Fuel Prices and their Effect on Your Flying

On 30 Apr 2006 19:55:07 -0700, "M" wrote:


From 172 to 133 is really quite a jump. However in the same class as
172 you can get a Grumman AA5/5A. My 75 AA5 can easily do 127 KTAS on
9GPH, or 115 KTAS on 7GPH. On local flights I power back and do 98
KTAS on 5.9GPH. Last week I had a 420nm trip burning 27.58gal autogas.

The maintenance and the insurance costs are be very comparable to a
172.

There are too many "it all depends" to give that as a blanket
statement.

Total time for each pilot, time in high performance/complex/retract,
hours flown per year in recent years, hours in last 90 days,
instrument rating, any claims, and the hours required to be checked
out in make and model vary widely between companies.

The Bo is reliable, but parts for one add a new meaning to the word
"expensive". For example each of those little stamped aluminum hinges
on a gear door (2 per door) is over $500. The doors them selves run
close to that and there are two doors. Last I heard the nose strut
was over $7,000 and climbing.

Using my old Deb for example, my total operating costs (all fixed and
variable combined) are currently running around $115 per hour, or
between 10 and $12K per year. Insurance is now around $1300 give or
take a tad and hangar rent is now $135/Mo. That has historically been
less than several of the single owner 172s on the field. A few years
ago when I was flying more hours I was running about $78/hr and those
172s were running around $100 to $125, BUT they were not flying as
many hours as I was.

So, yes you might operate a Bo for even less than a 172, but any major
work will put the operating costs right up there. The Bo is fast and
slipery and can be very unforgiving for those who do not stay
proficient (rather than current)


Bob Noel wrote:
In article , Doug Vetter wrote:

Would you mind talking some sense into my partner? We have a perfect
opportunity to buy a F33 from a friend in the next hangar over.

If it's cheap enough I could use another one:-))

Good Luck,

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

Pristine aircraft, casual sale (so no tax liability here in NJ), just
needs some avionics work. It does 178KTAS on ~15GPH, while we burn
11GPH in the 172/180HP doing 115KTAS on a good day. Ugh. My kingdom
for a little common sense.

However, what would the difference in maintenance costs be between the
172 and the F33, and insurance...?

On 30 Apr 2006 14:46:30 -0700, "M" wrote:

Most of the speed mods makes the biggest difference at the top end of
the cruise speed, where parasite drag hurts the most. At the much
slower max-range speed, parasite drag isn't as significant because its
proportional to the square of the calibrated airspeed. Because of this
reason, speed mods only has a very modest effect to fuel efficiency at
lower speed.

The best "mod" you can get to make fuel cost more bearable is the
autogas STC, if you're lucky enough to own a model that can get the
STC, and you can get ethanol free autogas.

Mo Gas in a Bo? I have the little 260HP and even it can not get a mo
gas STC due to the compression. Besides, last fill up I paid $2.97
for car gas and $3.06 or so for the 100LL.

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

On 1 May 2006 04:05:07 -0700, "Denny" wrote:

The maintenance and the insurance costs are be very comparable to a
172.
************************************************* ***********************

In an infinite universe it is possible, but unlikely...
Having in a wasted lifetime owned and maintained everything from 65 hp
taildraggers with no electrics, to multiegine double redundant IFR
cross country machines, maintenance costs go up geometrically with each
mechanical and electrical itty bitty that is added to the airframe...

You noticed that too, huh?

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

denny

On Sun, 30 Apr 2006 16:20:02 GMT, Jon Kraus
wrote:
snip

Have higher fuel prices forced you to adjust your operations? I'm sure

Not really. I might stop at places selling fuel cheaper on long
trips, but I don't go out of my way to get it. It normally takes 20
to 30 gallons to top off. At a $1.00 a gallon cheaper I can't save
anything by making a 20 mile hop to fill up.

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

that over the years when fuel prices have peaked, folks have made
changes, but since I am a new owner (working on our second year) it is
my first experience at spiking prices. So what say you?

Jon Kraus
'79 Mooney 201
4443H @ TYQ

Roger wrote:



Mo Gas in a Bo?

Sure, every one up to and including the E series engines.

Roger wrote:
: Not really. I might stop at places selling fuel cheaper on long
: trips, but I don't go out of my way to get it. It normally takes 20
: to 30 gallons to top off. At a $1.00 a gallon cheaper I can't save
: anything by making a 20 mile hop to fill up.

30 gallons at $1.00 cheaper = $30 savings

20 miles at 12 mpg = 1.7 gal @ $4/gal = $7

Bzzzt! Try a different argument....

For long trips (especially to popular/large places with expensive fuel) one
can usually find less expensive fuel with very little additional distance. If you
don't want the aggravation, that's a different story.

-Cory


--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss, Ph.D., PPSEL-IA *
* Electrical Engineering *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

On 2006-04-30, Montblack Y4-NOT wrote:
("Newps" wrote)
Or just buy a more efficient plane. I sold my 182 and got a Bonanza. I'm
burning a lot less gas, approx 40%, than when I had my 182.

What are the two engines?
Your normal cruise speeds between the two?

The Bonanza is vastly more efficient than a C182. Our club had a 1960
C182 and a mid-60s S35 Bonanza. The C182 (IIRC) had an O-470. It would
burn about 13 gph in cruise at about 135 kts (again, IIRC). The Bonanza
with an IO-520 (285hp) would do 160 knots at the same fuel flow. It
would also climb a lot faster, take off in less distance, and IMHO was a
much nicer plane to fly.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

Dylan Smith wrote:
On 2006-04-30, Montblack Y4-NOT wrote:

("Newps" wrote)

Or just buy a more efficient plane. I sold my 182 and got a Bonanza. I'm
burning a lot less gas, approx 40%, than when I had my 182.

What are the two engines?
Your normal cruise speeds between the two?


The Bonanza is vastly more efficient than a C182. Our club had a 1960
C182 and a mid-60s S35 Bonanza. The C182 (IIRC) had an O-470. It would
burn about 13 gph in cruise at about 135 kts (again, IIRC). The Bonanza
with an IO-520 (285hp) would do 160 knots at the same fuel flow. It
would also climb a lot faster, take off in less distance, and IMHO was a
much nicer plane to fly.

I have the S model also. At 13 gph you are at 65% which gives me an
indicated airspeed of 173-175 MPH and a TAS of 186-189 MPH at 6000.
Yours was maybe a little slow.

Do your local fields allow fuel cans to be stored on the property? Both
of the places where I've had tie-downs forbade it.

Build one of these: http://alexisparkinn.com/fuel_truck.htm and save
yourself many, MANY thousands of dollars.

It's safer, easier, and your fuel is filtered properly.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Wed, 3 May 2006 11:53:36 +0000 (UTC),
wrote:

Roger wrote:
: Not really. I might stop at places selling fuel cheaper on long
: trips, but I don't go out of my way to get it. It normally takes 20
: to 30 gallons to top off. At a $1.00 a gallon cheaper I can't save
: anything by making a 20 mile hop to fill up.

30 gallons at $1.00 cheaper = $30 savings

20 miles at 12 mpg = 1.7 gal @ $4/gal = $7

Bzzzt! Try a different argument....

Try again. At $115 to $125 and hour I'm looking at roughly half an
hour total round trip counting taxi time at both airports. That works
out to about $55 to $62.50 minus $30 still costs me $25 to $35 over
the gas savings.
So instead of saving a dollar a gallon I'm spending an extra dollar a
gallon. IE, it costs me $2 a gallon to save a dollar a gallon.

There's a lot more to the cost of flying than gas.
Now if I'm coming back from a trip in that direction it makes sense to
top off before coming the rest of the way home.


For long trips (especially to popular/large places with expensive fuel) one
can usually find less expensive fuel with very little additional distance. If you
don't want the aggravation, that's a different story.

On trips where I can plan ahead even the extra 20 miles of so makes
much less difference and there I'm often putting in 60 to 70 gallons.

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


-Cory