Talk me out of this thinking.

Aztec Driver

Aztec Driver

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
982
Location
Elizabethtown, PA
Display Name
Bryon
Home Airfield
LNS
Even my wife thinks I am nuts for even thinking this.

I am having a difficult time justifying the ongoing costs of maintaining, hangaring, and insuring my beloved Twinkie.

I don't get a lot of time to keep it exercised, although I do try to run it for a period of time each week, including around the pattern, to keep it lubricated and limber. I am too busy at work, or too busy doing the air charters (which is where most of my flying hours now come from) to spend any time with "the mistress."

I do take it on trips a few times a year, but all totaled, I only end up with 50-75 hours per year on it. With all cost associated with the plane, the per hour costs are through the roof. Just to hangar, insure, and annual the airplane costs upward of 8-9K. That is without flying it at all. I love the Twinkie, but if I am not going to use it, I really do not need to spend the extra money on it.

On the other hand, there is nothing close by the area that I could rent that has the same capabilities, and that I could take for a week or so, and only pay for the hourly rent. They all would understandably want a daily minimum of rentable hours for an extended period of rental.

Set me straight, O Wise Ones.:wink2:
 
RJM62 said:
Leaseback?
Click to expand...
:no: :no: :no: :no: :no: :yes: :no: :no: :no: :no:
9 out of 10 Smilies think that is a very BAD idea. I agree. I'd consider taking on a partner. That would cut the fixed costs in half. Take your time and find a good one. They're out there.
 
Last edited:
I would keep it. The first trip you need or want to take after you sell it you will be kicking yourself.
 
Private aircraft don't make sense if you look at them from a financial perspective. Nor do boats, weekend retreat homes, tickets to sporting events, or whatever. But all that hard work should pay off with something enjoyable - fishing, hunting, flying, golf, or some other passion.

That said, you need to ask yourself two questions:

1 - Can you afford the Twinkie?

2 - If so, will selling the Twinkie (both the capital infusion and the savings from ongoing expenses) allow you to do something you'd rather do than own/fly a Twinkie?
 
RJM62 said:
Leaseback?

-Rich
Click to expand...

Dead Stick said:
:no: :no: :no: :no: :no: :yes: :no: :no: :no: :no:
9 out of 10 Smilies think that is a very BAD idea. I agree. I'd consider taking on a partner. That would cut the fixed costs in half. Take your time and find a good one. They're out there.
Click to expand...

In addition to finding a full time partner, find pilots that might want to do a short term arrangement... One of my regular flying buddies is talking to an owner of a Twin Comanche about a dry non-equity short term rental arrangement while he trains for, gets, and then builds time on his multi rating.
 
AggieMike88 said:
In addition to finding a full time partner, find pilots that might want to do a short term arrangement... One of my regular flying buddies is talking to an owner of a Twin Comanche about a dry non-equity short term rental arrangement while he trains for, gets, and then builds time on his multi rating.
Click to expand...
I was thinking along these lines too. Maybe find a reliable person who wants to build multiengine time.
 
Yeah..
how about being approached by a guy to sell him your airplane while it's not for sale? Now imagine that after the phone calls in March, he actually makes a point to come over today to talk about the same :rolleyes:
 
Too bad you are in PA. I know a couple of pilots out here that could keep the Twinky well exercised for you. One is a CFII, MEI and had to sell his share in a Twinky a few years ago.
 
I'd get a good canopy and wing cover and get rid of the hangar and just tie down. Then I'd change from hull to only liability insurance. And then I'd skip the annual if I know I'm not going to fly for a few months and just annual it before the next bigger trip. That should save a lot of money.
 
I for one see all the advantages in owning, and personally see no disadvantages. This is from the guy that has two boats sitting on lifts in his backyard, and would also have two jet skis if my dunba$$ son did not leave them on the driveway unlocked when he went out to eat, and was surprised when he got back they were not there. Anyhow, I have gone through the thought process you are going through with my boats, and in the end decided that the money I put into my boats is worth it for the 20 or so hrs I use them each year. This is because of the calming effect boating has on my hectic life. Now I would use them more often except for this damn addiction I have to flying(about 150 or so hours a year).

Oh well. There is a nicely equipped 35 foot tiara and a similiarly equipped 28 foot grady available to anyone who would like to take them out for an afternoon. You only have to leave them with full tanks.
 
Id recommend a partner or two if its just cost of sole ownership that's a problem.
 
I'm in exactly the same situation with my travel air. But I don't see any issue with it. Why try to conjur up an hourly rate, what's the purpose? You don't have a problem so why try to solve it ?
 
8-9k!!!

What is a twinky??

Turbo twin or something?


For my 4 place plane, 70mo land lease, 5-700 annual, I don't think I've ever gotten close to your lower number in the 5 years I've owned, that's west coast though BTW.
 
If the charter work is part time non money critical, I say drop the charter gig and fly your plane more.
 
Leaseback -- I don't think so. Too much liability and wear and tear/ damage possibility for little to no benefit for the most part. New multiengine students are hard on the planes, and a Twinkie is not the easiest airplane to master a nice touchdown in. They tend to bounce them pretty hard quite often. That is not something I would like to subject my Twinkie to.

Had a partner. He lost his job and could no longer afford it. Would try to find other partners, but it has to be the right person, and I have gotten too accustomed to the plane being the way I left it, and it being available anytime I want it.

Outside tie down? Are you insane? I can't leave my baby outside in the elements. And, while the hangar is expensive, it is darn nice. At only $285/mo (although it is shared with a motor home and other vehicle) it is an electric bi fold door with a full concrete floor, and a very nice macadam tarmac drive up area. Lighted and nearly new.

I do not believe in postponing maintenance to save money. I want it to be ready at a moment's notice, if I need it. I have needed it on that type of occasion more than once. Non-critical systems? Yes. But not an annual or flight critical systems.

Insurance is around 2K. Annual usually runs 1500-2500, although some have reached 4K. Yearly hangar is ~3300. Twinkie is a Twin, with all of the benefits and drawbacks of any light twin.

Charter work gives me my most flying fix. It also pays enough extra money to pay for the airplane ownership.

I agree, I don't really have a problem, I am just trying to justify paying this much for something I rarely use, and I want to figure out if there is a better way to accomplish the same thing.

If I could find something in the area that I could rent that goes the same speed and that I could take for a week at a time, I would consider that. At only around 50 hours, I may end up not spending quite as much.
 
If your argument against a partner is that you like finding your plane the way you left it, how does that jive with how you'd find it if you sell it? Or how one would be found if you rented one? Seems like the partner is the lesser of evils IF cost cutting is the main goal.

Good luck!
 
If you're not using it, sell it. It's not like you won't be able to find plenty of twins if your situation changes. Reluctancy to execute is the reason our airports are FULL of infrequent/non-flying birds and owners that continue to lose hundreds or thousands a month because they might start flying more someday. Planes depreciate and cost go up.

Don't be one of those guys desperately trying to sell a bird that hasn't flown much in years for top dollar based on the amount of money you've paid to hangar, annual, and insure it.
 
jmn444 said:
If your argument against a partner is that you like finding your plane the way you left it, how does that jive with how you'd find it if you sell it? Or how one would be found if you rented one? Seems like the partner is the lesser of evils IF cost cutting is the main goal.

Good luck!
Click to expand...
It doesn't jive at all. I didn't say I was being rational or realistic. Hence, my dilemma.
:D
 
Alexb2000 said:
If you're not using it, sell it. It's not like you won't be able to find plenty of twins if your situation changes. Reluctancy to execute is the reason our airports are FULL of infrequent/non-flying birds and owners that continue to lose hundreds or thousands a month because they might start flying more someday. Planes depreciate and cost go up.

Don't be one of those guys desperately trying to sell a bird that hasn't flown much in years for top dollar based on the amount of money you've paid to hangar, annual, and insure it.
Click to expand...

Never. I will fly it regularly until I sell it.
 
Last edited:
If you had a sailboat, would you calculate a price 'per mile sailed' ?
 
Either you can afford the plane or you can't - period.
The cost per hour is meaningless.
I will not go the partner route.
If it comes to that financially, the plane goes. That's just me.

The plane sits there at my beck and call. I know I won't discover a magically fouled plug, or empty tanks, or a new ding in the spinner when I open the hangar. That is worth something to me.
 
Aztec Driver said:
Never. I will fly it regularly until I sell it.
Click to expand...

We had an old car that we both just loved. We didn't drive it everyday (monthly), because we had newer cars to use. However, we kept it perfectly maintained, garaged, and drove it enough to keep it running right. Because we loved it as I mentioned.

One day we realized that keeping this old car wasn't fun, it was just something else to worry about, and yet another thing to use up our limited free time. So we sat down and figured out what we were spending to keep it. It was surprising, several thousand dollars a year. Then we thought about how that could buy us a little vacation every year vs. an old car that constantly needed washing and served us no practical purpose.

Deciding to sell it was liberating vs. depressing, much to our surprise.
 
Stuff owns you. There's no getting around that. Even if it's "free" it still takes up space, has to be moved, etc.

There's a (slightly wacko) movement within the minimalist movement that attempts to reduce one's items they own to 100 items total.

I only heard about it yesterday, but I want to see the lists. I think it would be fascinating to see how little one can exist on. Is at exist because I'm not sure that's really "living" for those of us who like tools and messing with things.
 
denverpilot said:
Stuff owns you. There's no getting around that. Even if it's "free" it still takes up space, has to be moved, etc.

There's a (slightly wacko) movement within the minimalist movement that attempts to reduce one's items they own to 100 items total.

I only heard about it yesterday, but I want to see the lists. I think it would be fascinating to see how little one can exist on. Is at exist because I'm not sure that's really "living" for those of us who like tools and messing with things.
Click to expand...

No way that works with women in your life.:no: I miss the days when everything I owned would fit in my pick up truck.
 
I sold my airplane last year, not because I wanted to sell her, but because I could not afford to own her after retiring. At first I had felt a great sense of relief after she had sold, and I no longer had the financial burden that she brought me.

Now, after about eight or so months since selling her, I can honestly say that I truly miss my little Warrior, and I had never even given her a name.

If you can afford to keep your Twinkie, then keep her. So what if you don't fly her as much as you would like, just knowing that you can, anytime you want, is the only excuse you need.

Renting out your mistress to strangers will not bring you any pleasure, but knowing that she is safe in her hanger, and you can visit whenever you want, will bring you a whole lot of comfort.

I love metaphors. :D

-John
 
denverpilot said:
Stuff owns you. There's no getting around that. Even if it's "free" it still takes up space, has to be moved, etc.
Click to expand...
No kidding, especially if it wasn't "yours" to begin with and you just ended up with it. When I buy something I try to get rid of something else. Been like that for years but I don't seem to be making progress. :dunno:

denverpilot said:
There's a (slightly wacko) movement within the minimalist movement that attempts to reduce one's items they own to 100 items total.
Click to expand...
That's something I could get into. :D

If it was me and I couldn't justify owning it any more I would sell it. Correction, if it was me I would procrastinate and it would sit there losing value. But my intention would be to [someday] sell it. :redface:
 
denverpilot said:
Stuff owns you. There's no getting around that. Even if it's "free" it still takes up space, has to be moved, etc.

There's a (slightly wacko) movement within the minimalist movement that attempts to reduce one's items they own to 100 items total.

I only heard about it yesterday, but I want to see the lists. I think it would be fascinating to see how little one can exist on. Is at exist because I'm not sure that's really "living" for those of us who like tools and messing with things.
Click to expand...

During my thirties I lived on my sailboat that I owned free and clear. My thirty foot slip was $45.00 a month at first, then over ten years it had increased to $225.00 a month. My total possessions consisted of my boat, my car, two jackets, three pairs of jeans, several pairs of shorts, a few assorted T shirts, some storm gear, a sabot I used as a dingy, and my little picture framing shop. My guess is I was at less than a hundred items that I owned.

Now just my garage probably has ten time that stuffed into it. I was generally happy then and I'm generally happy now. I don't think that your possessions, or lack of them, have squat to do with how you feel about your lot in life. I think it has more to do with how you are living your life.

-John
 
stratobee said:
I'd get a good canopy and wing cover and get rid of the hangar and just tie down. Then I'd change from hull to only liability insurance....

And then I'd skip the annual if I know I'm not going to fly for a few months and just annual it before the next bigger trip.

That should save a lot of money.
Click to expand...

That won't work ---
Capt Murphy says that when he brings it in for the annual, the IA will find a squawk that will take 4-5 months to fix and declare Twinkie unairworthy until that time
:eek:
 
kyleb said:
But all that hard work should pay off with something enjoyable - fishing, hunting, flying, golf, or some other passion.
Click to expand...


The trout I catch cost me around $100 per pound. But I still go fishing.

Dan
 
Dead Stick said:
:no: :no: :no: :no: :no: :yes: :no: :no: :no: :no:
9 out of 10 Smilies think that is a very BAD idea. I agree. I'd consider taking on a partner. That would cut the fixed costs in half. Take your time and find a good one. They're out there.
Click to expand...
:yeahthat: Clearly there's plenty of available time in the airplane's schedule to accommodate a partner. And I think the best partnership scheduling arrangement is where each alternates at a fixed period like 1-2 weeks or a month with one partner at a time being "primary". The primary partner can use the airplane as if they were the sole owner, the other partner can use it with the primary partner's permission. At the end of the period the primary partner switches to the other guy.

A good partnership cuts your fixed costs in half but has very little effect on your operating costs and in some cases might even improve it due to the higher utilization and associated reduction in time spent sitting between flights. IMO a two person partnership is ideal. Going with three partners only decreases your fixed costs by 17% compared to sole ownership while the two way arrangement cuts them in half.
 
Never leaseback any Comanche. Those stiff legs are expensive to repair after the 35th banged on landing this week. . . The average pilot is never going to master a Comanche landing and will break something eventually.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top