Owning more expensive than renting

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"

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 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"

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"

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"

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 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

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).

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