Lowering Cost of Ownership Tricks

Henning said:
No, these were insurance jobs brought to us, not regular customers, so no clue who supplied them. It's not like there are a lot of producers though. Trucks lose recaps on a regular basis. Recaps are not as good as first run tires, sorry, I've been dealing with tires of all types my whole life. Is it a certainty your recap will fail? No, it's a gamble like everything else in life. However, if you do have one fail, the damage costs will exceed the life time savings over buying good first run tires. You should be able to make TBO on a set of tires, two at most, unless you are flying under some really high performance work conditions. Even then, the damage costs go up even higher due to loss of revenue and cancelled flights. Maintenance does not cost a commercial operator anything, his customers pay for it, it's calculated into the billing. Ins exulted repairs that can cause a delay/cancellation for customer, that can lose you a critical account, or penalties on your contract. Just In Time and Drop Ship Next Day logistics does not brook not making your scheduled delivery very well. You can cost yourself thousands of dollars as a commercial operator and not actually save a dime. For a commercial operator it makes less sense to roll those dice than for an individual.

You're fine to roll the dice as you like, a failed recap is not likely to get you killed or injured, but the minimum it will cost is the deductible on the insurance.
Click to expand...

The majority of tires on transport category are recaps, thousands upon thousands of hours and landings, no problem.
 
RotorAndWing said:
The majority of tires on transport category are recaps, thousands upon thousands of hours and landings, no problem.
Click to expand...

But they keep tire pressures up on those! (See so many low tires taxi by on GA stuff)
 
Alexb2000 said:
Just a cautionary note, which may not be where the OP is at, IDK.

I see the mindset of pilots always trying to shave cost as dangerous. Soon enough you will be faced with a maintenance decision that you "might" be able to prolong, or pushing just a little further to get that .50 cents per gallon cheaper fuel, or… IMO if you want to save money, turnoff the cable, mow your own lawn, ride the bus to work, whatever, aviation is not the place.
Click to expand...

I agree 100 percent! An airplane is a decided luxury and the questions you've asked should be asked BEFORE you buy the airplane not after. I have never owned an airplane ( 8) that wasn't in its own hangar. ( always checked this prior to purchase as they really go bad outside quite quickly, not to mention better insurance rates if hangared.) be sure and get good insurance including hull. This saved me when a hangar collapsed on mine. My mechanic always said I could help but he would charge more due to my possibly stepping on or bumping into something expensive in his shop. In other words let him do it and get lost. I always bought his gas when possible and his oil as he's trying to make a living just like me. Worked well. Did me little favors over the years that added up.
 
As others have said - do all you can do. Case in point - CIrrus wanted $750 to remove and replace my wing walk tape. YAEH RIGHT!!

4.5 hours later, I did it myself for under 70 bucks in parts.. Of course new wing walk tape certainly is not necessary..
 
Alexb2000 said:
So fly any POS you like and rationalize it any way you want. There are hundreds of pilots on every airport that know more than the factory, their A&P/IA, the engine manufacturer, the prop manufacturer, etc. You'll find plenty of company.
Click to expand...
Thank for your concern, I intend to do exactly that. This weekend I'm chasing a gremlin with one of the prop synch pickups and checking the fuel vent float valves since the other guy who flies it saw a few drops of kerosene out a vent when parked on a hot day last week.

I suppose your view is that instead of legally and carefully fixing these things myself, I should take the plane several hundred miles and over a bit of ocean to a beech service center, drop it off, and give them a blank check. Sorry, that isn't going to improve anyone's safety, unless your definition of safety is to spend as much money as possible so you can say you "spared no expense".

Checkout_my_Six said:
the cheapest kind of plane to have.....is a friend with a plane. :D
Click to expand...
I had a very good week in that regard. The partner (extremely majority partner) told me he's going back to south africa for a couple months, could I do my best to keep the king air exercised so it doesn't get full of birds and spiders. And BTW he just bought 20,000L of jet A and he'd like to be able to freshen it with some new fuel when he gets back, so maybe we could burn some of that supply down for him. It's a burden doing favors for people but i guess we'll do what we can. Actually he's making out ok considering how much grease monkey time I've put in on this thing, and some of the issues he'd previously been unable to resolve taking it to the "beech specialists" in these parts.
 
Tom-D said:
Or a mechanic who will maintain it for the use of it. :)

Owner buys parts, A&P installs it free for the use. each buys their own consumables.
Click to expand...


I got my IR for $1200 and 8 hrs labor on the CFII/owner's annual.
 
JHW said:
Thank for your concern, I intend to do exactly that. This weekend I'm chasing a gremlin with one of the prop synch pickups and checking the fuel vent float valves since the other guy who flies it saw a few drops of kerosene out a vent when parked on a hot day last week.

I suppose your view is that instead of legally and carefully fixing these things myself, I should take the plane several hundred miles and over a bit of ocean to a beech service center, drop it off, and give them a blank check. Sorry, that isn't going to improve anyone's safety, unless your definition of safety is to spend as much money as possible so you can say you "spared no expense".
Click to expand...

Why is it that people always say things like "drop it off at the service center with a blank check" as the only other option to rationalize doing something dangerous or illegal?

In your example you sound like you have an A&P. Which of course would be a great way to save money and maybe that's a good suggestion for the OP, go to school and get an A&P, IDK. Of course for those of us in the states without an A&P, that would be an illegal repair. Surely that isn't what you are suggesting?

Just one more thing on the service center comment. Last year I posted the details of an expensive annual I had done at a service center. I posted ALL of the detailed financials for review. I was able to negotiate them down to an acceptable number, one that none of the A&P's here said was out of line. I did it just because we hear so much of this kind of talk I wanted to put it to the test and the result was that I paid a small premium 5-10% for using a service center, mostly due to their higher hourly rate.
 
Last edited:
I have great respect for our not-so-local service center. When I had my seat restraint done I also had a few other items handled and the cost was what was quoted up front. When I got the plane home I couldn't find my pitot cover and called to see if they could find it. They said they would look. I got a brand new one in the mail in two days. I would probably use them more if it wasn't a two hour flight each way.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Why is it that people always say things like "drop it off at the service center with a blank check" as the only other option to rationalize doing something dangerous or illegal?
Click to expand...
you have it backwards (again). you are the one who has put forward the view that "saving money" means doing something "dangerous or illegal". That is a connection (and accusation) that you created in your own mind. no doubt people have done stupid things to their planes to save money. The same goes for building houses or anything else. But you are the one who has jumped to extremes in saying that no money can be saved in aviation without creating a hazard.
 
Alexb2000 said:
In your example you sound like you have an A&P. Which of course would be a great way to save money and maybe that's a good suggestion for the OP, go to school and get an A&P, IDK. Of course for those of us in the states without an A&P, that would be an illegal repair. Surely that isn't what you are suggesting?
Click to expand...

Horsepuckey. Any fool with a crescent wrench and a bent screwdriver can make the repair legally. The A&P only has to return it to service, not do the repair themselves.

Jim
 
Have a private detective follow your IA around and get pictures of him with a hooker. If he's married your maintenance is gonna get real cheap. :lol:
 
I seriously love this forum more and more every day. Thanks for all of the great/hilarious replies. I always learn a lot when I post something here.
 
RotorAndWing said:
The majority of tires on transport category are recaps, thousands upon thousands of hours and landings, no problem.
Click to expand...

Airlines are a different use model. Airline tires don't last long enough for the bond to deteriorate, and get replaced at first sign of separation. If you look down the side of tugs and workboats, those are airliner tires hanging on those chains. Take a close look and you can see they do indeed fail, they just get changed before it's a catastrophic failure. Most GA planes don't see the level of pre and post flight inspection cycles that airliners do, nor the wear/time rate. GA tires can last 10 years on wear easily.
 
Last edited:
Don't half ass repairs.
Look ahead and plan for items that will need to be repaired/replaced.
Assist with the maintenance.
Fly the plane.
Find a good mechanic that will talk with you about what they are finding and what their philosophy is.
Know the difference between airworthy/safety items and "nice to have" items.
Get the maintenance manuals so you can learn the systems and explain what might be broken.
Wash your plane.
 
Get a K&N or that type of re-usable air filter.

Mine gave me two more inches of MP on take off, so that has to translate to more efficiency in all flight envelopes. The engine breathes better.

I'm a nut about tire pressure too. 1lb. per 100 gross weight. in my case, 24 lbs. on 8.5X6's. I see a lot of planes with what look like low unmaintained tires to me.
 
txflyer said:
Get a K&N or that type of re-usable air filter.

Mine gave me two more inches of MP on take off, so that has to translate to more efficiency in all flight envelopes. The engine breathes better. [...]
Click to expand...

Isn't the MP actually a negative value (suction), only that they the MP instrument does not show the minus (-) symbol? This would mean that is if it now shows two more inches of MP, the suction inside the inlet manifold is greater, what again means that you have less power available, because the engine has a harder time breathing!? :dunno:
 
German guy said:
Isn't the MP actually a negative value (suction), only that they the MP instrument does not show the minus (-) symbol? This would mean that is if it now shows two more inches of MP, the suction inside the inlet manifold is greater, what again means that you have less power available, because the engine has a harder time breathing!? :dunno:
Click to expand...


An internal combustion engine is just a vacuum pump.

More vacuum, more pump. :yesnod:
 
txflyer said:
Get a K&N or that type of re-usable air filter.

Mine gave me two more inches of MP on take off, so that has to translate to more efficiency in all flight envelopes. The engine breathes better.

I'm a nut about tire pressure too. 1lb. per 100 gross weight. in my case, 24 lbs. on 8.5X6's. I see a lot of planes with what look like low unmaintained tires to me.
Click to expand...

Do you do oil analysis? If so what do your silica numbers show as? I always wondered how well a K&N works out in TX. Do you treat yours with anything?
 
Henning said:
Do you do oil analysis? If so what do your silica numbers show as? I always wondered how well a K&N works out in TX. Do you treat yours with anything?
Click to expand...


Not yet.

Just treat it with K&N's oil at annual, or if it looks like it needs it.

Wash it first of coarse. And NEVER used compressed air to dry it. I hang mine in front of a low speed floor fan to dry. Compressed air will destroy the matrix of the material.
 
Having seen that K&N in automotive applications can't even come close to the filtration of a regular filter, I won't use them. My diesel mechanic also recommends against them. Both because they don't stop stuff a good regular filter will but also beside people tend to over oil them and destroy turbos.
 
txflyer said:
Not yet.

Just treat it with K&N's oil at annual, or if it looks like it needs it.

Wash it first of coarse. And NEVER used compressed air to dry it. I hang mine in front of a low speed floor fan to dry. Compressed air will destroy the matrix of the material.
Click to expand...

Considering what I saw in a Chevy field truck I had, I've kinda wondered about using K&N filters around the fine dust. I know I used to fly in the red haze layer in TX a lot, and it would go up thousands of feet.
 
denverpilot said:
Having seen that K&N in automotive applications can't even come close to the filtration of a regular filter, I won't use them. My diesel mechanic also recommends against them. Both because they don't stop stuff a good regular filter will but also beside people tend to over oil them and destroy turbos.
Click to expand...

Changing the filter if you cannot change the airbox design is pointless in 99% of cases anyway. Restrictive air filters are something they used to make 50 years ago, nowadays changing the filter to a K&N is a waste of time and money.

We recently did some testing for a company that manufactures filters and replacement airboxes for various applications, and changing the filter had no measurable effect on airflow/pressure drop/flow laminarity. There were no power gains/losses, and no effect on fuel consumption.

Over oiling the filter does nothing to the turbo. MAF sensors take the beating in cars.
 
Alexb2000 said:
Just a cautionary note, which may not be where the OP is at, IDK.

I see the mindset of pilots always trying to shave cost as dangerous. Soon enough you will be faced with a maintenance decision that you "might" be able to prolong, or pushing just a little further to get that .50 cents per gallon cheaper fuel, or… IMO if you want to save money, turnoff the cable, mow your own lawn, ride the bus to work, whatever, aviation is not the place.
Click to expand...



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Very wise thoughts!
 
German guy said:
Isn't the MP actually a negative value (suction), only that they the MP instrument does not show the minus (-) symbol? This would mean that is if it now shows two more inches of MP, the suction inside the inlet manifold is greater, what again means that you have less power available, because the engine has a harder time breathing!? :dunno:
Click to expand...

No. MP is referenced to a perfect vacuum - 0" MP = perfect vacuum. A higher MP = more air.

What you're thinking of is that the MP you see with the engine on is lower than when the engine isn't running because the engine is pumping air in past the throttle. Close the throttle more, and you restrict the air inlet, which lowers the MP.

When you shut the engine off, MP goes *up* to whatever the ambient pressure is, around 30", regardless of throttle position. Without the engine there to pump air and lower the MP, the MP gauge is essentially just a barometer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top