turboplanner Posted November 4, 2011 Posted November 4, 2011 Turbo: you left out the interest costs/revenues on your planes. assuming you lease or pay cash and earn it from the bank if you fly a Jabiru I know it's difficult, but way down on line ten I said: "The full spreadsheet would include a lot more data than this."
Guernsey Posted November 5, 2011 Posted November 5, 2011 It would be lighter too. It would also be faster, better for rough strips and make a good tail wheel additional trainer at any Flying School. Alan. 1
facthunter Posted November 5, 2011 Posted November 5, 2011 But as a tailwheel it would cost more to insure, and be more likely to be damaged. On a purely cold money making venture the Tricycle would be the one to use. If 10% fly of pilots tailwheel that would be about all. The one at Rutherford is flying constantly I believe. That is the first thing to happen to make money, Keep the hours up reduces your average hourly cost. They don't make a tailwheel and did not make a T/W version of the 150/152. Weren't they all Texas Taildraggers and not a factory mod? Nev 1
fly_tornado Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 I know it's difficult, but way down on line ten I said: "The full spreadsheet would include a lot more data than this." I ran it through a loan calculator and a $166000 loan over 5 years @ 12% is $55500 The $80000 Jab is $26700 A saving of over $28800
David Isaac Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 .... They don't make a tail wheel and did not make a T/W version of the 150/152. Weren't they all Texas Taildraggers and not a factory mod? Nev Correct Nev, the Texas taildragger was a modification and many also fitted the 0-320 to them as part of the STC. There were problems though with the conversion in the models with the swept back tail in that rudder effectiveness was not as good as it should have been. I was told (not sure of the reliability) that the C150 A & B and so on models with the old style upright fin were better to convert.I would reckon that the Texas tail dragger with 150HP 0-320 would be an excellent little short field performer.
Guernsey Posted November 6, 2011 Posted November 6, 2011 They certainly keep busy at Aldinga in SA with their fleet of Tail Draggers. There are some areas where there are no TW aircraft for miles so there could be a distinct advantage for a Flying School to have at least one on the line. Alan.
ExJourno Posted May 22, 2013 Posted May 22, 2013 What is the price of 162 here in oz taxes paid?And which Jab do we compare? They were doing a school spec thats certified for $60k brand new J160 with steam gauges and a 22oo 4 cylinder. So $70k with a zero timed engine at 1000hrs and change left over. (cheaper to rebuild than 6) Any figures for 162? Phil Advertisements for C162 range from AUD$150,000 to $160,000. Theres a dealer in either NSW or Vic. I can't recall which. The $60,000 jab - you sure that wasn't the J120?
seb7701 Posted May 22, 2013 Posted May 22, 2013 For the price of a skycatcher, but I am guessing a Tecnam would be on the cards too and for similar money and if you then compared a Jab to a Tecnam, well....let just say that there wouldn't be much indecision on my part.....
facthunter Posted May 22, 2013 Posted May 22, 2013 I think the comparison is hard to make. They really are very different aircraft . A good trainer it the RAAus category is hard to produce as it is limited by all up weight considerations . The Brumby has to be included as a consideration too, but the artificial weight limit kicks in there too. Both the last TWO have engine advantages. They are ALL acceptable trainers from strength and flight characteristics , and repairability. Many others have rather weak undercarriages or no nosewheel steering. Not good features of a training aircraft 1
Yenn Posted May 23, 2013 Posted May 23, 2013 The background of Jabiru was cane harvesting machinery. Rod and his then partner both worked in Cairns on cane machinery and then got shifted to Bundy. Its a good job that they built the Jab as it was the start of a whole new way of flying. On the coast we get alot of salt air and there are several beaches used regularly for landing. How does a spam can stand up to the salt? As far as engine performance I hope the sktcatcher is better than the C150. I flew one the other day and it was climbing at about 300' per minute. Had to do a practice forced landing and the instructor had more faith than I did. I was down below the tree tops and wondering which way to turn to find a gap. 1
dazza 38 Posted May 23, 2013 Posted May 23, 2013 If I had to choose between a brand new Skycatcher and a Brand new Jabiru. I would choose the Jabby 230. And I would have around Sixty thousand dollars left over.
mAgNeToDrOp Posted May 23, 2013 Posted May 23, 2013 218 kg useful load on the cessna, doesn't leave much unless you're one of the 75 kg average human beings....
Keenaviator Posted May 23, 2013 Posted May 23, 2013 Jabiru J120, around $60,000. Payload around 240kg.
David Isaac Posted May 23, 2013 Posted May 23, 2013 You will need the 60k for the spare engines ... 1 1
Keenaviator Posted May 23, 2013 Posted May 23, 2013 You will need the 60k for the spare engines ... Nice Javelin David :) Regards, Laurie
David Isaac Posted May 23, 2013 Posted May 23, 2013 Nice Javelin David :)Regards, Laurie Yep, good pick up Laurie, I call it my aerial trail bike ... a load of fun to fly (when its flying LOL)
coljones Posted May 23, 2013 Posted May 23, 2013 You will need the 60k for the spare engines ... Is this the "Volvo Driver" speaking? 1
bexrbetter Posted May 23, 2013 Posted May 23, 2013 A bit old but numbers from Jabiru themselves for 6 cyl engine last yearTotal Overhaul $5500 plus estimate parts - $2700 (depending whats required) . I just can't believe the aviation industry. There's not a scrap of guilt for what I am about to do to them, they have bought it on themselves. 1
seb7701 Posted May 23, 2013 Posted May 23, 2013 There was no more discouraging experience than my recent flight in a C150, in particularly due to the lack of climb performance! I must have been spoiled with these ultralight thingys!
facthunter Posted May 23, 2013 Posted May 23, 2013 With two "not small" people they don't get up quickly. They have been around since the 50's which is a long time especially when many of them are not hangared. When they were built I doubt anyone would have thought they would last that long. Nev
David Isaac Posted May 23, 2013 Posted May 23, 2013 Is this the "Volvo Driver" speaking? Good one Colin ... LOL . No ... this is the Landcruiser driver speaking, the guy with the same Landcruiser he bought new in 1991 and still owns it with 600,000 klms on the clock. I am used to things lasting a long time if you maintain them properly. 2
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now