Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

An aviator’s happiest moments are the day he buys his own airplane AND the day he sells it

From here

I think this one is worth a discussion

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Not owning an aeroplane and not flying one are two very different things! I flew my fewest hours per year during the time when I (co-) owned aircraft. You spend your weekend cleaning, washing and polishing your aircraft instead of flying around with it, you spend your money for spare parts, maintenance hangar/parking fees and insurance instead of fuel and landing fees. And with an average income, the cost of owning anything that is allowed to use airports and fly through clouds is so disproportionate from all the other expenses in life that one can not really justify it. At least not with a family.

And in my case that all was 20 years ago, no mention of EASA and Fraport yet. The proportion between the average income and the cost involved in owning an aeroplane has not changed much in my view. In my part of the world it is rather the cost of housing which has seen a massive increase over the last 2 or 3 decades (almost triplicated during that time) which does not leave a typical family with enough spare money for any kind of expensive hobby.

EDDS - Stuttgart

what_next wrote:

The proportion between the average income and the cost involved in owning an aeroplane has not changed much in my view. In my part of the world it is rather the cost of housing which has seen a massive increase over the last 2 or 3 decades (almost triplicated during that time) which does not leave a typical family with enough spare money for any kind of expensive hobby.

Good point. In the “elitism” thread a while ago I complained that everything aviation related is needlessly expensive, which I still think is true. But more prohibitive of aircraft ownership may be the increase in cost of living that never went hand in hand with an increase in income for anyone but the richest, which holds especially true in Germany (real incomes stagnant for 20 years) but to some degree for most of Europe.

That, along with the countless non-flying hours required for private aircraft ownership make it unattractive.

Novice pilot
EDVM Hildesheim

My view is that this sentiment merely underlines the all too common fact that flying is wonderful but many people find the stuff on the ground too much hassle.

You need only to read EuroGA for a bit to see how many people struggle with maintenance and with airport politics. It is much less of a problem for renters, but they pay a price in the form of a high hourly (marginal) cost and tend to accordingly fly a lot less.

And it doesn’t seem to be related to how “rich” you are. You could be keeping a TBM at some crappy airport full of hassle and politics. Or you could be flying an ultralight from a farm strip which you own, fuel it with car petrol, and have almost no hassle at all. But obviously money helps; GA has never been a cheap hobby.

I don’t think many people get out of flying because they got fed up with flying even if many do finish flying due to the loss of their medical.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

MedEwok wrote:

That, along with the countless non-flying hours required for private aircraft ownership make it unattractive.

Personally, I find most of those hours rather enjoyable. Maybe it’s an odd perversion, but I even liked reading the AMC for Part M when I wrote the AMP for the plane. This way I do aviation related things many more hours than I’d do if I were renting and for most of those hours I don’t have to pay for the running costs of a plane.

Hajdúszoboszló LHHO

The saying in the title is not complete without the famed 3 Fs rule! (If it Flies, Floats, better not buy but rent it!)

That’s OK if you don’t care who else is flying, sailing or f——g it

The first two are acceptable if the hourly rate is attractive but the 3rd one is, ahem, eventually going to give you some long term problems, involving a significant morbidity and, if your luck runs out, mortality

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

The first two are acceptable if the hourly rate is attractive …

The hourly rate is always going to be attractive compared to the one which results from owning. To this day, I have yet to see a single exception of this “rule”. With the exception of aircraft owned by self-flying entrepreneurs who can deduct some of the cost involved from their taxes. But a private person flying privately and valuing his spare time at least at minimum wages level (8,84 Euros per hour in my part of the world) will always rent cheaper.

Last Edited by what_next at 17 Jul 14:08
EDDS - Stuttgart

FWIW I believe the cost is very little to do with this topic – unless you are sufficiently below the entry level that you can’t participate at all and then of course the cost is highly relevant. It’s like one of the various “why do people give up flying” threads. The real reasons, if you speak to people personally/privately, are rarely to do with money.

I could merge this thread with one of the others but I think this specific topic (why are people allegedly so happy when they finally chuck it in) is a worthwhile one.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Peter wrote:

FWIW I believe the cost is very little to do with this topic…

I am not so sure. The thread starter wrote the the cost of owning his plane (allegedly pushed to the current level by EASA, Fraport and others) has grown more than what he is willing to spend for owning his plane.

And talking for myself, as I already wrote I once co-owned two airplanes (MEPs). Today I have a similar income than during those days, more steady even and all my debts are paid including the house. But no way could I afford to own a 1/3 share of a piston twin today, lest alone two as I did 20 years ago. To me this means that the cost involved must have grown a lot more than the income – contrary to the official figures.

EDDS - Stuttgart
92 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top