Multi Expenses?

spiderweb

spiderweb

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 22, 2005
Messages
9,488
Display Name
Ben
Comment on the following oft-heard statement: "Operating a twin is three times as expensive as operating a comparable single."

Questions:
1) Is this true?
2) Is this true if you are a renter? Be careful here: I understand that the actual rental cost is probably only 50%-100% more than a single, but one probably has to rent more frequently to maintain an equal level of proficiency.
3) What cost-managing strategies do you employ?
 
Last edited:
wangmyers said:
Comment on the following oft-hear statement: "Operating a twin is three times as expensive as operating a comparable single."

Questions:
1) Is this true?
2) Is this true if you are a renter? Be careful here: I understand that the actual rental cost is probably only 50%-100% more than a single, but one probably has to rent more frequently to maintain an equal level of proficiency.
3) What cost-managing strategies do you employ?
Click to expand...

1) In general, yes. There are several reasons why twins cost more to fly than singles. First of course is the extra engine and fuel it consumes. Second is that most twins are bigger, faster, and can carry more than the average single and all of that costs money. Third, twins typically have more systems and they require maintenance as well. More props, fuel tanks, vacuum pumps, alternators, radar and other high end autopilots and other avionics etc. Finally virtually all twins are complex by nature with retractable landing gear (and bigger more expensive tires), flaps, three axis trim and so on. All of that adds up and the sum means more cash required.

2) I think there are a couple Baron's renting for something like $280/hr at my home base, but they aren't as well equipped as mine. The same FBO rents a Bonanza for about $180 so your 50-100% increase is reasonable.

3) Two things: One is getting involved in the maintenance including doing as much of it yourself as you can as well as learning as much as possible about all the systems so you can help with troubleshooting and know when your mechanic is in over his head. BTW that happens a lot more than you might think partly because for every Seneca or Baron he works on he probably sees 20 Skyhawks and 30 Warriors. Joining a good type club and squezing them for knowledge is a must.

The other is starting with a plane in good condition and keeping it that way. If you buy a sharp looking Seneca with flashy new paint and recently updated interior that's been maintained on a shoestring you can easily find yourself spending more on maintenance in the first couple years than you paid for the plane in the first place. And fixing almost everything that breaks at an inconvenient time will cost close to double what it ought to, because you won't have the time to shop for bargains or even the most cost effective "cure".
 
Thanks for that, Lance. There is a Seneca II here at BWI that rents for $150 dry. Obviously, it isn't as nice as your Baron (or maybe a lot of other Senecas!), but I really don't want to learn in the Seminole. The engines are so underpowered. Additionally, the Seminoles in this area rent for almost as much as the Seneca.
 
wangmyers said:
Thanks for that, Lance. There is a Seneca II here at BWI that rents for $150 dry. Obviously, it isn't as nice as your Baron (or maybe a lot of other Senecas!), but I really don't want to learn in the Seminole. The engines are so underpowered. Additionally, the Seminoles in this area rent for almost as much as the Seneca.
Click to expand...

The numbers I gave you were wet rates, but they are also from memory and at least a few months old.
 
wangmyers said:
Comment on the following oft-heard statement: "Operating a twin is three times as expensive as operating a comparable single."

Questions:
1) Is this true?
2) Is this true if you are a renter? Be careful here: I understand that the actual rental cost is probably only 50%-100% more than a single, but one probably has to rent more frequently to maintain an equal level of proficiency.
3) What cost-managing strategies do you employ?
Click to expand...

1) Yes and no really because the hitch is most twins aren't comparable to most singles. In those that are, Seneca/ Saratoga, Baron/ Bonanza... It really isn't triple, and in some cases it can be less as in the case of my Travel Air and my friends S-35 Bonanza. I actually operated cheaper than he did because I had cheaper more reliable engines and could fly higher with my turbos. Not having maintenance bills was kinda cheating though.:D
Now If you want to compare a 210 vs a 310, your lucky to operate the 310 for triple the cost.

2) That's a pretty fair statement.

3) I treat planes very gently and apply the Lindberg Doctrine to all my distance flights. This saves both fuel and engine wear and tear. I don't maintain high deck angles to assure an even and plentifull airflow through the nacell. I do my best to manage my tempratures to stay around 2/3rds of maximum.
 
wangmyers said:
1) Is this true?
Click to expand...
Not for a twin of comparable payload and speed -- double, yes; triple, no. Compare a Baron to a 172, and yes, it probably does triple.

2) Is this true if you are a renter?
Click to expand...
Not many twin renters -- there just aren't that many twins available for rent.

3) What cost-managing strategies do you employ?
Click to expand...
Selling my twin and buying a single.
 
I'm pretty sure my CFI told me once that he was renting the beechcraft dutchess for $150 wet. I could be wrong. So deals can probably be found.


Either way. the dutchess isn't very exciting as far as twins go...but it is a twin.
 
Ben:
I own an A-36; had an A-55 Baron and now have a P-Baron. I agree with what Lance said above for several reasons, most of which he covered. Your fuel burn and engine usage is very close if not twice the cost of a single. Fuel a little less and engines 2X except, to get to the same speed, in the twin you could run just a little lower power setting.

More systems on top of that. In the A-55 and now in the P-Baron, there is almost always something that needs care. The A-36 just didn't have as much to go wrong in it. Of course, insurance and recurrent training will almost certainly be required for 1MM smooth coverage. Every place you stop, you may expect ramp fees, parking fees, etc. are more for a twin. In a bigger twin, you will also use self serve less. I can't move the twin around by myself on a ramp, and have to be careful where I land and how I park if there are no ground services.
How you maintain the plane will make a difference in this computation, but you strike me as someone that would want everything working and would do a lot of preventive maintenance. To provide you some perspective, my A-36 annual was just over $6,000 this month; almost no airworthiness issues. Did a lot of things that I just wanted to make sure were right: disassembly of ailerons and lubrication of all bearings and inspection; did the wing bolts last year, etc. Anyone that brags about a $1,000 annual on a plane like this, either does a LOT of maintenance during the year, or isn't doing anything more than is required. That doesn't describe me (and I'm willing to speculate Lance, Bruce or the other folks I respect on this board).

An older bird will have more costs simply because systems are older.

Best,

Dave
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all of those details. I'm getting a clearer picture every day!
 
Have you checked into insurance rates on a twin? It's been a recent discussion on the Beechcraft list.

I'd love to play with/ own a twin, but just dont have the mission requirements to come close to justifying one. :)
 
We have a couple of C310-R's that rent for $280/hour wet, compared to a 182T (Garmin G-1000) at $136/hour ($168/Tach hour). But as Henning said, they're not really comparable aircraft. I've had five full-grown adults with luggage in the 310, where as 3 was pushing it with the 182. Factor in the speed difference, and the 310 is actually about the same per person when loaded. To Ben's point about currency, we were taking along the MEII anyway, so didn't have to worry about it :^)
 
AirBaker said:
Have you checked into insurance rates on a twin? It's been a recent discussion on the Beechcraft list.

I'd love to play with/ own a twin, but just dont have the mission requirements to come close to justifying one. :)
Click to expand...

Don't know current, but when I bought my Travel Air with 60 some hours and no multi rating, even the insurance guy was shocked, it was cheaper than a Bo by several hundred dollars with the same basic requirement of 25 hrs dual, although I had the extra stipulation of doing my multi checkride in my plane.
 
Henning said:
Don't know current, but when I bought my Travel Air with 60 some hours and no multi rating, even the insurance guy was shocked, it was cheaper than a Bo by several hundred dollars with the same basic requirement of 25 hrs dual, although I had the extra stipulation of doing my multi checkride in my plane.
Click to expand...

In a recent post, 600TT, 150 in a Bonanza, and it was still 10.5k for the Baron insurance. The guy had zero mutli time though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top