tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post4558262938864118341..comments2024-01-25T19:59:19.744-05:00Comments on COPA Flight 8 Ottawa: Aviation Trends and ExpectationsMichael Shawhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17881160865679740901noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-57640304844245090522008-07-15T10:15:00.000-04:002008-07-15T10:15:00.000-04:00Terry:You bring up an interesting point with your ...Terry:<BR/><BR/>You bring up an interesting point with your comment: "In terms of fuel costs, it's still the lowest cost of owning and operating an aircraft."<BR/><BR/>Everyone I talk to lately is talking about avgas costs, which in checking my records, were $1.35 per litre two years ago versus $1.75 today (at Carp). This is only a 23% increase, nothing like the 100% increase that US pilots have seen, due to the additive effects of their falling dollar.<BR/><BR/>I ran some numbers to compare the costs of operating two typical GA aircraft, a C-150 and SR22 between 2006 and 2008 to see what the difference in operating costs for a 100 hr year are.<BR/><BR/>In 2006 a C-150 would have typically cost $124.89 per hour, whereas today it would be $134.61, which is a change of only 7%.<BR/><BR/>In 2006 an SR22 which typically burns 17 US gph, would have cost $512.60 per hour, whereas today it would be $539.62, which is a change of only 5%.<BR/><BR/>In the case of the SR22 the fuel cost is currently (2008) $112.60 per hour which is just 20% of the cost of running the plane on a 100 hr year.<BR/><BR/>In the case of the SR22 avgas would have to get to $6.63 per litre to be half the running cost on a 100 hour year, provided other items (maintenance, parts, insurance) stayed at 2008 levels.<BR/><BR/>So you are quite right - it isn't the most expensive item here in 2008.Adam Hunthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02524937335927976607noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6429311486394377221.post-79197252491285246202008-07-09T12:16:00.000-04:002008-07-09T12:16:00.000-04:00It's an interesting discussion, both on the fuel c...It's an interesting discussion, both on the fuel cost side and the electric side.<BR/>In terms of fuel costs, it's still the lowest cost of owning and operating an aircraft. Also, with the fuel costs it's still cheaper to run my plane that it is to run my truck on similar trips. Granted I fly a very efficient plane (as 50 year old planes go) and drive a very large truck. There is probably a point at which I'll stop flying, but it'll be because to overall cost is too much or TC decides that I shouldn't be flying anymore.<BR/>In terms of electric, that option makes a big assumption, that buying a new plane is possible. To change planes I'd have to sell my current plane for probably a $30K loss and then be able to buy a new plane for five times as much. Isn't going to happen. The only real option would be to change the power plant on my existing airframe, but that's not too practical either. The only remote option that exists today is diesel, which is not STC'd for my plane (and never will be, there are too few of them around) and it would cost in the range of $60+K to have installed. I can buy a lot of Avgas for $60K, and I can buy even more for the $120K that is being talked about as the option for electric.<BR/>Another point is that I don't see much value in a plane that only has a 400Lb useful load. It might be fine for me to bash around the patch alone, but I'd never be able to take any but my smallest friends along for the ride.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com