Antonio wrote:
I’ll also throw an alternative to airplane ownership: mid/long-term lease/rental
This actually is not a bad option, but rare in Europe. I am fiscally at peace with my Warrior (you can pull it apart and sideways and put it back together for relatively modest maintenance investment), but not sure I have the fiscal fortitude these days for a higher performance type. However, it would be nice to enter a three or six month lease in a HP type to cover a lot of territory and use up some holiday accrual.
In the USA these ads appear in Controller for HP types, but they are not clear on what the lessor is responsible for? I would assume they are responsible for maintenance and insurance, and the lessee covers hangarage, airport, airways charges and fuel/oil?
While $4k a month may be a bit rich (suspect you can offer less), the aircraft in this ad is probably worth $350k plus.
RobertL18C wrote:
In the USA these ads appear in Controller for HP types, but they are not clear on what the lessor is responsible for? I would assume they are responsible for maintenance and insurance, and the lessee covers hangarage, airport, airways charges and fuel/oil?While $4k a month may be a bit rich (suspect you can offer less), the aircraft in this ad is probably worth $350k plus.
That’s an interesting one and I wonder what the $4k/month buy you here. Should give the seller a call to find out.
You could go for a Grumman Goose or Albatros, and live inside it, both problems solved at once !!!!
WingsWaterAndWheels wrote:
You could go for a Grumman Goose or Albatros, and live inside it, both problems solved at once
Just not so easy with wife and kids and school and public authorities 
But indeed something for the time thereafter 
Thanks everyone, it made a much longer thread than I expected.
I guess flying wise, paying 1k €/month in a rent or a loan doesn’t make a difference.
My instinct told me the money put in a plane would need to be borrowed for the real estate purchase. But it isn’t so bad.
It is more a matter of middle-term :
I decided years ago I wouldn’t be an avgeek who would put all his time and money in aviation
One can’t have it all in life, and shall decide of his/her priorities ! It is a personal, moral question.
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/247658/pope-francis-asks-society-which-it-values-more-children-or-money
Jujupilote wrote:
I decided years ago I wouldn’t be an avgeek who would put all his time and money in aviation
And you don’t have to. But of course it involves dedication and time and money. But if your wife is not excited about that idea, I would not buy a plane. You’ll end up with one of both
By the way: nearly all of my kids absolutely love flying! Only one gets a bad vertigo, and preferred to stay on the ground, but he recently stated that he wants to “train” on it now to get rid of it.
So never say never, and it may be possible even with kids and family and house, but it’s not easy.
Jujupilote wrote:
One can’t have it all in life, and shall decide of his/her priorities ! It is a personal, moral question.
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/247658/pope-francis-asks-society-which-it-values-more-children-or-money
Yes but it is beyond a moral matter. It is probably the single biggest practical problem our “advanced” society is facing in t he mid-term. The social-economical system will not support the disproportionate amount of elderly vs productive people as a direct consequence of the low birth rate. The ramifications of this problem are plentifold.
IN general, the solution is “to have more kids” and “spend more resources with them”
The EuroGA version is : "have kids, fly them to places! "
It’s not a joke: the perspective GA travel affords them is, in my view, a very valuable gift for the rest of their lives (effort, discipline, other places, comfort zones, changes of plans, ineractions….you name it!) .
How do those of you in EuroGA whose parents flew GA recall it?
It’s a very complex decision indeed.
People with kids follow a very different path in life compared to people without kids. And the two sorts don’t mix very much
Jujupilote wrote:
It is a personal, moral question.
It’s personal – but I don’t think it’s a moral question. It’s an attitude question!
I’ve seen great mothers and fathers who for various reasons (job, illness, taking care of their parents, etc.) could only spend very little time with their kids and I have seen horrible mothers and fathers that (in some cases unfortunately) spent a lot of time with the kids.
I’d argue that the weekend trailer park at the local glider club is not the worst place for children to grow up…
Jujupilote wrote:
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/247658/pope-francis-asks-society-which-it-values-more-children-or-money
Right question from the wrong person: Last time I checked his organization had a clear policy that money is more important than kids and therefore is one of the very few employers in the world that actively forbids its executives to have kids (but not to take money).
Don’t know if it exits in English, but in Germany we have the saying that you should not throw bricks if you live in a glass house…
Catholic church matters moved to the usual place
