Charter Bonanza

[dell30rb]

I was talking with a friend who has no experience with GA other than a flight in a chartered V tail bonanza. From NC to FL to do some golfing with clients. Amazingly he said he actually felt safer in the bonanza than in an airliner "because if anything happened it looked like we could just land in a field". Smart guy.

Anyway that got me thinking about bonanza's being used in the charter business. I figured the only 6 seater single really getting any use is the Cherokee 6. But the bonanza sounds like a good aircraft for this type of work.. from what I gather about 160kts on 11 gph is reasonable? And the useful load does not look bad either.

Just curious as to what it costs to run an airplane like a bonanza. The pilot my friend flew with charged $400 an hour plus expenses etc.. and they seemed to think that was a pretty good deal. I figure it costs under $200 an hour to run the airplane

 

[RotorAndWing]

I was talking with a friend who has no experience with GA other than a flight in a chartered V tail bonanza. From NC to FL to do some golfing with clients. Amazingly he said he actually felt safer in the bonanza than in an airliner "because if anything happened it looked like we could just land in a field". Smart guy.

Anyway that got me thinking about bonanza's being used in the charter business. I figured the only 6 seater single really getting any use is the Cherokee 6. But the bonanza sounds like a good aircraft for this type of work.. from what I gather about 160kts on 11 gph is reasonable? And the useful load does not look bad either.

Just curious as to what it costs to run an airplane like a bonanza. The pilot my friend flew with charged $400 an hour plus expenses etc.. and they seemed to think that was a pretty good deal. I figure it costs under $200 an hour to run the airplane

I assume you are talking A36. Limited baggage, two aft seats very tight, if 4 people are in the back they will be real cozy.

But for 2 to 3 people it wouldn't be a bad ride.

 

[jhausch]

This is an outfit in Chicago doing it with Cirri
http://blueskytaxi.com/

 

[dell30rb]

I assume you are talking A36. Limited baggage, two aft seats very tight, if 4 people are in the back they will be real cozy.

But for 2 to 3 people it wouldn't be a bad ride.

He said it was a V-tail and had the 4 seats in back facing each other. Not sure but I would guess V35?

 

[Skylane81E]

This is an outfit in Chicago doing it with Cirri
http://blueskytaxi.com/

And here's one in Cincinnati:wink2:
http://www.blueashcharters.com/

 

[RotorAndWing]

He said it was a V-tail and had the 4 seats in back facing each other. Not sure but I would guess V35?

None of the V tails had club seating in the back.

 

[dell30rb]

None of the V tails had club seating in the back.

I didn't think they had that either. Can they be converted? I'm a little fuzzy on it but I think i've seen a v-tail with club seating.

 

[weilke]

Just curious as to what it costs to run an airplane like a bonanza. The pilot my friend flew with charged $400 an hour plus expenses etc.. and they seemed to think that was a pretty good deal. I figure it costs under $200 an hour to run the airplane

That sounds about right.

The insurance cost to operate a plane on a part135 certificate is considerable. The maintenance requirements are also more stringent than for noncommercial operation. 350/hr is what I have been quoted for an air-taxi flight in a SR22. 400 for an A36 would be a reasonable number.



(and then there is the off chance that this was one of those 'wink wink, I rent you this plane for x dollars and I just happen to have a pilot whom you can hire to fly you wink wink' type operations.)

 

[Skylane81E]

That sounds about right.

The insurance cost to operate a plane on a part135 certificate is considerable. The maintenance requirements are also more stringent than for noncommercial operation. 350/hr is what I have been quoted for an air-taxi flight in a SR22. 400 for an A36 would be a reasonable number.



(and then there is the off chance that this was one of those 'wink wink, I rent you this plane for x dollars and I just happen to have a pilot whom you can hire to fly you wink wink' type operations.)

I think we've gone to quotes by the mile, but costs probably work out the same. Nice thing with a Cirrus is as it's new the costs to maintain to 135 (short of overhaul requirements) aren't too much higher as there aren't too many SBs to be done as compared to some of the older aircraft.

 

[dell30rb]

I think we've gone to quotes by the mile, but costs probably work out the same. Nice thing with a Cirrus is as it's new the costs to maintain to 135 (short of overhaul requirements) aren't too much higher as there aren't too many SBs to be done as compared to some of the older aircraft.

They're also about 350k more than a nice used bonanza with a trusty lycoming!

 

[Skylane81E]

They're also about 350k more than a nice used bonanza with a trusty lycoming!

used for used the price delta isn't as bad, especially when you start replacing life limit parts on the older aircraft

 

[Ted]

The insurance cost to operate a plane on a part135 certificate is considerable. The maintenance requirements are also more stringent than for noncommercial operation. 350/hr is what I have been quoted for an air-taxi flight in a SR22. 400 for an A36 would be a reasonable number.

That's what I'm thinking, too. The other thing to remember is that, as a 135 operator, you're looking for more than just you're operating costs - you're looking for profit. So even a plane that costs $1000/hr to operate true cost you can expect to see for a good sum over $1000/hr.

They're also about 350k more than a nice used bonanza with a trusty lycoming!

From the factory, Bonanzas came with Continentals. At least, all the ones that I'm aware of.

Keep in mind that when you're looking at a working aircraft, downtime is a definite consideration. If you can reasonably believe that a newer aircraft will require less maintenance (read: less downtime) to keep in the air, there could be a good argument for the newer aircraft. Nevermind the perception of the passengers, which is of the utmost importance if you wish for repeat business.

 

[weilke]

They're also about 350k more than a nice used bonanza with a trusty lycoming!

Except for the 'Machen Conversion', I am not aware of a Bonanza with a Lycoming engine.

For part 135, you can't just take any old used Bonanza.

You would have to bring it up to part 135 standards. That would typically require a within overhaul interval engine, overhauled prop, every hose within replacement timeframe, every actuator (flaps etc.) within manufacturer recommended overhaul interval etc. All the work has to be properly documented that it was performed by a maintenance facility that had the correct pieces of paperwork nailed to the wall when the work was done. It gets expensive really quick.

 

[weilke]

That's what I'm thinking, too. The other thing to remember is that, as a 135 operator, you're looking for more than just you're operating costs - you're looking for profit.

I thought that that was the motive. Wayne explained to me that the object of part 135 is to amplify the rate at which you are loosing money on your aircraft.

 

[Skylane81E]

Except for the 'Machen Conversion', I am not aware of a Bonanza with a Lycoming engine.

For part 135, you can't just take any old used Bonanza.

You would have to bring it up to part 135 standards. That would typically require a within overhaul interval engine, overhauled prop, every hose within replacement timeframe, every actuator (flaps etc.) within manufacturer recommended overhaul interval etc. All the work has to be properly documented that it was performed by a maintenance facility that had the correct pieces of paperwork nailed to the wall when the work was done. It gets expensive really quick.

Yep, we did this last winter with a PA31-350, every hose, engine mounts, engines, props, all actuators, pumps, even the gear selector cable had to go. The only life limit part that didn't get changed was the spar splice plate, not at 15K hrs just yet:wink2:
Total bill was about equal to the purchase price.

 

[weilke]

I think we've gone to quotes by the mile, but costs probably work out the same. Nice thing with a Cirrus is as it's new the costs to maintain to 135 (short of overhaul requirements) aren't too much higher as there aren't too many SBs to be done as compared to some of the older aircraft.

The other nice thing is if you dont have to factor depreciation into the equation because some dentist picks up that part of your operating expenses just for the priviledge of being the owner of a new aircraft .

 

[weilke]

Yep, we did this last winter with a PA31-350, every hose, engine mounts, engines, props, all actuators, pumps, even the gear selector cable had to go. The only life limit part that didn't get changed was the spar splice plate, not at 15K hrs just yet:wink2:
Total bill was about equal to the purchase price.

That sounds about right for an older airframe. The good thing about older Twins is that you can buy them for just about scrap value right now (except for the Chieftain which actually has a commercial market).

Have you made lots of money with it yet ?

 

[Skylane81E]

The other nice thing is if you dont have to factor depreciation into the equation because some dentist picks up that part of your operating expenses just for the priviledge of being the owner of a new aircraft .

SATS air picked up that tab for us

 

[Skylane81E]

That sounds about right for an older airframe. The good thing about older Twins is that you can buy them for just about scrap value right now (except for the Chieftain which actually has a commercial market).

Have you made lots of money with it yet ?

Not ethical to get into specifics but the owner of said airplane has been turning a very healty profit on his investment.

Plus as he bought it at a very attractive price he could sell it for a profit if he was so inclined, but is making more money leasing it to us.

 

[weilke]

SATS air picked up that tab for us

You mean the dentists, doctors and lawyers who were generous enough to contribute the operating funds for that company :wink2: .

It looks to me like there is a whole raft of 'son of satsair' outfits propping up like the mushrooms in my lawn lately. Satsair spent some energy and money on convincing the FAA to let them fly single-pilot IFR in a single, now that the precedent is there, anyone with a million of play money in the bank starts up another clone of the concept.

 

[weilke]

Not ethical to get into specifics but the owner of said airplane has been turning a very healty profit on his investment.

Glad to hear that someone is making money these days. Did he have the customers lined up before the whole venture got started ?

 

[Skylane81E]

You mean the dentists, doctors and lawyers who were generous enough to contribute the operating funds for that company :wink2: .

It looks to me like there is a whole raft of 'son of satsair' outfits propping up like the mushrooms in my lawn lately. Satsair spent some energy and money on convincing the FAA to let them fly single-pilot IFR in a single, now that the precedent is there, anyone with a million of play money in the bank starts up another clone of the concept.

Meh, we've been single pilot single engine for quite some time now(about 7 odd years now), we just got lucky and our leasing partner picked up a repossed SATS air bird for a relative song

 

[Skylane81E]

Glad to hear that someone is making money these days. Did he have the customers lined up before the whole venture got started ?

we had some, his Navajo is our third, both the others left due to situations beyond our control
Both of them were profitable birds and we had a customer base already so we were able to roll them right into the newest plane.

 

[Ted]

For part 135, you can't just take any old used Bonanza.

You would have to bring it up to part 135 standards. That would typically require a within overhaul interval engine, overhauled prop, every hose within replacement timeframe, every actuator (flaps etc.) within manufacturer recommended overhaul interval etc. All the work has to be properly documented that it was performed by a maintenance facility that had the correct pieces of paperwork nailed to the wall when the work was done. It gets expensive really quick.

Note that this is true not just for the Bonanza, it's true for any old aircraft, piston or turbine. So one that's just come off of 135 is likely a good start there.

I thought that that was the motive. Wayne explained to me that the object of part 135 is to amplify the rate at which you are loosing money on your aircraft.

That may be Wayne's goal, but he's a man who forgot to paint his plane.

 

[Skylane81E]

Note that this is true not just for the Bonanza, it's true for any old aircraft, piston or turbine. So one that's just come off of 135 is likely a good start there.

Yeppers, they however tend to be at the top of the price scale for that type/year/equipment level of airplane

 

[weilke]

Note that this is true not just for the Bonanza, it's true for any old aircraft, piston or turbine. So one that's just come off of 135 is likely a good start there.

A good start. I was told that that doesn't guarantee that the new FSDO doesn't want 1/2 the stuff redone.

There is a life-cycle to these planes, so if you see a plane coming fresh off a certificate, the engines are likely close to TBO or some unassuming exhaust part that is hand-whittled from a block of solid Iridium in Switzerland is coming up for replacement.

 

[Skylane81E]

A good start. I was told that that doesn't guarantee that the new FSDO doesn't want 1/2 the stuff redone.

There is a life-cycle to these planes, so if you see a plane coming fresh off a certificate, the engines are likely close to TBO or some unassuming exhaust part that is hand-whittled from a block of solid Iridium in Switzerland is coming up for replacement.

Our former charter Seneca (we took it off due to lack of useage and calender timed out props) has custom titanium landing gear web bolts.

 

[Ted]

A good start. I was told that that doesn't guarantee that the new FSDO doesn't want 1/2 the stuff redone.

There is a life-cycle to these planes, so if you see a plane coming fresh off a certificate, the engines are likely close to TBO or some unassuming exhaust part that is hand-whittled from a block of solid Iridium in Switzerland is coming up for replacement.

Absolutely correct. If they're taking it off 135, there's probably a reason why, and you may be inheriting that reason. As with everything, buyer beware.

 

[Skylane81E]

Absolutely correct. If they're taking it off 135, there's probably a reason why, and you may be inheriting that reason. As with everything, buyer beware.

Yessir, our inherited reason was a timmed out engine/prop. Cirrus wanted to be rid of the plane so badly that they agreed to a new platinum engine and a prop overhaul at no addtional charge

 

[weilke]

Absolutely correct. If they're taking it off 135, there's probably a reason why, and you may be inheriting that reason. As with everything, buyer beware.

The alternative is to pull some derelict from the weeds and to start fresh with everything.

AOPA has an article on Kenmore air. It sounds like that is what they pretty much do with the Beavers they refurbish. You bring them a dataplate bolted to a scrap of aluminum and a pile of money and you get a new Beaver.

 

[dell30rb]

The alternative is to pull some derelict from the weeds and to start fresh with everything.

Too bad its such a slug and I could never afford to maintain it - but I could get a free apache that was running fine when parked 15 years ago. Needed the prop AD and the owner said screw it, and parked it.

 

[Ted]

Too bad its such a slug and I could never afford to maintain it - but I could get a free apache that was running fine when parked 15 years ago. Needed the prop AD and the owner said screw it, and parked it.

I would suspect it needs significantly more than that now.

 

[dell30rb]

I would suspect it needs significantly more than that now.

yeah its pretty much scrap now. would need both engines overhauled, complete fuel system cleaning, probably some good corrosion where water has pooled, the retractable gear overhauled, and a bunch of other small things including a prop AD. if anyone wants to buy a parts apache let me know.

 

[kimberlyanne546]

We have a V-Tail for sale at my airport, discovered by myself and Teller when we were there. I have pictures on my cell phone if you would like them. If you are curious about the selling price, I can contact my flight school and see what they know. It has been in repairs in the large maintenance hangar of my school since I started flying with them in February. Pretty cool looking airplane.


Kimberly

 

[wabower]

A high percentage of airplanes on 135 certificates are leased rather than owned by the 135 operator. As a result, the operators generate revenues (and perhaps some profit) by flying the trips, but the owner only (and very rarely) generates profits if his share of the trip revenues are greater than his own/op costs for the airplane.

As a result of this incongruent/inconsistent method of generating revenues and profits, the owners and the operators are often at odds with respect to rates and sharing agreements. Any owner who leases an airplane to a 135 needs a check-up from the neck up.

That's what I'm thinking, too. The other thing to remember is that, as a 135 operator, you're looking for more than just you're operating costs - you're looking for profit. So even a plane that costs $1000/hr to operate true cost you can expect to see for a good sum over $1000/hr.



From the factory, Bonanzas came with Continentals. At least, all the ones that I'm aware of.

Keep in mind that when you're looking at a working aircraft, downtime is a definite consideration. If you can reasonably believe that a newer aircraft will require less maintenance (read: less downtime) to keep in the air, there could be a good argument for the newer aircraft. Nevermind the perception of the passengers, which is of the utmost importance if you wish for repeat business.

 

[Ted]

A high percentage of airplanes on 135 certificates are leased rather than owned by the 135 operator. As a result, the operators generate revenues (and perhaps some profit) by flying the trips, but the owner only (and very rarely) generates profits if his share of the trip revenues are greater than his own/op costs for the airplane.

As a result of this incongruent/inconsistent method of generating revenues and profits, the owners and the operators are often at odds with respect to rates and sharing agreements. Any owner who leases an airplane to a 135 needs a check-up from the neck up.

As with anything, it's a question of being able to charge more than what your total costs are. One of the issues with airplanes is that they tend to cost a lot normally, and then cost even more now and then when it's time for your engine overhauls, etc. I would suspect that most people going into aircraft ownership underestimate what their true costs are, especially to keep the plane legal to 135 standards. So, if they agree to too low of a number with a 135 operator leasing the plane at the outset, they later end up trying to get the costs more up to actual.

Were my aircraft to be used in a 135, I'd need to be the one in charge of the 135 and getting the profits. That just simplifies it all. Although the demand for Aztecs with dog cages on 135 is probably minimal.

 

[Skylane81E]

Any owner who leases an airplane to a 135 needs a check-up from the neck up.

So you can make five figures income a month and you need a check up?

Just like any partnership both sides need to know exactly what they are getting into before they put pen to paper. We've yet to have an aircraft owner upset with our 135 op, sure one didn't make money but a non deiced Seneca without club seats just doesn't have a market.

 

[wabower]

The most-common problem that I see is that the operators know more tricks than do the owners. For example, many operators ask the owners to disconnect the hour recorder so that the crew can record the time manually on the trip sheets. IOW, the operator will fudge the trip times so that they only pay the owner for the amount of time contemplated by their trip quote software. The difference between actual time flown and time billed to the customer somehow disappears into the ether.

Another strategy is employed when the operator and the owner negotiate the hourly rate that will be charged by the operator. In many cases the operator knows that the rate desired by the owner is unrealistic, but agrees to the deal anyway, knowing that after the owner will be expecting some rental revenuses, especially after paying the costs of conforming the airplane to the operator's certificate. When questioned by the owner as to why the airplane is not being flown on charter trips, the operator will respond that "the competition is charging less" and that he is powerless to produce any revenue until/unless the owner reduces the hourly rate.

caveat emptor

As with anything, it's a question of being able to charge more than what your total costs are. One of the issues with airplanes is that they tend to cost a lot normally, and then cost even more now and then when it's time for your engine overhauls, etc. I would suspect that most people going into aircraft ownership underestimate what their true costs are, especially to keep the plane legal to 135 standards. So, if they agree to too low of a number with a 135 operator leasing the plane at the outset, they later end up trying to get the costs more up to actual.

Were my aircraft to be used in a 135, I'd need to be the one in charge of the 135 and getting the profits. That just simplifies it all. Although the demand for Aztecs with dog cages on 135 is probably minimal.

 

[Everskyward]

So you can make five figures income a month and you need a check up?

That depends on what your expenses are.

Just like any partnership both sides need to know exactly what they are getting into before they put pen to paper.

That is true. Also, from what I've seen, owners may have very different expectations even from each other. Some owners want their airplanes to charter a much as possible and will even move or cancel their own trips in order to facilitate that. Some owners won't release their airplane to charter until the last minute just in case they might need it and require specific permission for each charter. Whatever the conditions are, they need to be in writing, in the contract.

I'll also add that if your airplane is your baby you'll have a harder time seeing it charter because there will be passengers who won't treat it like your prized possession and you will be unhappy. If it's just a piece of your transportation solution and you want to defray some of your costs by having it charter it might work as long as you are realistic about your numbers.

 

[Skylane81E]

That depends on what your expenses are.

Less

Sad to see that so many places try to make a dishonest buck