bflynn
Final Approach
In an ownership club.
A&P Rates
- Thread starter RyanB
- Start date
In an ownership club.
bflynn
Final Approach
I have been paying very close attention and I can see there is only one thing that will satisfy you.
You're right, I'm wrong. The laws of economics are obviously suspended in the realm of airplane maintenance.
Doc Holliday
En-Route
Doesnt count. Have provided maintenance for several clubs and other group efforts. Not the same as single ownership. So the answer is no. Correct?
Yes. And for various reasons. If you actually want to know why, you now have the chance to ask specific questions vs rant about generalities on the topic.
denverpilot
Tied Down
Literally nobody here and nobody I've ever met in the vast majority.
I understand you may see it in your line of work but take the zoom lens off occasionally. It's embarassing.
Not even close to the majority or reality.
The funny thing is it’s the people with the least amount of experience or knowledge on a subject that are the ones who usually state there is no problem. So the only embarrassing thing here is you believe there is no problem also. Perhaps you need to put your zoom lens on for a change and maybe you’ll enlighten yourself.
"Literally nobody" on PoA? Then what were all the threads I posted in/read discussing 20 minute/$200 annuals and cutting corners on maintenance about? Are you saying these PoA members were just full of BS?
Well its been a reality since the late 90s. And has only gotten worse. And while I don't know what your definition of a "majority" is I can tell you with confidence more than 50%, i.e., majority, of the GA fleet suffers from a lack of proper maintenance and inspection. It is what it is.
Jdm
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2020
- Messages
- 896
- Display Name
Display name:
Jdm
I try to make $100 per hour as an independent but it’s not always cut and dry. A lot of jobs take longer than expected and I end up feeling that it’s too high, especially for the more basic jobs. In those cases I usually end up looking at the total job and cutting it back to what I think is reasonable. So much time goes into parts research, maint research, shipping, receiving, paperwork, etc. it’s very difficult cover all of that. If you take all of those things into account I’m probably only making $65 an hour.
bflynn
Final Approach
Yes. And for various reasons. If you actually want to know why, you now have the chance to ask specific questions vs rant about generalities on the topic.
I'm sorry, but every time I've heard someone say "the rules don't apply to me", they were wrong. The laws of supply and demand are not repealable. The rules of balancing finances are fixed and finite. The market for customers in your business might be very competitive, but that only influences your business challenges and you're not unique in that regard.
So why is the business of GA airplane maintenance unique? Why can you not raise the pay rate an pass it on to a customer? In terms of the total bill, it should be less than 5%.
bflynn
Final Approach
The concept of aircraft maintenance is obviously not in your realm of knowledge.
Well, it is, but I have no interest in having a patronizing discussion with you. Cheers
BTW, by "house fee", I thinking more of a whorehouse than a casino. My main point remains - If you're paying low wages and complaining people won't come work for you, the answer is to figure out how to pay them more.
I could write a book. Give me a specific aircraft maintenance scenario following your perceived rules and I'll show you how it differs.
Doc Holliday
En-Route
Yea, you originally posted this, then modified your post 20 minutes later with below.
Tell ya what, here's how you solve this.
Crack down and eliminate the signature sellers. Increase oversight of the legitimate businesses and independents to insure the integrity of the work being performed. This will eliminate the low paying jobs and increase the job market for A&P's.
Now for those remaining in the business, they can now demand and get more money. So far, so good.
So where is that money going to come from? Should the business principals absorb the cost to keep their hourly rates lower? Or should the business principals raise the hourly rates to adjust for the higher wages they are now paying?
Now, back to our GA hobbyist. Now that the cheap annuals/maintenance is gone, and now they will be paying higher shop rates, just how happy are they going to be?
But at least they won't have to wait, right?
The guy I use charges around $90/hr. He owns his own shop, employs a couple of non-A&P helpers that he oversees. He's booked solid and overworked, but he's young (mid-30s) and very, very good. He's also very open to owner-assisted maintenance, which is how I keep my costs low.
But I do think there's an undue amount of focus on hourly rates, which aren't necessarily indicative of how much your total bill is going to be. A guy charging $65/hr could be horribly inefficient, inexperienced or just a heavy biller and his total bill for a given task could far exceed the $100/hr guy who is highly experienced, efficient and ethical. This is where knowing and trusting your A&P becomes critical. Not every A&P will step back and look at the overall job and say "well, it took me 10 hours but should have only taken 6, so I'll just bill 6." Some will bill every single minute regardless of whether it's reasonable (or whether they should). You want the former guy, not the latter.
But I do think there's an undue amount of focus on hourly rates, which aren't necessarily indicative of how much your total bill is going to be. A guy charging $65/hr could be horribly inefficient, inexperienced or just a heavy biller and his total bill for a given task could far exceed the $100/hr guy who is highly experienced, efficient and ethical. This is where knowing and trusting your A&P becomes critical. Not every A&P will step back and look at the overall job and say "well, it took me 10 hours but should have only taken 6, so I'll just bill 6." Some will bill every single minute regardless of whether it's reasonable (or whether they should). You want the former guy, not the latter.
I worry about what happens when our on field guy retires. He seems to be slowing down and taking on less work. I have no problem paying his rates for good maintenance. I want my bird in top shape.
Not to butt in on the economics p!ssing match, but there was an article about this in AOPA last fall. I remember one shop owner saying he raised rates and was worried about losing clients. Only ones he lost were the ones complaining and he dreaded working for anyway. Same goes in my industry. We're swamped with work(again, different industry). But if an a shop is backed up, time to raise rates. Might lose a few of the ones looking for the 200 dollar annual, but those are the biggest pains to deal with. One thing about airplanes, they're transient. So if the rate was that big of a deal, they'd go elsewhere. Otherwise it's like any other small business. You get used to hearing people complain. When I get the rare guy that doesn't complain I always think I left money on the table.
Can shops raise the rate they pay AP's, it depends on a lot of factors. And those factors aren't always in the shop owners control.
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media...ber/pilot/savvy-maintenance-mechanic-shortage
Can shops raise the rate they pay AP's, it depends on a lot of factors. And those factors aren't always in the shop owners control.
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media...ber/pilot/savvy-maintenance-mechanic-shortage
Last edited:
bflynn
Final Approach
I wasn't asking about specific maintenance scenarios. I made a business suggestion on how to be able to more easily hire mechanics and was told that if you did that everyone would immediately run to the rogue A&P who sells their signature for $200.
But if you want a specific scenario, let's say an annual on a 172S. The cost ought to be around $1200 and take 2 days and of course there are no corrective actions in that price. I know there's variance in the effort, for example if the owner removes the inspection plates, seats, etc, but let's stick with this unless you object to the numbers. The labor cost to the shop paying $25/hr for 16 hours of work is $400 given the numbers. The actual might vary.
Would you lose a significant number of customers if the cost was $1300 vs $1200? If you're my mechanic and tell me the annual is going up by $100, well, don't do that every year, but Ok because I trust you and you do quality work. Besides, for 100 hours of flying per year, that's $1 per hour. Now you can pay the mechanic $30/hr and be able to more easily hire people. BTW, in the process, you also made an extra $20.
We can quibble about the numbers, but the basic process is sound. It's challenging if all the costs are going up at the same time, but that doesn't mean you raise your target to the point that you can easily replace someone.
Another point I've seen is people complaining it's going to take too long to get work done. From an economics standpoint that is a classic sign that prices are too low. I get the fear of losing customers, but that might not be reality. On average, the people that you're already losing are probably going to a shop that charges a little more but gets the work done quickly and the ones you will lose will be the cheapskates. Between paying a little more and having the plane down for 2 months, it's costing me a lot more to pay for a broken airplane I can't fly than paying a shop a little more to fix it.
bflynn
Final Approach
So, increase regulatory oversight and costs for business owners? If you're going to be sarcastic, please use a green font so we can identify it.
Doc Holliday
En-Route
For a guy that claimed a few hours ago you didn't want to have a discussion, you sure can't help yourself.
So question, have you ever owned and operated a business, one that employed others? Judging from your replies I would have to venture that's a "no".
I have no problem paying a little more, all I ask is that we can hook up the air filter hoses. Or replace them when they have a hole in them. Same goes with a cabin heat hose. Charge 1800 and I still have to take the cowl off to get the hoses on. I get a little peeved
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 23,006
- Display Name
Display name:
Bob Noel
How do you think owner-assisted annuals/maintenance fit into this picture?
I don't have an airplane now, but when I did (a pa-28-140) I enjoyed doing the owner-assisted annuals, working with the A&P and IA.
Jdm
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2020
- Messages
- 896
- Display Name
Display name:
Jdm
The FAA should start with the repair stations! Many are putting out some of the worst work the business right now. Apparently no rules apply to repair stations anymore. It’s not uncommon to have inexperienced, non-A&P types working unsupervised on non-avionic items. It’s gotten horrible over the past few years. I’ve found aerodynamically important parts installed backwards, no seat stops installed, multiple holes put in a firewall that were left wide open, tools remaining inside panels, fuel hoses routed incorrectly, etc. Avionics shops are the worst when it comes to accomplishing basic A&P type work. You can’t take a guy from the local Best Buy radio shop and expect him to accomplish proper engine and airframe maintenance (at an avionics shop) without supervision.
I refuse to let a couple of the local avionics shops touch my airplane because of poor experiences with folks removing and installing basic parts. I've had airplanes come back from those shops, after instrument repairs, with hoses not hooked up at all (or incorrectly) and with connectors not actually secured in place. Another local avionics shop sent a guy out to remove my altimeter for a pitot static check not with a correct 9/16 wrench, but with a pair of pliers to use on my brand new nylon fittings. Fortunately I was there and said "why don't you let me just remove that..." as I got a wrench from my travel tool bag. In a pinch, I'll hand-carry instruments that I've removed myself in for repair, then reinstall myself and get my own A&P to signoff on the R&R.
Doc Holliday
En-Route
Doc Holliday
En-Route
No problem. I have participated in owner assisted annuals (as the A&P/IA), but I held a strict standard and made it clear I did not sell my signature nor do I negotiate airworthiness. I was also very selective about who's aircraft I would perform maintenance or inspections on.
And yes, I had those who would ask me to "sign off" their annual because they already looked everything over. And when I refused, word got back to me how these individuals were bad mouthing me for being an ******* and not helping people.
There were some A&P's that I would not work with to sign off inspections because I knew of the low quality work they did. Got the same treatment from them.
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,397
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
Increased oversight is the opposite of what we need. The FAA is a big part of the existing problem.Yea, you originally posted this, then modified your post 20 minutes later with below.
Tell ya what, here's how you solve this.
Crack down and eliminate the signature sellers. Increase oversight of the legitimate businesses and independents to insure the integrity of the work being performed. This will eliminate the low paying jobs and increase the job market for A&P's.
Now for those remaining in the business, they can now demand and get more money. So far, so good.
So where is that money going to come from? Should the business principals absorb the cost to keep their hourly rates lower? Or should the business principals raise the hourly rates to adjust for the higher wages they are now paying?
Now, back to our GA hobbyist. Now that the cheap annuals/maintenance is gone, and now they will be paying higher shop rates, just how happy are they going to be?
But at least they won't have to wait, right?
Doc Holliday
En-Route
How so?
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,397
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
Regulation drives up costs and hinders market development. It’s not unique to the FAA.
Doc Holliday
En-Route
OK, so what's your solution?
Probably an overly broad statement. Oversight is both necessary and appropriate from a safety standpoint. But the current system, at least as it relates to Part 91 operations, is basically broken. I think the real problem is the lack of focus and consistency of FAA oversight (which likely stems, at least in part, from staffing shortages and overall bureaucracy). Rather than focusing on practical things like quality of work and practical safety, the FAA seemingly focuses so much of its efforts on needless paperwork exercises and hyper-technicalities designed to make life harder for the A&Ps and owners who are in fact doing things (or at least trying to do things) correctly and safely. That means places like Repair Stations, who may be very good at the "paperwork" side of things but not so good at the "quality" side of things, don't get the hard look they should in furtherance of true safety.
On top of that, you've got inspectors who have been given certain oversight responsibilities and discretion to approve things (like field approvals and ferry permits) who simply refuse to exercise that discretion (evidenced by refusal to even consider field approvals, and forcing owners to pay a DAR for a simple ferry permit).
Jdm
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2020
- Messages
- 896
- Display Name
Display name:
Jdm
Many reasons. Price, location, friendship, etc. Unfortunately it’s usually because the customers (owners/operators) don’t actually see or understand the poor work themselves. It’s the A&P who finds it later. The A&P may or may not even tell the customer, depending on the situation. Sometimes the mistakes are not found for years later when it’s hard to actually determine who caused the mistake.
bflynn
Final Approach
Well, let's be clear. I don't want to have a discussion with you.
I don't know what bee crawled up your butt, but you've been arrogant and condescending from the start of this conversation. So, while I might reply to a post, it will be one sided.
Doc Holliday
En-Route
bflynn
Final Approach
denverpilot
Tied Down
It's because only the people hyper focused on the MINORITY problem see it all day. Everyone else sees owners who do reasonable maintenance. As always you also CHANGED the goalposts like y'all are prone to doing when called on BS.The funny thing is it’s the people with the least amount of experience or knowledge on a subject that are the ones who usually state there is no problem. So the only embarrassing thing here is you believe there is no problem also. Perhaps you need to put your zoom lens on for a change and maybe you’ll enlighten yourself.
"Literally nobody" on PoA? Then what were all the threads I posted in/read discussing 20 minute/$200 annuals and cutting corners on maintenance about? Are you saying these PoA members were just full of BS?
Well its been a reality since the late 90s. And has only gotten worse. And while I don't know what your definition of a "majority" is I can tell you with confidence more than 50%, i.e., majority, of the GA fleet suffers from a lack of proper maintenance and inspection. It is what it is.
The original assertion was pilots won't spend MONEY on proper MAINTENANCE. I know of no owners who won't.
You switched it to two new assertions -- that owners don't DO enough INSPECTIONS and MAINTENANCE. And apparently this happened in the "late 90s".
Addressing the dumbest of those first... I've been flying since before the late 90s and ...
A) I've seen no changes in regulations in 30 years to attempt to fix either of those.
B) I see the vast majority of the local fleet, same N numbers even, still flying just fine with no significant rise in accidents from said "problem".
C) No official or industry watch groups claiming maintenance has taken a turn for the dangerous.
D) Some of the same 90s mechanics still run shops around here. They haven't been sued out if existence for shoddy work.
Etc. I can go on. Maintenance is pretty much the same as it's always been for the vast majority of aircraft owners and the airplanes are still flying. Literally the same airplanes in your supposed time sample.
So ... If I'm wrong I'm fine with that but I'll continue to assert the ORIGINAL statement about owners not willimg to pay up is false for everywhere in the real world and not the fake internet world where people claim they got $200 annuals.
Oh sure they happen and someone will pencil whip anything but it's not a majority of someones... It's not even a significant real safety issue. Anybody flying garbage knows they're flying garbage even renters.
To continue with your NEW assertions, again... If FAA wanted to do something about it, all they have to do is pick up a pen and change the rules.
What do they want owners to do? If annusl inspections aren't enough, what ya want? Quarterly? That covers the dumb frequency assertion. Either a year (and or 100 hours) is enough or it's not. Many of us have shorter ADs than 100 hours so there's "eyes on" the aircraft more often anyway.
As far as the "amount of maintenance itself* however you're defining that, owners change tires and oil and fix stuff as it is found to be broken. If they don't it's stuff that isn't required or unsafe to fly with ... So what "more maintenance" would you have us do?
Bottom line:
The vast majority are at least following the letter of the law and doing everything required and airplanes aren't falling from the sky from your perceived but fake "problems". But the initial assertion was about money and I find no one not already shoveling out the hourly rates the thread was about. If you want me to shovel out more, tell me on exactly what.
And no. It hasn't changed since the "late 90s". There weren't any big beautiful well lit shops with fleets of mechanics bring paid to work long extra hours on the GA fleet prior to 1995 and then poof they stopped. Haha.
Same damn shop, same number of mechsnics around here. Same owners doing the same maintenance for decades.
Show your numbers if you disagree. The whole rental fleet sitting at the school is 80% made up of the same aircraft it was when I started flying here. And they're all flying fine and in about as good a shape as they were in 1990-1991. Most got new engines somewhere in there.
Not sure what you're grousing about. If we all thought the local fleets were unsafe we wouldn't be teaching in them and flying them.
If FAA wants em inspected more often or more stuff done to them, they could have said so any time in the last three decades. They have on a few ADs but that's really about it.
My airplane wouldn't be 46 years old and through three sets of owners if it wasn't properly maintained. If you want to nitpick it it definitely needs interior work but that's not a safety issue, it's just ugly upholstery. It also has a malfunctioning and completely optional autopilot that never worked very well brand new in 1975. It's off switch still works perfectly.
What do you specifically want us to do? Put it in the good, busy, backed up two months shop four times a year? It ain't about money. Quite a few of us would pay double to have a shop that would drop everything and fix our stuff in a day. They don't exist. Didn't exist before the "late 90s" either.
Doc Holliday
En-Route
That's coming from management well above the Inspector level. And there are more services on the chopping block as senior management wants to shift more functions to designees. They didn't learn from the Max debacle.
One option I’ve been recommending for a few years is get togather with the other airport users and talk to field mechanic to see if he will help you locate someone to take his place when he retires. I’ve helped several groups look into alternates but in most cases the resident APIA stepped up and helped them.
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,397
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
Less of the problem.
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,397
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
I don’t agree.
This. While the article you linked is very general, it does not address the independent APIA side. Established shops have more staying power than one man shops. And it is this side of the business that is declining at an alarming rate. For example, there used to be over a dozen independent APIAs in a 200 mile radius. Now there are only a handful. I still get calls looking for references but unfortunately I have none. The only new independent APIAs in that same region are either associated with an FBO or cater to the low end.
Doc Holliday
En-Route
Timbeck2
Final Approach
Ive worked with two mechanics that in my opinion are the best I’ve ever seen. It’s very difficult to say how long something is going to take to fix. I’ve found that in a LOT of cases, fasteners and hardware crumble in your hand just taking the cowling off to get to what was supposed to be worked on to begin with. Project creep is very real. Your mechanic may be hired to fix A but he finds B,C and D just getting to A. While he’s at it, he finds E through M. Oh and by the way, F is an airworthiness item.
Lastly if more pilots took an interest in their aircraft in how it works and inspecting their aircraft, they would understand the cost of maintenance. The pilots I can’t stand the most are the ones that throw their keys to the mechanic and say “call me when it’s done.” then balk at the cost of what it took to fix it. Not to mention the blood sweat and swears it took, those were free of charge.
Last edited: