Cost of ownership
Matt Herron Jr.
change.
Anyone want to share their experience on the real cost of ownership of
a modern glass ship (aside from purchase price)? I got a ballpark
estimate from Costello Insurance for a $50K glider/trailer that ran
about $1450/year for insurance. What do you spend on maintenance,
inspections, taxes, etc? I am comparing this to a rent/borrow
situation, so the cost of flying (tows, retrieves, hotels, etc.) don't
count, but tie downs and things like that, do.
Thanks for any insights.
Matt (Jr.)
Martin Gregorie
When I sat down and did the sums a few years back (2003/4) here in the UK,
the numbers said 70 hours a year was the break point: below that it was
better to fly club gliders (my club has two Discii and a Peg 90) at
around £30/hour and above running a used glider in the ASW-19/20/Pegase
category was cheaper. That's assuming solo ownership. A two person
syndicate would obviously move the break point down to 35 hours.
To put UK numbers on this: I currently am sole owner and operator of an
H.201 Libelle. This year its cost me a bit under £2400 to operate. That
includes insurance, trailer parking on the field, annual inspection and
all normal operating costs including minor trailer repairs.
--
martin@ | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org |
kirk.stant
I'm sure others will bombard you with their cost analysis' and lots of
numbers - so I'll take a different tack. The cost is really not a
factor, in my opinion - you will spend as much as you have available
to fly. If it's on rentals, more money equals more flight time,
including checkouts at new locations, etc. If it's your own ship,
more money means more toys for the instrument panel, more trips to new
flying locations, contests, etc.
Unless you are retired and live in Minden, flight time is often
limited by available free time and suitable weather. If cost limits
flying time, become a commercial pilot and give rides, or a CFIG,
etc. It's doable.
In my opinion, the absolute best aspect of owning vs renting is being
able to setup your glider EXACTLY the way you want it, then go off for
3 - 5 hours at a time, not worrying about who has it next, and being
totally comfortable (or not, perhaps!) with all the neat gizmos in the
cockpit. Once you experience varios that work, GPS glide computers
that compute and don't lie, a comfortable chute, and a pee tube (!!!)
it's hard to go back to pattern bashing or twirlybirding in the local
rental beater. I find now that when my ship isn't available, I'll
take the low performance ships (K-13s, open cockpit 1-26) over rental
or club glass just for the retro pleasure of flying with no
functioning magic! I guess that makes me a bit of a snob
(glasshole?), but it does reduce competition for the nicer rentals/
club ships...
Next best is racing - not practical as a renter (perhaps as a club
member, especially in more enlightened countries than the good ol'
USA).
Bottom line - If you want to own - then buy what you can afford, make
it yours, then fly the devil out of it - whether its a Duster or a
Nimbus. You'll love it!
Kirk
66
Mike the Strike
wrote:
Which route you go depends very much on the available rental fleet
where you live and the club's attitude to flying. Many European clubs
have a lot of club ships available to their members that span the
whole spectrum from trainers to club class ships to modern racing
sailplanes. However, some clubs don't permit their ships to be flown
out of gliding range of the home field. Here in the USA, clubs
typically don't have such a wide variety of ships, but they can be
very cost-effective. (Our Tucson Soaring Club does not charge members
for the use of club ships - it's included in the monthly membership
fee - and we have several cross-country ships).
You will find that once you have your own ship, you will fly a lot
more. It's not unusual for owners to report that their flying hours
double with their own ship. Comparing costs isn't easy with this in
mind.
Insurance has typically been a half or more of the costs of ownership
- just double it as a first guess.
Mike
Andy
Hey Matt,
I know you can do the math, but I'll work it out here for
completeness.
Capital Cost: This is probably the biggest cost, depending on what
you want to assume. The bulk of this cost is the opportunity cost of
the money you tie up. If you assume 5% after tax for income then it's
$2500/year on a $50,000 glider. For a used glider I would assume it
holds it's value, or zero for depreciation. Beware of gliders coming
up on airframe limits or needing refinishing (this can cost $5-10,000,
or more). You may need to buy support equipment or instruments too.
Personal property or use tax: This varies considerably by state and
generally applies both to gliders and trailers. In California use tax
is basically a sales tax on non-retail sales. It is generally imposed
on the purchaser of tangible personal property that is used, consumed,
or stored in-state. Private party sales or brokered transactions are
normally subject to use tax. If the first use of the property occurs
in California, use tax may apply even if the purchaser is not a
resident of the state. In San Mateo County where you live the use tax
is 9.25%. The address on the FAA title/registration will rat you out
to the state taxing authorities. For more info see:
http://www.boe.ca.gov/sutax/faqtrans.htm
There is an exemption (or used to be) to paying the tax if the
purchase was for an aircraft that is not stored or flown in California
for the first six months. This means you need to take delivery out of
state and have receipts for tie-down or storage and all tows out of
state for the entire period. After that you can bring it into state
without paying tax. This may expose you to tax in the state where the
glider is stored, though it seems less frequent that this comes to
pass. What you do for trailer tags in the 6 months can be tricky. Try
not to land out.
Insurance: I pay a bit under $2000/yr for my 7 year old ASW-27, so
$1500/yr seems about right for a $50,000 glider.
Annual inspection. This seems to vary by type of certification. I pay
$300/yr for a standard certified aircraft. I have heard that
experimental can be less than $100/yr.
Maintenance: This is the big uncertainty. I assume $500/year, but it
can vary a lot. You may spend more than that in the first year or so
building up some spares, consumables, and maintenance tools.
If I add it all up it comes to $4100/year. An equivalent rental rate
is $55/hour. If you fly more than 75 hours per year it should be
cheaper than renting an equivalent glider. If you fly only 50 hours
ownership costs an extra $1400/yr. At 100 flight hours you save $1400/
year versus renting.
If you can find a way to make money related to your glider ownership
then some expenses may be deductible (if you need a glider for
Glideplan map testing, for instance). In this case you may be able to
reduce the total net cost through tax benefits.
9B
Andy
Oops - the total cost is $4600 per year so the breakeven is 83 hours
per year.
9B
Darryl Ramm
Matt -- In the broad SF Bay Area you have access to serious XC capable
ships via Williams Soaring (Duo, several ASW-24, ASW-27), BASA
(DG-1000S, DG-505, Pegase) or Silvarado Soaring (DG-505). You could
check with Soaring NV on their glider availability for solo XC use out
of Minden, they are all well equipped XC machines. Most of these are
well equipped for XC soaring, all belong to clubs or FBOs that
encourage XC use of their gliders and are several place gliders in the
Sierras at times or allowing safaris' and trips with their glider.
This is a much better access to rental XC gliders than many places in
the USA, if just getting to the locations and the club/FBO rules will
work for you. You also can easily find all the other costs such as tie-
down fees etc. You currenty use/share a Ventus so finding current
ownership costs can't be hard. For rental/club gliders you will have
to work out if their location or usage rules etc. are convenient for
you. This is likely to be the first order problem, it is just utterly
pointless worrying about anything else unless you know you actually
have a rental/club option that would work. Alternately ask around and
you might find people interested in a few way share on a glider.
The value of ownership is greatly increased freedom to fly when/
wherever and have the ship set up exactly as I like. I don't know how
to exactly value those but they are so high on my list that I did not
want to calculate any actual costs and and show any other choice was a
good one :-)
Darryl
Andy
term depending on where you keep you glider when you are flying and
off season. I paid $85/month to keep my trailer in a hangar year-
round. These days I keep my glider at home and tie down assembled at
the airport on soaring weekends. That's probably $100 per year of
tiedown fees and $400 in incremental fuel versus driving without a
trailer (long drive for me). A trailer tiedown at Minden is $50/month
or so, or about the same depending on whether you bring the glider
home in the off-season.
Now the breakeven is 93 hours per year. If you fly only 50 hours per
year you are paying an extra $2300 per year to own versus rent.
9B
tienshanman
Bruce
If what you want to do is have fun flying then - buy the best
performance you can afford.
That means you still have to have the money to fly.
There is a financial opportunity cost to owning a glider, sure. It is
even reasonably easy to work out. What is not easy to work out is the
opportunity cost of :
Not being able to get the XC ship on the day you have available and the
weather is booming - but you did not get to book it in time.
Not being familiar with the rental set up in the glider so you don't go
anywhere.
Not having the trailer sorted out - on your car, so retrieves are
nightmarish...
There are all sorts of other motivations for me -
Having my own glider works for me - I am much more confident and
prepared to fly and explore with my own glider.
You get to tow her to interesting places and fly.
You get to have access to her whenever you have spare time , and get to
fly.
Basically you get to fly a lot more = partly because a lot of the costs
are fixed, so more flying is effectively at zero marginal cost.
Then you have the pleasure of ownership, or in the sailplane world
curatorship. SO for instance I have taken my first ship from a pretty
tired 30+ year old with steam age instruments and a mess of a trailer to
a pretty sorted out XC ship with nice instruments and sealing. The
investment in time, at my billable rate is a poor investment. The
improvement in my sanity is invaluable. And the best part is when you
pass ownership on you get the investment back. Number 1 (std Cirrus) is
currently getting refinished and mistress number 2 (Kestrel 19) is in
use. So yes I would do it again - in fact I did do it again...
Neither of them was particularly expensive. Which is another point = the
difference in performance over the last 10-15 years has been small.
Handling and ergonomics have improved, but a 20-30 year old ships
performance is a lot less difference than the price difference.
So - again - buy the best you can afford. The financial investment
should break even and the investment in life is invaluable.
Bruce
Paul Cordell
the same (or less) investment.
Martin Gregorie
> Basically you get to fly a lot more = partly because a lot of the costs
> are fixed, so more flying is effectively at zero marginal cost.
>
Especially if you're lucky enough to be on a winch site :-)
Matt Herron Jr.
perspectives as well. This year I spent a lot of time and money
renting ships from Soar Minden, Soaring NV, and Williams. over the
last two years I feel privileged to have flown a lot of nice ( and
some not so nice) gliders, including several K-21's, an ASW 24, an ASK
23, an LS-4, a Grob 103, a Discus CS, a Duo Discus, and an ASW 27b.
At the end of it all, I am left with mixed feelings.
It is great to have the luxury of trying out so many different birds.
And I much prefer to take someone else's glider to 27,500 ft as I did
in January at Soaring NV, rather than abusing my own. Additionally,
part of my motivation for renting was to be able to take friends and
family up, either for joy rides (see an amusing video of my daughter
going zero G: http://gallery.me.com/glideplan#100112 ) or perhaps XC
out of Minden with a power pilot friend who is soar-curious.
Most of the challenges with renting have been covered in the previous
posts. For me it really boils down to two things; equipment, and
scheduling. For the most part, the rentals I flew were in great
shape. I want to commend Williams Soaring in particular on this. But
I had my fair share of stuck varios, or misbehaving GPS units, or
gliders that were just under-equiped for serious cross country
flight. On the rare days you can steal away from family or work to
fly, a technical hitch is very frustrating.
Scheduling for me is the biggest hurdle. It's hard enough to get good
soaring weather and a day off to overlap. Overlay glider availability
on top of that, and the result is almost an empty set. I have
committed to renting gliders on marginal days because I had the
weekend blocked out to fly, had driven 5 hrs to get there, and
someone else wanted to rent the glider if I didn't. At the end of the
day I ended up feeling a lot poorer and yet vaguely unfulfilled.
Shared ownerships have some of the same problems. I have observed a
friend, who co-owns a glider with a great partner, give up designated
weekends again and again because of family, work, weather, etc. He
also watches the great weekends go by when he could get away, but
knows he doesn't have the glider. It is true that 1/2 time ownership
should give you plenty of flying hours, if only you could pick and
choose the hours you wanted.
To quote Joe Walsh; "I can't complain, but sometimes I still do". My
father (also Matt Herron) has a beautiful Ventus C which he lets me
fly as often as is possible, and for free! We have worked together to
tune the ship and optimize the instrumentation, so I know it well. It
is a capable and potent XC bird, and has the potential to do well in
the regional contests we both like to fly (the pilots are clearly the
limiting factor here...). But even this arrangement has drawbacks.
For one thing, even though we both share the love of flying, we rarely
get to fly in the air together. (Team flying regional competitions
comes close to this goal.) It would be nice to share some flights
together, like two hikers on a challenging trail with adventurous
stories to tell at the end of the day. Then logistics get in the
way. An extra three hours drive to pick up the glider from wherever
it is and take it to wherever I want to fly, then do the whole thing
in reverse.
Which brings me back to the topic of this thread; I want my own
glider. And given the excellent financial analysis done by several
posters, especially concerning the lost opportunity cost of the cash
tied up in the glider, I can't justify it on financial grounds. How
about needy, selfish, emotional grounds? Hmmm, also kind of a tough
sell. Oh well, a boy can dream, can't he?
Thanks for listening.
Matt (JR)
Uncle Fuzzy
> Thanks for all the information and some good philosophical
> perspectives as well. This year I spent a lot of time and money
> renting ships from Soar Minden, Soaring NV, and Williams. over the
> last two years I feel privileged to have flown a lot of nice ( and
> some not so nice) gliders, including several K-21's, an ASW 24, an ASK
> 23, an LS-4, a Grob 103, a Discus CS, a Duo Discus, and an ASW 27b.
> At the end of it all, I am left with mixed feelings.
>
> It is great to have the luxury of trying out so many different birds.
> And I much prefer to take someone else's glider to 27,500 ft as I did
> in January at Soaring NV, rather than abusing my own. Additionally,
> part of my motivation for renting was to be able to take friends and
> family up, either for joy rides (see an amusing video of my daughter
Get a glider. Maybe not a $50K+, 50/1 glider, but there are many 40/1
gliders out there for under $25k. It WILL be worth it. I have about
$20k in my glider. I spend nearly $3500 a year in insurance, tows,
and maintenance (mostly tows), and fly an average of 110 hours a
year. It's the best investment I've ever made, bar none.
T8
> It's the best investment I've ever made, bar none.
No, it's a capital expense... (and probably well worth it, yes).
-T8
Liam
>
> Personal property or use tax: This varies considerably by state and
> generally applies both to gliders and trailers. In California use tax
> is basically a sales tax on non-retail sales. It is generally imposed
> on the purchaser of tangible personal property that is used, consumed,
> or stored in-state. Private party sales or brokered transactions are
> normally subject to use tax. If the first use of the property occurs
> in California, use tax may apply even if the purchaser is not a
> resident of the state. In San Mateo County where you live the use tax
> is 9.25%. The address on the FAA title/registration will rat you out
> to the state taxing authorities. For more info see:
>
> http://www.boe.ca.gov/sutax/faqtrans.htm
>
I have in the past gotten out of paying use tax by arguing that a
glider does
not constitute an "aircraft" as defined in Reg 1610. Perhaps they're
getting more
strict now that the state is bankrupt.
Greg Arnold
Unless they have changed the law in the last couple of years, there is
no use tax in California on a used glider (as long as it does not have
an engine).
Bruce
As always people make the mistake of concentrating on the cost as
opposed to the value of things.
T8
Value is obvious to everyone in this thread. Merits no discussion.
Cost is a barrier issue of significant importance to many in the
sport. As such, it does merit discussion.
-T8
Guy
However, they will tag you for property tax. You will pay property
tax at the rate for the geographic location that you store your glider
at (or declare that you are storing it at). Each county has a
different rate.
Guy
Mark
I think I am glad I live in Oregon.
Mark
Eric Greenwell
snip
> Scheduling for me is the biggest hurdle. It's hard enough to get good
> soaring weather and a day off to overlap.
>
> It is true that 1/2 time ownership
> should give you plenty of flying hours, if only you could pick and
> choose the hours you wanted.
>
> glider. And given the excellent financial analysis done by several
> posters, especially concerning the lost opportunity cost of the cash
> tied up in the glider, I can't justify it on financial grounds. How
> about needy, selfish, emotional grounds? Hmmm, also kind of a tough
> sell. Oh well, a boy can dream, can't he?
It makes some things a lot easier, in several ways:
* you don't need to show up early or wait in a long line for a tow.
Just show up, rig, and go.
* you don't need to fly from an airport with a towplane, so you can
fly from a closer, more convenient airport.
* you don't need a day with widespread, predictable lift to go
cross-country, because you can cross blue holes, shadowed areas,
or recover from a bad guess about the lift with a few minutes of
motor operation.
* all the above make it easier to share th glider with a partner,
and still get in plenty of flying.
Owning a motorglider means more money to purchase the same soaring
performance, more maintenance, and higher insurance cost because of the
higher price. It also means more complexity for the pilot, and more
responsibility, because you are now the towpilot, too. You have to
decide if the ability to fly more and to explore more is worth the cost.
If you want to know more about owning and flying a motorglider, I
suggest starting with "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation",
downloaded from www.motorglider.org
--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
Greg Arnold
Eric Greenwell wrote:
>
> Owning a motorglider means more money to purchase the same soaring
> performance, more maintenance, and higher insurance cost because of the
> higher price. It also means more complexity for the pilot, and more
> responsibility, because you are now the towpilot, too. You have to
> decide if the ability to fly more and to explore more is worth the cost.
>
> If you want to know more about owning and flying a motorglider, I
> suggest starting with "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation",
> downloaded from www.motorglider.org
>
Eric:
Do you have any numbers for the annual maintenance cost on your '26E? I
wonder how that compares to the saving on tows.
Greg
Andy
The law appears to me to be ambiguous so my guess is it may be a
judgement call. Here is the exact language.
"“AIRCRAFT.” “Aircraft” means any contrivance designed for powered
navigation in the air, except a rocket or a missile. “Aircraft”
includes an airframe or a fuselage even without an engine."
Could it be less clear? Powered, but without an engine (and maybe
without wings). I guess they mean what was it originally DESIGNED to
do? Motor gliders are taxable I guess. I am really glad to hear that
any missiles I might want to buy won't be subject to tax. I can see
the headlines now: "California Tax Break for Terrorists!"
I can't find anywhere in the regulations that used sales are exempted.
It appears that the intent of the law is to collect taxes on new
property bought from out of state or from resellers not licensed to
collect sales tax, so it wouldn't surprise me if they don't go after
used sales. Just don't blame me if you get a tax bill.
9B
Darryl Ramm
The law seems clear to me. You do not pay California use tax on a pure
glider. My experience is people do not pay this, and they quote that
exact wording about powered navigation. Owning a motorglider - I pay
it. Since the use tax varies from county to county I paid it in the
lower cost county where the motorglider is stored/operated and not
where I live that was simple to prove to CA tax board with tie-down,
fuel and maintenance receipts.
In California you do pay county propery tax however on a pure glider.
Again in my case that is paid to Colusa county where the glider is
kept. Not the slightly higher rate county where I live. And I much
prefer it goes to Colusa county becasue they use aviation property tax
income to fund local airports. Even if I don't fly from those airports
I like seeing aviation related tax get used for that.
Darryl
Andy
> I can't find anywhere in the regulations that used sales are exempted.
> It appears that the intent of the law is to collect taxes on new
> property bought from out of state or from resellers not licensed to
> collect sales tax, so it wouldn't surprise me if they don't go after
> used sales. Just don't blame me if you get a tax bill.
>
> 9B
After a little research - apparently they will go after you for tax on
used property transactions. Apparently I was mistaken on the out of
state time limit. It used to be 90 days, it was recently changed to 12
months. If you bring an aircraft into the state within 12 months of
purchase you are subject to use tax. There is consideration about
location > 50% of the time for cars, but I can't find the original
relevant source regarding aircraft.
The tax rate is nearly 10% so it's not a small matter to be concerned
about.
9B
Greg Arnold
>
> The law appears to me to be ambiguous so my guess is it may be a
> judgement call. Here is the exact language.
>
> "�AIRCRAFT.� �Aircraft� means any contrivance designed for powered
> navigation in the air, except a rocket or a missile. �Aircraft�
> includes an airframe or a fuselage even without an engine."
>
> Could it be less clear? Powered, but without an engine (and maybe
> without wings). I guess they mean what was it originally DESIGNED to
> do? Motor gliders are taxable I guess. I am really glad to hear that
> any missiles I might want to buy won't be subject to tax. I can see
> the headlines now: "California Tax Break for Terrorists!"
>
> I can't find anywhere in the regulations that used sales are exempted.
> It appears that the intent of the law is to collect taxes on new
> property bought from out of state or from resellers not licensed to
> collect sales tax, so it wouldn't surprise me if they don't go after
> used sales. Just don't blame me if you get a tax bill.
>
> 9B
California Revenue and Taxation Code section 6274 says:
"Aircraft" means any contrivance designed for powered navigation in the
air except a rocket or missile.
This language is at
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=rtc&group=06001-07000&file=6271-6277
The second sentence you quote is included in the regulations, but not in
the statute. The regulations cannot expand the scope of the statute. I
believe the second sentence just means you can't escape tax by removing
the engine from a powered plane.
I have bought 4 used non-powered gliders in California, and have never
heard anything from the state about use tax.
Darryl Ramm
Eric discusses this a bit in his article he linked to.
Without quoting numbers I can say that a motorglider, at least
anything relatively new and expensive, is just not even something to
consider for saving costs on tows. Avoiding tow cost is just not a
good justification for buying a motorglider. The maintenance costs,
depreciation, capital expense are all much more than just buying a
conventional glider and using a local tow services.
With a few year old 26E I had maintenance costs this season over
$2,000 including new oil pump, replacement drive belt and some other
bits and pieces. I'll have a bill for a few $k to deal with current
issues. You can't even think of a typical motorglider engine in the
same light you think of the Lycoming or Continental doing service in a
tow plane. All the different motorglider engines have their own
issues. The electrics will swap battery issues for engine issues, will
be interesting to see the difference in long term costs there. And new
motorglider depreciation can be scary - they will likely suffer
significant early depreciation based on engine hours (think thousands
of dollars per engine hour). So you really ought to make sure you want
it especially if you buy a new one.
(when it's working) the motorglider shines with flexibility and
convenience and ground/retrieve crew avoidance, not tow plane
avoidance. It depends on the costs and situation but at times it is
more convenient, cheaper and faster (e.g. long tows behind a Pawnee
are faster) to use a local towplane than to self launch a motorglider,
but just have the engine there if needed for a self retrieve.
Darryl
Eric Greenwell
>
> Eric Greenwell wrote:
>>
>> Owning a motorglider means more money to purchase the same soaring
>> performance, more maintenance, and higher insurance cost because of
>> the higher price. It also means more complexity for the pilot, and
>> more responsibility, because you are now the towpilot, too. You have
>> to decide if the ability to fly more and to explore more is worth the
>> cost.
>>
>> If you want to know more about owning and flying a motorglider, I
>> suggest starting with "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane
>> Operation", downloaded from www.motorglider.org
>>
> I wonder how that compares to the saving on tows.
as any glider, because the vibration from the Wankel rotary motor is so
small it doesn't cause any problems.
The annual is more expensive than a towed glider because of the
propulsion system. My cost for the annual is low because of special
circumstances, so asking your mechanic, or someone like Rex Mayes (who
does a lot of 26 E's), will provide a better number.
Routine maintenance is very small:
* New batteries every 3 or 4 years: ~$100 plus installation (owner
can do it)
* If you taxi a lot, a new main tire every 3 or 4 years: ~$100 plus
installation (owner can do it)
* New coolant hoses every 5 years: ~$150 for the hoses and new
antifreeze, 1 or 2 hours shop time, plus removing/replacing the
engine (2 hours total). Usually done when the engine has to be
removed for other reasons.
* the carburettor might need tuning every few years.
The major maintenance costs will be "black swans" - unexpected events.
I've owned my glider for 15 seasons. It now has 3000 hours airframe, and
147 hours engine. Over the years, replacements include the fan (AD) and
muffler (AD), both of which were early "new model" problems. Also
replaced were the propeller extension motor when I suspected it was
getting noisy, but it was probably OK. The water pump was replaced
preemptively, just because it had 130 hours and the engine was out for
other reasons. My cost doesn't mean much, because the parts were a lot
cheaper when the $ was stronger, and I do most of the work with the aid
of a friendly mechanic. Ask Rex about current costs.
Still, my major costs due to the propulsion system are the cost of
buying it (about $30,000) and the cost of insuring that extra purchase
price. At 5% interest, the "opportunity cost" is $1500 year; the extra
insurance cost is about $500, for a total extra yearly cost of $2000.
My major savings are tow costs, retrieve costs, and travel costs. A
2000' AGL launch takes less than 0.5 gallons of 100LL, so 50 flights a
year x $40 launch = $2000 saved. Without the motor, I'd land out about
10 times a year, so guessing at $100 average for tow and trailer
retrieves = $1000. That's $3000 avoided costs.
But wait, there's more: I can fly from the airport that's 4 miles away
instead of driving 110 miles to the nearest towplane. That ability is
almost priceless, but let's say for a weekend (2 flights) I avoid 4
hours and 220 miles of driving, and a night in a cheap motel: $30 gas +
$40 motel = $35/flight; times 50 flights = $1750.
So for me, I avoid $2000 (tows) + $1000 (retrieves) + $1750 (driving,
motels) = $4750. Net of the extra ownership costs ($3500) = $1250. After
15 years x $1250 = $18,750, I'm way ahead of the game, but a major
"black swan" event would change that.
Your mileage (literally and figuratively) will definitely vary, so run
the numbers to get an idea of your cost. Once you have the dollars, you
can begin considering if the cost and complexity are worth the
additional amount and quality of the flying you'll get.
One more thing: this is the 5th glider I've owned, by far the most
expensive to buy, but my wife thinks it's the very best one ever,
because I always get home!
--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "Transponders in Sailplanes" http://tinyurl.com/y739x4
* Sections on Mode S, TPAS, ADS-B, Flarm, more
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org
Eric Greenwell
> And new
> motorglider depreciation can be scary - they will likely suffer
> significant early depreciation based on engine hours (think thousands
> of dollars per engine hour). So you really ought to make sure you want
> it especially if you buy a new one.
>
excessive for motor-based depreciation. Would pilots really think a
$200,000, 3 year old glider with 10 hours on the engine is the same
value as an $150,000, 3 year old glider, identical except for the 35
hours on the engine?
This might be a good time to remind everyone a DG 400 or PIK 20 E will
be lot cheaper than a new (or newish) ASH 26 E or DG 800, and that there
are new self-launchers that cost about what a used DG 400 costs. Both
Apis and Silent have several models, including electrics.
--
Eric Greenwell - Washington State, USA
* Change "netto" to "net" to email me directly
* "A Guide to Self-launching Sailplane Operation" at www.motorglider.org
Darryl Ramm
Working out depreciation costs are difficult. Afterall most sales are
into a very small specialized market and values are whatever you can
close a deal for and hard to keep track of. An expensive new
motorglider toy might _appreciate_ if there is demand (anybody got an
ASH-31Mi handy?). However since many of these mototgliders are very
fussy to misshandling and engine maintenance issues I personally would
devalue used motorgliders a lot if they had relatively high hours or
something did not give me warm fuzzies about the previous owner(s) or
people who maintained them. And I'd have no problem knocking of $k's
per hour for the first few hours on a new high-end motorglider. I've
looked at for people where I recommend walking away on a $150k glider
because of dubious issues. Depreciated to next to not worth the
hassle, well maybe some other sucker pays what is being asked.
Oh and the $30k premium for an engine is not for a new ASH-26E/31Mi.
You need to compare current pricing for the the ASG-29/18m to the
ASH-31Mi/18m price and the difference is more significant. The old
price delta on a 26/26E was around EUR 30k, that is about $45k now,
but the base cost is also out of date and motorgliders often get
configured with options like long range tanks etc. that add some more
costs. Then buying an ASH-26 (non-motorglider) I assume you are paying
extra costs for a motorglider prepared fueslage that would not
encumber an ASG-29, besides people would buy the more competitive 29
over a 26 (non-motor) although maybe the 31 without motor might be fun
in open-class. But as you say there are other lower costs options.
Darryl
Andy
>...Without the motor, I'd land out about
> 10 times a year, so guessing at $100 average for tow and trailer
> retrieves = $1000.
You are a braver man than I am Eric. I've landed out once since 2003
and that was an airport - but without a motor I probably fly
differently when things get dodgy. I don't have a soaring operation
close to home - but the air is generally stable around the SF Bay so
I'd have relocate by ground or air either way. As you said -
everyone's mileage varies.
Aside from the absolute capital cost my main issue is I just don't
want to do all the additional fiddling and troubleshooting that a
motor demands - at least not while my free time is in short supply. I
used to work with my Dad on his Nimbus 3DM and we had more mechanical
gremlins ground us for days on end than I'd care to recall. Maybe
after a few seasons it all sorts itself out but I see lots of guys at
the airport heads down in the engine bay.
Do you think motorgliders are owned disproportionately by pilots who
are fully or semi-retired? That is my casual observation, but I don't
know if it's true in general. If true it could be simply that that's
where the money is or it could be that's when the extra time comes
available.
9B
Eric Greenwell
> On Oct 27, 8:37 pm, Eric Greenwell <flyguy...@verizon.netto> wrote:
>
>> ...Without the motor, I'd land out about
>> 10 times a year, so guessing at $100 average for tow and trailer
>> retrieves = $1000.
>>
>
> You are a braver man than I am Eric. I've landed out once since 2003
> and that was an airport - but without a motor I probably fly
> differently when things get dodgy.
within reach of an airport, even with the motorglider. During my 50 or
so flights each year, I'll typically restart the motor about 10 times,
and maybe only one will be over a field instead of an airport.
> I don't have a soaring operation
> close to home - but the air is generally stable around the SF Bay so
> I'd have relocate by ground or air either way. As you said -
> everyone's mileage varies.
>
> Aside from the absolute capital cost my main issue is I just don't
> want to do all the additional fiddling and troubleshooting that a
> motor demands - at least not while my free time is in short supply. I
> used to work with my Dad on his Nimbus 3DM and we had more mechanical
> gremlins ground us for days on end than I'd care to recall. Maybe
> after a few seasons it all sorts itself out but I see lots of guys at
> the airport heads down in the engine bay.
>
interfered with flying, as I've always been able to do maintenance
during unflyable periods. When I flew towed gliders, I was out of luck
many times, when the towplane was down, or a tow pilot couldn't be
scheduled.
> Do you think motorgliders are owned disproportionately by pilots who
> are fully or semi-retired? That is my casual observation, but I don't
> know if it's true in general.
easier to find days with good soaring! I'm hoping the electric powered
gliders will reduce the fiddling to nearly zero, and attract pilots that
are put off by the motor maintenance and more complex operation of the
gas powered gliders.
> If true it could be simply that that's
> where the money is or it could be that's when the extra time comes
> available.
>
younger pilot, for obvious reasons, and will have the time to fully
utilize the glider. That makes it a better value.