flying (and actually keep them as members). Taildragger, aeros come to mind.

First question to be answered is: "Will my chosen airfield let me start a new Club?"

@FlyingMac: may we extend that to "go for something Rotax-powered, at least for your basic trainer"

@Parson: a good remark, but a club needs to make sure to invest for the best interest of its members. That means low hourly rates which in turn means flying a lot of hours. It will depend on membership if aerobatic or taildragger planes will draw enough interest. In my observation (on the other side of the small pond) clubs only have such an exotism when they have at least five more conventional planes - microlights included.

Mr Average has a good point. Another club would not be allowed to set up in competition at my local field. Even if you were permitted to do so it probably would not be worth the aggro.

You would ideally have a bar and cafe or restaurant at the airfield. If it was yours you may actually make some money.

C172 or PA28 are the sensible choice. They have 4 seats and you can train in them. The C172, especially the 'S' models are good short field machines but the customers prefer Pipers. One of the schools nearby have tried every type you could think of over the last 30 years. Trago Mills, Grob 115, DA20 ARV, and a few others. Whilst the C152's have gone the fleet is still mostly Piper Warriors.

As TOO has already pointed out the aircraft have to do a substantial number of hours due to the high fixed costs. I reckon my Archer, 15 years ago cost £10000 per year before it flew.

Finally, one of our three runways is grass and on average it is usable 9-10 months of the year and is very labour intensive.

Actually, if you are looking to offer strip flying you may be better with something like a Piper Cub/Supercub, you can also then offer tailwheel courses.

Jan O - possibly, but if I was starting/running a flying club I would be seriously looking at keep members flying once they had they got their PPL. Many PPLs tire of the £100 (more like £200 these days..) bacon sandwich and anything that encourages them to fly more/progress has to be worth looking at.

A club doesn't have to buy such aircraft but could lease on an ad-hoc basis. Club where I learnt to fly had access to a privately owned Chipmunk which appealed to members and instructors alike!

C172 and Lancair Evolution Turbine ;-).

Yes, a good formula, a win-win if well done. My club offers an aerobatic CAP-10 that way.

Cessna 170B, or taildragger 172. Good general trainer, side by side, and taildragger experience as a part of the learning!

methinks this might be a fishing expedition.

IF your thinking of setting up a club/school on a strip, what are the restrictions in terms of movements and noise at said strip?

Where will you get your fuel? If you plan to "sell" fuel to your club members then you need to be licensed to store and sell it, talking about storing.................

The club will, no doubt, need staff, even if they're volunteers, which means insurance and stuff. What your doing is setting up a business and will need all the same liability insurances any other business needs.

If your club is to sell alcohol, well, there is yet another license

need I go on?

one last thought, in the area you mention, there are quite a few well established schools and clubs already, can the market take another?

Fine if you wish to deliver training for microlight and probably just about the ugliest small aircraft in modern day production.

In practical terms, what's the difference between a club and group ownership with several aircraft?

I have a single seater which costs about £10-18 per hour in fuel depending on how fast I go. I wanted it for currency, as I felt I was getting rusty enough that I couldn't afford to fly enough to trust myself with other people's lives. Also, I couldn't afford to fly far enough to go anywhere interesting.

My ideal would be to co-own several aircraft - something small and cheap, something aerobatic, and something good for touring with a couple of people. As co-ownership would open up the prospect of permit types, costs would be lower and choice of aircraft could be considerably more varied.

Avoid 150/152s like tbe plague. They have too little performance from grass to be worthwhile. Stay safe and use a 172. Start with at least three to cover unserviceablities and once you have a thriving club start looking at something more interesting. More interesting equals tailwheel (Cub, Moth etc.), aerobatic and/or vintage. If people want a fast tourers, let them form syndicates to buy them.

But what ever you do, avoid runway hogs and things with a poor load carrying.

PM

"Avoid 150/152s like tbe plague. They have too little performance from grass to be worthwhile."

That's odd, I fly my 150 off grass all the time, all year round. Careful handling needed when its muddy and I have been known to take off with low fuel loadings in the winter and make a short hop to the nearest hard runway with fuel. MTOW always needs care with 150/152's to stay within limits.

I do find it an odd reflection of this hobby of ours, though, that when thinking about a shiny new venture considerations are given to having the core asset being something which hasn't been manufactured for 40 years !

A bit like driving schools using Morris Minors and teaching double declutching...

Shows what a good trainer Mr Cessna turned out all those years back. Also shows how durable they turned out to be.

What would Martin have to say about you moving in on his territory at Derby?

It would just be a non starter.

Well, avoid the plague for sure. As for 150's operating from grass runways, I have 29 years, and 3000 hours of that operation in mine which assures me that it's perfectly fine. Now, in the early days, I did lengthen my home runway from 700 feet, to 1700, to increase my margin of comfort, and allow full loads on hot days, so I agree the 150 is not the best plane to haul a load out of a short runway on a hot day. The planes which haul the loads out of short runways well are more expensive to operate, and insure, and less well suited for initial training. But broad brushing any type as inadequate is not helpful.

The first sentence is a load of rot, the C150/152 is not the best trainer by any means, durable, with readily available spares and cheap to operate is what makes them a good school machine!

Struggling to see where, in the first sentence it was stated that the C150/152 is the "best" trainer?

I've not said a 150/152 can not operate from grass. It is just that even operating from a paved runway you too often have a TOW restriction. I've also done enough time in an asthmatic 152 to know how pathetic their performance is and quite why people describe them as good trainers is beyond me. I've flown PA 18, 28, 32 & 38s, C150/152/172 (various)/206 & 207, Robin DR400 and quite a hours in other more interesting types. The most unpleasant to fly were the C150/152 and PA38. The most useful, from a PPL perspective was the DR400. But it is not a good club aircraft. It needs a hanger and people who will respect it.

Returning to the 172, I've done enough ab-initio instruction in one to know that that they are a good teaching platform. A 172 can lift more from less. Quite how much more it costs to operate than a 150/152 I'm not sure but it has to be worth it. Hatton asked about the best aircraft to start a group with. Any aircraft where you have too many limits is best avoided. One with more performance means more utility which means a better club operation. And as someone said above, it's a shame we have to look at relics for current operations. This is true cost of lawyers and product liability insurance.

PM