Peter wrote:
What this thread demonstrates is that the idea of a “club” existing “solely for the benefit of its members” etc, while perhaps true in the sense of retaining profits within the organisation, doesn’t usually deliver a reduction in costs relative to just renting the same hardware from some “school” which utilises the said hardware for PPL training.
I don’t see how one can reach a conclusion either way from this thread… Anyway, I looked at the websites of the commercial schools in Sweden that advertise prices for rental (“time building”) and they are considerably higher than you would expect in a Swedish club.
Aircraft costs are pretty static in the UK – plan around £60 per hour dry for a PA28 and fuel on top and you will get the not for profit operating cost.
The difference comes in the ‘fixed’ costs of the organisation – salaries (if any), advertising, web site etc building and airfield rental. In a true not for profit club you keep these as minimal possible and try to cover with membership costs, or a small subsidy from flying rate.
If you need a high transfer from flying rate to cover the ‘fixed’ costs you are going to hit trouble sooner or later as you get inevitable weather/airfield works/ash cloud/aircraft gets crashed disruption and cash flow soon goes wrong.
The best model IMHO is a high monthly type club membership with nice facilities, social etc and then just have aircraft costs low to break even.
Ps any club owning their own aircraft is insane in my experience, dry lease every time if you are really aiming at a ‘club’ set up
Airborne_Again wrote:
I don’t see how one can reach a conclusion either way from this thread… Anyway, I looked at the websites of the commercial schools in Sweden that advertise prices for rental (“time building”) and they are considerably higher than you would expect in a Swedish club.
When I got my PPL in 1992 at an ATO/Airline (wasn’t called ATO back then I guess, but still), it was cheaper and had much better/newer airplanes for rent than the local club. The company was doing PPL/CPL, taxi flying and even had some regular routes. When finished I could rent the planes they used for instructions (C-172) and also the ones they used for taxi flying. The only one I could fly however that wasn’t used exclusively for training was the C-172 XP, but they had several twins also that I could use if I had the ratings (and money).
That company is long gone with just about every other company like it. Today there is a helicopter company at it’s place. Helicopters have completely taken over. For some time they had some bizjets, but they are also gone. There are only a couple of ATOs left doing PPL A, and one of those have become the sole provider of PPL theory. All PPL A practical instructions are done at the clubs. ATO simply isn’t an option anymore, except H and IFR and specialized airline stuff (whatever that consists of).
For all practical purposes the only place to take PPL practical instructions for fixed wing is a club. The whole scene is organised around it also. Theory using web and some token classroom lessons at that monopoly ATO and practical instructions at the clubs. On the other hand, to my knowledge all FIs have CPL/ATPL. One may wonder how this situation has come into existence. I’m not sure how and why exactly, but it’s some combination of a strong member organisation (NLF) and the market isn’t there for commercial PPL training (due mostly to EASA IMO)
IMO Peter don’t have the basic knowledge of how things work throughout Europe to reach such conclusions on a general basis, which I don’t think is possible in any case. A club in Norway is obviously a very different thing than a club or similar in the UK. Lots of club members have their own planes, or have planes with others. Clubs also usually have different planes, some are used almost exclusively for instructions, others are used for flying of various “missions”. Two of the members have their own Lancair, a plane that cannot be used for anything but long range x-country. They still fly the club’s planes every now and then for short and grass field etc. Others have light sport planes or C-182s or whatever.
However, the bread and butter of a club is the club school. The reason for this is it’s possible for high utilization. 4-500 h per year for a basic trainer isn’t unusual. This creates a financial surplus that can be used for other planes, Cub-type, acro etc that is difficult to operate financially while still keeping the per hour rate at reasonable levels. Or the surplus can be used for newer trainers, or a combination. What is more difficult is planes used for x-country. The simple reason is that while away, they cannot be used by anyone else. Economically they don’t make sense, unless they are old and worn, but in OK technical condition, and therefore not particular useful as a modern trainer (a modern trainer must have glass etc and the ability to run 4-500h without snags).
We had two of those up until this winter when one crashed at Femunden ice strip (not by me 
) . So, nice x-country planes tends to be private, or owned by a few individuals. Theoretically a new Cirrus could be owned by the club, but at a huge financial cost. It will only be used by a few, but the club (with all the members) carries the risk and cost. It doesn’t really make sense. A better option would be for the owner(s) of that brand new Cirrus to let the club use the plane at whatever rate that is agreed upon, and for whatever purpose. Anyway, the club is free to make any sort of arrangement and purchase the planes it wants, even if it makes no economical sense whatsoever, it’s a 100% democratic organisation. A poorly run club will soon end up in big trouble though.
IMO Peter don’t have the basic knowledge of how things work throughout Europe
IMO LeSving doesn’t have much knowledge of how things work outside Norway.
But we have been here before… last time this came up you vanished for a few months. So why get personal?
@Peter at least for German clubs and especially my club, I disagree. In Germany their is a VAT benefit because the flying club falls under the privilege of sports clubs, that means they only have to charge 7% on rental instead of 19%. Then we have 1 hour minimum rental for a weekday and 2 hours for a weekend. And without special permission you can take an aircraft for 5 days or if you share it with two pilots for 10 days. More days need special permission which is normally granted once a year per member if not for extraordinary circumstances.
Is all of that possible with your typical rental at a flight school?
It seems to vary. The schools I have known about do allow unlimited takeaways subject to a daily billing of 2-3hrs. This is obviously expensive for say a week.
My point is that there cannot be a free lunch; if you allow long and cheap takeaways that implies spare aircraft (i.e. aircraft under-utilisation) which needs to be funded somehow. So, as pointed further above, you choose who subsidises who and how much.
Peter wrote:
So why get personal?
It wasn’t personal. From what I have read you always talk in negative terms about clubs. In particular as if a “club is a club” kind of way, and that certain bad things are bound to happen in a club. I learned to fly in a Belgium club by the way, near Mons in Belgium. Almost everything you have to say about clubs are very much in opposition with my experience of clubs.
Of course I know Norway best, and Norwegian clubs. But it’s not like clubs exists in total vacuum. All clubs in Norway are under NLF, and NLF is a member of FAI. I am also a member of EAA (chapter 573, the Norwegian chapter), which I also consider a club, and like clubs in NLF, EAA Chapter 573 is part of the central EAA based in Oshkosh USA. Over the years I have come in contact with lots of people from all over the world. Just a few days ago I came home from an engine course at the ULPower factory in Belgium together with Germans, Italians, Ukraine and even two Chinese persons. Even EuroGA is a kind of a club in an a virtual sort of way.
A club is simply a bunch of people getting together because:
A club is a natural thing for humans to engage in. As humans, clubs come in all sorts of shapes and sizes. And of course, whenever people get together there are the usual socializing processes. Where to put the coffee machine, and who to decide it. Some wants black coffee, others want tee. Where is the tea? Why haven’t someone made tea? What kind of shitty club is this, no tea?
I know clubs can break down, go completely to pieces. I have seen it for a club close by where I was a member for some time. But so what? My club at ENVA has kept going since 1946, and is going strong as ever (it also has been is serious trouble, but that’s only normal also). If it wasn’t for clubs there wouldn’t be much flying activity today in Scandinavia, Germany or France except a handful of Cirruses here and there.
Cttime wrote:
Now in 2019 they have risen to 172S Nav III – 230 euro / hr PA-28 Archer III – 187 euro / hr PA-28 Cadet – 169 euro / hr
This prices are including fuel, right?
In our club in southern Germany the rates are quite similar. However, only flight time (takeoff – landing) is being charged:
G-115 C1 Acro – 163 € / hr
DR-400 R 180 – 179 € / hr
C-182 T Nav III – 243 € / hr
F33A Bonanza – 298 € / hr
Within the last 2 years, prices have raised by roughly 15 %.
But:
