Thanks keven it does . Don
The problem with renting is the ability to use the plane overnight. After getting my license, I quickly found out that rentals are a joke for travel. The best thing about owning is going some place with the plane and staying there for a week or two. The minimum hours per day charges on rentals were a turn-off. That said, cleaning, maintenance down time, etc. didn’t look attractive either. So, I went fractional with AirShares. At first the costs looked outrageous. Then I started running numbers like you just did. All of a sudden it didn’t look so bad. Any way you slice it, this is one very expensive hobby. One of my favorite quotes comes from a COPA post. I don’t remember who but he said:
“What I like most about flying are all of the nice formerly wealthy people I meet.”
I agree with you. For me, I don’t do too many overnight trips so rental isn’t such a bad option–provided the planes aren’t always booked up far in advance–now that WVFC has some newer aircraft. Four years ago their fleet contained a lot of rattletraps and virtually no new planes. Now they have 4 Cirri, a 182T, a couple of Archer IIIs, and a number of 172SPs.
I tried a fractional arrangement when there was one at PAO but the insurance was inadequate for my needs and at the time the plane’s availability was even worse than the flying club (and their SR20 was a slug–I could easily outpace it in my 260se/stol)! Still I think the concept is a very good one and I might consider it again.
The other problem with renting is reliability. How many times have we all been in club planes when the VOR suddenly stops working (or the mode C inop in the bay area!).
When you own 100% of the plane, you know exactly how the pilot of the last flight treated the engine, greased (or bonked) the landing, brought it in for inspections, etc.
If you fly real IFR, these are serious issues.
I am surprised the SR20 was slower although I would not have expected it to be much faster either. I would consider the SR20 more comfortable with better avionics and ergonomics. I would consider the 260se to be fewer squawks and much more flexible. In many way I would like to have two planes - Adam A500 and 260SE. Since I only get a fraction of one I chose the SR22. My personal opinion is that Peterson has the most loyal owners I have ever known.
As for fractionals, the key is having a large fleet so one plane being down for maintenance is a minor hit. Hence my happiness with AirShares.
Locally, the choice in newer rental planes is limited. There are a reasonable number of 127R models from around 2000. There is a nice Archer. THere is at least one nice 182. There may be other nice planes but I don’t know of them. I looked for SR22s but could only find SR20s and I think they are now fractionally owned. One problem with renting is that the tanks are always full. If I plan ahead I can request “to the tabs” which is nice. I’m not the lightest guy and 4 adults don’t go well with full fuel in an SR22.
It was just that particular SR20–146-148 was about the best it could do flat out. I have flown another SR20 that made pre-2003 book speeds and was 6-8 kt faster than an average 260se.
Yes, I agree. But depending on the market it could take several years for the curve to change. But, yes the curve should shallow out each year
Mason
From the replies it seems the all in cost of single ownership or frac. ownership of an SR20 is apx 180/hr (based on apx 200hours).
Wonder what experiences people have had with partnerships. How do they handle insurance and joint liability?
In reply to:
Wonder what experiences people have had with partnerships. How do they handle insurance and joint liability?
We charge $50 an hour (hobbs) to cover gas, oil (including changes), Sandel bulb, and TBOs. Everything else is split equally. The insurance is for the plane and the named pilots (every pilot has the same coverage).
Do you have any way to protect yourself if one pilot is involved in accident that results in a judgement that is greater than your insurance. My aviation lawyer said there was no way around this problem.
In reply to:
Do you have any way to protect yourself if one pilot is involved in accident that results in a judgement that is greater than your insurance.
Liability is a concept that varies from state to state. Thus what may be true in California may be decided differently in Florida.
That being said, you plane should be held in a corp or LLC. The purpose is to limit your liability to the value of the aircraft or its’ insurance. Normally, the pilot flying the plane gets sued too. Unless the non-pilot did something to contribute to the accident, your liability will be limited as above.
If no corp or LLC, the aircraft owners get sued.
If you are going to fly, you need to understand pilot skills, and ownership rights and responsibilities as well.
Running a resturant is more than just knowing how to cook.
P.S. Don’t loan your kids the car either.
P.P.S. I doubt that there are any forum members who are adaquately covered by 1 million smooth.
A million doesn’t go as far as it used to.
In reply to:
Do you have any way to protect yourself if one pilot is involved in accident that results in a judgement that is greater than your insurance.
We own the plane under an LLC which pays all of the expenses, and which we pay into for the use of the plane. According to our lawyer this will help protect the non flying partner.
Do you know, if a pilot is sued, if a family limited partnership can successfully
protect assets?
In reply to:
Do you know, if a pilot is sued, if a family limited partnership can successfully
protect assets?
No, not without reading through it. Generally, any form of “partnership” implies sharing of benefits and liabilities.
Look for a tool that limits liability like a Limited Liability Company = LLC
Better yet, don’t fly a plane for which you have not had a check out = talk to your attorney.
It only cost a little bit to solve a problem before it happens. It cost a lot more to get you out of a problem after it happens
The reason I do not own a plane in a partnership is liability.
-
My attorney says an LLC or Corp. will not protect you if the plane causes serious damage to a person. The other side will look for the deepest pockets, no matter who was flying. There a several arguments they will use. The most basic is that as an officer of the LLC you were negligent in letting the pilot who caused the accident fly the plane. There seems to be no real reason to have an LLC.
-
The attorney goes on to state that buying adequate insurance is what you need to do.
-
I can not find other pilots who want $3M smooth. Attorney indicates this is what will stop the seriously injured (person or estate) from going after you.
-
I have also been told that a well worded release signed by passengers and their spouses will be of significant help. This of course does nothing about injured on the ground - but that is a much smaller risk that you can control to some degree.
If I could find an experienced Calif. aviation attorney with another opinion I would look for an SR2x partner.
Lawrence:
IMHO you should get an opinion from another attorney about the merits of an LLC. What your attorney is telling you is the opposite of how I have been advised.
Also, a release signed by the passengers is not of much value because it does not keep the family of the injured party from suing you, and the passenger cannot waive their right to do so.
Jim
CA attorneys speak of piercing the Corporate Veil which is very easy to do in CA at least, if you do not own the aircraft within a “real operating company”. If the company / LLC is set up and used primarily to own and operate the aircraft then even incidental business will not protect your. I am not an attorney; however I have received the same advice from more than one attorney.
DO not see how an LLC can totally protect - perhaps it can help. You are right that a release must be signed by a spouse to be of use.
In reply to:
DO not see how an LLC can totally protect
You are right. an LLC or a Corp can not totally protect you.
And, by the way, nor do condoms, flu shots, or instrument ratings protect you with any absolute certainty, but they go a long way, if you use them right.
If you really do not see how a corp or LLC can protect you, you need to not fly until you can see. Owning an airplane is more than flying. It’s also about taking responsibility to protect your family and that means understanding the basics of maintanence, insurance, and ownership forms, and that includes tax and liability issues.
There is much information available on the web on all of these subjects.
We can never eliminate risk, but we can manage and influence it.
Bob’s view on LLC’s is exactly what I have been told in CA. If the main purpose of the LLC is liability protection, rather than business operations, you have very thin protection, if any. This is also true of LLC’s and incorporation in general.
The legislature created these entities to aid real revenue generating businesses not individuals. If they really worked why would we need liability insurance?