Impact of RPL on resale value

[nickduncs84]

My instructor raised a valid point this morning. If the RPL goes ahead as planned, it will surely have a big impact on the used aircraft market in this country. At the moment, there is a premium paid for high performance LSA's, but after September 1, there will be a whole lot of relatively affordable aircraft that are all in play. Piper's, Cessna's, RV's, etc, etc. For those who are looking for true low frills flying, you still can't go past RA Aus, but for those who are trying to sell an LSA in the 75k to 150k range, there's a lot of competition. Just look at the prices of the J230's in the members market at the moment. The J230 is a nice plane, but for 90-100k, I think I'll take the RV-7!!

 

So, if you had 100k to spend on a plane, what would it be??

 

 

[rdarby]

Hmmm.....pondering....

 

I would still look at cost. And LSA is built cheaper, and even with the cost of a certified person working on it, a GA registered Rotax is probably going to be cheaper to fix than that Conitental or whatever in a Cessna.

 

I get your point, and I would be torn between a used Piper and a used LSA. I think the Piper would last longer and have more resale, but the LSA would be cheaper to maintain.

 

But would there be more competition in the used LSA market? Less so if the GA pilots aren't forced over to RAA now.

 

 

[nickduncs84]

Yes I agree, operating costs are still going to be cheaper with RA Aus, but will vary a lot. An annual on an old Cessna may cost 10k, but on a fairly new, low time RV, it wouldn't be that much more. And like I said, imagine you have a spare 100k to spend on a plane. If you're spending 100k on a plane, the difference between $70 an hour to cover the costs of an LSA vs $120 or even $150 an hour for GA doesn't matter too much. at 50 hours a year, the difference between the running costs of a jab and an RV is probably, only a couple of grand. And that's assuming the jab engine will be as reliable as a lycoming.

 

 

[nickduncs84]

Yeah I guess it's all dollars and cents. 6,000 extra a year isn't that much of a stretch for 100k buyers. If I was after real bang for buck, I would get a 30k Jab SP6. For 100k, I think an extra 6k a year in operating costs isn't too much of a stretch. $500 a month for an aircraft that is more reliable, more fun and has better resale value.....

 

 

[Downunder]

Yes, $6000 is alot. I paid for a ($100 000)LSA BECAUSE it is cheap as chips to run and maintain.

 

 

[nickduncs84]

Yes, $6000 is alot. I paid for a ($100 000)LSA BECAUSE it is cheap as chips to run and maintain.

So you paid 100k in cash, then pay for a hangar, insurance, etc and that fits the cheap as chips equation....but paying an extra $20 an hour for petrol and $2k a year for an annual is what makes it unaffordable??

 

As I said, each to their own. Things will vary massively by aircraft and also if you can do the maintenance yourself under Ra Aus but not GA, that would make a big difference, but there is no doubt that for a lot of people, many non RA Aus aircraft will now be an option....

 

 

[dazza 38]

The best way to go is to build your own GA experimental, do the SAAA course and then maintain the aircraft yourself.

 

 

[dlegg]

Can anyone provide a basic summary of how to go about changing a RAA 19 reg to VH reg? If you have already built your own plane, changing over rego, getting the RPL and a CTA endorsement would really open up the country.

 

 

[AVOCET]

i

 

Can anyone provide a basic summary of how to go about changing a RAA 19 reg to VH reg? If you have already built your own plane, changing over rego, getting the RPL and a CTA endorsement would really open up the country.

ide like to know how to , to .

I think it's possible if your a member of the SAAA and can prove your the original builder , and a decent build log , and I would imagine an inspection by an

 

ortherised casa deligated inspector ,

 

this could be expensive , depending on where you lived .

 

let's us know how you get on .

 

cheers mike

 

 

[dazza 38]

And that's assuming the jab engine will be as reliable as a lycoming.

That would have to be to most optimistic sentence I have read here in a long time.

 

 

[Guest Nobody]

I estimate the cost of all that to be circa $1800 assuming the builders pack is $1100. From memory it is cheaper if you have been a member for a while and same goes for the maintenece course

The SAAA CofA pack is a lot less than $1100.

 

 

[nickduncs84]

nick you don't own an aircraft do you?A few extra thousand is not chicken feed!

Nope, but I am looking. I think you are missing my point. A few thousand dollars isn't chicken feed, but neither is 150,000 dollars. It seems that you are saying that there are a lot of people out there who spend 100k on an aircraft and then aren't able to pay the 3 to 4 grand more a year to own an RV over a RA aus eligible plane. That seems like the definition of a pretty die hard aviation buff with a very understanding significant other! Ie if their income is such that 4k a year is a lot of money, how did they justify spending 100k on a depreciable asset?

Don't get me wrong, I'm sure you're right and that those people exist, but I also think a large portion of the people spending that much on a plane do it because they are making more than enough to justify the hobby and for people like that another $300 a month isn't going to make a difference. As such, the prediction that my instructor made about the demand for those type of aircraft increasing after September 1 is pretty valid I think.

 

That's all....

 

Nick

 

 

[68volksy]

A very interesting discussion. I'd very much like to see some figures on depreciation of RAA aircraft. My feeling is if we put 5,000 hours on a 182 which already has 5,000 hours you'll still be able to sell it for the same price you bought it for. Be interested to know what a tecnam with 10,000 hours is selling for? Does the depreciation on the RAA airframe offest in any way the extra maintenance costs on the 182?

 

 

[Downunder]

A Tecnam with 5000 hours works out at $20 per hour depreciated to $0. Personally, I pretty much see that as the life of the aircraft/airframe.

 

It can be replaced for, say $150 000.

 

A new Cessna at a replacement cost many hundreds of thousands of dollars becomes viable to keep in service and maintain.

 

 

[SDQDI]

Nick the thing is we will all buy as good as a plane we can get within our budget so if that's 10000 we will buy a nine, ten or eleven thousand dollar machine if its 20000 the same thing and so on and then after that we then 'discover' running costs. Now you can plan for running costs in advance but no one ever knows how many hours they will fly until the time comes so it is hard to get an accurate guesstimate.

 

What I am getting at is just because someone has saved up enough to buy a 150000 dollar machine doesn't mean they are happy throwing away an extra thousand or two, a lot of the time that extra cost is the straw that breaks the camels back.

 

With my plane it costs around the 40$ mark to run including maintenance, fuel, oil etc but if I had to have a lame do each 100hourly I wouldn't be able to afford it.

 

On the topic of the RPL dropping the value of our planes I don't think it will have a huge effect. I personally hope to do my ppl one day so I can hire a plane to take the whole family but I will still keep my RAA plane and cert. I can't see the benefit of the RPL as if I do step up the things I want to do still require the medical so might as well do the ppl. You might find the odd one gets fed up with RAA and swaps to RPL but I guess time will tell but at this stage I can't see our planes being worthless because of it.

 

But having said all that I have been wrong before and as a tip if you were looking to purchase a RAA plane maybe waiting til after September might be the way to go

 

 

[Oscar]

Nick, if you're thinking of a 'cheap', high-time GA aircraft, it'd be a very sound idea to talk to a Part 21M engineer about things like the fatigue life of components and repair costs of the aircraft involved. I think you can 'stretch' the life of a Lycosaurus via 'on inspection', but if the mainspar is about up to its hours, then I doubt you can do anything but replace it - if replacements are available. There's a reason why you see apparently undamaged older aircraft sitting forlornly on the edges of airports with weeds growing up through the control surfaces...

 

Also, the cost of maintaining an older, stressed-skin and rivets construction GA-type is not cheap; not only is it very, very labour-intensive work but you have to use release materials / have a Part 21M engineer prepare a repair scheme in some cases - that may include analysis of the original material if manufacturer's documentation is not available. Replacing a cast component that is not longer in production (such as say a spar end fitting) could become a nightmare. A VH-Ex reg. homebuilt is another story entirely, so an RV might be a serious contender if you pick the right model.

 

A mate of mine has been doing up a Victa Airtourer for the past about eight years now (does bits when he has assembled some more funds..) and for complexity, by comparison to a Jab 230 / 430, it's a ridiculously complex aircraft with a massive parts-count. On the plus side for him it'll be aerobatic, which the Jab cannot be - but for general getting-around-the-place use, the Jab. is just streets ahead. The Victa was built before NC machining, which means just about every damn part was basically hand-machined - and there are small but appreciable tolerance differences between parts that means ANY replacement part has to be hand-made to fit the specific aircraft.

 

You might want to also investigate insurance costs in your 'due diligence' of the operating budget.

 

All of that aside: I reckon that IF you pick the right model and example of a suitable GA aircraft, your basic point is correct: but rushing in to buy, say, a slightly-dented, high-time Traumahawk (for instance) may leave you in a vale of tears and a life doomed to tinkering in the hangar for more hours than you spend flying. It'd be a bit like finding a tired Jaguar E-type in a farmer's shed for less money than you'd have to pay for a somewhat-used Mazda MX-5: if you're into the restoration bit, the end result would be a wonderful (if vastly expensive) thing - but you'd miss out on a hell of a lot of fun driving in the sunshine to interesting places with no fears that you'd have to be towed to complete your journey.

 

 

[dazza 38]

I have mentioned this before a few times but I will mention it again. When I owned a piper archer in the late nineties , it was online at a flying school and it flew a lot . So it had multiple 100 hour lies a year. The cost per 100 hourly was minimal as it had five or six per year. But I did get a crack in the crank case and some other airframe repairs carried out on the wing walk area. The Bill was $14 000 . GA aircraft can be bought cheap, and that is the cheapest expense. Keeping them running is really where the expense is.

 

 

[68volksy]

You do get a lot of life out of a GA airframe though. Take the Warrior as an example - at 50,000 hours there is a mandatory wing spar inspection. Not a replacement - just an inspection!

 

The cost comes down to finding a good LAME. There are plenty out there that will allow you to work on your own aircraft under their close supervision also. Take the wing walk repairs for example - a lot of the time in that is removing the old rivets and getting the old walk area out - something that most people would be able to handle doing themselves under a LAME's supervision. If the aircraft was RA registered the repairs would be either completely ignored or the job would be done by the owner.

 

The whole argument about which is cheapest to maintain goes out the window if we start comparing paying a qualified LAME with doing the work yourself.

 

 

[jetjr]

let alone SIDS or similar coming for older US units

 

 

[planedriver]

Nick, if you're thinking of a 'cheap', high-time GA aircraft, it'd be a very sound idea to talk to a Part 21M engineer about things like the fatigue life of components and repair costs of the aircraft involved. I think you can 'stretch' the life of a Lycosaurus via 'on inspection', but if the mainspar is about up to its hours, then I doubt you can do anything but replace it - if replacements are available. There's a reason why you see apparently undamaged older aircraft sitting forlornly on the edges of airports with weeds growing up through the control surfaces...Also, the cost of maintaining an older, stressed-skin and rivets construction GA-type is not cheap; not only is it very, very labour-intensive work but you have to use release materials / have a Part 21M engineer prepare a repair scheme in some cases - that may include analysis of the original material if manufacturer's documentation is not available. Replacing a cast component that is not longer in production (such as say a spar end fitting) could become a nightmare. A VH-Ex reg. homebuilt is another story entirely, so an RV might be a serious contender if you pick the right model.

 

A mate of mine has been doing up a Victa Airtourer for the past about eight years now (does bits when he has assembled some more funds..) and for complexity, by comparison to a Jab 230 / 430, it's a ridiculously complex aircraft with a massive parts-count. On the plus side for him it'll be aerobatic, which the Jab cannot be - but for general getting-around-the-place use, the Jab. is just streets ahead. The Victa was built before NC machining, which means just about every damn part was basically hand-machined - and there are small but appreciable tolerance differences between parts that means ANY replacement part has to be hand-made to fit the specific aircraft.

 

You might want to also investigate insurance costs in your 'due diligence' of the operating budget.

 

All of that aside: I reckon that IF you pick the right model and example of a suitable GA aircraft, your basic point is correct: but rushing in to buy, say, a slightly-dented, high-time Traumahawk (for instance) may leave you in a vale of tears and a life doomed to tinkering in the hangar for more hours than you spend flying. It'd be a bit like finding a tired Jaguar E-type in a farmer's shed for less money than you'd have to pay for a somewhat-used Mazda MX-5: if you're into the restoration bit, the end result would be a wonderful (if vastly expensive) thing - but you'd miss out on a hell of a lot of fun driving in the sunshine to interesting places with no fears that you'd have to be towed to complete your journey.

Oscar you sound like a salesman painting those mind pictures, but i'm sure what you say is very close to the mark