Shares in a PA28 - 160 Hour building.
 

What would be the ideal number of active members in a group?

Active members? Ideally just you.

Depends how much the others fly. You could be 1/8 and still build time.

RTFQ 🤣

why would anyone buy a 1/8 then Einstein?

Ok, here goes... Airplanes have fixed operating costs per month/year and direct operating cost per hour. Generally people would buy a 1/Nth share to spread the fixed costs between N people, thus bringing the cost per hour down. The higher the number of shares gets, lower and closer the cost per hour gets to the DOC, which is great, except the more people you have in the group the more likely you'll be fighting each other to use it on nice sunny days. In an ideal group you'll have a lot of members but only a few who fly regularly.

The original question was how many active group members would be ideal. The answer is one. RTFQ.

The division of costs are simply explained above but look carefully at how the aircraft is managed and what funds are accrued for engine rebuilds and any expensive unscheduled maintenance etc. In the short period that you will be an owner you could be sharing a very large bill. The critical issue for you is the spread of the shareholders demands with regard to the normal days they fly. In many groups it is common for the aircraft to be heavily booked at weekends only and if your preferred days are midweek that should suit you well to hour build.

It is important to clarify with the future group how you wish to use the aeroplane and the hours you expect to fly over a given period. If sufficient held reserve funds are not in place then cash flow may be of concern to some and this can be aggravated when one member is flying intensely.

I joined an established 6 way partnership on PA-28-180 when one partner decided to sell. I was already in partnership on another aircraft with one of the members. I got as much time as I wanted but not always when I wanted it. The PA-28 partnership, for various reasons, became a 3 way, then a two way, and then me on my own. Of all those I think the 2 way worked best. I miss having someone to share the maintenance and the fixed costs. I don't miss making all the decisions by committee.

How many is ideal probably depends on what share of the fixed costs you can support.

In USA some insurers may decide it's a flying club not a partnership is the number gets too big. That could impact insurance premiums.

There are some considerations when using group aircraft for hour building. The group may not even let you join if they suspect that's what you intend to do. You may find that after you've achieved your goal it's harder to sell your share than you thought and you remain liable for ongoing costs.

Consider someone who is lucky enough with bookings and weather and maintenance to regularly fly 3 hours each Saturday: Once you've driven to and from the airport you can write off that whole day. 33 days to fly 100 hours not considering cost. A better option would be to use holiday allowance from work and go hour building in the US (or better still work those Saturdays and accrue extra leave.) There are plenty of places that will rent you a PA28 by the week and let you fly 8+ hours a day if you want to.

Flying 8+ hours per day is probably not a good idea for a low-time pilot. Fatiguing, and not good value in terms of experience if all you do is drill a hole in the sky.

AGREED, Combine your hour building with added value. If you don't have an IR or IMC(r) then do that and its a perfect time now to do a night rating. Both will expand your horizons and keep you flying throughout the winter months. The Scottish highlands and islands are wonderful to explore. A short hop across the pond and there is the whole of Europe.

The value is in building your experience not in repeating it.

Hear Hear! :D

And, phrased another way, you can have 1000 hours, or an hour a thousand times.

As for the original question, I don't think that the number is as important as how the members get along, and share the airplane. I don't think that having a number of members as a planning or decision tool should be the basis of the decision. What I do think is important is to have at least one member who is very experienced in care and feeding of airplanes, whom the more junior members are content to take advice from. Having a bunch of newbies collaborating on the maintenance of a legacy GA airplane is less than ideal.

It’s been said before, you’re better off taking flying holidays to South Africa, USA/Canada or Eastern Europe to build experience.
Instead of joining a group, hogging the airplane and repeating the same 2-3 hr cross countries.
There’s one long XC required for the CPL and I’ll bet the majority does exactly that, one long XC.
What you should have is 12-15 different XC’s that all meet the CPL requirements.

Hour building is a fantastic phase, during which you have the freedom to go literally anywhere. You could fly from Florida to Oregon and back if you wanted. But some people fly circuits instead...

I prefer to think of it as experience building. Sometimes I fly a burger run, sometimes circuits, and occasionally, a long trip. I will particularly fly circuits if I have just done a landing which disappointed me. Expanding all of your skills is the key. If you think to yourself that you're just doing [whatever it is] again, some more thought about diversifying may be appropriate. That includes types. I agree that having an airplane at your disposal is pretty important, But paying to operate one airplane should not be to the extend that it prevents you getting some experience on other types too - that is a merit of renting. Or, having a smaller share in each of more than one airplane.