Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far
owning is more expensive than renting. I must say that the convenience
of having your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few
bucks. Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
Student Mooney Owner

> Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far owning
> is more expensive than renting. I must say that the convenience of having
> your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few bucks. Has
> anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)

Owning is always more expensive than renting, until you get to a high number
of hours flown annually.

The old "100 hours per year break-even point" is about right -- until you do
a major interior upgrade, or replace a cylinder. Than *poof* -- renting
looks mighty fine. I'd bet the "real" break-even point (over time) is
closer to 150 hours per year.

But you're right -- owning is worth every penny.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
...
> I must say that the convenience
> of having your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few
> bucks.

I find walking out to a rental airplane that someone else has already
washed, fueled, fixed, annualed, etc. etc. etc. pretty damn convenient. There
are two sides to every story.

That said, I envy owners and hope to be one some day.


Vaughn

I carry my aircraft keys in my pocket. My headsets are in the plane,
plugged in. My logbook is in the plane. My charts are right where I
need them, in their special place, in the plane. My sunglasses are
tucked away into their place, in the plane. If I feel like it, I drive
out to the airport, push it out of the hangar and away I fly! I don't
have to ask anyone's permission, sign any forms or any of that rental
stuff. It's about FREEDOM!!!!!

I'm in a flying club, which is the best (worst) of both worlds...cheaper
than renting with good availabilty for trips. An those multi-thousand
dollar gotcha's are shared with the rest of the membership.

Of course owning is more expensive, but you didn't buy a plane to save
money, did you? :)


"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
...
> Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far
> owning is more expensive than renting. I must say that the convenience
> of having your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few
> bucks. Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)
>
> Jon Kraus
> PP-ASEL-IA
> Student Mooney Owner
>

"Jon Kraus" wrote:
> Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)

I've flown 135 hours this year. At $75/hr. wet, it would have cost me
$10,125+ $18/month dues to fly the local club's 172 that much.

Flying my 172RG cost me:

gas - (135*10gph*$3/gal) $4050
oil & filters - $160
sheltered tiedown - $2160
insurance - $1,500
engine o'haul setaside - $1,105
annual insp. - $750
repairs - $1,400
taxes - $490
capital opportunity cost @ 5% - $4000

Total: $15,615 or about $116/hour.

So the answer is "yes" in my case. Not really apples-to-apples, since
the Cutlass is a retractable with a cs prop and 20 more hp. and is 20
kts faster than the Skyhawk, but I doubt I could own as cheaply as
renting if my airplane was identical to the club's.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"Doug" wrote:
>I carry my aircraft keys in my pocket. My headsets are in the plane,
> plugged in. My logbook is in the plane. My charts are right where I
> need them, in their special place, in the plane. My sunglasses are
> tucked away into their place, in the plane. If I feel like it, I drive
> out to the airport, push it out of the hangar and away I fly! I don't
> have to ask anyone's permission, sign any forms or any of that rental
> stuff. It's about FREEDOM!!!!!

You're dam' right.

Owning is expensive and comes with headaches renters don't get, but it's
well worth it, IMO.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

a study at one time showed that the break even point for most light
singles.. was closer to 400 hours per year

Fixed costs per hour get reduce with more hours flown, insurance,
hanger/tiedown, financing (financing also includes cost of $ lost if not
invested elsewhere).

Variable costs, fuel, engine maint fund, oil, replaceable items like tires
etc, does not necessarily vary with additional hours flown.

BT

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:ODWwd.591568$D%.397211@attbi_s51...
>> Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far
>> owning is more expensive than renting. I must say that the convenience of
>> having your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few
>> bucks. Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)
>
> Owning is always more expensive than renting, until you get to a high
> number of hours flown annually.
>
> The old "100 hours per year break-even point" is about right -- until you
> do a major interior upgrade, or replace a cylinder. Than *poof* --
> renting looks mighty fine. I'd bet the "real" break-even point (over
> time) is closer to 150 hours per year.
>
> But you're right -- owning is worth every penny.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

Renting an airplane is like renting sex:

1. It's harder to get what you want at short notice on Saturday

2. The fun things always cost more.

3. Someone's always looking at their watch.

Ron Wanttaja

Dan,
Factor this in. The FBO I fly from at KRYY has two Cutlasses. Wet rate is
$109 an hour. It brings it a little closer to your costs!
--
Chris Ehlbeck, PP-ASEL
"It's a license to learn, have fun and buy really expensive hamburgers."

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jon Kraus" wrote:
> > Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)
>
> I've flown 135 hours this year. At $75/hr. wet, it would have cost me
> $10,125+ $18/month dues to fly the local club's 172 that much.
>
> Flying my 172RG cost me:
>
> gas - (135*10gph*$3/gal) $4050
> oil & filters - $160
> sheltered tiedown - $2160
> insurance - $1,500
> engine o'haul setaside - $1,105
> annual insp. - $750
> repairs - $1,400
> taxes - $490
> capital opportunity cost @ 5% - $4000
>
> Total: $15,615 or about $116/hour.
>
> So the answer is "yes" in my case. Not really apples-to-apples, since
> the Cutlass is a retractable with a cs prop and 20 more hp. and is 20
> kts faster than the Skyhawk, but I doubt I could own as cheaply as
> renting if my airplane was identical to the club's.
> --
> Dan
> C172RG at BFM
>
>

"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
...
> Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far
> owning is more expensive than renting. I must say that the convenience
> of having your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few
> bucks. Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)

If it flies, floats or f**cks, you're better off renting. ;-)

Shhh...... Jon, you are not to post that statement anymore,,,, don't want
my wife to see it <grin>

'Sides, have to figure out how to stress how 'practical' owning my own plane
will be <GRIN> wink....

Someday... most definitely!!! :0)

--
--
=-----
Good Flights!

Cecil
PP-ASEL-IA
Student - CP-ASEL

Check out my personal flying adventures from my first flight to the
checkride AND the continuing adventures beyond!
Complete with pictures and text at: www.bayareapilot.com

"I fly because it releases my mind from the tyranny of petty things."
- Antoine de Saint-Exupery -

"We who fly, do so for the love of flying. We are alive in the air with
this miracle that lies in our hands and beneath our feet"
- Cecil Day Lewis -

> bucks. Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)
>
> Jon Kraus
> PP-ASEL-IA
> Student Mooney Owner
>

OK Cecil, I've got it... I won't post it any more... I wondering if my
first instructor had it right when he told me "flyings expensive. I've
found that putting the reciepts in a box and not looking at them works
for me". I think sometimes the old "head in the sand" thing probably
isn't a bad idea... :-)

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
Student Mooney Owner

Cecil Chapman wrote:

> Shhh...... Jon, you are not to post that statement anymore,,,, don't want
> my wife to see it <grin>
>
> 'Sides, have to figure out how to stress how 'practical' owning my own plane
> will be <GRIN> wink....
>
> Someday... most definitely!!! :0)
>

In article >,
Jon Kraus > wrote:
>Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far
>owning is more expensive than renting.

Absolutely. A big part of the savings for me would have been not flying
the trips I wanted to fly with a rental due to availability! Plus, with
no expectation of being able to go on multi-day trips I probably wouldn't
have gotten my instrument rating.

There's no way it will work out for you over a few months. I think I've
come close to breaking even vs theoretical renting over the last calendar
year. Of course if I follow through on my plans to install new side windows
and a 6-channel egt/cht + fuel flow instrument then I will be in the red
for sure!

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

Hey, ya gotta have some bells and whistles too. I've found that I really
like our engine analzer. You will to.

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
Student Mooney Owner

Ben Jackson wrote:

> In article >,
> Jon Kraus > wrote:
>
>>Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far
>>owning is more expensive than renting.
>
>
> Absolutely. A big part of the savings for me would have been not flying
> the trips I wanted to fly with a rental due to availability! Plus, with
> no expectation of being able to go on multi-day trips I probably wouldn't
> have gotten my instrument rating.
>
> There's no way it will work out for you over a few months. I think I've
> come close to breaking even vs theoretical renting over the last calendar
> year. Of course if I follow through on my plans to install new side windows
> and a 6-channel egt/cht + fuel flow instrument then I will be in the red
> for sure!
>

In article >,
"Vaughn" > writes:

> I find walking out to a rental airplane that someone else has already
>washed, fueled, fixed, annualed, etc. etc. etc. pretty damn convenient.
>There
>are two sides to every story.

And perhaps landed HARD and had trouble with one of the instruments and choose
not to say anything.
It's that knowledge of "who landed my plane last" that caused me to buy my
Archer 8 years ago and I have had no regrets though the cost for the 1000 hrs
during that period have cost about $74 per hour on cost alone. BUT I have
added a 430 and a 330 transponder and wingtip lights and secondary air and
maybe some other things that don't come to mind right now. Subtract these
costs and you get about $60 per hour. Not bad for an Archer that is always
waiting for you!

Chuck

In article >,
(PaulaJay1) writes:

>And perhaps landed HARD and had trouble with one of the instruments and
>choose
>not to say anything.
>It's that knowledge of "who landed my plane last" that caused me to buy my
>Archer 8 years ago and I have had no regrets though the cost for the 1000 hrs
>during that period have cost about $74 per hour on cost alone. BUT I have
>added a 430 and a 330 transponder and wingtip lights and secondary air and
>maybe some other things that don't come to mind right now. Subtract these
>costs and you get about $60 per hour. Not bad for an Archer that is always
>waiting for you!
>
>Chuck
>

Forgot to figure in the engine and airframe time adjustments that adds adds
about $10k for the 1000 hours making the overall hourly at about $70. Still
not bad.

Chuck

Doug,

Just one suggestion. Take the log books out of the airplane and keep
them in a safe place. If, God forbid, you were to have an accident that
destroyed the logbooks, that wouldn't be a good thing. You probably would
want them available to the accident investigators and the insurance
company.

Rick Graves
N34759 - 1974 C177B

On Sat, 18 Dec
2004 07:57:26 -0800, Doug wrote:

> I carry my aircraft keys in my pocket. My headsets are in the plane,
> plugged in. My logbook is in the plane. My charts are right where I
> need them, in their special place, in the plane. My sunglasses are
> tucked away into their place, in the plane. If I feel like it, I drive
> out to the airport, push it out of the hangar and away I fly! I don't
> have to ask anyone's permission, sign any forms or any of that rental
> stuff. It's about FREEDOM!!!!!

"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
...
> Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far
> owning is more expensive than renting. I must say that the convenience
> of having your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few
> bucks. Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)

Of course it is more expensive. You now have to pay for a whole airplane
instead of just a tiny part of it.

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:42:47 -0800, "BTIZ" >
wrote:

>a study at one time showed that the break even point for most light
>singles.. was closer to 400 hours per year

That sure sounds high.
Flying 130 hours a year in a Debonair was running me around $79/hour
including ALL costs. That includes an unexpected top.

Adding a 3-blade Hartzell brought the costs up into the $90 range over
about 7 years. So, I've been flying a 260HP, high
performance/complex/retract for about the same as they rent a 172.

However, I have not flown nearly as much the last couple of years
which is rapidly offsetting those savings. Currently it's running a
bit over $110 USD/hr.

>
>Fixed costs per hour get reduce with more hours flown, insurance,
>hanger/tiedown, financing (financing also includes cost of $ lost if not
>invested elsewhere).

In that case I made/saved a *lot* money by purchasing the Deb as this
was during the Dot Com bust and that cost me far more than the Deb
including the operating costs.

It "all depends" on the amount of maintenance and upgrades as well as
the hours flown. There is no figure set-in-stone but for normal
expenses it's probably going to be in the 100 to 150 hour range. A
good portion of that can come from interest on the financing.

You may, or may not use *potential* investment gains as not everyone
is an active investor. If they are not an investor and have to borrow
the money the investment losses would not count. Besides, counting
investment losses from money you didn't invest is sorta, like, coulda,
shoulda, woulda.... It's imaginary. Just like I made money today
because the market went up. I didn't make or lose a cent
because I didn't sell. There are only two days that mean anything
when you are investing. The day you purchase the stock and the day
you sell the stock. You could have purchased it for a buck, it could
have gone to a 100,000 and back to two bucks on the day you sell. You
made a dollar.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

>
>Variable costs, fuel, engine maint fund, oil, replaceable items like tires
>etc, does not necessarily vary with additional hours flown.
>
>BT
>
>"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
>news:ODWwd.591568$D%.397211@attbi_s51...
>>> Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far
>>> owning is more expensive than renting. I must say that the convenience of
>>> having your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few
>>> bucks. Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)
>>
>> Owning is always more expensive than renting, until you get to a high
>> number of hours flown annually.
>>
>> The old "100 hours per year break-even point" is about right -- until you
>> do a major interior upgrade, or replace a cylinder. Than *poof* --
>> renting looks mighty fine. I'd bet the "real" break-even point (over
>> time) is closer to 150 hours per year.
>>
>> But you're right -- owning is worth every penny.
>> --
>> Jay Honeck
>> Iowa City, IA
>> Pathfinder N56993
>> www.AlexisParkInn.com
>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>>
>

"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
...
> Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far
> owning is more expensive than renting. I must say that the convenience
> of having your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few
> bucks. Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)
>
> Jon Kraus
> PP-ASEL-IA
> Student Mooney Owner
>

Rent an airplane and fly to a remote place for a week and see how much it
costs? Owning is well worth it if you fly long distances and are away with
the airplane for days or week at a time. I have added it up and I have
already broke even with my airplane compared to renting because ill go
someplace stay for a few days and there are min daily rental fees at most
fbo's around here if you plan on having the aircraft away for a few days.

In article >,
"Richard W. Graves" > wrote:

> Doug,
>
> Just one suggestion. Take the log books out of the airplane and keep
> them in a safe place. If, God forbid, you were to have an accident that
> destroyed the logbooks, that wouldn't be a good thing. You probably would
> want them available to the accident investigators and the insurance
> company.

otoh - logs destroyed in a post-accident fire means less evidence that
can be used against you or your estate.

--
Bob Noel
looking for a sig the lawyers will like

"John Kunkel" > wrote in message
news:Bo_wd.258475$HA.2022@attbi_s01...
>
> "Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far
> > owning is more expensive than renting. I must say that the convenience
> > of having your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few
> > bucks. Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)
>
> If it flies, floats or f**cks, you're better off renting. ;-)
>
>

I gave up hookers the cost of 1 hooker a month is 5 to 8 hours of flying I
would rather be flying

"Doug" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> I carry my aircraft keys in my pocket. My headsets are in the plane,
> plugged in. My logbook is in the plane. My charts are right where I
> need them, in their special place, in the plane. My sunglasses are
> tucked away into their place, in the plane. If I feel like it, I drive
> out to the airport, push it out of the hangar and away I fly! I don't
> have to ask anyone's permission, sign any forms or any of that rental
> stuff. It's about FREEDOM!!!!!
>

Doug, I here ya!

On 18-Dec-2004, "Jay Honeck" > wrote:

> The old "100 hours per year break-even point" is about right -- until you
> do a major interior upgrade, or replace a cylinder. Than *poof* --
> renting
> looks mighty fine. I'd bet the "real" break-even point (over time) is
> closer to 150 hours per year.
>
> But you're right -- owning is worth every penny.


My two co-owners and I recently tried to calculate the actual per-hour cost
to fly our Arrow IV. At our current annual usage of around 170 hours, this
number came to just under $100/hr (tach time), which is well below what an
Arrow would rent for in this area. We thought we were doing pretty well,
especially since we pay the extra cost to keep our plane hangared (which is
rare for rental planes around here).

However, our calculation did not include the cost of our investment. If we
sold the plane for fair market value and put the proceeds in a safe
investment paying 6% interest, the (lost) income would work out to about $28
per flight hour, which would put the total cost very much in line with
renting. On the other hand, the value of the plane is also appreciating, so
this is really not apples-to-apples.

Bottom line: the 150 hour break-even rule of thumb is probably about right.
If you (or a co-ownership group) have that much utilization or more, it
makes economic sense to own, particularly considering all of the other
benefits that come with ownership.
--
-Elliott Drucker

Brad Zeigler wrote:

> I'm in a flying club, which is the best (worst) of both worlds...cheaper
> than renting with good availabilty for trips. An those multi-thousand
> dollar gotcha's are shared with the rest of the membership.

A club has other advantages. In no particular order, I've found:

o Sharing the work load (dealing with insurance, mechanics, etc.)
o Having more than one plane, which means one is flying while an
airplane is in maintenance
o There's always someone that knows more than I about what I'm
supposed to be doing
o Sometimes I can fly an easy plane, sometimes a faster plane

- Andrew

> However, our calculation did not include the cost of our investment. If
> we
> sold the plane for fair market value and put the proceeds in a safe
> investment paying 6% interest, the (lost) income would work out to about
> $28
> per flight hour, which would put the total cost very much in line with
> renting. On the other hand, the value of the plane is also appreciating,
> so
> this is really not apples-to-apples.
>
> Bottom line: the 150 hour break-even rule of thumb is probably about
> right.
> If you (or a co-ownership group) have that much utilization or more, it
> makes economic sense to own, particularly considering all of the other
> benefits that come with ownership.
> --
> -Elliott Drucker

Please send instructions on finding that safe 6% please. That is post tax
correct? Otherwise it works out to 5% so recalcute. My airplane has cost me
less than my former work stock plan and my 401k has been pretty flat if you
don't count matching.

Anyway, I think the 150 is a sure thing, and the 100 might be doable if you
work at it (of course your work would have value).

"Doug" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>I carry my aircraft keys in my pocket. My headsets are in the plane,
> plugged in. My logbook is in the plane. My charts are right where I
> need them, in their special place, in the plane. My sunglasses are
> tucked away into their place, in the plane. If I feel like it, I drive
> out to the airport, push it out of the hangar and away I fly! I don't
> have to ask anyone's permission, sign any forms or any of that rental
> stuff. It's about FREEDOM!!!!!
>

Getting my first plane was like getting my first car, and there are not a
lot of ways to get those good teenage level rushes decades later.

Well put, Doug!

>
> I gave up hookers the cost of 1 hooker a month is 5 to 8 hours of flying
> I
> would rather be flying
>

THis is more information about you than we all really wanted to know.

wrote:
>
> If we
> sold the plane for fair market value and put the proceeds in a safe
> investment paying 6% interest, the (lost) income would work out to about $28
> per flight hour, which would put the total cost very much in line with
> renting.

Safe investments (like bonds) these days are bringing in about 1.5%, and have
been for nearly two years. 2001 was the last year you could count on something
like 6% from one of those accounts.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

> wrote in message
news:Qx1xd.2733$tG3.1799@trnddc02...
>
> My two co-owners and I recently tried to calculate the actual per-hour
cost
> to fly our Arrow IV. At our current annual usage of around 170 hours,
this
> number came to just under $100/hr (tach time), which is well below what an
> Arrow would rent for in this area. We thought we were doing pretty well,
> especially since we pay the extra cost to keep our plane hangared (which
is
> rare for rental planes around here).

Using a rental aircraft for business flying is tenuous at best.

IAC, I calculate that my B36TC runs $165 an hour for everything -- 430 hours
in the past 12 months including hanger fees of $3000 annually. One big
factor is your location; it's going to be much more expensive in an
expensive town/city/state.

I don't recall EVER seeing a B36TC for rental. Also, when we need to travel
its often (about 1/3 of our flights) on an hours notice.

Lastly. one thing missing in many rentals is the ability to do a RON.


Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

"PaulaJay1" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "Vaughn" > writes:
>
> > I find walking out to a rental airplane that someone else has already
> >washed, fueled, fixed, annualed, etc. etc. etc. pretty damn convenient.
> >There
> >are two sides to every story.
>
> And perhaps landed HARD and had trouble with one of the instruments and
choose
> not to say anything.

There's a reason rental CARS are not kept very long: multiple drivers wear
them out much more quickly and DO NOT drive them like they would their own.
:~)


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Why would anybody pay good money to watch somebody hit a golf ball in a left
turning arc?

Jim


>
> I gave up hookers the cost of 1 hooker a month is 5 to 8 hours of flying
> I
> would rather be flying
>
>

ah ha... and at $110 an hour, that's what I pay for a rental Arrow, granted
the Deb is better than the Arrow.

Does your cost include the "engine replacement fund" you are paying into, or
the "avionics replacement fun"? Based on a generous 2000 hr TBO, and a now
almost $25-30K expense for a new engine, at least $10/hr or maybe even
12-25/hr should be allotted for the engine fund.

Unless you want to just have to come up with the cash when you need it, the
cost still factors into the "operating cost" over all, whether in actual
expense or depreciated value for a used up engine.

I'll agree that the 400hr estimate was when rentals were running closer to
$65-80/hr instead of the current $110 for the Arrow. I paid $18/hr for
flight training in a C-150 II Commuter, 30yrs ago.
Those 150s now rent for $50-60 per hour. The Bonanza that used to be
available was $160/hr and the Twin Seneca IIs are currently $180-200 /hr.

BT

"Roger" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:42:47 -0800, "BTIZ" >
> wrote:
>
>>a study at one time showed that the break even point for most light
>>singles.. was closer to 400 hours per year
>
> That sure sounds high.
> Flying 130 hours a year in a Debonair was running me around $79/hour
> including ALL costs. That includes an unexpected top.
>
> Adding a 3-blade Hartzell brought the costs up into the $90 range over
> about 7 years. So, I've been flying a 260HP, high
> performance/complex/retract for about the same as they rent a 172.
>
> However, I have not flown nearly as much the last couple of years
> which is rapidly offsetting those savings. Currently it's running a
> bit over $110 USD/hr.
>
>>
>>Fixed costs per hour get reduce with more hours flown, insurance,
>>hanger/tiedown, financing (financing also includes cost of $ lost if not
>>invested elsewhere).
>
> In that case I made/saved a *lot* money by purchasing the Deb as this
> was during the Dot Com bust and that cost me far more than the Deb
> including the operating costs.
>
> It "all depends" on the amount of maintenance and upgrades as well as
> the hours flown. There is no figure set-in-stone but for normal
> expenses it's probably going to be in the 100 to 150 hour range. A
> good portion of that can come from interest on the financing.
>
> You may, or may not use *potential* investment gains as not everyone
> is an active investor. If they are not an investor and have to borrow
> the money the investment losses would not count. Besides, counting
> investment losses from money you didn't invest is sorta, like, coulda,
> shoulda, woulda.... It's imaginary. Just like I made money today
> because the market went up. I didn't make or lose a cent
> because I didn't sell. There are only two days that mean anything
> when you are investing. The day you purchase the stock and the day
> you sell the stock. You could have purchased it for a buck, it could
> have gone to a 100,000 and back to two bucks on the day you sell. You
> made a dollar.
>
> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
> www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>>
>>Variable costs, fuel, engine maint fund, oil, replaceable items like tires
>>etc, does not necessarily vary with additional hours flown.
>>
>>BT
>>
>>"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
>>news:ODWwd.591568$D%.397211@attbi_s51...
>>>> Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far
>>>> owning is more expensive than renting. I must say that the convenience
>>>> of
>>>> having your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few
>>>> bucks. Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)
>>>
>>> Owning is always more expensive than renting, until you get to a high
>>> number of hours flown annually.
>>>
>>> The old "100 hours per year break-even point" is about right -- until
>>> you
>>> do a major interior upgrade, or replace a cylinder. Than *poof* --
>>> renting looks mighty fine. I'd bet the "real" break-even point (over
>>> time) is closer to 150 hours per year.
>>>
>>> But you're right -- owning is worth every penny.
>>> --
>>> Jay Honeck
>>> Iowa City, IA
>>> Pathfinder N56993
>>> www.AlexisParkInn.com
>>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>>>
>>
>

> I find walking out to a rental airplane that someone else has already
> washed, fueled, fixed, annualed, etc. etc. etc. pretty damn convenient.
> There
> are two sides to every story.

Wow -- the rental planes I used to fly were:

a) Clapped out
b) Unwashed -- for years
c) Rarely fueled by anyone except me
d) Had lots of things wrong -- or, at least, not quite right

And if it was hangared (few were), I had to drag the thing out of a group
hangar from behind a couple of other planes.

There is nothing about renting that I miss -- except at annual time.

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On 18-Dec-2004, "Matt Barrow" > wrote:

> Using a rental aircraft for business flying is tenuous at best.


You got that right!!
--
-Elliott Drucker

On 18-Dec-2004, "Dude" > wrote:

> Please send instructions on finding that safe 6% please.


Well, "safe" is a relative term, but you might check out ticker symbol WIA.

Actually, compared to the market in general over the Bush years, airplane
appreciation (or at least lack of depreciation) looks like a pretty good
deal.
--
-Elliott Drucker

Speaking of washing planes. How do you get your plane washed in the
winter? Mine could use it and I have no idea what to do. Thanks!!

Jon Kraus
PP-ASEL-IA
Dirty Mooney Owner


Jay Honeck wrote:

>> I find walking out to a rental airplane that someone else has already
>>washed, fueled, fixed, annualed, etc. etc. etc. pretty damn convenient.
>>There
>>are two sides to every story.
>
>
> Wow -- the rental planes I used to fly were:
>
> a) Clapped out
> b) Unwashed -- for years
> c) Rarely fueled by anyone except me
> d) Had lots of things wrong -- or, at least, not quite right
>
> And if it was hangared (few were), I had to drag the thing out of a group
> hangar from behind a couple of other planes.
>
> There is nothing about renting that I miss -- except at annual time.
>
> ;-)

I have rented / owned / owned and rented / leased / borrowed (never
stole though:) / airplanes my entire adult life... I could teach an
entire PhD course in the uneconomics of airplanes... Among the several
things I have learned along the way is that owning is more expensive
than renting - period! There will be the occasional bright guy, like
Roger, who can make the numbers work out in favor of owning - I have
never been able to make that happen...

But, renting affects me... Every time I have flown a rented airplane I
am concious of the Hobbs meter running... It affects my decision
making... If I am on the way somewhere and the thought comes up, "Gee
if I deviate a half hour to the West we can fly over the St. Louis arch
(or some such)... In a rented plane it doesn't happen because both
conciously and subconciously I can see that &*^$@# meter running... In
my own airplane, it's a slam dunk - we ARE going to fly over the arch
(or whatever)... I will drive 20 miles out to the airport just to make
two circuits around the field with crosswind landings, 20 minutes of
flying just for fun... I won't do that in a rented airplane... I will
go to the airport on a really bad weather morning just to vacuum the
carpet and polish the spinner... I won't do that in a rented
airplane... I will go to the airport at 2AM just to go fly lazy
circles for 40 minutes to look at the moon and the stars (stress
relief)... I won't do that in a rented airplane... I wll arrange a 3
day weekend to fly down to Florida and sit on the beach for a day... I
won't do that in a rented airplane...

Bottom line "for me" is that I have to own... For you it may be
different... I would urge those who rent to consider a club ownership,
or a partnership deal... Owning makes a huge difference in how you see
the airplane and in how you use it... How many of you would consider
renting your car? Not many... But for those who have cars on lease,
how many of you are always concious of the miles accumulating on trips?
Every one of you, I bet, because going over mileage on the lease
contract carries a big $$ penalty..

Cheers ... Denny

Re, I keep the flight logs in the plane (the aircraft logs NOT). But
they are my logs, I'll keep em where I damn well please.

> Speaking of washing planes. How do you get your plane washed in the
> winter? Mine could use it and I have no idea what to do.

I *never* wash my planes (or motorcycles) with soap and water. Everything
is done with Lemon Pledge and cloth diapers.

Unfortunately they no longer make pump-spray Pledge, and the aerosol stuff
is just not right. (It comes out in a foam, instead of liquid.)

Luckily, I bought 6 cases of the stuff before they stopped making it -- so
I'm good for a few more years. ;-)

Anyway, Pledge works on any above-freezing day. The paint looks new, and so
does the plexiglass. I haven't had to find a substitute yet, so if anyone
finds an equally economical solution, please post it here.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Curious as to why no soap and water. The paint is probably some
polyeurethane (Imron etc...) so it wouldn't be hurt. JK

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>Speaking of washing planes. How do you get your plane washed in the
>>winter? Mine could use it and I have no idea what to do.
>
>
> I *never* wash my planes (or motorcycles) with soap and water. Everything
> is done with Lemon Pledge and cloth diapers.
>
> Unfortunately they no longer make pump-spray Pledge, and the aerosol stuff
> is just not right. (It comes out in a foam, instead of liquid.)
>
> Luckily, I bought 6 cases of the stuff before they stopped making it -- so
> I'm good for a few more years. ;-)
>
> Anyway, Pledge works on any above-freezing day. The paint looks new, and so
> does the plexiglass. I haven't had to find a substitute yet, so if anyone
> finds an equally economical solution, please post it here.

On 19 Dec 2004 06:02:40 -0800, "Denny" > wrote:

>I have rented / owned / owned and rented / leased / borrowed (never
>stole though:) / airplanes my entire adult life... I could teach an
>entire PhD course in the uneconomics of airplanes...

Good one, I'd never heard the term ueconomics before.

>things I have learned along the way is that owning is more expensive
>than renting - period!

I have been fortunate, my ownership costs have been around $68/hr for
a Cherokee 180, but this is not including engine overhaul reserve,
aircraft depreciation due to increased TTAF, the new paint job,
avionics updates, Knots2U mods, opportunity cost of money, and the
countless hours I've spent working on the plane (which I enjoy).

A nice Cherokee 180 or early Archer rents for ~$90 wet in Chicago
area, so there's no way I'm coming out ahead. On the other hand,
that's not why I own.

This is for ~200hrs / year of flying.

-Nathan

"Denny" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> I have rented / owned / owned and rented / leased / borrowed (never
> stole though:) / airplanes my entire adult life... I could teach an
> entire PhD course in the uneconomics of airplanes... Among the several
> things I have learned along the way is that owning is more expensive
> than renting - period! There will be the occasional bright guy, like
> Roger, who can make the numbers work out in favor of owning - I have
> never been able to make that happen...
>

Let's have a show of hands from all those who drive a Hertz (okay...Budget)
rental car instead of your owned/leased vehicle?

Anyone? Anyone at all?

The economics and justifications are the same -- UTILIZATION and frequency.

If we drove once every six months using Hertz might make sense.

Way too many people use aircraft for pleasure or marginally "profitable"
business. If you make $25-50 an hour, you can't justify too much for flying
expenses, or if you make $200 an hour, but only for a day or so.

When I started my business back in 1996, I tried using rentals while getting
the business started. It worked, but was very constricting. In the first
year I got a T182, then a T210, then four years ago a B36TC. I started with
a radius of business of 150 miles, then 300 and now I go from Great Falls
down to North Texas, from SLC east to Omaha. I build houses and usually
never more than ten in any one town, usually smaller towns. I couldn't do
that with rentals or airlines/commuters. The aircraft I owned never cost me
more than about $85,000 a year (everything included), but enabled us to
build the company into a $4.5M business. As I mentioned in another post,
what I use/"am looking for next", don't come on the rental market.

Now I'm looking for all weather capability, thinking of a turbo-prop. We're
putting together two projects to build a total 55 houses in two
towns....more than we now build in a year. Budget looks like $9.75M. There's
usually three or four of us that have to travel together, 550nm and 600nm .
Any suggestions?

Too many people let their ego get in the way of making a sound justification
for an aircraft purchase. The economics don't pan out unless you can have
the tax man help you,


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:02:42 -0800, "BTIZ" >
wrote:

>ah ha... and at $110 an hour, that's what I pay for a rental Arrow, granted
>the Deb is better than the Arrow.
>
>Does your cost include the "engine replacement fund" you are paying into, or

Yup

>the "avionics replacement fun"? Based on a generous 2000 hr TBO, and a now

2000? I wish. The IO-470N is only 1700

>almost $25-30K expense for a new engine, at least $10/hr or maybe even
>12-25/hr should be allotted for the engine fund.
>
>Unless you want to just have to come up with the cash when you need it, the
>cost still factors into the "operating cost" over all, whether in actual
>expense or depreciated value for a used up engine.

The big difference is I probably pay much less for a hanger than most
and I have no interest payments.
I use a progressive maintenance program, but the plane has been
relatively trouble free.

Hanger runs $125/Mo I toss in a dollar a day when using the engine
heater.

>
>I'll agree that the 400hr estimate was when rentals were running closer to
>$65-80/hr instead of the current $110 for the Arrow. I paid $18/hr for
>flight training in a C-150 II Commuter, 30yrs ago.

That much? I was paying $6/Hr for a Piper Colt ...Wet. <:-))
You could fly all day on less than $50. Of course you could fly all
day and not go anywhere either. Now, there was a forgiving airplane.
Nothing worked on it but the engine and controls, but it was
forgiving.

>Those 150s now rent for $50-60 per hour. The Bonanza that used to be
>available was $160/hr and the Twin Seneca IIs are currently $180-200 /hr.

I remember the V-tail they had was $16/Hr

Hmmm...come to think of it, that was 41 years ago.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>BT
>
>"Roger" > wrote in message
...
>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 08:42:47 -0800, "BTIZ" >
>> wrote:
>>
>>>a study at one time showed that the break even point for most light
>>>singles.. was closer to 400 hours per year
>>
>> That sure sounds high.
>> Flying 130 hours a year in a Debonair was running me around $79/hour
>> including ALL costs. That includes an unexpected top.
>>
>> Adding a 3-blade Hartzell brought the costs up into the $90 range over
>> about 7 years. So, I've been flying a 260HP, high
>> performance/complex/retract for about the same as they rent a 172.
>>
>> However, I have not flown nearly as much the last couple of years
>> which is rapidly offsetting those savings. Currently it's running a
>> bit over $110 USD/hr.
>>
>>>
>>>Fixed costs per hour get reduce with more hours flown, insurance,
>>>hanger/tiedown, financing (financing also includes cost of $ lost if not
>>>invested elsewhere).
>>
>> In that case I made/saved a *lot* money by purchasing the Deb as this
>> was during the Dot Com bust and that cost me far more than the Deb
>> including the operating costs.
>>
>> It "all depends" on the amount of maintenance and upgrades as well as
>> the hours flown. There is no figure set-in-stone but for normal
>> expenses it's probably going to be in the 100 to 150 hour range. A
>> good portion of that can come from interest on the financing.
>>
>> You may, or may not use *potential* investment gains as not everyone
>> is an active investor. If they are not an investor and have to borrow
>> the money the investment losses would not count. Besides, counting
>> investment losses from money you didn't invest is sorta, like, coulda,
>> shoulda, woulda.... It's imaginary. Just like I made money today
>> because the market went up. I didn't make or lose a cent
>> because I didn't sell. There are only two days that mean anything
>> when you are investing. The day you purchase the stock and the day
>> you sell the stock. You could have purchased it for a buck, it could
>> have gone to a 100,000 and back to two bucks on the day you sell. You
>> made a dollar.
>>
>> Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
>> (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
>> www.rogerhalstead.com
>>
>>>
>>>Variable costs, fuel, engine maint fund, oil, replaceable items like tires
>>>etc, does not necessarily vary with additional hours flown.
>>>
>>>BT
>>>
>>>"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
>>>news:ODWwd.591568$D%.397211@attbi_s51...
>>>>> Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far
>>>>> owning is more expensive than renting. I must say that the convenience
>>>>> of
>>>>> having your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few
>>>>> bucks. Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)
>>>>
>>>> Owning is always more expensive than renting, until you get to a high
>>>> number of hours flown annually.
>>>>
>>>> The old "100 hours per year break-even point" is about right -- until
>>>> you
>>>> do a major interior upgrade, or replace a cylinder. Than *poof* --
>>>> renting looks mighty fine. I'd bet the "real" break-even point (over
>>>> time) is closer to 150 hours per year.
>>>>
>>>> But you're right -- owning is worth every penny.
>>>> --
>>>> Jay Honeck
>>>> Iowa City, IA
>>>> Pathfinder N56993
>>>> www.AlexisParkInn.com
>>>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>Speaking of washing planes. How do you get your plane washed in the
>>winter? Mine could use it and I have no idea what to do.
>
>
> I *never* wash my planes (or motorcycles) with soap and water. Everything
> is done with Lemon Pledge and cloth diapers.
>
> Unfortunately they no longer make pump-spray Pledge, and the aerosol stuff
> is just not right. (It comes out in a foam, instead of liquid.)
>
> Luckily, I bought 6 cases of the stuff before they stopped making it -- so
> I'm good for a few more years. ;-)
>
> Anyway, Pledge works on any above-freezing day. The paint looks new, and so
> does the plexiglass. I haven't had to find a substitute yet, so if anyone
> finds an equally economical solution, please post it here.

You obviously don't get your cars or airplane very dirty. Washing off
mud or any amount of dirt with Pledge and a diaper would make a great
abrasive that would trash your paint in short order. Vehicles should
always be washed with lots of water prior to touching the surface with a
sponge or cloth. Soap helps loosen the dirt and avoid scratches, but
water alone does a pretty good job. Never take a cloth to a dry and
dirty painted or plexi surface.


Matt

Nathan Young wrote:

> On 19 Dec 2004 06:02:40 -0800, "Denny" > wrote:
>
>
>>I have rented / owned / owned and rented / leased / borrowed (never
>>stole though:) / airplanes my entire adult life... I could teach an
>>entire PhD course in the uneconomics of airplanes...
>
>
> Good one, I'd never heard the term ueconomics before.
>
>
>>things I have learned along the way is that owning is more expensive
>>than renting - period!
>
>
> I have been fortunate, my ownership costs have been around $68/hr for
> a Cherokee 180, but this is not including engine overhaul reserve,
> aircraft depreciation due to increased TTAF, the new paint job,
> avionics updates, Knots2U mods, opportunity cost of money, and the
> countless hours I've spent working on the plane (which I enjoy).

No, your ownership costs have been way higher than $68/hours. Your
direct operating costs may be $68/hr, but not your ownership costs.


Matt

On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 13:04:21 GMT, Jon Kraus >
wrote:

>Speaking of washing planes. How do you get your plane washed in the
>winter? Mine could use it and I have no idea what to do. Thanks!!

I figure that's added insulation.

Mine rarely gets washed in the winter.

OTOH you can use the so called "dry wash". It's not really dry and
goes on much like wax with a wet cloth. It does a good job on
everything except grease and oil. There, I guess you could use some
solvent followed by the dry wash.

It does need above freezing temperatures though.
A couple of the catalytic LP gas heaters do a pretty good job of
making the hanger warm enough you can shed the "long snuggies", but
it's definitely not tropical in there.

>
>Jon Kraus
>PP-ASEL-IA
>Dirty Mooney Owner
>
>
>Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>>> I find walking out to a rental airplane that someone else has already
>>>washed, fueled, fixed, annualed, etc. etc. etc. pretty damn convenient.

Down time is the only time I miss the multi-plane club.

>>>There
>>>are two sides to every story.
>>
>>
>> Wow -- the rental planes I used to fly were:
>>
>> a) Clapped out

That's the only kind I can afford.

>> b) Unwashed -- for years

Why wash? Bugs stick better to a clean plane.
Once they build up a layer it doesn't seem to get any thicker.
As slippery as they are, you'd think they'd make the plane go faster.

>> c) Rarely fueled by anyone except me

Your contributions are appreciated, but not acknowledged publicly.

>> d) Had lots of things wrong -- or, at least, not quite right

You are describing a normal airplane.
and they say, FORD = Fix, Or Repair Daily.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>>
>> And if it was hangared (few were), I had to drag the thing out of a group
>> hangar from behind a couple of other planes.
>>
>> There is nothing about renting that I miss -- except at annual time.
>>
>> ;-)

Jay Honeck wrote:

> Wow -- the rental planes I used to fly were:
>
> a) Clapped out
> b) Unwashed -- for years
> c) Rarely fueled by anyone except me
> d) Had lots of things wrong -- or, at least, not quite right

There are two FBOs around here that have 172Rs and 172SPs that are in
pretty- to quite-good shape. One is also a Cessna dealer, so I expect that
this plays some role.

Unfortunately, though, stepping up from the 172 is tougher to find. Add
that to my list of club advantages.

There are other FBOs here, of course, which are more as you describe. So I
guess there is a market for that.

- Andrew

"Jay Honeck" wrote

> Unfortunately they no longer make pump-spray Pledge, and the aerosol stuff
> is just not right. (It comes out in a foam, instead of liquid.)

> Jay Honeck

Have you tried turning a can upside down, and spraying out all of the
propellant? Then you can stab or cut the can open and get the stuff out.
I'll bet the foaming is not there without the pressure.
--
Jim in NC

Matt Barrow wrote:

> If we drove once every six months using Hertz might make sense.

Exactly. During that unfortunate period in my life when I was living in
Philadelphia, I drove once every few months. I rented.

- Andrew

Matt Barrow wrote:
>
> Let's have a show of hands from all those who drive a Hertz (okay...Budget)
> rental car instead of your owned/leased vehicle?

We rent one every time we need to travel more than about 100 miles. It's sort of
the opposite of airplane rentals. We own high-mileage vehicles that aren't real
comfortable (read "small") on trips. That's great for local driving but not so
hot for a drive to (say) Tennessee with a load of luggage.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

I tried a detailed analysis of this once and it turned me off owning,
atleast for now. What many do not figure into the calculations of costs is
the lost of investment capital of the purchase and depreciation. If you are
a reasonably good investor, this loss of capital is not going to be
insignificant. Even if you put it into bonds, it will depend on the
original purchase price. Sure, if you get a 152, it is not going to matter
much. If you are planning to get a nice Seneca II or 172SP, things are
going to be different. Once I put all costs into the equation a used 172SP
would set me back +$20,000 usd per year. That is alot of rental hours
indeed. Of course, the the pride of owning offsets this costs for many new
owners. Then the novelty wears off and the financial burnden comes into
play. On the psychological side, the stress of responsabilities of
ownership are not to be discounted either. For the moment, I would rather
just pay my dues, not worry about maintenance (hide my head in the sand) and
fly a different plane once in a while.

Tien

"BTIZ" > wrote in message
news:76Zwd.103$iD.7@fed1read05...
> a study at one time showed that the break even point for most light
> singles.. was closer to 400 hours per year
>
> Fixed costs per hour get reduce with more hours flown, insurance,
> hanger/tiedown, financing (financing also includes cost of $ lost if not
> invested elsewhere).
>
> Variable costs, fuel, engine maint fund, oil, replaceable items like tires
> etc, does not necessarily vary with additional hours flown.
>
> BT
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> news:ODWwd.591568$D%.397211@attbi_s51...
> >> Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far
> >> owning is more expensive than renting. I must say that the convenience
of
> >> having your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few
> >> bucks. Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)
> >
> > Owning is always more expensive than renting, until you get to a high
> > number of hours flown annually.
> >
> > The old "100 hours per year break-even point" is about right -- until
you
> > do a major interior upgrade, or replace a cylinder. Than *poof* --
> > renting looks mighty fine. I'd bet the "real" break-even point (over
> > time) is closer to 150 hours per year.
> >
> > But you're right -- owning is worth every penny.
> > --
> > Jay Honeck
> > Iowa City, IA
> > Pathfinder N56993
> > www.AlexisParkInn.com
> > "Your Aviation Destination"
> >
>
>

On 19-Dec-2004, "Matt Barrow" > wrote:

> Now I'm looking for all weather capability, thinking of a turbo-prop.
> We're putting together two projects to build a total 55 houses in two
> towns....more than we now build in a year. Budget looks like $9.75M.
> There's usually three or four of us that have to travel together, 550nm
> and 600nm
> .
> Any suggestions?


Nice problem to have! Sounds like the ideal mission profile for a single
turboprop (Meridian, TBM-700, PC-12), or maybe a Malibu Mirage. However,
either of the Pipers might have a problem making a 600 nm trip nonstop with
4 aboard against a strong headwind and with IFR reserves.
--
-Elliott Drucker

ok, i have re-read this whole thread and i can't see where anyone is
baking-in the value of the asset gained in the buy/rent discussions.
i'm not too far from buying my first (and probably last, i'm gettin
close to 60 years old and already retired) plane and the kinds of
planes i'm looking at quit depreciating a long time ago. yes, you've
got engine time and a list of different types of expenses that would
drive an enron accountant crazy but, end of the day, you do have an
asset. in my brief experience, it looks like the little planes are
holding value and may be appreciating some. not enough to offset
engine use-cost but some. meanwhile, someone here pointed me at the
c-140 and those are looking mighty interesting. 140A especially but
maybe a 152 would be smarter.this is fun to wory about anyway.

dan

> Curious as to why no soap and water. The paint is probably some
> polyeurethane (Imron etc...) so it wouldn't be hurt. JK

Water sprayed under pressure gets into all sorts of areas you DON'T want it,
both on motorcycles and airplanes.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

> You obviously don't get your cars or airplane very dirty. Washing off mud
> or any amount of dirt with Pledge and a diaper would make a great abrasive
> that would trash your paint in short order. Vehicles should always be
> washed with lots of water prior to touching the surface with a sponge or
> cloth. Soap helps loosen the dirt and avoid scratches, but water alone
> does a pretty good job. Never take a cloth to a dry and dirty painted or
> plexus surface.

You're correct -- our plane never has a chance to get dirty. We (the whole
family) wipe it down after every flight with Pledge and diapers.

I get the left leading edge, cowling and wheel pant.

Mary gets the right leading edge, and beer/pop.

My son gets the empennage

My daughter gets the main gear wheel pants.

The procedure is:

a) Push Atlas into the hangar
b) Spray our respective surfaces with Pledge
c) Crack a cold one
d) Half way through aforementioned cold one (or, at this time of year, hot
chocolate) wipe down our respective surfaces.

We usually fly twice a week, and the plane is always immaculate.

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 02:08:46 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>You're correct -- our plane never has a chance to get dirty. We (the whole
>family) wipe it down after every flight with Pledge and diapers.
>
>I get the left leading edge, cowling and wheel pant.
>
>Mary gets the right leading edge, and beer/pop.
What about the rest of the wing?

>My son gets the empennage
Does this include the belly?

>My daughter gets the main gear wheel pants.

What about the horizonta and vertical stabilizors and rudder?

Not picking, but it seems like you'd need to wash the rest of it at
some point.

z

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>You obviously don't get your cars or airplane very dirty. Washing off mud
>>or any amount of dirt with Pledge and a diaper would make a great abrasive
>>that would trash your paint in short order. Vehicles should always be
>>washed with lots of water prior to touching the surface with a sponge or
>>cloth. Soap helps loosen the dirt and avoid scratches, but water alone
>>does a pretty good job. Never take a cloth to a dry and dirty painted or
>>plexus surface.
>
>
> You're correct -- our plane never has a chance to get dirty. We (the whole
> family) wipe it down after every flight with Pledge and diapers.

Flying on paved strips only helps a lot. My airplane was based on a
grass/dirt strip for several years and pledge and a diaper just wouldn't
cut it! Likewise, I have a 1700' gravel driveway and my cars definitely
need a water bath before washing or I'd have my paint ground away in a
few washings.


Matt

I've been reasonably happy with Dry Wash N Guard... Enough so that I
quit using Pledge a few years back...

http://www.dri-waterless-car-wash.com/

The devil is in the details, of course...
Start with the 32 oz. with the pump sprayer to see if you like it...
Shake it WELL before decanting or using - and after you have it shaken
(not stirred), then shake it for double the time you thought was
adequate... There are some 50 ingredients in it and some settle out...
After the 32 oz. bottle gets low then the 64 oz. jug is good...

Oh yeah... On the pump sprayer, do NOT tighten the cap crushing the
O-ring seal, as this dents the O-ring and it eventually stops holding
pressure... Gently screw the cap down until you can just feel the
O-ring start to add drag, then add about one ounce of torque beyond
that... My O-ring on the pump is 4 years old and still going strong -
guys who just have to torque it down until it jams and the bottle
starts to distort will be lucky to get a few weeks out of the 0-ring
(gotta stop them leaks doancha know)...

It looks pricey but goes a long, long ways... ymmv, bni, sar, etc.
Denny

Owning is a LOT more expensive than renting. While you may
get a breakeven at a certain number of hours .. few owners would
fly as much as they do if they were renting. So that comparison is
a bit fictitious.



"Jon Kraus" > wrote in message
...
> Well I have only been an airplane owner for a few months but so far owning
> is more expensive than renting. I must say that the convenience of having
> your own airplane to go to when ever you want is worth a few bucks. Has
> anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)
>
> Jon Kraus
> PP-ASEL-IA
> Student Mooney Owner
>

When you own you don't have to turn yourself in at the end of the
flight. You are free to go.
--
Gene Seibel
Gene & Sue's Aeroplanes - http://pad39a.com/gene/planes.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

Matt Barrow wrote:

> Lastly. one thing missing in many rentals is the ability to do a RON.
>

RON?

xyzzy wrote:
>
> RON?

Remain OverNight.

George Patterson
The desire for safety stands against every great and noble enterprise.

"Roger" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:02:42 -0800, "BTIZ" >
> wrote:
>
> >Those 150s now rent for $50-60 per hour. The Bonanza that used to be
> >available was $160/hr and the Twin Seneca IIs are currently $180-200 /hr.
>
> I remember the V-tail they had was $16/Hr
>
> Hmmm...come to think of it, that was 41 years ago.

I guess!! I still have the FBO's receipt from the day I solo'ed
(12/01/82) -- the 152 was $12.00 and the instructor was $9.00 (a 172 was
$14).


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

> wrote in message
news:7_mxd.379$Y57.11@trnddc08...
> On 19-Dec-2004, "Matt Barrow" > wrote:
>
> > Now I'm looking for all weather capability, thinking of a turbo-prop.
> > We're putting together two projects to build a total 55 houses in two
> > towns....more than we now build in a year. Budget looks like $9.75M.

I should clarifiy that the amount mentioned is for the project, not for the
airplane.

> > There's usually three or four of us that have to travel together, 550nm
> > and 600nm
> > .
> > Any suggestions?
>
>
> Nice problem to have! Sounds like the ideal mission profile for a single
> turboprop (Meridian, TBM-700, PC-12), or maybe a Malibu Mirage. However,
> either of the Pipers might have a problem making a 600 nm trip nonstop
with
> 4 aboard against a strong headwind and with IFR reserves.

I had been thinking King Air C90B, but a single might work.

How are they for "roominess"? These boys come from the construction trades
and are pretty "big" boys. My project leader is 6'7" and about 260.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Matt Barrow wrote:
> >
> > Let's have a show of hands from all those who drive a Hertz
(okay...Budget)
> > rental car instead of your owned/leased vehicle?
>
> We rent one every time we need to travel more than about 100 miles. It's
sort of
> the opposite of airplane rentals. We own high-mileage vehicles that aren't
real
> comfortable (read "small") on trips. That's great for local driving but
not so
> hot for a drive to (say) Tennessee with a load of luggage.

When flying was strictly for pleasure we joined a flying club and managed
about 75-100 hours a year. When we started our own business and it grew
outside the local area, we bought and were doing 200-300 years from the
beginning, and now are well over 400 annually.

I can unequivocally say the two planes I've owned these past six years have
virtually made my business possible and it could NOT have been done with
rentals. Now I need to add all-weather capability, more range and speed.

I must say, though, it's a fun dilemma.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

Vaughn wrote:

> That said, I envy owners and hope to be one some day.

Someday I hope to be two. :-)

On 20-Dec-2004, "Matt Barrow" > wrote:

> Sounds like the ideal mission profile for a single
> > turboprop (Meridian, TBM-700, PC-12), or maybe a Malibu Mirage.
> > However, either of the Pipers might have a problem making a 600 nm trip
> > nonstop
> > with 4 aboard against a strong headwind and with IFR reserves.
>
> I had been thinking King Air C90B, but a single might work.
>
> How are they for "roominess"? These boys come from the construction trades
> and are pretty "big" boys. My project leader is 6'7" and about 260.


The Pipers are probably just a bit roomier than your B36TC (but pressurized,
so they will certainly be more comfortable). The TBM is quite a bit larger,
and I'd wager the PC-12 has more cabin room than a C-90 (and maybe half the
direct operating cost).

--
-Elliott Drucker

On Sat, 18 Dec 2004 13:38:17 GMT, Jon Kraus wrote:

>Has anyone found owning more expensive than renting? :-)

After my major overhaul after an inflight cylinder failure on my 1976
Sundowner. I thought I was through the "worst" case scenario, but a new
problem is about to bite me in my rear end that has my A&P scratching his
head.....

Last flight, I noticed under the wing root, some blue dye on my nice shiny
white paint. Thought, ok, maybe when I was topped off, that some fuel
dripped down and left it's traces. Wiped it off, nothing leaking, so I
thought.... Flew the plane, landed, no obvious signs of leaking.

Today, go out, same thing, just enough leakage, that it doesn't make it to
the bottom of the fusalage, nothing on the ground, yet I have a fuel leak
from the root of the wing.

My A&P took a look, sure enough, said I have never seen anything like this.
The Sundowner doesn't have any access panels to the fuel tanks! Everything
is riveted tight as a drum. So.... now do I have a leaky fuel tank, or do
I have a fuel line problem.

A&P said run it today, with the warmer weather and see if I get seepage.
Came back, sure enough, very fine strip of blue from fuel seeping out.

I wiped it off after the flight, to see if I get any seepage. I am
figuring if no seepage, then there is a good chance it's a fuel line
leaking under pressure. I asked for the tank to be topped off as well.

Either way, it's going to be very expensive to repair.... If it's the
tank, the entire wing will probably have to be removed from what I gather,
as it does not appear to be "bladders" according to my A&P.

Total time on airframe is 2253, so be very careful in buying "underused"
airplanes. Sitting on the ramp is worse then being used on a regular basis
as I am learning the hard way.

Allen

> wrote in message
news:w7Hxd.2382$2X6.2213@trnddc07...
>
> On 20-Dec-2004, "Matt Barrow" > wrote:
>
> > Sounds like the ideal mission profile for a single
> > > turboprop (Meridian, TBM-700, PC-12), or maybe a Malibu Mirage.
> > > However, either of the Pipers might have a problem making a 600 nm
trip
> > > nonstop
> > > with 4 aboard against a strong headwind and with IFR reserves.
> >
> > I had been thinking King Air C90B, but a single might work.
> >
> > How are they for "roominess"? These boys come from the construction
trades
> > and are pretty "big" boys. My project leader is 6'7" and about 260.
>
>
> The Pipers are probably just a bit roomier than your B36TC (but
pressurized,
> so they will certainly be more comfortable). The TBM is quite a bit
larger,
> and I'd wager the PC-12 has more cabin room than a C-90 (and maybe half
the
> direct operating cost).

In looking at some of the spec's, the PC-12 is definitely the choice. I
think I was gravitating to the King Air as I've been a Beech fan for some
years now. I checked it out on ASO and I'm not impressed with the Piper
Meridian, and the Piaggio is $8 million USED!! A PC-12 can be had for about
$2M, a TBM-700 for about $1.5M.

This is the off-season for our industry, so I'll use the time to do some
digging.

Thanks for your input.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

>>Mary gets the right leading edge, and beer/pop.
> What about the rest of the wing?
> What about the horizonta and vertical stabilizors and rudder?

These parts get "The Pledge" treatment occasionally, when we're feeling
especially ambitious. They don't really get dirty -- only dusty. (As long
as your plane is hangared, of course.)

>>My son gets the empennage
> Does this include the belly?

Our new M20 air/oil separator has basically put my son out of business. I
used to pay him $.50 per wingspan foot (30 feet = $15) to clean the bottom
of the plane once a month. Now, he hasn't had to do it since August.

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

> Flying on paved strips only helps a lot. My airplane was based on a
> grass/dirt strip for several years and pledge and a diaper just wouldn't
> cut it!

We fly into a grass strip half a dozen times per year, and it takes Pledge,
diapers, and Simple Green (on the fiberglass parts) to clean up after those
excursions...

> Likewise, I have a 1700' gravel driveway and my cars definitely need a
> water bath before washing or I'd have my paint ground away in a few
> washings.

Gravel driveways are the norm in rural Iowa. You can really tell the
"out-of-towners" by the beaters they drive into town. I'm sure they don't
see much point in buying an expensive car when you basically trash it
without ever leaving your property. (Of course, crushing rural poverty has
something to do with this, too...)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 04:47:18 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>>>Mary gets the right leading edge, and beer/pop.
>> What about the rest of the wing?
>> What about the horizonta and vertical stabilizors and rudder?
>
>These parts get "The Pledge" treatment occasionally, when we're feeling
>especially ambitious. They don't really get dirty -- only dusty. (As long
>as your plane is hangared, of course.)
>
>>>My son gets the empennage
>> Does this include the belly?
>
>Our new M20 air/oil separator has basically put my son out of business. I
>used to pay him $.50 per wingspan foot (30 feet = $15) to clean the bottom
>of the plane once a month. Now, he hasn't had to do it since August.
>
>:-)


Ahhh. No hangar here = dirty tail. The birds love to practice bombing
the horizontal stabilizer from the beacon. Also no M20 separator, or
children = more work for me!

Thanks,
z

Suggestion Matt... I don't know crapola about turboprops, but I have
spent my whole life banging around airports... If you go to an all
weather turboprop consider hiring an ATP rated pilot with a degree in
business or engineering, etc., who can be your copilot and can work in
the business when not flying... If you and your partners are going to
take on a multimillion dollar project with short timelines, you will
have far more on your mind than having fun flying - especially those
VOR-A approaches with circle to land in nasty weather, when you
absolutely, positively, have to be there...
Denny

Piaggio is $5.6MM new.

Mike
MU-2

"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> > wrote in message
> news:w7Hxd.2382$2X6.2213@trnddc07...
>>
>> On 20-Dec-2004, "Matt Barrow" > wrote:
>>
>> > Sounds like the ideal mission profile for a single
>> > > turboprop (Meridian, TBM-700, PC-12), or maybe a Malibu Mirage.
>> > > However, either of the Pipers might have a problem making a 600 nm
> trip
>> > > nonstop
>> > > with 4 aboard against a strong headwind and with IFR reserves.
>> >
>> > I had been thinking King Air C90B, but a single might work.
>> >
>> > How are they for "roominess"? These boys come from the construction
> trades
>> > and are pretty "big" boys. My project leader is 6'7" and about 260.
>>
>>
>> The Pipers are probably just a bit roomier than your B36TC (but
> pressurized,
>> so they will certainly be more comfortable). The TBM is quite a bit
> larger,
>> and I'd wager the PC-12 has more cabin room than a C-90 (and maybe half
> the
>> direct operating cost).
>
> In looking at some of the spec's, the PC-12 is definitely the choice. I
> think I was gravitating to the King Air as I've been a Beech fan for some
> years now. I checked it out on ASO and I'm not impressed with the Piper
> Meridian, and the Piaggio is $8 million USED!! A PC-12 can be had for
> about
> $2M, a TBM-700 for about $1.5M.
>
> This is the off-season for our industry, so I'll use the time to do some
> digging.
>
> Thanks for your input.
>
>
> --
> Matt
> ---------------------
> Matthew W. Barrow
> Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
> Montrose, CO
>
>
>

"Denny" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Suggestion Matt... I don't know crapola about turboprops, but I have
> spent my whole life banging around airports... If you go to an all
> weather turboprop consider hiring an ATP rated pilot with a degree in
> business or engineering, etc., who can be your copilot and can work in
> the business when not flying...

Unfortunately, I need neither a business person, nor an engineer though that
might (probably will) change.

Why would the person need an ATP?

> If you and your partners are going to
> take on a multimillion dollar project with short timelines,

What do you consider "short timelines"? We're looking at nine months. Then
next year we think we can do it again.

> you will
> have far more on your mind than having fun flying - especially those
> VOR-A approaches with circle to land in nasty weather, when you
> absolutely, positively, have to be there...

Believe me, where we're going there are definitely NOT just VOR-A
approaches...even though these two main sites are not in major metropolitan
areas. :~) We still expect to do a few other projects, though most places
don't have those approaches either.

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> Piaggio is $5.6MM new.
>

I find two on ASO for just under $5M, a 1999 and a 2001 model.
Whatever...it's still way outside my budget.

I'm not impressed with the present market for the Cessna 441's I see on the
market. I can pick up a Commander 840 or even a 900 for less than $1M,
which is more akin to the budget and still suites the mission just fine.

> Mike
> MU-2
>
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > > wrote in message
> > news:w7Hxd.2382$2X6.2213@trnddc07...
> >>
> >> On 20-Dec-2004, "Matt Barrow" > wrote:
> >>
> >> > Sounds like the ideal mission profile for a single
> >> > > turboprop (Meridian, TBM-700, PC-12), or maybe a Malibu Mirage.
> >> > > However, either of the Pipers might have a problem making a 600 nm
> > trip
> >> > > nonstop
> >> > > with 4 aboard against a strong headwind and with IFR reserves.
> >> >
> >> > I had been thinking King Air C90B, but a single might work.
> >> >
> >> > How are they for "roominess"? These boys come from the construction
> > trades
> >> > and are pretty "big" boys. My project leader is 6'7" and about 260.
> >>
> >>
> >> The Pipers are probably just a bit roomier than your B36TC (but
> > pressurized,
> >> so they will certainly be more comfortable). The TBM is quite a bit
> > larger,
> >> and I'd wager the PC-12 has more cabin room than a C-90 (and maybe half
> > the
> >> direct operating cost).

On 21-Dec-2004, "Matt Barrow" > wrote:

> I find two on ASO for just under $5M, a 1999 and a 2001 model.
> Whatever...it's still way outside my budget.
>
> I'm not impressed with the present market for the Cessna 441's I see on
> the market. I can pick up a Commander 840 or even a 900 for less than
> $1M,
> which is more akin to the budget and still suites the mission just fine.


Just remember that operating and maintenance costs for a 20 year old twin
turboprop will be the same or higher than for a brand new one. Purchase
price is only part of the story. The real question is, how much can you
afford in total hourly cost to fly the plane? Oh, and don't forget the cost
and time for recurrent training, which your insurance carrier is bound to
require.
--
-Elliott Drucker

And the Commander's are much better airplanes!
Compare C/G envelopes and pax v fuel loading senarios.

Matt Barrow wrote:
> I'm not impressed with the present market for the Cessna 441's I see on the
> market. I can pick up a Commander 840 or even a 900 for less than $1M,
> which is more akin to the budget and still suites the mission just fine.

> wrote in message
news:cf%xd.6954$rL3.3392@trnddc03...
>
> On 21-Dec-2004, "Matt Barrow" > wrote:
>
> > I find two on ASO for just under $5M, a 1999 and a 2001 model.
> > Whatever...it's still way outside my budget.
> >
> > I'm not impressed with the present market for the Cessna 441's I see on
> > the market. I can pick up a Commander 840 or even a 900 for less than
> > $1M,
> > which is more akin to the budget and still suites the mission just fine.
>
>
> Just remember that operating and maintenance costs for a 20 year old twin
> turboprop will be the same or higher than for a brand new one.

Probably the same, and insurance probably will be less. Many of the ones I
saw have been refurbished, and some have been completely restored. One has
virtually new TFE331-10T engines (20 hours) and another, has an all new
Garmin/Meggitt panel.

> Purchase
> price is only part of the story. The real question is, how much can you
> afford in total hourly cost to fly the plane? Oh, and don't forget the
cost
> and time for recurrent training, which your insurance carrier is bound to
> require.

Well, if I save a half million or more, I can afford a lot of training :~)

Like I said, I've got a couple months to keep digging.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 04:47:18 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>>>Mary gets the right leading edge, and beer/pop.
>> What about the rest of the wing?
>> What about the horizonta and vertical stabilizors and rudder?
>
>These parts get "The Pledge" treatment occasionally, when we're feeling
>especially ambitious. They don't really get dirty -- only dusty. (As long
>as your plane is hangared, of course.)

Yah, but how do you get the bugs to stick if you put pledge on the
wings?

>
>>>My son gets the empennage
>> Does this include the belly?
>
>Our new M20 air/oil separator has basically put my son out of business. I
>used to pay him $.50 per wingspan foot (30 feet = $15) to clean the bottom
>of the plane once a month. Now, he hasn't had to do it since August.

Air oil separator on the Deb (IO-47N) with no oil filter and it has a
wet vacuum pump, has no noticeable oil use in 25 hours. Engine is
nearing TBO.

The belly would stay clean if I'd only fly in nice weather and stay
off the grass farm strips.

Bugs on the wings and cowl are another matter.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>
>:-)

Roger wrote:

> On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 04:47:18 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> > wrote:
>
>
>>>>Mary gets the right leading edge, and beer/pop.
>>>
>>>What about the rest of the wing?
>>>What about the horizonta and vertical stabilizors and rudder?
>>
>>These parts get "The Pledge" treatment occasionally, when we're feeling
>>especially ambitious. They don't really get dirty -- only dusty. (As long
>>as your plane is hangared, of course.)
>
>
> Yah, but how do you get the bugs to stick if you put pledge on the
> wings?

Fly faster, of course.


Matt

Matt, stepping up to an all weather turboprop aircraft is a whole new
world... Until you have a year or two of flying one on a gotta-be-there
schedule, you need someone in the cockpit who's major skill set is
pushing aluminum from point A to point B in any weather, not building
houses in any weather...
No, the hired pilot doesn't 'have' to be ATP rated but he/she needs to
be commercial, CFII, with real world experience - military flying, or
bush pilot time, air taxi time, UPS, etc... This will help you
tremendously in the cost of insurance which is going to be a big ticket
item if you are the named pilot and just moving into turbine aircraft -
having a propilot with turbine experience as the named pilot initially
will save you money up front and get you (almost) free instruction time
until you can satisfy the insurance minimum turbine time requirement...
Look in Trade-A-Plane for guys wanting a job... There are folks with
both technical education and turbine time looking for work...
Monster.com is a resource also.. While I suggested a full time
employee who is available on demand, there are folks who will work just
for the flying, also...

Denny

Denny

"Denny" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Matt, stepping up to an all weather turboprop aircraft is a whole new
> world...

Probably not as bad as the Baron I used to own.

> Until you have a year or two of flying one on a gotta-be-there
> schedule, you need someone in the cockpit who's major skill set is
> pushing aluminum from point A to point B in any weather, not building
> houses in any weather...

I've been managing to push aluminum around for all these years, including
the eight that I've spent building my business, I imagine that it can't be
worse than getting there in my Bonanza.

> No, the hired pilot doesn't 'have' to be ATP rated but he/she needs to
> be commercial, CFII, with real world experience - military flying, or
> bush pilot time, air taxi time, UPS, etc... This will help you
> tremendously in the cost of insurance which is going to be a big ticket
> item if you are the named pilot and just moving into turbine aircraft -
> having a propilot with turbine experience as the named pilot initially
> will save you money up front and get you (almost) free instruction time
> until you can satisfy the insurance minimum turbine time requirement...
> Look in Trade-A-Plane for guys wanting a job... There are folks with
> both technical education and turbine time looking for work...
> Monster.com is a resource also.. While I suggested a full time
> employee who is available on demand, there are folks who will work just
> for the flying, also...

Thanks for your comments.
--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 04:51:53 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>> Flying on paved strips only helps a lot. My airplane was based on a
>> grass/dirt strip for several years and pledge and a diaper just wouldn't
>> cut it!
>
>We fly into a grass strip half a dozen times per year, and it takes Pledge,
>diapers, and Simple Green (on the fiberglass parts) to clean up after those
>excursions...
>
>> Likewise, I have a 1700' gravel driveway and my cars definitely need a
>> water bath before washing or I'd have my paint ground away in a few
>> washings.
>
>Gravel driveways are the norm in rural Iowa. You can really tell the

We have a lot of "dirt" driveways in rural Michigan as well.
Although I don't see it much any more, at one time you could purchase
a car with a "chip guard" right from the factory, which was a kind of
plastic coating on the bottom foot of so of the doors and fenders.
The stuff really worked.

At that time I had nearly a mile and a half of gravel road going into
town. It was gravel right up to the village limits.

Of course that is the same town where my 40 acre field (on which I
used to land the Piper Colt) was within the city limits.

One of the guys who lived about 15 miles out actually brought his
equipment up and mowed a strip full length of the field. He could fly
up to the field and walk the rest of the was faster than he could
drive it. Of course that didn't work if he needed to carry a lot.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com
>"out-of-towners" by the beaters they drive into town. I'm sure they don't
>see much point in buying an expensive car when you basically trash it
>without ever leaving your property. (Of course, crushing rural poverty has
>something to do with this, too...)

On 22 Dec 2004 06:00:54 -0800, "Denny" > wrote:

>Matt, stepping up to an all weather turboprop aircraft is a whole new
>world... Until you have a year or two of flying one on a gotta-be-there
>schedule, you need someone in the cockpit who's major skill set is
>pushing aluminum from point A to point B in any weather, not building
>houses in any weather...
>No, the hired pilot doesn't 'have' to be ATP rated but he/she needs to
>be commercial, CFII, with real world experience - military flying, or
>bush pilot time, air taxi time, UPS, etc... This will help you
>tremendously in the cost of insurance which is going to be a big ticket
>item if you are the named pilot and just moving into turbine aircraft -
>having a propilot with turbine experience as the named pilot initially
>will save you money up front and get you (almost) free instruction time
>until you can satisfy the insurance minimum turbine time requirement...
>Look in Trade-A-Plane for guys wanting a job... There are folks with
>both technical education and turbine time looking for work...
>Monster.com is a resource also.. While I suggested a full time
>employee who is available on demand, there are folks who will work just
>for the flying, also...

I've been doing research into buying a plane. I have about 300 hours
and have considered everything from a T182RG to a T210 to making the
jump straight into a 400-series Cessna. I talked to a guy who has a
421, and the insurance company wanted him to pay $30,000/yr for his
first year, PLUS (something like) 200 hours DUAL!

If for no other reason than the insurance cost, you could hire a guy
full time to be instructor/SIC, and the difference in insurance cost
would probably pay for the salary. You'd also have an experienced
person teaching you while you build time.
John Szpara
Affordable Satellite
Fiero Owner 2-84 Indy Pace cars, 86 Coupe, 88 Formula 3.4, 88 Coupe, 88GT

On 20-Dec-2004, A Lieberman > wrote:

> My A&P took a look, sure enough, said I have never seen anything like
> this. The Sundowner doesn't have any access panels to the fuel tanks!
> Everything is riveted tight as a drum. So.... now do I have a leaky fuel
> tank, or do
> I have a fuel line problem.

I don't know squat about Sundowners, but I'm wondering how it could be that
here are NO access/inspection holes on the wings. Certainly, there has to
be access to the wing attach bolts. Also, how does the fuel line get
connected after a wing is installed if there are no access points?

I've seen some remarkable snorkeling periscope tools that allow one to
"peek" around corners inside a wing when the inspection hole isn't where the
problem it.

Have you considered that Beech technical support might be able to help on
this problem?

Good luck, and let us know what happens.

--
-Elliott Drucker

I have access to a 20 ft fiberoptic borescope. I'm here in San Diego.
Wouldn't mind playing with it as long as we don't break it. I could never
afford to replace it...


> wrote in message
news:YUNyd.5511$h.2950@trnddc04...
>
> On 20-Dec-2004, A Lieberman > wrote:
>
> > My A&P took a look, sure enough, said I have never seen anything like
> > this. The Sundowner doesn't have any access panels to the fuel tanks!
> > Everything is riveted tight as a drum. So.... now do I have a leaky
fuel
> > tank, or do
> > I have a fuel line problem.
>
> I don't know squat about Sundowners, but I'm wondering how it could be
that
> here are NO access/inspection holes on the wings. Certainly, there has to
> be access to the wing attach bolts. Also, how does the fuel line get
> connected after a wing is installed if there are no access points?
>
> I've seen some remarkable snorkeling periscope tools that allow one to
> "peek" around corners inside a wing when the inspection hole isn't where
the
> problem it.
>
> Have you considered that Beech technical support might be able to help on
> this problem?
>
> Good luck, and let us know what happens.
>
> --
> -Elliott Drucker