Mowing 75 degree slope mower

[Dargo]

$125 Per hour training rate for a 172 in Ca. $250 to $1000 per hour for Robinson to Jet Ranger... Saddly unless I am renting them for work I cannot afford the stick time in a helicopter...

I was wondering if someone would note this major difference.

Back on the remote mower, I thought of it as a joke until I read that it has 22 hp. It ought to have plenty of power to mowing width ratio. The R/C stuff I've flown with a good 4 channel Futaba had a pretty good range. My guess would be that you'd be limited more by your ability to see the mower than the range of the controller...or it could easily be made that way. Maybe you just need a set of headset binoculars.

 

[ray66v]

I was wondering if someone would note this major difference.

What major difference are you referring to?

 

[Dargo]

What major difference are you referring to?

The cost difference between rental time on a 172 and on any rotary wing aircraft.

 

[MossRoad]

$125 Per hour training rate for a 172 in Ca. $250 to $1000 per hour for Robinson to Jet Ranger... Saddly unless I am renting them for work I cannot afford the stick time in a helicopter...

Back in 1986 when I last worked at an FBO 172 time was around $30 and Jet Ranger was $500. 100LL was under two bucks and jet fuel was about $2.10, I believe.

 

[ray66v]

Back in 1986 when I last worked at an FBO 172 time was around $30 and Jet Ranger was $500. 100LL was under two bucks and jet fuel was about $2.10, I believe.

As Archie and Edith said: Those were the days. When I started flying in 1976, 100LL was .60.


Difference, (in price), between flying fixed wing and a heli: The guy that owns/flies a heli for pleasure, probably has an income about $200k/year more than the guy who owns/flies a fixed wing. And, if they are both at the low end of that pay scale, they are both equally broke at the end of the month..

 

[woodlandfarms]

The cost difference between rental time on a 172 and on any rotary wing aircraft.

Demand is the biggest, with tons of 172's avail for rent and not a lot of Robinsons, or jet rangers. Jet rangers ( use this term generically for all jet helicopters) are jets so you pay a ton for that. Finally, there are more things that need looking at on a Rotary... Different level of experienced mechanic. Considering speed and operating efficency, not really worth it to have one ( I know 3 guys who own there own eurocopters and the owner of a major operation in LA with over 100 and these guys make 7 figures easy). But the fun factor in a rotary is only surpassed by a jet / fast prop / aerobatic plane...

 

[ray66v]

Demand is the biggest, with tons of 172's avail for rent and not a lot of Robinsons, or jet rangers. Jet rangers ( use this term generically for all jet helicopters) are jets so you pay a ton for that. Finally, there are more things that need looking at on a Rotary... Different level of experienced mechanic. Considering speed and operating efficency, not really worth it to have one ( I know 3 guys who own there own eurocopters and the owner of a major operation in LA with over 100 and these guys make 7 figures easy). But the fun factor in a rotary is only surpassed by a jet / fast prop / aerobatic plane...

Biggest reasons for cost difference between fixed wing and heli.:
1. Fuel burn, (helis need rich air fuel mixtures to keep cool, use lots more fuel).
2. Insurance costs, approximately 10x more to insure a heli. (much more likely to be damaged & much more likely to be a total loss when damaged ).
3. Life limited parts, helis have lots of very expensive parts that you have to replace at set intervals. (fixed wing a/c generally do not have any).
4. Heli's require much more preventative maintenance. (Many joke, fly for 1 hour, work on it for 2).

 

[Charlie_Iliff]

Back in 1986 when I last worked at an FBO 172 time was around $30 and Jet Ranger was $500. 100LL was under two bucks and jet fuel was about $2.10, I believe.

When I soloed, the J-3 was $8.00 per hour wet. Instructor was additional $5.00.
That was too expensive, so three of us bought a Cessna 140. $2,500.
There was a Bell 47 in the area but we never bothered to price it. Way out of our league.

 

[Bob999]

When I soloed, the J-3 was $8.00 per hour wet. Instructor was additional $5.00.
That was too expensive, so three of us bought a Cessna 140. $2,500.
There was a Bell 47 in the area but we never bothered to price it. Way out of our league.

I think the J-3 (magneto only--no electical system) was $7 per hour wet when I soloed and the Tripacer (with a radio and lights for night flying along with electric start) was $10 wet.

 

[KentT]

Here in the NE, my wife is paying $125 an hour for a 172N with the IP, or $95 an hour solo -- and that's considered a bargain, both for the IP and the 172 consuming LL-100 at 8GPH...

These kinds of costs are what's driving the LSA and ELSA market...

 

[MossRoad]

When I soloed, the J-3 was $8.00 per hour wet. Instructor was additional $5.00.
That was too expensive, so three of us bought a Cessna 140. $2,500.
There was a Bell 47 in the area but we never bothered to price it. Way out of our league.

Back in 1977 I was a Sophomore in high school. 4 of us were driving my VW van up to the beach, about 30 miles away. The price of gas at my favorite gas station was $.55 a gallon. There was a station down the road that had it for $.50. I was going to put 10 gallons in the van. That would have been $5.50 VS $5.00. The other guys started arguing with me and we got into a big old fight over 50 cents split between 4 guys... 12.5 cents each! They each pitched in a buck and a quarter and I caughed up the extra 50 cents.

 

[ray66v]

These kinds of costs are what's driving the LSA and ELSA market...

LSA is cheaper but, not by a lot, it still expensive. The medical issue is, and has always been, mostly what was driving LSA.

 

[KentT]

LSA is cheaper but, not by a lot, it still expensive. The medical issue is, and has always been, mostly what was driving LSA.

I understand what you're saying and it is certainly largely the aging baby boomers who're buying the LSAs -- after all, they're largely the people with the disposable income that can perhaps afford such an expensive hobby.

But, when you combine the 5GPH vs 8-10GPH, initial purchase price less than 1/2 (closer to 1/3) of new GA aircraft, and the ability of LSA owners to do more of their own maintenance without an A&P cert -- especially. With 2000-hour TBOs on some of the LSA engines now (Jabiru, for example), the differences become significant. IMO, you're looking at the cost per flying hour to be about 1/2 of a that for a GA Cessna or Piper, never mind the sexier, more expensive airframes...

I've been trying to look at ownership, joint ownership, etc. in lots of different ways, both GA ad LSA, to see how we can afford this hobby once I'm retired in about 4 years. An LSA (perhaps ELSA) may be the only way we can -- or cut it back to more infrequent use of flying club airframes...

Flying has always been an expensive hobby -- but the costs of GA have escalated out of proportion to the cost-of-living -- or at least it appears that way to me.

 

[ray66v]

I think all that argument only holds up, if you insist on owning a "new" aircraft.

Price of a good used 172, 25% to 60% cheaper than the LSA. If money is a big factor, a used C172, or C150 are much less money. Not just to purchase initially but, also to insure. Add in resale value, you won't loose much, if any money, on the Cessna's.

You could buy a good 150, put a new engine on it, new radio, spend more money on ascetics, and have nice, easy to fly, (somewhat bullet proof), airplane for way less than half the cost of a LSA. (One that burns 5 gph).

There are mechanics that will let you do some, to most, of your own maintenance.

The LSA is going to take the "drive the new car home, and loose 10%, or more, of its value" hit. This is without considering the possibility that at least one of these LSA's is going to get a bad reputation, and take a big resale value hit, (-50% or more).

The difference keeps coming back to the medical. And if your getting older, and want to keep it, your getting closer to the day they pull it on you. Due to this, I have a growing list of family, and friends that have to rely on me to be able to go flying. Each has to decide for them selfs whether or not to gamble.

 

[KentT]

I think all that argument only holds up, if you insist on owning a "new" aircraft.

Price of a good used 172, 25% to 60% cheaper than the LSA. If money is a big factor, a used C172, or C150 are much less money. Not just to purchase initially but, also to insure. Add in resale value, you won't loose much, if any money, on the Cessna's.

While there is some merit to that conclusion -- I'm finding your numbers to be way off. Price of a new LSA is approximately $100K. Price of a used 172 in decent condition (doesn't need paint or interior, an engine overhaul or radio replacement immediately -- all major $$ --) with reasonable airframe hours to be at least $60K or higher, not 60% cheaper than an LSA.... I'm finding that used 172s that you could reasonbly expect to get five years of service out of with only routine maintenance to actually be closer to $70-$75K, not $60K.

Certainly Cessna 150s can be had in the price range that you're talking about, but try finding one with less than 5,000 hours on it -- even then you'd be buying something that has lower performance specs than many of today's LSAs...

As far as resale value (and likely insurance costs, long-term), IMO it may be too soon to tell what the future of LSAs holds, because they're so new. When the Cessna LSA starts being delivered in large numbers later this summer, IMO the whole landscape and perception of LSAs will begin to change. Same holds true for the new LSA powerplants. Trying to project both maintenance and depreciation costs for an LSA is a shot in the dark, right now...

Similarly the current $18 per flying hour difference in fuel costs (5gph vs 8gph at $6/gal for LL100) is likely to only increase significantly. Anyone want to project what LL100 will cost 2 to 5 years from now? IMO, a lot of "conventional wisdom" may get turned upside down in the not-too-distant future...

 

[ray66v]

While there is some merit to that conclusion -- I'm finding your numbers to be way off. Price of a new LSA is approximately $100K. Price of a used 172 in decent condition (doesn't need paint or interior, an engine overhaul or radio replacement immediately -- all major $$ --) with reasonable airframe hours to be at least $60K or higher, not 60% cheaper than an LSA.... I'm finding that used 172s that you could reasonbly expect to get five years of service out of with only routine maintenance to actually be closer to $70-$75K, not $60K.

Certainly Cessna 150s can be had in the price range that you're talking about, but try finding one with less than 5,000 hours on it -- even then you'd be buying something that has lower performance specs than many of today's LSAs...

As far as resale value (and likely insurance costs, long-term), IMO it may be too soon to tell what the future of LSAs holds, because they're so new. When the Cessna LSA starts being delivered in large numbers later this summer, IMO the whole landscape and perception of LSAs will begin to change. Same holds true for the new LSA powerplants. Trying to project both maintenance and depreciation costs for an LSA is a shot in the dark, right now...

Similarly the current $18 per flying hour difference in fuel costs (5gph vs 8gph at $6/gal for LL100) is likely to only increase significantly. Anyone want to project what LL100 will cost 2 to 5 years from now? IMO, a lot of "conventional wisdom" may get turned upside down in the not-too-distant future...

I did say 25-60% you only saw 60% apparently.

My numbers are based on: I am being told by owners of new LSA's on our field(s) that they paid in the $110 to $120k range.

Aircraft have come down from the prices your quoting. Their not currently getting that kind of money, and are likely to fall significantly as 100LL rises.

I have a 1979 172N with 2800TT (airframe) 1200SMOH (engine), exterior 9, interior 8, full IFR, I have been tracking the market for this airplane very closely, and I can't find any evidence that I can get more than $55-$60k TOPS for it right now. It was in the low $50k's late in the winter. If we could get $65-70k, it would be flying off into the sunset!

I also have a friend that bought a 150 last year with 1700TT and a new engine for $25k. And another friend that bought a 172a with a new engine for $35k (continental 6, uses less fuel than the lycoming). Both are nice airplanes. Neither aircraft needed any avionics, paint or interior repair or replacement.

At those prices, your going to have to do a lot of still expensive, day only, VFR only, flying to make up a difference of even $30/hr. for fuel.

 

[KentT]

The prices I'm seeing are on ASO:

Cessna 172 for Sale on ASO.com – Cessna 172, Cessna Skyhawk, 172SP, 172 Skyhawk XP, 172RG, 172RG Cutlass

Controller:
CESSNA 172 For Sale at Controller.com

and Trade-A-Plane;
Cessna 172 Skyhawk Search Results at Trade-A-Plane.com

I've been watching 172M and later models for quite a while now... the wife is flying an N. The actual sales prices may have dropped significantly recently, just like trade-in value of SUVs...

I dunno...

Meanwhile, we're hijacked this topic and aren't getting anywhere close to an agreement, so I guess we should just leave it at that...

 

[Blagadan]

While driving through MD last week, I noticed a guy with a remote controlled mower working on an embankment at the side of the highway. Some guy standing by his truck with a remote control in his hands and this remote mower on a really steep bank musta been 75deg easy....
Sure wish I could have stopped and had a proper look.

 

[MossRoad]

While driving through MD last week, I noticed a guy with a remote controlled mower working on an embankment at the side of the highway. Some guy standing by his truck with a remote control in his hands and this remote mower on a really steep bank musta been 75deg easy....
Sure wish I could have stopped and had a proper look.

There was a guy delivering dry wall to a 4th floor window downtown that had a remote control crane on his truck.

Lots of trains are now switched in small yards or small sidings with one guy and a remote.

Remotes have come a long way, for sure, so I can see why a mower on a slope would be a huge saftey improvement.

 

[Rara Avis]

slope mower

Here's a true commercial mower for you to mow your slopes...

Commercial Slope Mower by Dvorak - Spider IDL02

The only downside is that it retails for 38K to 40K...