Professional advice
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Professional advice
Hello everyone,
I would kindly ask you to critique my career plan outlined below, which is hopefully not too obtuse.
I find myself under highly felicitous circumstances, allowing me to pursue my dream of controlled flight while making a living from it. I want to become an owner/operator of a single aircraft providing services in heliskiing and sightseeing in Hokkaido, Japan. My education is in business administration, and I'm a successful, ambitious entrepreneur. At nearly 40, I find myself at a changing point in my life, with Japan solidifying itself as my next long-term home. I have engaged in market research and have identified a viable niche business opportunity. Naturally, I will refrain from divulging the particulars on a public online forum.
I want to purchase an IFR-rated Bell 407 GXI for the operation. I have spent countless hours comparing it to the venerable Squirrel and Koala, and it seems that it is the best fit for my target market, being able to take six passengers and a large utility basket. Would you agree with my choice? Do you have any other type suggestions? My budget is $4.5 USD.
Regarding training, I do not have any piloting experience. I'm adept at operating many types of heavy equipment and am a great fan of coordinating multiple inputs to achieve smooth machine operation. I have thoroughly studied the FAA's Rotorcraft Flight Manual and have had in-depth discussions with several knowledgeable people; thus, although far below the level of a novice, I have a basic understanding of the mechanics of flight and some of its perils. I plan to train in Canada and have found a highly reputable training operation - TopFlight, in Penticton, BC. They teach skids down autos in the 407 and do a lot of specialized training that interests me.
I plan to complete my CPL, IFR, night, mountain flight, and other courses over 300 instructed PIC hours. I'm content with investing the funds into this training for obvious reasons. Once I'm at my new base, I intend to spend the first year familiarizing myself with the area of operations and putting in another 200 hours to become a certified "Sky Ace" per North American rules.
I have gathered that the first 500 hours are the formative period, mainly determining the attitudes and practices the pilot will use in their future work. Would you say that my training itinerary provides me with enough training to safely engage in the abovementioned business?
Lastly, has anyone here flown in Japan or is familiar with the area?
Candid feedback is greatly appreciated.
Thank you for your time,
Paul
I would kindly ask you to critique my career plan outlined below, which is hopefully not too obtuse.
I find myself under highly felicitous circumstances, allowing me to pursue my dream of controlled flight while making a living from it. I want to become an owner/operator of a single aircraft providing services in heliskiing and sightseeing in Hokkaido, Japan. My education is in business administration, and I'm a successful, ambitious entrepreneur. At nearly 40, I find myself at a changing point in my life, with Japan solidifying itself as my next long-term home. I have engaged in market research and have identified a viable niche business opportunity. Naturally, I will refrain from divulging the particulars on a public online forum.
I want to purchase an IFR-rated Bell 407 GXI for the operation. I have spent countless hours comparing it to the venerable Squirrel and Koala, and it seems that it is the best fit for my target market, being able to take six passengers and a large utility basket. Would you agree with my choice? Do you have any other type suggestions? My budget is $4.5 USD.
Regarding training, I do not have any piloting experience. I'm adept at operating many types of heavy equipment and am a great fan of coordinating multiple inputs to achieve smooth machine operation. I have thoroughly studied the FAA's Rotorcraft Flight Manual and have had in-depth discussions with several knowledgeable people; thus, although far below the level of a novice, I have a basic understanding of the mechanics of flight and some of its perils. I plan to train in Canada and have found a highly reputable training operation - TopFlight, in Penticton, BC. They teach skids down autos in the 407 and do a lot of specialized training that interests me.
I plan to complete my CPL, IFR, night, mountain flight, and other courses over 300 instructed PIC hours. I'm content with investing the funds into this training for obvious reasons. Once I'm at my new base, I intend to spend the first year familiarizing myself with the area of operations and putting in another 200 hours to become a certified "Sky Ace" per North American rules.
I have gathered that the first 500 hours are the formative period, mainly determining the attitudes and practices the pilot will use in their future work. Would you say that my training itinerary provides me with enough training to safely engage in the abovementioned business?
Lastly, has anyone here flown in Japan or is familiar with the area?
Candid feedback is greatly appreciated.
Thank you for your time,
Paul
Last edited by Ptichka; 17th Dec 2023 at 02:16. Reason: incorrect aircraft data
Top Answer
17th Dec 2023, 05:59
Being IFR won't help you get to a snowed-in mountain top.
A brand-new pilot in a hot machine, loaded with heavy skiers and headed for a high mountain in crummy weather - I will read about it in the crash comics. Hire a qualified, experienced pilot, and you stay in the office counting your losses.
A brand-new pilot in a hot machine, loaded with heavy skiers and headed for a high mountain in crummy weather - I will read about it in the crash comics. Hire a qualified, experienced pilot, and you stay in the office counting your losses.
Hi Ptichka, first of all congratulations on finding yourself in such a fortunate position. Some immediate thoughts:
1. 407 is 6 pax + pilot. I’m an Astar guy myself and would recommend them because I know them. Drawbacks are one less pax than 407 (tho you can get a twinned ‘loveseat’ for the front and carry 6 pax as well). Either machine will be squishy at full capacity but doable. Both excellent helicopters, anecdotally my understanding is that 407s are more maintenance intensive than Astars. Consider an AS350B3, AS350B32B1, or lastly AS350B3e (H125) if new is important to you. You can easily trim down your budget if you go lightly used in any model.
2. I think you’ll be wasting money on an IFR rating if your primary intent is skiing and tours. Maintaining currency in ifr will be a challenge for your circumstances. VFR in the mountains heliskiing is challenging enough, don’t fool yourself into thinking an ifr ticket will get you out of IIMC in the mountains. Just don’t go there in the first place.
3. You’ve selected a reputable, if expensive training outfit.
4. Not sure what 500hr Sky Ace is but in Canada you will still be known as a ‘100hr wonder’. 500hrs is still very low time for heliski ops (i highly doubt any pilot in North America is doing production skiing at 500hrs) and I urge you to really arm yourself with what heliski flying entails before you dive in. Most winters in Canada there are a couple of serious incidents with heliskiing. Almost always pilots with thousands of hours, almost always pilot error with weather and/or whiteout being a factor. Not saying your dream is impossible but more mountain training instead of ifr training would be a better investment imho.
5. Best case would be to have an experienced mountain/heliski pilot train with you on location in Japan for a significant amount of time. Call it 20 hours minimum.
Best of luck in pursuing your dream. Arm yourself with knowledge, train with experienced heliski pilots when the time comes and be bloody careful. It’s a serious game.
1. 407 is 6 pax + pilot. I’m an Astar guy myself and would recommend them because I know them. Drawbacks are one less pax than 407 (tho you can get a twinned ‘loveseat’ for the front and carry 6 pax as well). Either machine will be squishy at full capacity but doable. Both excellent helicopters, anecdotally my understanding is that 407s are more maintenance intensive than Astars. Consider an AS350B3, AS350B32B1, or lastly AS350B3e (H125) if new is important to you. You can easily trim down your budget if you go lightly used in any model.
2. I think you’ll be wasting money on an IFR rating if your primary intent is skiing and tours. Maintaining currency in ifr will be a challenge for your circumstances. VFR in the mountains heliskiing is challenging enough, don’t fool yourself into thinking an ifr ticket will get you out of IIMC in the mountains. Just don’t go there in the first place.
3. You’ve selected a reputable, if expensive training outfit.
4. Not sure what 500hr Sky Ace is but in Canada you will still be known as a ‘100hr wonder’. 500hrs is still very low time for heliski ops (i highly doubt any pilot in North America is doing production skiing at 500hrs) and I urge you to really arm yourself with what heliski flying entails before you dive in. Most winters in Canada there are a couple of serious incidents with heliskiing. Almost always pilots with thousands of hours, almost always pilot error with weather and/or whiteout being a factor. Not saying your dream is impossible but more mountain training instead of ifr training would be a better investment imho.
5. Best case would be to have an experienced mountain/heliski pilot train with you on location in Japan for a significant amount of time. Call it 20 hours minimum.
Best of luck in pursuing your dream. Arm yourself with knowledge, train with experienced heliski pilots when the time comes and be bloody careful. It’s a serious game.
Hello everyone,
I would kindly ask you to critique my career plan outlined below, which is hopefully not too obtuse.
I find myself under highly felicitous circumstances, allowing me to pursue my dream of controlled flight while making a living from it. I want to become an owner/operator of a single aircraft providing services in heliskiing and sightseeing in Hokkaido, Japan. My education is in business administration, and I'm a successful, ambitious entrepreneur. At nearly 40, I find myself at a changing point in my life, with Japan solidifying itself as my next long-term home. I have engaged in market research and have identified a viable niche business opportunity. Naturally, I will refrain from divulging the particulars on a public online forum.
I want to purchase an IFR-rated Bell 407 GXI for the operation. I have spent countless hours comparing it to the venerable Squirrel and Koala, and it seems that it is the best fit for my target market, being able to take seven passengers and a large utility basket. Would you agree with my choice? Do you have any other type suggestions? My budget is $4.5 USD.
Regarding training, I do not have any piloting experience. I'm adept at operating many types of heavy equipment and am a great fan of coordinating multiple inputs to achieve smooth machine operation. I have thoroughly studied the FAA's Rotorcraft Flight Manual and have had in-depth discussions with several knowledgeable people; thus, although far below the level of a novice, I have a basic understanding of the mechanics of flight and some of its perils. I plan to train in Canada and have found a highly reputable training operation - TopFlight, in Penticton, BC. They teach skids down autos in the 407 and do a lot of specialized training that interests me.
I plan to complete my CPL, IFR, night, mountain flight, and other courses over 300 instructed PIC hours. I'm content with investing the funds into this training for obvious reasons. Once I'm at my new base, I intend to spend the first year familiarizing myself with the area of operations and putting in another 200 hours to become a certified "Sky Ace" per North American rules.
I have gathered that the first 500 hours are the formative period, mainly determining the attitudes and practices the pilot will use in their future work. Would you say that my training itinerary provides me with enough training to safely engage in the abovementioned business?
Lastly, has anyone here flown in Japan or is familiar with the area?
Candid feedback is greatly appreciated.
Thank you for your time,
Paul
I would kindly ask you to critique my career plan outlined below, which is hopefully not too obtuse.
I find myself under highly felicitous circumstances, allowing me to pursue my dream of controlled flight while making a living from it. I want to become an owner/operator of a single aircraft providing services in heliskiing and sightseeing in Hokkaido, Japan. My education is in business administration, and I'm a successful, ambitious entrepreneur. At nearly 40, I find myself at a changing point in my life, with Japan solidifying itself as my next long-term home. I have engaged in market research and have identified a viable niche business opportunity. Naturally, I will refrain from divulging the particulars on a public online forum.
I want to purchase an IFR-rated Bell 407 GXI for the operation. I have spent countless hours comparing it to the venerable Squirrel and Koala, and it seems that it is the best fit for my target market, being able to take seven passengers and a large utility basket. Would you agree with my choice? Do you have any other type suggestions? My budget is $4.5 USD.
Regarding training, I do not have any piloting experience. I'm adept at operating many types of heavy equipment and am a great fan of coordinating multiple inputs to achieve smooth machine operation. I have thoroughly studied the FAA's Rotorcraft Flight Manual and have had in-depth discussions with several knowledgeable people; thus, although far below the level of a novice, I have a basic understanding of the mechanics of flight and some of its perils. I plan to train in Canada and have found a highly reputable training operation - TopFlight, in Penticton, BC. They teach skids down autos in the 407 and do a lot of specialized training that interests me.
I plan to complete my CPL, IFR, night, mountain flight, and other courses over 300 instructed PIC hours. I'm content with investing the funds into this training for obvious reasons. Once I'm at my new base, I intend to spend the first year familiarizing myself with the area of operations and putting in another 200 hours to become a certified "Sky Ace" per North American rules.
I have gathered that the first 500 hours are the formative period, mainly determining the attitudes and practices the pilot will use in their future work. Would you say that my training itinerary provides me with enough training to safely engage in the abovementioned business?
Lastly, has anyone here flown in Japan or is familiar with the area?
Candid feedback is greatly appreciated.
Thank you for your time,
Paul
The following users liked this post:
Ok let me answer first, I spent 11 years in Japan, I founded there an engineering company, but I am a also pilot. I have long scouted for self-made helicopter operation opportunities there. I understand the motivation of your project but I must say it has gigantic holes through out.
1/ you are a foreigner in Japan, you will always be, that gives you a tremendous disadvantage with the Japanese administration, (you will need a lot of that to set up a private operator status). If in addition you don’t have a native language skill, your odds are very low that you can be more than a rich investor and not a day-to-day participant. In other words you will hardly have any chance to lift the business up with sweat equity as you could in another country.
2/ you don’t have a helicopter pilot license, and even if you had one it could not be converted to the Japanese license. (Very few japanese pilot come from the private training sector, all of them are government trained)
3/ Yes Hokkaido is a great ski resort area, it is mostly frequented by Australian and they do have purchasing power, I don’t think any Heli ski services exist there. but note that the weather can be inclement to flying for long period of times there. That world renowned power snow condition of Hokkaido is there for a reason, because it snows all the time. And then in the summer what are going to operate your aircraft on.
4/ Success in starting a successful venture is to make money quick, from the first day you start. You better have a very solid customer connection ready to pounce (VIP travel agent…). In any case USD 4.5M seems like a very small amount for setting up such an operation. I would not consider anything below USD 15M a viable amount for a project like that.
5/ I will let somebody else explain that it’s not about buying in an aircraft and flying customer around, the amount of operations that need to be built around will dwarf the cost of acquiring the aircraft. The Japanese helicopter industry is highly government regulated, and Japanese authorities hate risk taking. Please try to visit the current operators there. One of the most friendly there is alpha aviation, there are worth your taking a look and talking to.
I was just like you for a few years, I tried studying setting up a shuttle from Narita Airport to Tokyo center. On paper it looked like it could have some meat in the project, but it was insanely difficult, riddled with administrative issues that even the Japanese people who had worked on it for decades were still working at trying to go around them. to give you an example, Narita airport does not open the airspace to helicopter shuttles. So, you land in your private jet, then you take a limo to Sakura (15 minutes ride) outside of Narita airport airspace only then start your trip to Tokyo by helicopter. It takes about the same time as other means of transportation.
Next, I looked at being the dedicated helicopter services supplier for one of the best football team in Japan. Because I knew the star player (Keisuke Honda) and he was building his own football team, I was going to buy a retired AS365 Dauphin and assign it to his personal football team use. That also crushed by administration.
I think you way underestimate the Japan challenge.
1/ you are a foreigner in Japan, you will always be, that gives you a tremendous disadvantage with the Japanese administration, (you will need a lot of that to set up a private operator status). If in addition you don’t have a native language skill, your odds are very low that you can be more than a rich investor and not a day-to-day participant. In other words you will hardly have any chance to lift the business up with sweat equity as you could in another country.
2/ you don’t have a helicopter pilot license, and even if you had one it could not be converted to the Japanese license. (Very few japanese pilot come from the private training sector, all of them are government trained)
3/ Yes Hokkaido is a great ski resort area, it is mostly frequented by Australian and they do have purchasing power, I don’t think any Heli ski services exist there. but note that the weather can be inclement to flying for long period of times there. That world renowned power snow condition of Hokkaido is there for a reason, because it snows all the time. And then in the summer what are going to operate your aircraft on.
4/ Success in starting a successful venture is to make money quick, from the first day you start. You better have a very solid customer connection ready to pounce (VIP travel agent…). In any case USD 4.5M seems like a very small amount for setting up such an operation. I would not consider anything below USD 15M a viable amount for a project like that.
5/ I will let somebody else explain that it’s not about buying in an aircraft and flying customer around, the amount of operations that need to be built around will dwarf the cost of acquiring the aircraft. The Japanese helicopter industry is highly government regulated, and Japanese authorities hate risk taking. Please try to visit the current operators there. One of the most friendly there is alpha aviation, there are worth your taking a look and talking to.
I was just like you for a few years, I tried studying setting up a shuttle from Narita Airport to Tokyo center. On paper it looked like it could have some meat in the project, but it was insanely difficult, riddled with administrative issues that even the Japanese people who had worked on it for decades were still working at trying to go around them. to give you an example, Narita airport does not open the airspace to helicopter shuttles. So, you land in your private jet, then you take a limo to Sakura (15 minutes ride) outside of Narita airport airspace only then start your trip to Tokyo by helicopter. It takes about the same time as other means of transportation.
Next, I looked at being the dedicated helicopter services supplier for one of the best football team in Japan. Because I knew the star player (Keisuke Honda) and he was building his own football team, I was going to buy a retired AS365 Dauphin and assign it to his personal football team use. That also crushed by administration.
I think you way underestimate the Japan challenge.
The following 5 users liked this post by Agile:
Being IFR won't help you get to a snowed-in mountain top.
A brand-new pilot in a hot machine, loaded with heavy skiers and headed for a high mountain in crummy weather - I will read about it in the crash comics. Hire a qualified, experienced pilot, and you stay in the office counting your losses.
A brand-new pilot in a hot machine, loaded with heavy skiers and headed for a high mountain in crummy weather - I will read about it in the crash comics. Hire a qualified, experienced pilot, and you stay in the office counting your losses.
The following 10 users liked this post by Ascend Charlie:
Interestingly, there is already a heli skiing operator in that area. And they complain about the red tape. They have been there since 2016 ... ish. https://www.hokkaidobackcountryclub.com/en/heli-skiing/
A few more points.
I suppose you speak Japanese. If not, you either learn it real fast or just stop your project now. To fly in Japan commercially, you need to speak and read Japanese, because you will have to pass the tests for commercial pilot and IFR for a Japanese license. The validation - recognition of your canadian license - will only get you to private pilot.
What do you want with an IFR rated helicopter? You can not use IFR for heli skiing. You just don't fly, when the weather is IMC. There are no instrument approaches to heli skiing sites. IFR rating is always a good thing for pilots, but in heli skiing you do not fly IFR. Just no. You can't legally and if you do it anyway, you will end up in cumulus granitus.
You need a hangar. You can not let the ship outside in the winter.
You need a place for the hangar, preferably close to hotels and slopes. Therefore you need buliding permits and helicopter operation permits, since you are operating from a private heliport.
You need a FOM (Flight Operations Manual) for your company. That alone will cost you a lot of time and money and the Japanese CAA has to accept it in the end for your company. In the US this is called a part 135 or air taxi operation.
You need certified maintenance personell.
You need fuel on site. Therefore you need permits to handle fuel.
You need experienced pilots as chief pilots. Nobody will let you do this operation on 500 total hours. Especially not the insurance companies.
You need office staff to sell your flights. You can not do both, flying and selling on the phone.
You need mountain guides that fly with you.
You need permits from the forestry agency, where you can do heli skiing.
You need way more money than just 4.5M. That covers the helicopter, but operating a helicopter is very expensive. Just as an example. HBC (the ones above) have two minutes to fly up to the mountain. Therefore one rotation (up and down) takes appox. 5 Minutes. You have to do this continuously for hours, without shutting the helicopter down. If you shut down every 5 minutes, your turbine will wear out quite fast, because every start up of the turbine is hard on it. Your turbine could reach TBO only because of cycles way before you reach TBO by hours. An overhaul of a C47 will cost a lot of money.
As a single ship, single low time pilot operation, there is probably no country in the world, that would give you an air taxi operation permit. And as mentioned, Japan does not make it easy, on the contrary.
Flying a helicopter is easy compared to operating one, let alone in Japan. BTW, if you would try to do this in the US, you would have exactly the same problems. Just a bit less red tape. With 500 hours the insurance companies would be rather reluctant do let you do this kind of operation.
Take your money and buy into an operation, if you absolutely want to fly and then learn it from the ground up. In general, aviation businesses are not your run of the mill businesses you can just hit the ground running. There is a lot to learn and if you think you can do it without a very deep understanding about regulations and operation, you will fail. The FAA Helicopter Handbook is not even close to enough you must know about helicopters.
A few more points.
I suppose you speak Japanese. If not, you either learn it real fast or just stop your project now. To fly in Japan commercially, you need to speak and read Japanese, because you will have to pass the tests for commercial pilot and IFR for a Japanese license. The validation - recognition of your canadian license - will only get you to private pilot.
What do you want with an IFR rated helicopter? You can not use IFR for heli skiing. You just don't fly, when the weather is IMC. There are no instrument approaches to heli skiing sites. IFR rating is always a good thing for pilots, but in heli skiing you do not fly IFR. Just no. You can't legally and if you do it anyway, you will end up in cumulus granitus.
You need a hangar. You can not let the ship outside in the winter.
You need a place for the hangar, preferably close to hotels and slopes. Therefore you need buliding permits and helicopter operation permits, since you are operating from a private heliport.
You need a FOM (Flight Operations Manual) for your company. That alone will cost you a lot of time and money and the Japanese CAA has to accept it in the end for your company. In the US this is called a part 135 or air taxi operation.
You need certified maintenance personell.
You need fuel on site. Therefore you need permits to handle fuel.
You need experienced pilots as chief pilots. Nobody will let you do this operation on 500 total hours. Especially not the insurance companies.
You need office staff to sell your flights. You can not do both, flying and selling on the phone.
You need mountain guides that fly with you.
You need permits from the forestry agency, where you can do heli skiing.
You need way more money than just 4.5M. That covers the helicopter, but operating a helicopter is very expensive. Just as an example. HBC (the ones above) have two minutes to fly up to the mountain. Therefore one rotation (up and down) takes appox. 5 Minutes. You have to do this continuously for hours, without shutting the helicopter down. If you shut down every 5 minutes, your turbine will wear out quite fast, because every start up of the turbine is hard on it. Your turbine could reach TBO only because of cycles way before you reach TBO by hours. An overhaul of a C47 will cost a lot of money.
As a single ship, single low time pilot operation, there is probably no country in the world, that would give you an air taxi operation permit. And as mentioned, Japan does not make it easy, on the contrary.
Flying a helicopter is easy compared to operating one, let alone in Japan. BTW, if you would try to do this in the US, you would have exactly the same problems. Just a bit less red tape. With 500 hours the insurance companies would be rather reluctant do let you do this kind of operation.
Take your money and buy into an operation, if you absolutely want to fly and then learn it from the ground up. In general, aviation businesses are not your run of the mill businesses you can just hit the ground running. There is a lot to learn and if you think you can do it without a very deep understanding about regulations and operation, you will fail. The FAA Helicopter Handbook is not even close to enough you must know about helicopters.
Last edited by Rotorbee; 17th Dec 2023 at 06:25.
The following 2 users liked this post by Rotorbee:
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Thank you for taking the time to respond! All valid points have been taken into consideration. I'll provide some additional clarification below and greatly welcome further feedback.
1. The Japanese society/business ecosystem: I realize I will always stand out from the general populace, which I'm content with. I plan to fully amalgamate with Japanese society through an in-depth study of the language and culture. I'm committing to a permanent relocation rather than a temporary visit. I earnestly desire to build long-term community relationships and participate fully in daily activities. Frankly, I think there will be a way where there is a will.
I know some of the particulars of Japanese business practices, as I have long been interested in the subject. I'm glad to retain the services of a reputable bilingual legal firm to facilitate the necessary bureaucratic procedures while I familiarize myself with all the nuances. I'm well aware of the work associated with a successful start-up business, as the funds at my disposal are the product of my merits. The budget of USD 4.5M I indicated pertained to the purchase of the machine only; the rest of the considerations for a functional business infrastructure have already been addressed. I'm perfectly content hiring a local chief pilot from whom I could continue learning.
2. Training: I have been fascinated with aviation since I was a young boy; I spent the last decade thoroughly researching the subject as I worked towards securing the financial means required to pursue my dream. There is a helicopter in my future regardless of this business idea; however, instead of being a hobby pilot and doing something else for a living, I think that it is reasonable to use the helicopter to generate a sufficient revenue stream through relatively light-duty applications while enjoying the machine for leisure when seeing fit to do so. I do not want to make all the money in the world; therefore, I do not need to push myself past the limits of my abilities. I do not wish to grow my business into an industry giant but enjoy the work-life balance available to an owner/operator. It's like a tractor/trailer owner but in a different equipment category. One could take their B-train fishing, but it wouldn't be as elegant as arriving by air, and it would significantly limit the choice of fishing location.
I have over 15,000 hours operating a dangerous piece of heavy equipment in high-risk environments involving proximity to powerlines, explosive atmospheres, and highly congested areas with numerous personnel present. I'm a consistent, pedantic individual who thrives on structure, procedures and checklists. I've passed an on-site Occupational Health and Safety inspection with a commendation from the inspecting officer and haven't had a single safety infraction in a decade of service. I'm as much of a safety squirrel as one can be, and I find the highly organized and regulated world of aviation irresistible due to its well-structured nature. I will not only jump through all the hoops but will do so gracefully and with a smile.
I'm well aware of my limitations as a low-hour pilot. I do not intend to provide the clients with an exhilarating experience through aerobatic maneuvers but rather by delivering safe, luxurious transportation to a unique and fun event. They can get their adrenaline descending avalanche-prone slopes, not through my machine. I'm confident that few of you will dare contest the fact that experience is conducive to developing complacency. My minimal knowledge of helicopters shows that pilot error tends to cause most incidents, and it is not the domain of novices exclusively. I have reviewed several dozen incident reports, many about heli-skiing, and have a basic understanding of issues that may arise during the specific operation type, including white-out conditions, rollovers, and good-ol' cyclic pushovers for the sheer thrill of it. My "Sky Ace" remark was facetious. It was aimed at the fact that the 500-hour milestone designates one as an "expert pilot" by Transport Canada and the insurance underwriters, resulting in a significant decrease in insurance premiums and the ability to operate in limited VFR. Additionally, my conversations with local operators indicate that many clients specify 500 hours as the minimum experience for the pilot, information that may not necessarily apply to Japan. Still, it does provide me with a training benchmark.
One of the reasons for choosing Top Flight is their expertise in mountain operations. Hopefully, I can be taught with some of that knowledge. I was entertaining the idea of longlining to diversify the offered services. Still, as a low-hour pilot, I think it makes most sense to pick one specific direction within the industry and attempt to master it. I would be open to committing to 500 hours of instructed PIC operation to provide me with operation-specific training. It is a significant investment, but it appears judicious, considering that I plan to fly the machine I pay for and would like to return home safely. I'm not hung up on IFR as I have zero intentions of flying into IMC; I regard the training as an aid to successfully exit IIMC if I find myself in such a situation. This brings me back to the point that I do not plan to risk my life and will not hesitate to say no to clients if my assessment of the flight conditions is unfavourable. I intend to ameliorate the gaps in my knowledge through modern technology - FADEC and sophisticated autopilot and avionics. However, I regard these devices as aids facilitating a decreased pilot workload instead of technological enhancements to my skills. I will not increase my risk tolerance simply because I have an intelligent helicopter. Still, I will gladly beseech the flight director to save me if a dangerous situation arises.
3. Aircraft type: I'm adamant about purchasing a new machine for the benefit of a factory warranty and the manufacturer's operation/maintenance training programs.
As I was mistaken, I corrected my statement regarding the 407's seating capacity in the original post; it still provides one extra-paying seat per trip over the H125. Another reason I like the 407 is the exceptional visibility achieved with the high visibility kit. I consider that for the view of the clients, as half the year the machine will work in sightseeing. It is also faster than the H125 but is longer - potentially complicating off-airport landings.
I won't lie; the Squirrel is a highly attractive machine. It is more powerful, slightly less expensive to operate and offers the flexibility of the sliding door, making the aircraft suitable for air photography applications. The high visibility kits available for the model should provide a good view for the passengers seated in the center seats.
What machine would be more comfortable for the passengers? My understanding is that the 407's rotor head design significantly minimizes vibrations.
The first step I'm planning in this entire process is a month-long recognizance mission to Hokkaido involving a host of consultations with barristers and industry members to fully validate the business proposition, which I think is viable. It would be too banal to settle for a carwash and a used EC120B.
Sorry for the loquacious monologue! Any additional thoughts are welcome, even from the surliest members indicating their anticipation of seeing my name in the obituaries...
- Paul
1. The Japanese society/business ecosystem: I realize I will always stand out from the general populace, which I'm content with. I plan to fully amalgamate with Japanese society through an in-depth study of the language and culture. I'm committing to a permanent relocation rather than a temporary visit. I earnestly desire to build long-term community relationships and participate fully in daily activities. Frankly, I think there will be a way where there is a will.
I know some of the particulars of Japanese business practices, as I have long been interested in the subject. I'm glad to retain the services of a reputable bilingual legal firm to facilitate the necessary bureaucratic procedures while I familiarize myself with all the nuances. I'm well aware of the work associated with a successful start-up business, as the funds at my disposal are the product of my merits. The budget of USD 4.5M I indicated pertained to the purchase of the machine only; the rest of the considerations for a functional business infrastructure have already been addressed. I'm perfectly content hiring a local chief pilot from whom I could continue learning.
2. Training: I have been fascinated with aviation since I was a young boy; I spent the last decade thoroughly researching the subject as I worked towards securing the financial means required to pursue my dream. There is a helicopter in my future regardless of this business idea; however, instead of being a hobby pilot and doing something else for a living, I think that it is reasonable to use the helicopter to generate a sufficient revenue stream through relatively light-duty applications while enjoying the machine for leisure when seeing fit to do so. I do not want to make all the money in the world; therefore, I do not need to push myself past the limits of my abilities. I do not wish to grow my business into an industry giant but enjoy the work-life balance available to an owner/operator. It's like a tractor/trailer owner but in a different equipment category. One could take their B-train fishing, but it wouldn't be as elegant as arriving by air, and it would significantly limit the choice of fishing location.
I have over 15,000 hours operating a dangerous piece of heavy equipment in high-risk environments involving proximity to powerlines, explosive atmospheres, and highly congested areas with numerous personnel present. I'm a consistent, pedantic individual who thrives on structure, procedures and checklists. I've passed an on-site Occupational Health and Safety inspection with a commendation from the inspecting officer and haven't had a single safety infraction in a decade of service. I'm as much of a safety squirrel as one can be, and I find the highly organized and regulated world of aviation irresistible due to its well-structured nature. I will not only jump through all the hoops but will do so gracefully and with a smile.
I'm well aware of my limitations as a low-hour pilot. I do not intend to provide the clients with an exhilarating experience through aerobatic maneuvers but rather by delivering safe, luxurious transportation to a unique and fun event. They can get their adrenaline descending avalanche-prone slopes, not through my machine. I'm confident that few of you will dare contest the fact that experience is conducive to developing complacency. My minimal knowledge of helicopters shows that pilot error tends to cause most incidents, and it is not the domain of novices exclusively. I have reviewed several dozen incident reports, many about heli-skiing, and have a basic understanding of issues that may arise during the specific operation type, including white-out conditions, rollovers, and good-ol' cyclic pushovers for the sheer thrill of it. My "Sky Ace" remark was facetious. It was aimed at the fact that the 500-hour milestone designates one as an "expert pilot" by Transport Canada and the insurance underwriters, resulting in a significant decrease in insurance premiums and the ability to operate in limited VFR. Additionally, my conversations with local operators indicate that many clients specify 500 hours as the minimum experience for the pilot, information that may not necessarily apply to Japan. Still, it does provide me with a training benchmark.
One of the reasons for choosing Top Flight is their expertise in mountain operations. Hopefully, I can be taught with some of that knowledge. I was entertaining the idea of longlining to diversify the offered services. Still, as a low-hour pilot, I think it makes most sense to pick one specific direction within the industry and attempt to master it. I would be open to committing to 500 hours of instructed PIC operation to provide me with operation-specific training. It is a significant investment, but it appears judicious, considering that I plan to fly the machine I pay for and would like to return home safely. I'm not hung up on IFR as I have zero intentions of flying into IMC; I regard the training as an aid to successfully exit IIMC if I find myself in such a situation. This brings me back to the point that I do not plan to risk my life and will not hesitate to say no to clients if my assessment of the flight conditions is unfavourable. I intend to ameliorate the gaps in my knowledge through modern technology - FADEC and sophisticated autopilot and avionics. However, I regard these devices as aids facilitating a decreased pilot workload instead of technological enhancements to my skills. I will not increase my risk tolerance simply because I have an intelligent helicopter. Still, I will gladly beseech the flight director to save me if a dangerous situation arises.
3. Aircraft type: I'm adamant about purchasing a new machine for the benefit of a factory warranty and the manufacturer's operation/maintenance training programs.
As I was mistaken, I corrected my statement regarding the 407's seating capacity in the original post; it still provides one extra-paying seat per trip over the H125. Another reason I like the 407 is the exceptional visibility achieved with the high visibility kit. I consider that for the view of the clients, as half the year the machine will work in sightseeing. It is also faster than the H125 but is longer - potentially complicating off-airport landings.
I won't lie; the Squirrel is a highly attractive machine. It is more powerful, slightly less expensive to operate and offers the flexibility of the sliding door, making the aircraft suitable for air photography applications. The high visibility kits available for the model should provide a good view for the passengers seated in the center seats.
What machine would be more comfortable for the passengers? My understanding is that the 407's rotor head design significantly minimizes vibrations.
The first step I'm planning in this entire process is a month-long recognizance mission to Hokkaido involving a host of consultations with barristers and industry members to fully validate the business proposition, which I think is viable. It would be too banal to settle for a carwash and a used EC120B.
Sorry for the loquacious monologue! Any additional thoughts are welcome, even from the surliest members indicating their anticipation of seeing my name in the obituaries...
- Paul
The following users liked this post:
Being IFR won't help you get to a snowed-in mountain top.
A brand-new pilot in a hot machine, loaded with heavy skiers and headed for a high mountain in crummy weather - I will read about it in the crash comics. Hire a qualified, experienced pilot, and you stay in the office counting your losses.
A brand-new pilot in a hot machine, loaded with heavy skiers and headed for a high mountain in crummy weather - I will read about it in the crash comics. Hire a qualified, experienced pilot, and you stay in the office counting your losses.
ANd never heard of this "certified "Sky Ace" per North American rules", is it something the drone pilots tout?
I chalenge you to get six grown males in full ski gear in a Bell 407 and ask if they enjoy the ride....
Great advice here too:
Take your money and buy into an operation, if you absolutely want to fly and then learn it from the ground up. In general, aviation businesses are not your run of the mill businesses you can just hit the ground running. There is a lot to learn and if you think you can do it without a very deep understanding about regulations and operation, you will fail. The FAA Helicopter Handbook is not even close to enough you must know about helicopters.
The following 2 users liked this post by Gordy:
I am going to pop your bubble bit more because you are still on a cloud
you are so far away from reality! its not a matter of standing out, its a matter that you cannot read any contract, cannot even open a bank account or apply for a credit card.
permanent relocation, how? only if your wife is japanese. sure you can learn the language understand the nuances, how long is that going to take?, I say 10 years, I speak from experience.
so you will be 50 yrs old at that time.
In Japan business practices, when you think you know, that is when you realize that you don't know.
bilingual legal firm? there are no such thing!, there are legal firm with a broken english interpreter.
there are international law firm group but they charge such a fee that it will make you business plan even more uncompetitive.
even still legal firm is not what you need, you need industry connections, the type of guy that can make it work for you of which there is only 1 or 2.
there is not enouth juice in Hokkaido heli-ski for that.
If you still want to spend stupid money, find a strugling outfit somewhere in the Alps, buy it out and rebuild it.
10~20 years will not be enough to crack the Japan nut.
1. The Japanese society/business ecosystem: I realize I will always stand out from the general populace, which I'm content with. I plan to fully amalgamate with Japanese society through an in-depth study of the language and culture. I'm committing to a permanent relocation rather than a temporary visit. I earnestly desire to build long-term community relationships and participate fully in daily activities. Frankly, I think there will be a way where there is a will.
permanent relocation, how? only if your wife is japanese. sure you can learn the language understand the nuances, how long is that going to take?, I say 10 years, I speak from experience.
so you will be 50 yrs old at that time.
I know some of the particulars of Japanese business practices, as I have long been interested in the subject. I'm glad to retain the services of a reputable bilingual legal firm to facilitate the necessary bureaucratic procedures while I familiarize myself with all the nuances. I'm well aware of the work associated with a successful start-up business, as the funds at my disposal are the product of my merits. The budget of USD 4.5M I indicated pertained to the purchase of the machine only; the rest of the considerations for a functional business infrastructure have already been addressed. I'm perfectly content hiring a local chief pilot from whom I could continue learning.
bilingual legal firm? there are no such thing!, there are legal firm with a broken english interpreter.
there are international law firm group but they charge such a fee that it will make you business plan even more uncompetitive.
even still legal firm is not what you need, you need industry connections, the type of guy that can make it work for you of which there is only 1 or 2.
there is not enouth juice in Hokkaido heli-ski for that.
If you still want to spend stupid money, find a strugling outfit somewhere in the Alps, buy it out and rebuild it.
10~20 years will not be enough to crack the Japan nut.
The following users liked this post:
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: White Waltham, Prestwick & Calgary
Age: 72
Posts: 4,154
Likes: 0
Received 29 Likes
on
14 Posts
I don't know if these extracts will help, but I've come across many people in your position and included it in the Helicopter Pilot's Handbook:
You will need much, much more money than you anticipate. Not for nothing is it said that to end up with a small fortune in Aviation, you need to start with a large one! But it needn't be that bad, provided things are done properly from the start.
First of all, if you need to borrow money, you'll need as much slack as you can get to cover cash flow while you're waiting for customers to pay, and emergencies - if you only ask for just enough money, it will be patently obvious you don't know what you're doing and will be shown the door. When running an airline, you will find that major travel agencies can take up to 6 months (or more) to pay their bills, if they pay at all, which will cause major cashflow problems. Once the fuel companies don't give you any more credit, you don't have long to go, because people who owe you money definitely won't pay if they can get away with it.
Also, things only work out cheaper if you can afford to fork out the money from the start. Buying your own bowser, for instance, instead of positioning your helicopter to the local airfield for fuel, will probably cover all that empty flying and unnecessary landing fees inside three months, but you have to have the money in the first place - paying as you go along should be avoided as much as possible, as it will usually kill any project stone dead.
Don't depend purely on loans. In fact, you probably won't get one till the lender sees some input from another source (preferably yours), so you may need to find a Venture Capitalist who would be willing to invest in your project. These sort of people supply money in return for stock (shares in the Company), typically expecting to be free of their obligation in about four years or so with a handsome profit (although they could make a loss). The major benefit to you is that they provide ready cash and stability without your spending power being drained by interest payments. Although a business plan is important, you will find that your personality, or those of others in the plot, will account for at least half of the decision.
Use accountants, by all means (you will need one on board for the business plan), but never, ever let them run your business, unless they've either been there themselves or have gone to business school. The problem is, their training makes them very narrowly focussed, and they often fail to see the big picture. Mind you, pilots running businesses have limitations, too, since they're programmed to fly and don't always realise you can make more money by not flying sometimes.
A business plan is needed to raise capital - it is a brief sketch of your proposals, detailing how you mean to repay the money, together with how things will be run (this includes the management team). Like a resume, it should be short and to the point, somewhere between a quarter and a half inch thick and, if it is well thought-out, need not be too polished, though it should still look neat, tidy and professional.
The magic figure to survive in the small charter world is 500 hours per aircraft per year - that's revenue hours, ten a week, which doesn't include training, etc. Remember, the object of the company is not to fly, but to make a profit so that you can live, or to provide the investor with a return on his capital (not profit necessarily, although sometimes they can coincide). Far too many people forget this, set themselves up with no research, don't market their product, then expect the world to beat a path to their door because they have an aircraft. Even if work does come, more often than not by accident, the same people undercut everybody else around, thinking to put the opposition out of business then put the prices up again. Unfortunately, it doesn't happen like that - they're the ones to go out of business first because they have no cash flow, left with debts, wondering what went wrong. In fact, too many companies operate on cashflow only, and don’t put money by for the future, which is how they can undercut everyone else around. The trouble is that they have to guarantee getting the next work, which means undercutting even more into a vicious circle. There is a lot of revenue in flying helicopters - please don’t make the mistake of thinking that it’s all profit and go spending it!
Many aviation companies owe their existence to a larger parent company that bought an aircraft as a way of spending excess money that can't otherwise be used (also known as a tax dodge), but it's not impossible to survive purely on Aviation without assistance from a Big Brother. Whether it is or not depends on competition, how big you expect your Company to be and the availability of work (with no competition, there might not be any!)
Purchasing An Aircraft
Whatever happens, you will have to get your hands on a machine. Expensive stuff like that (while being an asset in itself) will create massive debt which will require servicing, which in turn means interest. Which company will take care of that? If the Aviation Company itself buys the machine then it will have that much more to worry about.
What is more likely is that an outside company will own the aircraft and lease it to your Company, giving the additional benefit of the equipment being one step removed in case of disasters. Outside aviation it's common practice to place all valuable assets into a holding company that trades only with associated ones, thus insulating them from unplanned contingencies (try looking at a Pure Trust). Where Aviation is concerned, it also legally separates the registered owner from the user. The leasing cost to you will be a total of maintenance costs, spares or engine replacement costs, insurance costs plus a bit on top for contingencies (the spares or engine replacement costs are like depreciation, an accountant's way of establishing a fund for future replacement of machinery).
One creative solution is to raise a loan on something else, say, a house, and use that money to buy the aircraft - you will then get lower interest rates and longer terms.
The aircraft doesn't just cost, say two million. It will also cost what you can't do with the money having spent it - what economists call the opportunity cost. In other words, you lose the opportunity to do something else with it, even if only to sit in a bank account and gain interest. Sometimes it's better not to buy outright but to do it on a mortgage and let the interest gained from whatever you do with the rest pay the interest on the mortgage. With a little shopping around for interest rates (abroad as well) this is entirely possible.
Imagine you have the choice of two aircraft - one relatively expensive to buy, but cheap to operate and the other cheap to buy, but expensive to run. Both do the job you want - well, near enough, anyway. The difference in purchase price between the two may well, if placed on deposit somewhere, more than pay for the increased running costs if you buy the cheaper one. However, this may be low on the list of priorities, as often the purchasing of an aircraft will tend to be a personal decision on behalf of the Chairman.
So, when evaluating an aircraft, first establish what you want it to do - in many cases, a simpler, cheaper aircraft will suit. For example, if you want a helicopter for corporate transport, use a 206B-III, but for training or pleasure flying, a 206A would not only be cheaper, but more efficient, as its C18 engine is not cycle-limited.
Like with a car, look beneath the shiny paint. There's nothing wrong with sprucing something up for sale, but make a thorough examination anyway. Do not do what one buyer of my acquaintance did - took a helicopter away to lunch, leaving the engineer that he'd taken along (at great expense) alone to look at the books which were written in German! Yes, he bought the wrong aircraft; and deserved it! It sure looked nice, though. Take time to talk to pilots and engineers who actually work with the type of machine you're after - you may find that what you're looking at is OK until the turbocharger goes, which then takes at least three days to repair because it's hidden behind the engine which has to come out completely. On the other hand, another ship could have similar work done in less than half a day and doesn't go wrong in the first place because the turbocharger is not in such a stupid place. Similarly, a particular helicopter could be cheaper to run on paper, but its shorter range on full tanks means that you're paying out for landing fees and dead flying more often, thereby bringing the total operating cost nearly equal to something more comfortable with more endurance (accountants don’t often see the big picture).
You need to check the data for rotor or engine Times Between Overhaul (TBO), the Mean Times Between Failures (MTBF) on avionics equipment, amongst other things. Certainly, buy from a company that can provide support, particularly an engineering-based one, and have an independent survey by a competent engineer.
Aircraft Valuation
Actually, when it was built is largely irrelevant; what counts is the time remaining on its components, since they must all be inspected and replaced at specified times. Equally important is documentation supporting it - it can take longer to verify paperwork than physically survey the aircraft. In this respect, be especially careful when buying from the USA. There are many apparently "cheap" aircraft available, mostly confiscated from smugglers or drug dealers - with no acceptable documentation, their only value is scrap. Also, the regulations for privately owned or agricultural aircraft are less stringent than in Europe, and you may need expensive engineering and/or major components replaced before they will get a C of A. So:
There is no such thing as a cheap helicopter!
Which applies to maintenance as well; if you save money one year, expect to spend it the next. Remember that as well as shipping charges, you may have local taxes and costs of dismantling, packing and erecting when you get it to wherever you are. Shipping is normally All Charges Forward and you will cover insurance.
Depreciation
Because inspection, overhaul and replacement can ensure that a 10-year old aircraft can be as efficient as a new machine, you can't apply this in the same way as a car, or other industrial machinery. However, accountants like it, and it's useful for calculating operating costs, so take the purchase price and give it a one-third residual value, then write down the difference over 10 years. Market prices, though, may vary this. If you have a new engine, or something equally expensive, the machine's value could exceed the new cost.
You will need much, much more money than you anticipate. Not for nothing is it said that to end up with a small fortune in Aviation, you need to start with a large one! But it needn't be that bad, provided things are done properly from the start.
First of all, if you need to borrow money, you'll need as much slack as you can get to cover cash flow while you're waiting for customers to pay, and emergencies - if you only ask for just enough money, it will be patently obvious you don't know what you're doing and will be shown the door. When running an airline, you will find that major travel agencies can take up to 6 months (or more) to pay their bills, if they pay at all, which will cause major cashflow problems. Once the fuel companies don't give you any more credit, you don't have long to go, because people who owe you money definitely won't pay if they can get away with it.
Also, things only work out cheaper if you can afford to fork out the money from the start. Buying your own bowser, for instance, instead of positioning your helicopter to the local airfield for fuel, will probably cover all that empty flying and unnecessary landing fees inside three months, but you have to have the money in the first place - paying as you go along should be avoided as much as possible, as it will usually kill any project stone dead.
Don't depend purely on loans. In fact, you probably won't get one till the lender sees some input from another source (preferably yours), so you may need to find a Venture Capitalist who would be willing to invest in your project. These sort of people supply money in return for stock (shares in the Company), typically expecting to be free of their obligation in about four years or so with a handsome profit (although they could make a loss). The major benefit to you is that they provide ready cash and stability without your spending power being drained by interest payments. Although a business plan is important, you will find that your personality, or those of others in the plot, will account for at least half of the decision.
Use accountants, by all means (you will need one on board for the business plan), but never, ever let them run your business, unless they've either been there themselves or have gone to business school. The problem is, their training makes them very narrowly focussed, and they often fail to see the big picture. Mind you, pilots running businesses have limitations, too, since they're programmed to fly and don't always realise you can make more money by not flying sometimes.
A business plan is needed to raise capital - it is a brief sketch of your proposals, detailing how you mean to repay the money, together with how things will be run (this includes the management team). Like a resume, it should be short and to the point, somewhere between a quarter and a half inch thick and, if it is well thought-out, need not be too polished, though it should still look neat, tidy and professional.
The magic figure to survive in the small charter world is 500 hours per aircraft per year - that's revenue hours, ten a week, which doesn't include training, etc. Remember, the object of the company is not to fly, but to make a profit so that you can live, or to provide the investor with a return on his capital (not profit necessarily, although sometimes they can coincide). Far too many people forget this, set themselves up with no research, don't market their product, then expect the world to beat a path to their door because they have an aircraft. Even if work does come, more often than not by accident, the same people undercut everybody else around, thinking to put the opposition out of business then put the prices up again. Unfortunately, it doesn't happen like that - they're the ones to go out of business first because they have no cash flow, left with debts, wondering what went wrong. In fact, too many companies operate on cashflow only, and don’t put money by for the future, which is how they can undercut everyone else around. The trouble is that they have to guarantee getting the next work, which means undercutting even more into a vicious circle. There is a lot of revenue in flying helicopters - please don’t make the mistake of thinking that it’s all profit and go spending it!
Many aviation companies owe their existence to a larger parent company that bought an aircraft as a way of spending excess money that can't otherwise be used (also known as a tax dodge), but it's not impossible to survive purely on Aviation without assistance from a Big Brother. Whether it is or not depends on competition, how big you expect your Company to be and the availability of work (with no competition, there might not be any!)
Purchasing An Aircraft
Whatever happens, you will have to get your hands on a machine. Expensive stuff like that (while being an asset in itself) will create massive debt which will require servicing, which in turn means interest. Which company will take care of that? If the Aviation Company itself buys the machine then it will have that much more to worry about.
What is more likely is that an outside company will own the aircraft and lease it to your Company, giving the additional benefit of the equipment being one step removed in case of disasters. Outside aviation it's common practice to place all valuable assets into a holding company that trades only with associated ones, thus insulating them from unplanned contingencies (try looking at a Pure Trust). Where Aviation is concerned, it also legally separates the registered owner from the user. The leasing cost to you will be a total of maintenance costs, spares or engine replacement costs, insurance costs plus a bit on top for contingencies (the spares or engine replacement costs are like depreciation, an accountant's way of establishing a fund for future replacement of machinery).
One creative solution is to raise a loan on something else, say, a house, and use that money to buy the aircraft - you will then get lower interest rates and longer terms.
The aircraft doesn't just cost, say two million. It will also cost what you can't do with the money having spent it - what economists call the opportunity cost. In other words, you lose the opportunity to do something else with it, even if only to sit in a bank account and gain interest. Sometimes it's better not to buy outright but to do it on a mortgage and let the interest gained from whatever you do with the rest pay the interest on the mortgage. With a little shopping around for interest rates (abroad as well) this is entirely possible.
Imagine you have the choice of two aircraft - one relatively expensive to buy, but cheap to operate and the other cheap to buy, but expensive to run. Both do the job you want - well, near enough, anyway. The difference in purchase price between the two may well, if placed on deposit somewhere, more than pay for the increased running costs if you buy the cheaper one. However, this may be low on the list of priorities, as often the purchasing of an aircraft will tend to be a personal decision on behalf of the Chairman.
So, when evaluating an aircraft, first establish what you want it to do - in many cases, a simpler, cheaper aircraft will suit. For example, if you want a helicopter for corporate transport, use a 206B-III, but for training or pleasure flying, a 206A would not only be cheaper, but more efficient, as its C18 engine is not cycle-limited.
Like with a car, look beneath the shiny paint. There's nothing wrong with sprucing something up for sale, but make a thorough examination anyway. Do not do what one buyer of my acquaintance did - took a helicopter away to lunch, leaving the engineer that he'd taken along (at great expense) alone to look at the books which were written in German! Yes, he bought the wrong aircraft; and deserved it! It sure looked nice, though. Take time to talk to pilots and engineers who actually work with the type of machine you're after - you may find that what you're looking at is OK until the turbocharger goes, which then takes at least three days to repair because it's hidden behind the engine which has to come out completely. On the other hand, another ship could have similar work done in less than half a day and doesn't go wrong in the first place because the turbocharger is not in such a stupid place. Similarly, a particular helicopter could be cheaper to run on paper, but its shorter range on full tanks means that you're paying out for landing fees and dead flying more often, thereby bringing the total operating cost nearly equal to something more comfortable with more endurance (accountants don’t often see the big picture).
You need to check the data for rotor or engine Times Between Overhaul (TBO), the Mean Times Between Failures (MTBF) on avionics equipment, amongst other things. Certainly, buy from a company that can provide support, particularly an engineering-based one, and have an independent survey by a competent engineer.
Aircraft Valuation
Actually, when it was built is largely irrelevant; what counts is the time remaining on its components, since they must all be inspected and replaced at specified times. Equally important is documentation supporting it - it can take longer to verify paperwork than physically survey the aircraft. In this respect, be especially careful when buying from the USA. There are many apparently "cheap" aircraft available, mostly confiscated from smugglers or drug dealers - with no acceptable documentation, their only value is scrap. Also, the regulations for privately owned or agricultural aircraft are less stringent than in Europe, and you may need expensive engineering and/or major components replaced before they will get a C of A. So:
There is no such thing as a cheap helicopter!
Which applies to maintenance as well; if you save money one year, expect to spend it the next. Remember that as well as shipping charges, you may have local taxes and costs of dismantling, packing and erecting when you get it to wherever you are. Shipping is normally All Charges Forward and you will cover insurance.
Depreciation
Because inspection, overhaul and replacement can ensure that a 10-year old aircraft can be as efficient as a new machine, you can't apply this in the same way as a car, or other industrial machinery. However, accountants like it, and it's useful for calculating operating costs, so take the purchase price and give it a one-third residual value, then write down the difference over 10 years. Market prices, though, may vary this. If you have a new engine, or something equally expensive, the machine's value could exceed the new cost.
The following 8 users liked this post by paco:
The following 2 users liked this post by PlasticCabDriver:
The following 3 users liked this post by rudestuff:
Well Pitchka, two questions:
Where did you get that "expert pilot" from? It looks like nobody here has ever heard of it. Anyway, whatever this might mean in Canada, it might not mean anything in any other country.
What is limited VFR? Special VFR? Does that depend on the number of hours in Canada?
If you already have sufficient funds to buy a helicopter and fly it for training for 500 hours - which I think is not a very clever idea, because your ship will be down for maintenance a lot - why don't you move to Japan a do your training there with a local company with their helicopters? You swat several flys with one stroke. You learn the language, you learn the system you want to fly in, you get contacts in the industry, you get experience dealing with the government ... and when you have all your tickets, you can start the company. Provided Nippon lets you stay.
Where did you get that "expert pilot" from? It looks like nobody here has ever heard of it. Anyway, whatever this might mean in Canada, it might not mean anything in any other country.
What is limited VFR? Special VFR? Does that depend on the number of hours in Canada?
If you already have sufficient funds to buy a helicopter and fly it for training for 500 hours - which I think is not a very clever idea, because your ship will be down for maintenance a lot - why don't you move to Japan a do your training there with a local company with their helicopters? You swat several flys with one stroke. You learn the language, you learn the system you want to fly in, you get contacts in the industry, you get experience dealing with the government ... and when you have all your tickets, you can start the company. Provided Nippon lets you stay.
The more that I read the OP’s posts, the more that I start to feel that ChatGPT might be helping ‘him’ draft them.
If not, well, there have got to be more fun ways of trying to burn through $15m than this one…
If not, well, there have got to be more fun ways of trying to burn through $15m than this one…
Last edited by Bravo73; 18th Dec 2023 at 20:47.
Had to check my calendar for a moment I thought it was April 1st
Just curious once you’ve achieved the titles of “Expert Pilot” and “Sky Ace” at 500hrs what honours are bestowed on you at say a 1000hrs and then 5000hrs?
Just curious once you’ve achieved the titles of “Expert Pilot” and “Sky Ace” at 500hrs what honours are bestowed on you at say a 1000hrs and then 5000hrs?
The following users liked this post:
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
Thank you for the useful feedback. I'm perplexed that the facetiousness of my "expert pilot" remark, indicated with the quotation signs, eluded such perspicacious individuals. I simply referred to the information I received from an insurance agent and the Transport Canada website.
Regardless, there is a wealth of information for me to digest as I refine my strategy.
Thank you all for the input!
Regardless, there is a wealth of information for me to digest as I refine my strategy.
Thank you all for the input!
Pitchka, we all want to know, where on the TC website this is mentioned. Really. Because in general, 500h is one of the numbers where the first time complacency comes up. At 500h you are less safe than at 200h. At least that's what I learned during my FI-course. I am pretty sure you got something wrong there. And I am also sure, there is no certification or anything. We only jump on terms like that, because there are so many terms that are used by laymen/the press/I-know-everything-guys that are used wrong, out of context or are misunderstood, that we just can help ourselves to get giddy.
Oh, and BTW, the H125 is the better option. Speed is not the deciding factor, climb rate is. Sitting in a 407 with ski boots is way less comfortable than in a H125 and getting in and out on one side only, too. And don't go for the leather seats.
And one more thing. A single ship operation is completely useless in heli skiing. The helicopter has to be there when conditions are right. If it is down for maintenance and you don't have another ship, nobody is going to book you again. And this will happen. Helicopters are not cars. You can't just wait another 20 or 30 hours for scheduled maintenance. And if some clumsy customer does some damage, your helicopter might be grounded for quite a while.
Oh, and BTW, the H125 is the better option. Speed is not the deciding factor, climb rate is. Sitting in a 407 with ski boots is way less comfortable than in a H125 and getting in and out on one side only, too. And don't go for the leather seats.
And one more thing. A single ship operation is completely useless in heli skiing. The helicopter has to be there when conditions are right. If it is down for maintenance and you don't have another ship, nobody is going to book you again. And this will happen. Helicopters are not cars. You can't just wait another 20 or 30 hours for scheduled maintenance. And if some clumsy customer does some damage, your helicopter might be grounded for quite a while.
Maybe Pitchka misread/understood it a bit.
In the UK (don't know how it is in Canada) but in the UK when a private owner reaches 500hrs, the insurance will decrease significantly.
Not sure if this is also for commercial operations but 100% sure that for a private owner, the insurance becomes less painful after 500hrs.
Does this make the pilot an expert at 500hrs.......I think you would need an extra 0 to get to expert level.
In the UK (don't know how it is in Canada) but in the UK when a private owner reaches 500hrs, the insurance will decrease significantly.
Not sure if this is also for commercial operations but 100% sure that for a private owner, the insurance becomes less painful after 500hrs.
Does this make the pilot an expert at 500hrs.......I think you would need an extra 0 to get to expert level.