Maintenance and Insurance

[AceHyflyer]

Hi all,

I've been interested in flying for a long time, and I'm finally hoping
to be able to get my PPL and work up from there.

At the moment I'm trying to research what kind of plane I would like to
look into owning either before or after I get my PPL. I have a few
questions for those of you who already own airplanes.

Firstly, Insurance premiums. How do insurance premiums compare between
fixed gear single engine, retractable gear single engine, and
retractable gear twin engine planes?

Secondly, Maintenance and Fuel. How do maintenance and fuel costs
compare between single and twin engine planes?

Third, do maintenance and fuel costs differ majorly between a new
airplane, and an older (20-40 years) airplane that has been taken care
of?

Fourth, what is the biggest difference between owning a twin engine
plane, as compared to a single engined plane? What are the benefits
and drawbacks?

Finally, is it possible to learn for your PPL in a complex and/or twin
engine airplane? What would be the benefits and drawbacks?

Thank you for any help you can give me,
Chris

[Doug[_1_]]

All your questions have answers, except maintenance is the big unknown.
Also, hangar and tiedown costs vary greatly airport to airport. Take a
look at rental rates and that gives you an idea of what ownership
costs. Ownership is seldom less expensive than renting. The more a
plane is used, the less it costs PER HOUR to run.

I would recommend that you learn in a simple airplane. Almost everyone
does and it will be extremely expensive to insure you, a low time
pilot, in anything else. Learning is much more enjoyable in simpler
airplanes.

I would also recommend that you rent, not buy, until you have your
license. Learning to fly is complicated enough without adding the extra
worries of ownership. Then after you have your certificate, go out and
buy what you want (and can afford).


AceHyflyer wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've been interested in flying for a long time, and I'm finally hoping
> to be able to get my PPL and work up from there.
>
> At the moment I'm trying to research what kind of plane I would like to
> look into owning either before or after I get my PPL. I have a few
> questions for those of you who already own airplanes.
>
> Firstly, Insurance premiums. How do insurance premiums compare between
> fixed gear single engine, retractable gear single engine, and
> retractable gear twin engine planes?
>
> Secondly, Maintenance and Fuel. How do maintenance and fuel costs
> compare between single and twin engine planes?
>
> Third, do maintenance and fuel costs differ majorly between a new
> airplane, and an older (20-40 years) airplane that has been taken care
> of?
>
> Fourth, what is the biggest difference between owning a twin engine
> plane, as compared to a single engined plane? What are the benefits
> and drawbacks?
>
> Finally, is it possible to learn for your PPL in a complex and/or twin
> engine airplane? What would be the benefits and drawbacks?
>
> Thank you for any help you can give me,
> Chris

[[email protected]]

On 14-Jul-2006, "Doug" > wrote:

> Then after you have your certificate, go out and
> buy what you want (and can afford).


I agree with everything Doug said EXCEPT that line. Far too many
financially well-off but inexperienced pilots buy "what they want and can
afford" in the form of a complex and high performance airplane inappropriate
to their piloting skills. The result is all too often tragic.

-Elliott Drucker

[Peter R.]

AceHyflyer > wrote:

> Firstly, Insurance premiums. How do insurance premiums compare between
> fixed gear single engine, retractable gear single engine, and
> retractable gear twin engine planes?

A typical later model Cessna 172 can be insured for $1000 to $2,000 per
year in the US, assuming it is not a flight school or large flying club
aircraft, and also depending on hull value and pilot's experience
(including instrument rating).

This compares to my retractable, single engine Bonanza that is about $3,000
per year. In my case, I have about 1,000 hours and an instrument rating,
with about 500 hours in a Bonanza that has a hull value of around $195k
(anti-icing, new engine, new paint, etc).

I cannot speak firsthand of the Cirrus-type aircraft, but an instructor at
my local FBO who is a certified Cirrus instructor claimed that a new Cirrus
runs $8,000 to $10,000 per year to insure. FWIW.

The rumor I heard is that insuring a twin is a catch-22 these days. That
is, unless you have at least 250 or so time in type, you probably cannot
get insurance. Of course, you cannot get time in type without flying, so
therein is the catch-22. Someone with actual experience will correct this
if I am wrong.

Also, don't be afraid to call the insurance companies and ask them premium
cost questions.

> Secondly, Maintenance and Fuel. How do maintenance and fuel costs
> compare between single and twin engine planes?

A C172 burns about 9 gallons an hour at 125 kts at cruise. My Bonanza
burns 15gph at 185 kts cruise. Twins burn between 12 (the new Diamond
Twin) and 50 gph, or perhaps more, depending on model. Thus, you can
easily do the math, assuming an average of US $4.10 or so per gallon of
fuel.

Maintenance? It definitely goes up as the airplane gets older, faster, and
double the engines. Numbers? Perhaps $3,000 to $10,000 per year for a
single, double and then some for a twin? (someone with actual twin
experience would have to correct my speculation).

Also, there is the engine reserve. 25k to put a rebuilt engine in a C172,
35-40k to redo the Bonanza, and 60-80k for a small twin. Divide these
numbers by their typical lifespan (1800 to 2000 hours) to get your hourly
engine reserve, or money that needs to be squirreled away to replace the
engine(s) at the end of their live(s).

> Third, do maintenance and fuel costs differ majorly between a new
> airplane, and an older (20-40 years) airplane that has been taken care
> of?

The one advantage of buying new is that most manufacturers offer a spinner-
to-tail warranty that covers just about everything except routine
maintenance (oil changes, tires, spark plugs, and annuals) for two or so
years.

However, does this offset the large drop in depreciation that occurs these
days when you fly "off the showroom floor," so to speak? In my opinion
and experience, it depends. If you are able to make the aircraft a
business aircraft and take the accelerated depreciation tax benefit that
the IRS offers and you have income to offset, it might.

If you buy the aircraft as a personal aircraft? Then in my opinion the
depreciation now and potentially that could occur over the next few years
as the used aircraft market really takes a dump due to rising fuel costs is
not worth it.

Older aircraft, even those impeccably maintained, will still have
age-related bills and surprises. (That is, unless you can locate a used
AOPA give-away aircraft - those babies are completely rebuilt with all new
parts <G>)

> Fourth, what is the biggest difference between owning a twin engine
> plane, as compared to a single engined plane? What are the benefits
> and drawbacks?

Biggest differences? Twins have higher maintenance costs, insurance costs,
and recurring training costs. From what I have heard, insurance companies
mandate recurring training for twins and the engine failure on takeoff
procedures require even more continued practice.

In other words, besides all of the normal aviation proficiencies you as a
pilot will need to maintain (IFR, weather planning, radios, airspace, etc),
you will also have to routinely practice your one engine routines for your
twin.

If you have a lot of time to devote to this, then it may not be an issue.
Where pilots get in trouble is when family, work, and non-aviation social
activities fill the weeks and months, leaving less and less time to
practice the art of aviation. Then one day, Mr. Twin pilot jumps into his
aircraft for a flight with the family off to the islands in hard IFR and
boom, engine failure on takeoff in IMC.

Of course, this can happen with singles, too, but my point is simply having
the time to maintain proficiency.

> Finally, is it possible to learn for your PPL in a complex and/or twin
> engine airplane? What would be the benefits and drawbacks?

I am not a CFI so I don't know how the learning aspects between learning in
a single versus a twin differ, but from what I would speculate, getting
insurance for a twin to meet the solo requirements during your initial
training would probably be prohibitive and/or impossible.


--
Peter

[AceHyflyer]

Thank you very much, everyone, this is really helpful information!

>From everything you have said it really looks like a fixed-gear, single
engine plane will be the way to go. Unfortunately, I've got a 5 person
family and I'll need to be able to carry a fairly large amount of
baggage, so I'm going to have to look into something a little bigger
than a Skyhawk.

I've been thinking that something along the lines of a Cessna 205/206
or Beechcraft S-35 would be appropriate for my needs.

What would you think of owning something like a well cared for 1965
Cessna 205 with about 900 hours SMOH on the engine? Would I just be
letting myself in for a maintenance disaster? What would you consider
to be the oldest airplane that you would consider buying as a long term
family airplane?

Thanks again,
Chris

[Robert M. Gary]

As a rule of thumb look at what a similar airplane costs to rent from
the FBO. If you fly 200 hours a year your costs will probably be 50%
more than the rental cost. If you fly 50 hours per your you'll probably
by twice or three times the rental cost.

-Robert

[zatatime]

On 15 Jul 2006 12:05:42 -0700, "AceHyflyer" >
wrote:

>Thank you very much, everyone, this is really helpful information!
>
>>From everything you have said it really looks like a fixed-gear, single
>engine plane will be the way to go. Unfortunately, I've got a 5 person
>family and I'll need to be able to carry a fairly large amount of
>baggage, so I'm going to have to look into something a little bigger
>than a Skyhawk.
>
>I've been thinking that something along the lines of a Cessna 205/206
>or Beechcraft S-35 would be appropriate for my needs.
>
>What would you think of owning something like a well cared for 1965
>Cessna 205 with about 900 hours SMOH on the engine? Would I just be
>letting myself in for a maintenance disaster? What would you consider
>to be the oldest airplane that you would consider buying as a long term
>family airplane?
>
>Thanks again,
>Chris


Cessna 205/206 are good airplanes. As someone else posted, just make
sure your skills are up to handling a larger single like this before
you fill it up with family/friends and bags for a trip.

An old timer once made a statement that for some reason has stuck with
me....."You're only as good as your worst day."

Good luck.
z

[AceHyflyer]

Yup, definitely!

I tend to be a very cautious kind of person, so it'll probably be a
while before I let anything larger than a mouse ride with me :)

Chris

zatatime wrote:
> On 15 Jul 2006 12:05:42 -0700, "AceHyflyer" >
> wrote:
>
> >Thank you very much, everyone, this is really helpful information!
> >
> >>From everything you have said it really looks like a fixed-gear, single
> >engine plane will be the way to go. Unfortunately, I've got a 5 person
> >family and I'll need to be able to carry a fairly large amount of
> >baggage, so I'm going to have to look into something a little bigger
> >than a Skyhawk.
> >
> >I've been thinking that something along the lines of a Cessna 205/206
> >or Beechcraft S-35 would be appropriate for my needs.
> >
> >What would you think of owning something like a well cared for 1965
> >Cessna 205 with about 900 hours SMOH on the engine? Would I just be
> >letting myself in for a maintenance disaster? What would you consider
> >to be the oldest airplane that you would consider buying as a long term
> >family airplane?
> >
> >Thanks again,
> >Chris
>
>
> Cessna 205/206 are good airplanes. As someone else posted, just make
> sure your skills are up to handling a larger single like this before
> you fill it up with family/friends and bags for a trip.
>
> An old timer once made a statement that for some reason has stuck with
> me....."You're only as good as your worst day."
>
> Good luck.
> z

[Michele Howard]

It is ENTIRELY possible to get insurance on a twin engine aircraft even if
you have ZERO multi-engine hours if you choose the right twin. Even a
low-time private pilot can get insurance under the right conditions (I sell
aircraf and aircraft insurance, so, yes, I know that it can be done).

Similarly it is relatively easy, albeit expensive, to get insurance on a
single engine retractable gear aircraft even as a student pilot.

Previous suggetions to rent and get your Private certificate prior to buying
are wise. If you STILL want to buy your own aircraft to learn in, I would
suggest a Cessna 172 or Piper Cherokee as being the least expensive to own
and insure. If you want to buy a retract, get an older Mooney M20C-G model,
Cessna 172RG or Piper Arrow would be insurable even as a student pilot. You
CAN get into a Beech 33 or even 36 in some cases, but the insurance will be
very expensive.

Don't bother buying a twin until you have your PVT and Instrument ratings
and you know what type of aircraft you'll really need or want. As a low
time pilot, the only twins you'll be able to get insurance on are the
lower-horsepower models like the PA44, Beech 76 or maybe a PA34. You'll
probably want more aircraft than that down the road.

Jon Howard



"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
> AceHyflyer > wrote:
>
>> Firstly, Insurance premiums. How do insurance premiums compare between
>> fixed gear single engine, retractable gear single engine, and
>> retractable gear twin engine planes?
>
> A typical later model Cessna 172 can be insured for $1000 to $2,000 per
> year in the US, assuming it is not a flight school or large flying club
> aircraft, and also depending on hull value and pilot's experience
> (including instrument rating).
>
> This compares to my retractable, single engine Bonanza that is about
> $3,000
> per year. In my case, I have about 1,000 hours and an instrument rating,
> with about 500 hours in a Bonanza that has a hull value of around $195k
> (anti-icing, new engine, new paint, etc).
>
> I cannot speak firsthand of the Cirrus-type aircraft, but an instructor at
> my local FBO who is a certified Cirrus instructor claimed that a new
> Cirrus
> runs $8,000 to $10,000 per year to insure. FWIW.
>
> The rumor I heard is that insuring a twin is a catch-22 these days. That
> is, unless you have at least 250 or so time in type, you probably cannot
> get insurance. Of course, you cannot get time in type without flying, so
> therein is the catch-22. Someone with actual experience will correct this
> if I am wrong.
>
> Also, don't be afraid to call the insurance companies and ask them premium
> cost questions.
>
>> Secondly, Maintenance and Fuel. How do maintenance and fuel costs
>> compare between single and twin engine planes?
>
> A C172 burns about 9 gallons an hour at 125 kts at cruise. My Bonanza
> burns 15gph at 185 kts cruise. Twins burn between 12 (the new Diamond
> Twin) and 50 gph, or perhaps more, depending on model. Thus, you can
> easily do the math, assuming an average of US $4.10 or so per gallon of
> fuel.
>
> Maintenance? It definitely goes up as the airplane gets older, faster,
> and
> double the engines. Numbers? Perhaps $3,000 to $10,000 per year for a
> single, double and then some for a twin? (someone with actual twin
> experience would have to correct my speculation).
>
> Also, there is the engine reserve. 25k to put a rebuilt engine in a C172,
> 35-40k to redo the Bonanza, and 60-80k for a small twin. Divide these
> numbers by their typical lifespan (1800 to 2000 hours) to get your hourly
> engine reserve, or money that needs to be squirreled away to replace the
> engine(s) at the end of their live(s).
>
>> Third, do maintenance and fuel costs differ majorly between a new
>> airplane, and an older (20-40 years) airplane that has been taken care
>> of?
>
> The one advantage of buying new is that most manufacturers offer a
> spinner-
> to-tail warranty that covers just about everything except routine
> maintenance (oil changes, tires, spark plugs, and annuals) for two or so
> years.
>
> However, does this offset the large drop in depreciation that occurs these
> days when you fly "off the showroom floor," so to speak? In my opinion
> and experience, it depends. If you are able to make the aircraft a
> business aircraft and take the accelerated depreciation tax benefit that
> the IRS offers and you have income to offset, it might.
>
> If you buy the aircraft as a personal aircraft? Then in my opinion the
> depreciation now and potentially that could occur over the next few years
> as the used aircraft market really takes a dump due to rising fuel costs
> is
> not worth it.
>
> Older aircraft, even those impeccably maintained, will still have
> age-related bills and surprises. (That is, unless you can locate a used
> AOPA give-away aircraft - those babies are completely rebuilt with all new
> parts <G>)
>
>> Fourth, what is the biggest difference between owning a twin engine
>> plane, as compared to a single engined plane? What are the benefits
>> and drawbacks?
>
> Biggest differences? Twins have higher maintenance costs, insurance
> costs,
> and recurring training costs. From what I have heard, insurance companies
> mandate recurring training for twins and the engine failure on takeoff
> procedures require even more continued practice.
>
> In other words, besides all of the normal aviation proficiencies you as a
> pilot will need to maintain (IFR, weather planning, radios, airspace,
> etc),
> you will also have to routinely practice your one engine routines for your
> twin.
>
> If you have a lot of time to devote to this, then it may not be an issue.
> Where pilots get in trouble is when family, work, and non-aviation social
> activities fill the weeks and months, leaving less and less time to
> practice the art of aviation. Then one day, Mr. Twin pilot jumps into his
> aircraft for a flight with the family off to the islands in hard IFR and
> boom, engine failure on takeoff in IMC.
>
> Of course, this can happen with singles, too, but my point is simply
> having
> the time to maintain proficiency.
>
>> Finally, is it possible to learn for your PPL in a complex and/or twin
>> engine airplane? What would be the benefits and drawbacks?
>
> I am not a CFI so I don't know how the learning aspects between learning
> in
> a single versus a twin differ, but from what I would speculate, getting
> insurance for a twin to meet the solo requirements during your initial
> training would probably be prohibitive and/or impossible.
>
>
> --
> Peter

[Peter R.]

Michele Howard > wrote:

> It is ENTIRELY possible to get insurance on a twin engine aircraft even if
> you have ZERO multi-engine hours if you choose the right twin. Even a
> low-time private pilot can get insurance under the right conditions (I sell
> aircraf and aircraft insurance, so, yes, I know that it can be done).

OK. I guess there is a price for anything. :) Thanks for the correction.
Just as a ballpark figure, what would it cost to insure a PA44 owned and
flown by a student pilot with absolutely zero total time, much less zero
twin time?

--
Peter

[Dave Butler[_1_]]

AceHyflyer wrote:

>>From everything you have said it really looks like a fixed-gear, single
> engine plane will be the way to go. Unfortunately, I've got a 5 person
> family and I'll need to be able to carry a fairly large amount of
> baggage, so I'm going to have to look into something a little bigger
> than a Skyhawk.
>
> I've been thinking that something along the lines of a Cessna 205/206
> or Beechcraft S-35 would be appropriate for my needs.

Many people anticipate that they will be flying all over the country with their
entire families, and once they start flying, they find that most of the time
they are solo or carrying a single passenger. Often spouses and families are not
as enthusiastic about flying as the new pilot anticipates. YMMV.

DGB

[AceHyflyer]

Thanks a lot everyone, this has been very useful information!

Well, my family loves to travel, and they are all very enthusiastic
about anything that can save travel times.

Thanks again,
Chris
Dave Butler wrote:
> AceHyflyer wrote:
>
> >>From everything you have said it really looks like a fixed-gear, single
> > engine plane will be the way to go. Unfortunately, I've got a 5 person
> > family and I'll need to be able to carry a fairly large amount of
> > baggage, so I'm going to have to look into something a little bigger
> > than a Skyhawk.
> >
> > I've been thinking that something along the lines of a Cessna 205/206
> > or Beechcraft S-35 would be appropriate for my needs.
>
> Many people anticipate that they will be flying all over the country with their
> entire families, and once they start flying, they find that most of the time
> they are solo or carrying a single passenger. Often spouses and families are not
> as enthusiastic about flying as the new pilot anticipates. YMMV.
>
> DGB

[Jon Howard]

A student pilot probably can't get insurance in a PA44 (but there are always
exceptions), but a newly minted Private pilot might have a shot if he/she
has a little bit of retractable gear time and an insurance agent who has a
good relationships with the right underwriters. :)

Jon

"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
> Michele Howard > wrote:
>
>> It is ENTIRELY possible to get insurance on a twin engine aircraft even
>> if
>> you have ZERO multi-engine hours if you choose the right twin. Even a
>> low-time private pilot can get insurance under the right conditions (I
>> sell
>> aircraf and aircraft insurance, so, yes, I know that it can be done).
>
> OK. I guess there is a price for anything. :) Thanks for the
> correction.
> Just as a ballpark figure, what would it cost to insure a PA44 owned and
> flown by a student pilot with absolutely zero total time, much less zero
> twin time?
>
> --
> Peter