Is ownership worth it?

@Fernando I do feel for you. Guess you were like all the fresh owners are, just an excited kid jumping in anticipation of using his new toy.
Sincerely hope it will eventually work out so you can enjoy this, or another airplane.

There are quite a few rules to safely, though even that can be relative, acquiring a second hand aircraft. And the pre-buy is one of the many pre-requisites.
A pre-buy can be thorough, reduced, or anything in between. Reduced for instance, if you know the owner, if you were the one doing maintenance on the object, etc. Thorough to very thorough if having any doubt about the aircraft.
Rule #1 in a pre-buy is not to use the maintenance facility taking care of the airplane.
There quite a few other rules, just regarding pre-buys, and those are valid all over the place, US, Europe, or the Moon.
Books have been published on the subject of aircraft buying, associations are helping, Mike Bush is well and alive, internet info galore.

I bought, and sold a few airplanes myself, and do perform pre-buys, but only on airplanes I thoroughly understand. Being specialised in the homebuilt world makes it easier for me, and I sincerely believe that there are less lemons and crooks out there than in the certified world.

PS
Interestingly enough, I targeted an RV-3 (yes, the single place RV) which was advertised about 2 months ago on a vendor’s company site, as well as on Planecheck… I was attracted to this RV for personal reasons, and it was offered at a very attractive price…
I called the seller early, and tried to fix a date for an inspection of the aircraft and the logs. Received an evasive confirmation, and that they would contact me back. Well, despite confirming my interest in written a few times again, nothing was heard.
Lo and behold I learned the aircraft sold, and was picked up last week… probably sight unseen. I might be wrong, but my best guess is that the seller was fishing for an unsuspecting soul to plunge into an open pandora’s box.

@dan thanks for your message. The plane is now in great shape. It was “just” the fin.

I shall be ready to pick up the plane soon and enjoy it, just as the summer comes to an end :)

Yesterday 10 years ago I bought my C172, a 1977 N model.

I went with two mechanic friends, who overlooked the aeroplane that had been sitting in the hangar for the previous 2 years. They said it was in good shape so I shook hands with the owner for the price comprehensive of a new annual. I flew the first year without a glitch.

When I bought it the engine had 1700 hours. Being an O-320-2HAD, and having been sitting for 2 years I was doubtful it would reach 2000. In fact in my second year of use metal appeared in the oil filter and the camshaft was shot. 6 weeks downtime for complete engine overhaul (cost had been budgeted when I bought the aeroplane originally.

Since then I have only had a minor issue resolved in 2 weeks.

I do my annuals with the same company that had followed the maintenance in the previous 10 years prior to me buying (they can’t invent excuses).

Annuals often take a week maximum two. I fly it in on a Saturday and fetch it the next weekend. I always verify what is needed to be done a month before so the Maintenance company orders parts beforehand or books revision slots (carb, mag, prop) so I don’t loose downtime.

Longest annual was 6 weeks, over a Xmas period, when I changed all the windows that initially got lost in shipping.

So I can’t complain, am very happy so far, and buying my own aeroplane has been the best thing I have ever done.

cost had been budgeted when I bought the aeroplane originally.

I know someone who has just done that (got ~30k off) and I always recommend it, but most sellers won’t agree to it because they live in a dream-land… until they actually need the cash.

Silvaire wrote:

Ownership needs to be a hands-on, brain-on activity unless it is to be an open wallet activity filled with frustration and manipulation by others.

Indeed. This is one of the main reasons ULs are popular in Europe. The EASA regulations, the entire philosophy, is made around planes owned by an organization doing business with other maintenance organizations. A private airplane is much better handled by, and between, individuals.

And it is my main reason to remain N-reg

Antonio wrote:

it is my main reason to remain N-reg

What more can you do on N-reg that you cannot with part-M light and an owner-declared (and performed) maintenance?
(this probably belongs in another thread, we’ll see where it goes)

I don’t know about Antonio’s situation but I’ve been N-reg since 2005 and would not go back because I have flexibility which I would not have under EASA-anything. Theory differs from practice once airfield/maintenance politics comes into it. Most of the maintenance business sabotages Part-ML because it is revenue-reducing. So many threads here on this…

• you need a hangar where freelance work can be done behind closed doors
• there are many more freelance A&Ps than freelance EASA66s (most of the latter have full time jobs and need to keep a low profile, while most of the former are freelance by default)
• there is much more “political acceptance” of freelance N-reg work than freelance EASA-reg work
• A&Ps often work freelance for EASA firms (needed for N-reg signoffs) so the EASA firms owe them favours, and permit / don’t object to freelancing on an N-reg
• more freedom on what is a minor mod
• FAA A&P is authorised to declare a part airworthy by inspection (the similar Euro process has been sabotaged and was always blocked at every step by the industry)

The list is long… but as you can see it is largely about making money, and making money. Ownership is sooo much about relationships. Get these wrong and ownership will be hell.

Of course many will post they can do all this in their hangar but it is the other 90-99% who remain silent, partly because nobody will write anything critical of their country on an international forum

Peter wrote:

because I have flexibility which I would not have under EASA-anything

I’d say as long as anyone is happy with his situation, keep it.

I just add that EASA part-ML has greatly changed, the more so in Germany, since Pilot/Owner-Maintenance. I have no direct comparison, no idea of owning n-reg despite some friends having it arranged that way, but things are moving every year.

I am with a CAMO that is perfectly fine with freelance work and to me that’s a very relaxing situation.

Things that are changing too slowly is the availability of freelance mechanics and examiners (COVID has reportedly slowed this down a lot, because exams are in person in practice, and that was not allowed during the pandemic situation, so no further mechanics / examiners could check out their courses).

To own an aircraft with a small budget is to anticipate and avoid pitfalls and to invest some time and thinking (hands-on and head-on as @Silvaire wrote recently in another thread). It is possible with EASA-reg.

It may depend on the very local possibilities. E.g. on a neighboring airfield there is a local FAA mechanic. Lots of planes are n-reg there and it’s some sort of a grown family.

I’ve come to trust the arrangement I’m in and I don’t see that I would have any advantages on n-reg – maybe I don’t know better. But my costs are ok low. If I would encounter any bigger chunk I could go to “minimum maintenance program” if it helped.

I agree there is more flexibility in the regs but that isn’t the issue. The issue is that most owners, due to limited options, are constrained by airfield-political factors which prevent them from exercising these new regulatory options.

Part-ML, if fully exploited, would reduce MO revenue by probably 50-75%, and that is totally unacceptable to the industry. Even just the concession on “aviation paperwork” would reduce MO margin on parts supply by some huge factor. Even my granny would have realised this simply isn’t going to fly.

Now of course we will see the usual posts from a couple of people that this is a “UK problem” but I know from hundreds of contacts that this isn’t the case.