On the whole, pilots are more likely to tell you how LITTLE they manage to fly for, than boast about how much they spend. And I haven't actually seen anyone doing either on this thread, or if they have no-one else has really noticed. We're just a bunch of aviation addicts who spend what we can afford...and then some...and then more...and then....... :eek:

Lighten up!
 

CJ lighten up a bit.

Someone asked a question and some have given a reply and some an anwer ;)

Nobody forcing you to commit your spend to the bulletin board or have a look around.

Although it is true that money does not make you a better aviator the reverse is certainly not true either.

On the whole generalisations like the one you make are pretty unhelpful and polarizing.

Have found though that even the most fervent supporters of your thesis never turn a flight down in something lean and mean when offered the opportunity. Do you? :eek:

Followers of Freud in psychoanalysis deem aeroplanes to be phallus icons.

Have fun.

FD

So nobody dragged me to this forum nor threatened pain if I don't post my annual spend and that means I shouldn't be here commenting!.

In offering what you may consider to be an ill informed view I am only doing what others do on this forum yet you choose to pick on me.

Perhaps I have pricked some pomposity and defalted an ego somewhere well all well and good if I have.

I don't intend to boast about my earnings, my spend, or the size of my member but then if you were as disadvantaged as me in these area nor would you. Doesn't stop me wanting to point out that not everyone can afford three luxury homes, a fleet of helicopters, five cruis liners, and a ferrari for each day of the week.

Come on CJ, pricking (or showing-off) anybody's egos was never the intention of the thread - if you want to do that there are other places to do so.

The question was what is the annual spend of a private or recreational pilot? Well, I think we've all demonstrated that it varies hugely.

Somebody once said (I think it was after Lord somebody or other inadvertently electrocuted himself changing a lightbulb) that it was the role of the wealthy man to create employment for the artisan. Taking all at face value, rotorboater is a wealthy man - so by operating these various toys he is keeping various boat designers, sports car manufacturers, aircraft builders, technicians, etc. in gainful employment. I doubt his helicopter is British, but if his boats are, he's also contributing to the health of the UK economy. People like him keep people like me (I work in the design and approval of recreational aeroplanes) in gainful employment, for which I and my bank manager are grateful. If he has this money, obtained through whatever (one hopes legitimate) means, by spending it he's doing some good, even if he is ultimately spending more on his expensive toys than most of us make before tax.

Or in other words, leave the chap alone and stick to the subject. Once airborne, the only inequalities are down to our individual abilities anyway.

G

Chipjockey -- the politics of envy. What is this the Daily Mail or something?!

Good luck and clear skies to whoever has two yachts and a helicopter and is prepared to tell us what they spend in answer to an honest question.

Quit beefing and take your small-minded attitudes elsewhere.

QDM

Well, this has made very interesting reading and i'd like to thank those of you who shared your budgetary information so openly!

Steve, your log is particularly informative.

Now, this invites another question which i will post a new thread for.

Happy Christmas and safe flying to all!

W

Chip Jockey

I am in no way trying to boast and I am definatly not wealthy, all I was trying to stress that all my toy's are under used which happens because I work 85 hours a week and have flown over 100,000 miles this year (in the back unfortunatly). My spare time is very precious and I want to spend as much of it doing things I love, like flying and sailing. The fact I spend an inordinate share of my income on it is my choice, why don't you try being positive about something in the future and not be so wound up, you will end up with heart problems and then you won't be allowed to fly at all!

Forget Chip Jockey, he's a hoax.

Back to the question......

Owning a light single I would say that the more i fly the more I save (or at least I convince myself of that).

Fixed costs: Insurance and maintenance. Own hangarage on farm so not an issue (if that's okay with Chip Jockey)

Variable Costs: Fuel, Landing fees, GPS batteries (!), oil.

As an aircraft owner one must not forget that these things appreciate over time. I bought a four place Cessna for 28k and sold it after four years for 34k. The 1.5k appreciation per year actually paid 50% of my flying costs I suppose...............hourly cost for that period was £20 per hour.

Otherwise I cost it at around £43 per hour based on an 85 hrs per year budget.

Steve, you are really a glutton for punishment! Sure hope your wife never finds that information. :D Why do you keep such meticulous records?

I try not to think about what I spend - and have certainly never budgeted a fixed amount for flying - but VERY roughly it works out like this each year (prices in Canadian dollars):

(1) glider club membership: $500;
(2) glider rental: $400;
(3) glider tows: approximately $250;
(4) airplane rental: 50 hours @ $90 = $4,500
(5) instruction: five hours @ $40 = $200

Total = C$5,850 (= approx. £2,350). Money well spent, I think. You only live once ...

If I average 20 hours of soaring pa, then that works out to a total of 70 hours each year, yielding an average hourly cost of about C$83 (= £34). But each year I also fly about 25 hours (for free) in our gliding club towplane, so that brings the hourly cost down to $65 (= £26). I can live with that.

God. You made me get the calculator out :(

£35ph, £75pm, plus surprise maintainence outlays, landing fees and bacon sarnies ;), averaging 60hrs over the last year...

£2100 + £900+ £900 + £200ish + £30ish...

£4130 :eek:

Some of that will have been subsidised by pax here and there, but not much - maybe just £100-£200.

Our three man group owns 4 aircraft and I own another half share. Of the five (all PFA types) 2 have been U/S all year. Ive done 80 hours in the others.

Fuel costs are 4 G/H mogas = £14X 80 = £1120
Hangarage = £77PCM = £ 924
Servicing, inspections, oil
Permit renewals etc... = £ 500

TOTAL = £2544 or £ 31.80PH

Here's the interesting bit - If I sold my shares in the three group planes and the half share, but retained my share in the L4 Cub I flew the most last year look what happens to the costs...

Fuel costs Same = £1120
Hangarage = £ 160 (!)
Permit&upkeep = £ 150

Total = £ 1430 or £ 17.88PH

AND I DRAW APPROX £14K from the other planes. Mmmm.. thats enough to keep me flying for 10 years!

Dont believe the hype - the cheapest flying is to be had from PFA group 'A' aircraft flying from farm strips. NOT microlights.

Merry X Mas

KINGY

I agree that this is a question which should never be asked, particularly if married to a non-flying spouse.

However, once, while confined to bed for a few weeks, I went through my cancelled checks and worked out that owning a Cessna 150 was costing me about $5,000 US per year for about 300 hours per year of flying.

Cost of 100 low lead av gas at my home field now is $3 per gallon USD. As any plane owner knows, however, this is the least of your expenses. AD on propeller anyone? The new one was $3,000 US, but it's pretty.

Kingy, we all have our personal biases about what's best to fly - but so far as I can see, servicing, hangerage, permit fees and fuel are pretty much the same on cheaper microlights and cheaper PFA types. How costs then pan out is largely down to useage.

Without doubt the most expensive group A are more expensive than the most expensive microlights - stands to reason since you can hang more toys on them that have running costs attached. But down in the weeds, I don't think there's anything in it - the only real difference is paperwork. Initial training and outright purchase costs are less for a microlight, but the NPPL has largely now made a nonsense of the former, and syndicates can trivialise the latter for anybody on a very low budget.

Genghis

Who flies both microlights and group A, often from farmstrips.

Genghis,

Im not in total agreement regarding microlights and PFA group 'A' A/C being both equally cheap. The rapid grouth of microlighting over the last 10 years has attracted many newcomers into the sport and who all firmly believe that they have the cheapest flying. I don't think that's true.

Some types of proven homebuilt group 'A' designs are very, very cheap to purchase and are bargains in my opinion. Im a part owner in a FRED. It's a single seat open cockpit plane with a VW engine and it's worth a massive £2-3 grand. It uses 2.5 G/H mogas and cruises at 70mph. It was constructed over 20 years by hand to a very high standard from the plans.

What does your £2-3K get you in a microlight ... well not much!. Perhaps an old flexwing, or the most basic 3 axis machine of which both will have an unreliable early two stroke motor which will cost more to maintain and use more fuel than a VW (Rotax parts are very expensive).

Another factor is 'group 'A' is group 'A'' by which I mean hours logged in any group 'A' A/C whether that's a Club PA28 @ £100PH or your bargain PFA single seater still count for hour builders where as old group 'D' microlights do not.

With the new NPPL perhaps things will change - I hope so, as I could never understand the gulf between us grass roots sport PFA flyers and the Microlight brigade. Maybe with all these guys upgrading to group 'A' the ol' FRED may be worth somthing after all .... but I doubt it!

KNG

I certainly agree with you on the hourbuilding issue. In fact I can never understand why so many prospective ATPLs needing lots of hours insist on hourbuilding in rental aeroplanes rather than buying something like a VP1 or minimax and flying the pants off it.

£2-3k in microlights will get you something like a Goldwing, which is a 65mph cruise single seater at around 2 gal/hr, or any of a whole range of 2-seat flexwings that will cruise at 40-50mph at around 3 gal/hr. I run both, and around £20/hr all in is pretty close to the mark on both. So, I maintain my point that down in the weeds, microlights and group A are much the same.

Like you, I certainly don't understand the "them and us" that exists between two very similar branches of aviation, or even more so between either branch and gliding. All very silly and unhelpful.

G

Kingy, Genghis,

I think that the cost advatage of microlight training over nppl grp A training will continue to favour the microlight for one reason - the cost of landing fees and the near impossiblity of even paying for circuits at some fields. Basically grp A needs licensed fields which cost a bit and charge !! micros don't need such costs and therefore are quite a bit cheaper. It really does make a difference.
(Admit that after you've got the licence a farmstrip can be cheaper but when you are down to say 12 hrs a year landing fees become relatively insignificant)

I fly both types and spend anything between £1k and £3k per yr dependant on how all the other things in life intervene.

bingoboy, what doyou mean with I think you'll find that they don't. Some aircraft renters won't allow their aircraft to be taken to unlicensed airfields because of "insurance problems" but I can't think of any other restrictions on unlicensed fields.

To the uninitiated, don't think all unlicensed fields are tiny grass strips. Dunsfold's rather large runway is an unlicensed field....

Bingo,

Im no expert but I have been shocked by training rates in the region of £ 85 P/H for 3 axis microlight training - unlicensed airfield or not... It seems like a lot to me when compared to ca. £ 100 PH for Group 'A' training.

Genghis,

I agree with you on the aspect of gliding. As an Ex glider pilot Ive seen both sides but I recon most of the gliding guys think of group 'A' pilots as flying club 172 'drivers' who regularly blunder through their overhead heads down. Whilst I DONT share that view and I can see their side of things after spending much time at a cable launch site in busy (but class G) airspace...

In my opinion what the gliding guys dont 'get' is that grass roots PFA type flying is very much a sport just like gliding and in many cases needs a very simular flying skill set.

I actually fancy a bit of gliding but have been put off by a certain 'attitude' when you mention that you are a power pilot when visiting prospective clubs.

On a different note, Ive just worked out I only paid 5 landing fees last year - not bad for 82hrs! achieved thanks to lots of strip flying, free fly-ins and those wonderful free landing vouchers in the magazines - used 6 of them!

My final word on PFA vs Microlights.. and Ive got you on this one.
We can do our own Permit renewal test flights, rather than paying an inspector to do so. Now THERE'S a saving!! :)

Low n Slow -- you will note I was refering to training when, unless the CAA have changed things lately, grp a nppl still requires licenced airfields - this makes circuit work v expensive.

Re BMAA instruction rates I agree that they are/seem high (depending on what numbers you use). They do pay their instructors well and on occasion the words closed shop spring to mind.

Re permit renewals - Yes the PFA can be cheaper than the BMAA (both have microlights by the way) The BMAA require specific persons to be used for the inspection AND flt test, Again the words closed shop spring to mind.

Still hey ho both are cheaper and usually quicker than a Cof A shop inspection.

Closer to $6USD per gallon in the UK!

QDM