Hangarage can be very expensive in the UK. I know one TB20 owner who pays £7500/year and I am not far below that. Further north, it (like most things) gets cheaper and I know some who pay as little as £1000/year, though deals in that area tend to involve part ownership of the hangar, etc.
But some say this is a waste of money. You don't get total access, you get "hangar rash" (damage, with usually nobody admitting it), and the considerable money saved will pay for a respray every 2-3 years. Also you have to be very careful to maintain a good relationship with the hangar owner and, in some cases, with the airport owner, which can be difficult especially if the hangar firm also does your maintenance i.e. standard airport politics...
My view is that hangarage is worth it, for the much better aircraft condition, better avionics life and reliability, security, ability to fly in the winter without having to scrape off ice, etc.
For outdoor parking you need to get really comprehensive covers, which can take time to get on/off. What do people do about that?
Apart from any maintenance benefit, it seems that "always hangared" (or equivalent in other languages) seems to read like "full dealer service history" as when buying a car...with the commensurate premium attached....the plane I am (hopefully) going to close on has been always hangared...and this seems important to me....although unfortunately there is no hangarage at Aberdeen where she will live!
I have aircraft, well shares in them, in both situations so I live with both.
I find that stored outside increases preventative maintenance and removing a full set of covers is time consuming. You also need an awareness of the hard to get at places where moisture may be trapped and check them systematically.
With care though it can reduce your ownership costs significantly, but increases the amount of time spent in keeping your aircraft in good shape also in preparing for flight and packing away. Another case of the old truism that you get nothing for nothing.
Don't forget the comfort of cleaning/waxing and doing some other things on the plane when in a hangar. On covers: don't forget that they wear out too in a couple of years, depending on where you are located. Pricey stuff.
I think a hangar in which you can do maintenance, by a freelance engineer, is priceless.
You immediately save at least 2k on the Annual, simply by not using a "company".
You then save huge amounts on any avionics work. For example my TCAS install would have been something like £5k cheaper.
But you need to know the right people for that, be technically minded (to manage the work), and most people I know in the UK are not allowed to work in their hangars (myself included).
Only some "homebuilt" owners, and some farm strip based owners that I know, have "politically suitable" hangars.
One often reads of accounts from homebuilt/Annex-2 pilots paying incredibly small amounts for their regular maintenance, but actually the savings are largely due to either doing work themselves (time not accounted for) or using a freelancer - all possible only in a suitable hangar, though the ability to do the Annual yourself (i.e. working for free) is worth a lot too.
I have one aircraft in an old style hangar and another one in a private t-hangar. The latter is more than worth the money and extremely hard to find in Southern Germany (more hangars = more airplanes = more noise -> city counsel will not approve new hangars). I can do whatever I like in there and I've set it up as my "second home". I only wish it was heated! Note that a Part 145 maintenance shop is not technically allowed to perform maintenance outside their approved facility. Freelance IAs basically no longer exist under the EASA regime. I do everything myself in the hanger, only go to a 145 for the annual inspection but that is worth it. I find having a team of 15 mechanics in one room to be much more fruitful than working with a single mechanic. So much experience to be drawn from.
The common hangar has pros and cons. I discover new scratches on my aircraft about once a month. You don't get those often when the aircraft is parked outside. If you take care of the aircraft, it can sit outside but it needs good paint for that and you have to redo it every few years. The avionics might not like the humid conditions. My aircraft's paint is in 2/10 condition but it doesn't matter because of the hangar and so I can save those €13000 for a paint job.
It's like parking your car. I would only park my car on the street if there was no other way. However, I know someone driving the same car, bought at the same time. His parked on the street, mine always in the garage. No real difference in looks or maintenance costs.
My first CFI used to say: the bad thing about the Cessnas is that water enters the cabin from the top. The good thing about the Cessnas is that water flows out of the bottom again.
Note that a Part 145 maintenance shop is not technically allowed to perform maintenance outside their approved facility. Freelance IAs basically no longer exist under the EASA regime
You don't need a 145 firm unless operating under an AOC. Surely not in Germany?
You can do freelance maintenance if you use 1 man who is EASA66 (who does the actual work) and then he needs to call in another man who is Part M Subpart G (G?). This 2nd man cannot actually be "Part M" alone but the way is to appoint some family member(s) to the other posts, and he can then travel as a one-man operation, inspecting and signing off work. So you need 2 people, whereas under N-reg you need just the A&P/IA.
Two more aspects: hangarage becomes a lot more important for any aircraft with wooden parts, and also at any locations with a significant chance of hail, freezing rain and similar nasty weather phenomena.
By the way, can anyone recommend an inexpensive solution for a transportable quick-erect hangar? I'd suppose these may be available e.g. from military surplus, the question is - which country's military? :-)
I'm in my hangar for about as many of my waking hours as I am at home, and as I speak it has nine vehicles inside (motorcycles included), a workshop area and a kind of living room area too. Nothing too fancy but it works and nobody has a key except me. It took a while to get all that figured out, aided by management at US airports which views small airports as a civic benefit, equivalent to harbors for small privately owned boats. It means a lot to me - once your plane is in what amounts to an extension of your house, it can be very well cared for if you're so inclined. Happily, in my area the lack of heating or AC is not missed for most of the year and that's surely a simplification.
My hangar actually pays for itself because I can and do live in a smaller house, so I consider the hangar cost part of my housing expense, not part of the expense of aircraft ownership. There is also a dramatic saving in maintenance labor because I end up doing much of the work myself under FAA A&P supervision, and the A&Ps have not chosen to charge me much for their work over the last 10 years. I wouldn't own an aircraft otherwise. If you subtract most of the maintenance labor cost and all of the storage cost from your aircraft ownership cost, what's left? Parts, any component overhaul or repair station services, and not too much else. The fact that part of my 'home' is at the airport is just a benefit :-)
Re portable hangars, the traditional solution in the US is the Port-A-Port but they aren't really quick-erect and I don't suppose they have European representation. Worth pointing out though as they (or anything similar) aren't permanent buildings and the permissions are easier to get for that reason. That's one of the reasons people buy them.
I know this is an “elderly” thread but rather than start a new one….
Appreciating the previous comments, I would be very interested to hear what the thoughts are in respect of hangarage for a pressurized aircraft (Malibu, Meridian and the like). Does the fact the aircraft is pressurized mitigate the impact of the environment on the avionics etc?
