why is it so expensive?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: panama
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why is it so expensive?
..to pay for a type rating?
I frankly think that 30.000 euros for a type rsting which could be the A320 is really tooo much money! But why is it? there's no fuel needed into the simulator and no landing fees and things like these, its just a computer with hydraulic pistons moving a cabin, and the only thing to do is to keep it clean once a few days!
can anybody answer this curious question?
I frankly think that 30.000 euros for a type rsting which could be the A320 is really tooo much money! But why is it? there's no fuel needed into the simulator and no landing fees and things like these, its just a computer with hydraulic pistons moving a cabin, and the only thing to do is to keep it clean once a few days!
can anybody answer this curious question?
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Scotland
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not going to talk about how expensive sims are to operate. Price has little to do with cost; supply, demand and value dictate most prices.
Lots of airline tickets cost less than the car park, but the car park isn't necessarily overpriced.
If you have the money and 10+ years of service to go, buy the type rating. Take the bus over a Boeing, it will be a benefit over time. Don't be surprised if your bus rating gets you a job on a boeing, it will still be the reason you got the job.
Lots of airline tickets cost less than the car park, but the car park isn't necessarily overpriced.
If you have the money and 10+ years of service to go, buy the type rating. Take the bus over a Boeing, it will be a benefit over time. Don't be surprised if your bus rating gets you a job on a boeing, it will still be the reason you got the job.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuel is not the expensive thing in the sim - nor in the plane itself. The box itself costs as much as the plane, it eats wiggly amps, requires briefing rooms with lights, chairs, drinks, toilets, the sim instructor, engineers to keep feeding the machine wiggly (and straight) amps but there is only one paying passenger - you! And consider this - you pay for a type rating on spec. and when you get a job, you find you have to do it all over again because airline X's procedures are different to the TRTO's with whom you paid said fortune. Paying for one type rating (IMHO) is pointless, paying for two is sheer stupidity! However, there is an "up" side. You don't have to get checked by Himmler's little henchmen every time you want to fly one.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: europe
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a sim cost 50 millions US $ and up.
maintenece is very expensive, and CAA charge the max to kill you (and to feed poor illegal imigrants who need free housing with free TV cable.)
in the US, sims cost the same.type rating costs 2-3x less. no tax from the FAA, and only foodstamps for the mexicans.
Now, don't forget my commission!if you read this, you have to pay me!
maintenece is very expensive, and CAA charge the max to kill you (and to feed poor illegal imigrants who need free housing with free TV cable.)
in the US, sims cost the same.type rating costs 2-3x less. no tax from the FAA, and only foodstamps for the mexicans.
Now, don't forget my commission!if you read this, you have to pay me!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: panama
Posts: 403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by A320rider
a sim cost 50 millions US $ and up.
maintenece is very expensive, and CAA charge the max to kill you (and to feed poor illegal imigrants who need free housing with free TV cable.)
in the US, sims cost the same.type rating costs 2-3x less. no tax from the FAA, and only foodstamps for the mexicans.
Now, don't forget my commission!if you read this, you have to pay me!
maintenece is very expensive, and CAA charge the max to kill you (and to feed poor illegal imigrants who need free housing with free TV cable.)
in the US, sims cost the same.type rating costs 2-3x less. no tax from the FAA, and only foodstamps for the mexicans.
Now, don't forget my commission!if you read this, you have to pay me!
that's all pretty clear and your explanation mad with reason, but there's still no excuse for such prices! with 50 million dollars I could buy a brand new learjet or a Falcon 900. Moreover, a simulator doesn't move through the sky.
I can understand manteinance must be paid to tecnicians...but let me put it this way: 100 people a year pay their A320 type rating with X TRTO, that will cost roughly 3.000.000 euros!!! that's simply mind blowing!!
And why pay taxes to the CAA? Which taxes should they be? Are the FAA people idiots if compared to them?
Still damn too much and unjustified.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bristol U.K.
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sim Costs
Firstly new simulators are around $20 million.
The reason that they are so expensive is that they are for all purposes real flight decks, that is the instrumentation is the same as the aircraft.
The big problem is utilisation. If they were running 24/7 365 days then the cost would be quite low, but they dont.
If they do eight hours a day, then you do not have to be einstein to work out the cost per hour.
Add to that the cost of an instructor who will get anything between $400 to $1,000 per day then you can see the bills mounting.
Mainteneance is another issue, if an FMC breaks down its going to cost $16,000 for a bench test and $1,000,000 for a replacement. All the bits on the sim are mega bucks (so treat them carefully !!)
Someone has to pay for all of this and if you want 40 hours for a type rating, it is doubtfull that you will get away with much under £500 per hour. Having said that, try it on the real aircraft at £10,000 per hour.
The CAA dont levy taxes. They charge around £15,000 a year to carry out the checks required for certification. Not that excessive when you see whats involved.
The reason that they are so expensive is that they are for all purposes real flight decks, that is the instrumentation is the same as the aircraft.
The big problem is utilisation. If they were running 24/7 365 days then the cost would be quite low, but they dont.
If they do eight hours a day, then you do not have to be einstein to work out the cost per hour.
Add to that the cost of an instructor who will get anything between $400 to $1,000 per day then you can see the bills mounting.
Mainteneance is another issue, if an FMC breaks down its going to cost $16,000 for a bench test and $1,000,000 for a replacement. All the bits on the sim are mega bucks (so treat them carefully !!)
Someone has to pay for all of this and if you want 40 hours for a type rating, it is doubtfull that you will get away with much under £500 per hour. Having said that, try it on the real aircraft at £10,000 per hour.
The CAA dont levy taxes. They charge around £15,000 a year to carry out the checks required for certification. Not that excessive when you see whats involved.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: europe
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAA charge exams fee, license fee,...
then ad 19% VAT in england, because it is not considered as educational, but more as:"if you have the money for a type rating, you have enough for the social system, so we count on your generosity..."
most countries in europe dont pay VAT for type ratings.
then ad 19% VAT in england, because it is not considered as educational, but more as:"if you have the money for a type rating, you have enough for the social system, so we count on your generosity..."
most countries in europe dont pay VAT for type ratings.
Guest
Posts: n/a
It's that expensive because that's what you will pay.
1) Demand would be increased meaning further economies of scale for the TRTOs (more profit!)
2) The MPL would be a viable option for many more people, something which surely the airlines would like to see as they are the group saying how much more relevant it is than pottering about in SEP for 235 hrs.
3) We buy a TR with some confidence that a) it would be more affordable b) it would a useful step in that a self-funded jobbie would be more readily accepted by the airlines c) More standards could be applied to the whole process.
Overall individuals spend less and yet TRTOs increase turnover and airlines reduce new low houred hire costs and risks.
EITHER THAT OR
They can't reduce the costs enough to generate that kind of market because the mark-up isn't that outrageous, so they charge what they can to make a buck.
EITHER THAT OR
They have no vision.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Bristol U.K.
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sim Costs
It is not that they have no vision.
There are some very clever people around operating simulators.
There is not a lot of profit in them.
Yes if the numbers were substantialy increased the costs would come down, but not a great deal, because maintenace costs would rise.
There is no great advantage in getting a type rating on a particular aircraft unless you pay an airline and there is job offer at the end of it.
Just about all airlines would have to put you through their full training regime as part of their AOC requirements.
A 250 hour pilot with a type rating is no better for the airline than one without.
All it proves is that maybe you can "operate" a jet. However any half decent check Captain could work that out within 10 minutes of a sim assesment.
It is a shame that a few "rich kids" started this idea of getting ahead by paying outrageous amounts of money.
It must also be remebered that with 250 hours you really have no right to sit in the rhs of a medium or heavy transport. Remember Papa India and the reasons that BA shut down Hamble.
Far better for low houred pilots to get out in the world and fly some light twins around and get some real experience before graduating on to Turbo props and then jets, you will be a much better pilot for it.
There are some very clever people around operating simulators.
There is not a lot of profit in them.
Yes if the numbers were substantialy increased the costs would come down, but not a great deal, because maintenace costs would rise.
There is no great advantage in getting a type rating on a particular aircraft unless you pay an airline and there is job offer at the end of it.
Just about all airlines would have to put you through their full training regime as part of their AOC requirements.
A 250 hour pilot with a type rating is no better for the airline than one without.
All it proves is that maybe you can "operate" a jet. However any half decent check Captain could work that out within 10 minutes of a sim assesment.
It is a shame that a few "rich kids" started this idea of getting ahead by paying outrageous amounts of money.
It must also be remebered that with 250 hours you really have no right to sit in the rhs of a medium or heavy transport. Remember Papa India and the reasons that BA shut down Hamble.
Far better for low houred pilots to get out in the world and fly some light twins around and get some real experience before graduating on to Turbo props and then jets, you will be a much better pilot for it.
Jet Blast Rat
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Sarfend-on-Sea
Age: 50
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think people are substantially underestimating the costs of mainaining a full-motion simulator. When I was flying the MCC (with some fantastic instruction, of course 
You still off the smokes, T1?) we were warned about the cost of replacing some of the parts, and I couldn't believe that they could afford to rent the simulators out so cheaply! Add to this the motion system, which I understand can cost as much on its own to maintain as the rest of the simulator, and a decent instructor, then I think there is some good value for money out there!
As Tristar says, go and fly a small aeroplane. It is immense fun, I absolutely love this job! The other day I landed at Heathrow, at 01.30, in a Seneca! Only one other movement in the nearly 3 hours I was there. I get paid more than some turboprop FOs, I am the captain (lucky that, as I am usually on my own!), and I work with some great people.
You still off the smokes, T1?) we were warned about the cost of replacing some of the parts, and I couldn't believe that they could afford to rent the simulators out so cheaply! Add to this the motion system, which I understand can cost as much on its own to maintain as the rest of the simulator, and a decent instructor, then I think there is some good value for money out there!As Tristar says, go and fly a small aeroplane. It is immense fun, I absolutely love this job! The other day I landed at Heathrow, at 01.30, in a Seneca! Only one other movement in the nearly 3 hours I was there. I get paid more than some turboprop FOs, I am the captain (lucky that, as I am usually on my own!), and I work with some great people.
