Minimum Experience and VLJ's (was Eclipse 500)

[john smith]

Several posters have stated that the owner/operator of the new VLJ's
will not have the "necessary" skills to fly in the current environment.
Several numbers have been thrown out, but no one has said what the
minimum annual flight hours are to be accepted as proficient by the
detractors.

How much does one have to fly annually/monthly to be considered safe and
competent to fly a VLJ in the flight levels?

[Mike Rapoport]

I don't know about VLJ (actually nobody has ever gotten insured in one!) but
for turbines like MU-2, CJ-2 they want to see ATP, 2500TT, 1000 multi and
100 make and model minimium. This is from my experience trying to insure a
MU-2. It is possible to get coverage with less but there will only be a
couple of companies quoting and it will be expensive with a lot of
restrictions. These restrictions can be very expensive to comply with. It
is very ezpensive to fly off 100 or more hours with a pro-pilot babysitting
you. If you just go flying then it will cost at least $50,000 to get the
100hrs and if you try to actually go places you will be paying for hotels,
meals, non flying time ect. I think that this will be one of the biggest
limitation to the VLJ market. Ask yourself: "How many people do I
personally know that have ALL of the following

1) $1.5M (todays dollars) to spend on an airplane and intend to do it.
2) One year flying with a real pro-pilot. Keep in mind that the pro pilot
is taking up useful load, you aren't going to Aspen with the family and
skis.
3) One week per year to dedicate to recurrent training costing $10,000/yr
if you fly there in your VLJ
4) At least one week per year spent taking the airplane to service centers,
flying the airline back and then going to retrieve the airplane.
5) Insurance for the typical owner/operator will probably be $20-30,000.

When you start thinking about all these costs and issues, the market
suddenly isn't so big. Most people who have $1.5MM to spend on an airplane
and are willing to put up with the other costs and hassles probably already
have a jet. The cost of the actual airplane is only the first hurdle.

Mike
MU-2

"john smith" > wrote in message
...
> Several posters have stated that the owner/operator of the new VLJ's will
> not have the "necessary" skills to fly in the current environment.
> Several numbers have been thrown out, but no one has said what the minimum
> annual flight hours are to be accepted as proficient by the detractors.
>
> How much does one have to fly annually/monthly to be considered safe and
> competent to fly a VLJ in the flight levels?

[Peter R.]

Mike Rapoport > wrote:

> When you start thinking about all these costs and issues, the market
> suddenly isn't so big. Most people who have $1.5MM to spend on an airplane
> and are willing to put up with the other costs and hassles probably already
> have a jet. The cost of the actual airplane is only the first hurdle.

I met someone at my home airport who will be taking delivery of an Eclipse
sometime September 2006, assuming all goes well with final certification
and production.

He currently flies a 1999 Baron and claims that it will be cheaper per hour
(maintenance and engine reserve included) to fly an Eclipse. I didn't
really get into a lengthy conversation with him to know if he thought of
all the costs you listed, however.

--
Peter


















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[B. Jensen]

Mike,

You make some good points. However, I know of a couple of "deep pocket"
pilots that have their aircraft in LLC's and then simply
"self-insure". Since they have more money than experience, no
insurance company will insure them, so they take on the risk
themselves...and we are talking King Airs in this cause vs. a VLJ.

BJ

Mike Rapoport wrote:

>I don't know about VLJ (actually nobody has ever gotten insured in one!) but
>for turbines like MU-2, CJ-2 they want to see ATP, 2500TT, 1000 multi and
>100 make and model minimium. This is from my experience trying to insure a
>MU-2. It is possible to get coverage with less but there will only be a
>couple of companies quoting and it will be expensive with a lot of
>restrictions. These restrictions can be very expensive to comply with. It
>is very ezpensive to fly off 100 or more hours with a pro-pilot babysitting
>you. If you just go flying then it will cost at least $50,000 to get the
>100hrs and if you try to actually go places you will be paying for hotels,
>meals, non flying time ect. I think that this will be one of the biggest
>limitation to the VLJ market. Ask yourself: "How many people do I
>personally know that have ALL of the following
>
>1) $1.5M (todays dollars) to spend on an airplane and intend to do it.
>2) One year flying with a real pro-pilot. Keep in mind that the pro pilot
>is taking up useful load, you aren't going to Aspen with the family and
>skis.
>3) One week per year to dedicate to recurrent training costing $10,000/yr
>if you fly there in your VLJ
>4) At least one week per year spent taking the airplane to service centers,
>flying the airline back and then going to retrieve the airplane.
>5) Insurance for the typical owner/operator will probably be $20-30,000.
>
>When you start thinking about all these costs and issues, the market
>suddenly isn't so big. Most people who have $1.5MM to spend on an airplane
>and are willing to put up with the other costs and hassles probably already
>have a jet. The cost of the actual airplane is only the first hurdle.
>
>Mike
>MU-2
>
>"john smith" > wrote in message
...
>
>
>>Several posters have stated that the owner/operator of the new VLJ's will
>>not have the "necessary" skills to fly in the current environment.
>>Several numbers have been thrown out, but no one has said what the minimum
>>annual flight hours are to be accepted as proficient by the detractors.
>>
>>How much does one have to fly annually/monthly to be considered safe and
>>competent to fly a VLJ in the flight levels?
>>
>>
>
>
>
>

[Richard Kaplan]

I could not agree with you more.

I also think the alleged market for 1,000+ Eclipse air taxis is utterly
unrealistic. I do not believe the market exists for anywhere near that many
air taxis within the range and payload capabilities of the Eclipse and given
what will be the eventual costs.

--------------------
Richard Kaplan

www.flyimc.com

[Newps]

Mike Rapoport wrote:


> 5) Insurance for the typical owner/operator will probably be $20-30,000.

Which is cheap. I know two guys. One just sold his Citation. The
insurance bill was $95K per year. He also owns a Caravan on amphibs.
The tab for insurance on that one is $35K per year. The other guy owns
a Caravan on wheels. The tab for that insurance bill is $20K. He
skipped the hull insurance and just keeps liability for hardly anything.
Relatively speaking.

[Mike Rapoport]

Having an airplane in a LLC (or other entity) doesn't do anything to relieve
liability if you are the pilot. They protect you if someone else crashes
the airplane.

Mike
MU-2


"B. Jensen" > wrote in message
...
> Mike,
>
> You make some good points. However, I know of a couple of "deep pocket"
> pilots that have their aircraft in LLC's and then simply "self-insure".
> Since they have more money than experience, no insurance company will
> insure them, so they take on the risk themselves...and we are talking King
> Airs in this cause vs. a VLJ.
> BJ
>
> Mike Rapoport wrote:
>
>>I don't know about VLJ (actually nobody has ever gotten insured in one!)
>>but for turbines like MU-2, CJ-2 they want to see ATP, 2500TT, 1000 multi
>>and 100 make and model minimium. This is from my experience trying to
>>insure a MU-2. It is possible to get coverage with less but there will
>>only be a couple of companies quoting and it will be expensive with a lot
>>of restrictions. These restrictions can be very expensive to comply with.
>>It is very ezpensive to fly off 100 or more hours with a pro-pilot
>>babysitting you. If you just go flying then it will cost at least $50,000
>>to get the 100hrs and if you try to actually go places you will be paying
>>for hotels, meals, non flying time ect. I think that this will be one of
>>the biggest limitation to the VLJ market. Ask yourself: "How many people
>>do I personally know that have ALL of the following
>>
>>1) $1.5M (todays dollars) to spend on an airplane and intend to do it.
>>2) One year flying with a real pro-pilot. Keep in mind that the pro pilot
>>is taking up useful load, you aren't going to Aspen with the family and
>>skis.
>>3) One week per year to dedicate to recurrent training costing $10,000/yr
>>if you fly there in your VLJ
>>4) At least one week per year spent taking the airplane to service
>>centers, flying the airline back and then going to retrieve the airplane.
>>5) Insurance for the typical owner/operator will probably be $20-30,000.
>>
>>When you start thinking about all these costs and issues, the market
>>suddenly isn't so big. Most people who have $1.5MM to spend on an
>>airplane and are willing to put up with the other costs and hassles
>>probably already have a jet. The cost of the actual airplane is only the
>>first hurdle.
>>
>>Mike
>>MU-2
>>
>>"john smith" > wrote in message
...
>>
>>>Several posters have stated that the owner/operator of the new VLJ's will
>>>not have the "necessary" skills to fly in the current environment.
>>>Several numbers have been thrown out, but no one has said what the
>>>minimum annual flight hours are to be accepted as proficient by the
>>>detractors.
>>>
>>>How much does one have to fly annually/monthly to be considered safe and
>>>competent to fly a VLJ in the flight levels?
>>
>>
>>
>

[Mike Rapoport]

"Newps" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Mike Rapoport wrote:
>
>
>> 5) Insurance for the typical owner/operator will probably be $20-30,000.
>
> Which is cheap. I know two guys. One just sold his Citation. The
> insurance bill was $95K per year. He also owns a Caravan on amphibs. The
> tab for insurance on that one is $35K per year. The other guy owns a
> Caravan on wheels. The tab for that insurance bill is $20K. He skipped
> the hull insurance and just keeps liability for hardly anything.
> Relatively speaking.
>

Sure it is relatively cheap compared to the same pilot in a more expensive
airplane. In reality the insurance may be much higher than $20-30,000 it is
going to depend on pilot qualifications. If the VLJ is 50% of the hull
value of your friends Citation than it is going to cost half as much to
insure. In any event it is going to be a lot per hour for the typical user.

Mike
MU-2

[Mike Rapoport]

"Richard Kaplan" > wrote in message
news:1120956204.98fefa56d19619adcc5219c8241868f4@t eranews...
>I could not agree with you more.
>
> I also think the alleged market for 1,000+ Eclipse air taxis is utterly
> unrealistic. I do not believe the market exists for anywhere near that
> many air taxis within the range and payload capabilities of the Eclipse
> and given what will be the eventual costs.
>
> --------------------
> Richard Kaplan
>
> www.flyimc.com
>
I agree. The claims of orders for hundreds or thousands of Eclipses are
crazy. These proposed air taxi companies don't have any meaningful assets.
How are they going to buy a billion dollars worth of airplanes?

Mike
MU-2

[Mike Rapoport]

Sure there are some buyers for which the VLJs are a perfect match. The
question is whether there are enough of these buyers to make the concept a
success. They need to sell thousands or tens of thousands of these
airplanes to get the cost down. I doubt that he has considered longer term
costs like the air cycle machine or windows/windshields although the VLJs,
being new, won't need these things for a long time.

Mike
MU-2


"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
> Mike Rapoport > wrote:
>
>> When you start thinking about all these costs and issues, the market
>> suddenly isn't so big. Most people who have $1.5MM to spend on an
>> airplane
>> and are willing to put up with the other costs and hassles probably
>> already
>> have a jet. The cost of the actual airplane is only the first hurdle.
>
> I met someone at my home airport who will be taking delivery of an Eclipse
> sometime September 2006, assuming all goes well with final certification
> and production.
>
> He currently flies a 1999 Baron and claims that it will be cheaper per
> hour
> (maintenance and engine reserve included) to fly an Eclipse. I didn't
> really get into a lengthy conversation with him to know if he thought of
> all the costs you listed, however.
>
> --
> Peter
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
> News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
> Newsgroups
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
> =----

[Richard Kaplan]

What is an air cycle machine?

--------------------
Richard Kaplan

www.flyimc.com

[Mike Rapoport]

It takes bleed air which is hot and uses the energy in the hot air to cool
and dehumidify it. It is basically a series of heat exchangers, expansion
turbines, compressors water traps/sprayers and valves. The rotating group
turns something like 100,000rpm and overhauling one in an MU-2 can be
upwards of $35,000. They typically last about 4000 hrs. The alternative is
a vapor cycle machine which is better at cooling but even more expensive.
Cabin windows and windshields last about 20yrs or so (4000 hr) and on a MU-2
cost $70,000 to replace. Nobody thinks about these things as being typical
costs but they can add significantly to the operating cost over the lifetime
of an airplane.

Mike
MU-2


"Richard Kaplan" > wrote in message
news:1120968289.ca16ce6fd2c4644fb07a8b68b04395b6@t eranews...
> What is an air cycle machine?
>
> --------------------
> Richard Kaplan
>
> www.flyimc.com
>

[Richard Kaplan]

Thanks for the explanation.

--------------------
Richard Kaplan

www.flyimc.com

[Larry Dighera]

On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 04:02:10 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
> wrote in
et>::

>Sure there are some buyers for which the VLJs are a perfect match. The
>question is whether there are enough of these buyers to make the concept a
>success.

Aren't VLJs prime candidates for fractional ownership?

[Matt Whiting]

Mike Rapoport wrote:

> "Richard Kaplan" > wrote in message
> news:1120956204.98fefa56d19619adcc5219c8241868f4@t eranews...
>
>>I could not agree with you more.
>>
>>I also think the alleged market for 1,000+ Eclipse air taxis is utterly
>>unrealistic. I do not believe the market exists for anywhere near that
>>many air taxis within the range and payload capabilities of the Eclipse
>>and given what will be the eventual costs.
>>
>>--------------------
>>Richard Kaplan

>>www.flyimc.com
>>
>
> I agree. The claims of orders for hundreds or thousands of Eclipses are
> crazy. These proposed air taxi companies don't have any meaningful assets.
> How are they going to buy a billion dollars worth of airplanes?

Venture capital, just like all the other companies that have shakey
business plans.


Matt

[john smith]

Larry Dighera wrote:
> Aren't VLJs prime candidates for fractional ownership?

That remains to be seen.
As NetJets and Cessna learned operating Citation II's, the airplane just
wasn't designed for the high number of cycles the fractional operator
was placng on them.
Cessna service centers provided maintenance for NetJet aircraft. Cessna
applied what they learned from maintaining these aircraft to beef up the
structures and components on successive aircraft designs.
When NetJet began purchasing follow on aircraft to the Citation II's,
manufacturers service center maintenance and spares were always included
as part of the new aircraft purchase contract.

[Mike Rapoport]

I don't know if they are going to be rugged enough for high cycle
operations. The other issue is useful load particularly with a two pilot
crew.

Mike
MU-2


"Larry Dighera" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 10 Jul 2005 04:02:10 GMT, "Mike Rapoport"
> > wrote in
> et>::
>
>>Sure there are some buyers for which the VLJs are a perfect match. The
>>question is whether there are enough of these buyers to make the concept a
>>success.
>
> Aren't VLJs prime candidates for fractional ownership?
>
>

[Mike Rapoport]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Rapoport wrote:
>
>> "Richard Kaplan" > wrote in message
>> news:1120956204.98fefa56d19619adcc5219c8241868f4@t eranews...
>>
>>>I could not agree with you more.
>>>
>>>I also think the alleged market for 1,000+ Eclipse air taxis is utterly
>>>unrealistic. I do not believe the market exists for anywhere near that
>>>many air taxis within the range and payload capabilities of the Eclipse
>>>and given what will be the eventual costs.
>>>
>>>--------------------
>>>Richard Kaplan

>>>www.flyimc.com
>>>
>>
>> I agree. The claims of orders for hundreds or thousands of Eclipses are
>> crazy. These proposed air taxi companies don't have any meaningful
>> assets. How are they going to buy a billion dollars worth of airplanes?
>
> Venture capital, just like all the other companies that have shakey
> business plans.
>
>
> Matt

The largest venture deal was only 500MM. These air taxi companies are going
to have to demonstrate that the business model works before they get enough
money to buy the airplanes they have ordered.

Mike
MU-2

[Morgans]

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote

If you just go flying then it will cost at least $50,000 to get the
> 100hrs and if you try to actually go places you will be paying for hotels,
> meals, non flying time ect. I think that this will be one of the biggest
> limitation to the VLJ market. Ask yourself: "How many people do I
> personally know that have ALL of the following

I see the VLJ usage in the corporate / charter / time share / air taxi
market. There will be some Travolta types that have the dough, and the love
of flying themselves, but that will be a small share of the market, IMHO.

It should increase (significantly, perhaps) the number of people of flying,
and the amount of time in the air.

Jim in NC