I seriously doubt that.

The capital cost from the higher cost of the 525 hull value alone swamps almost everything else. On top of that I have more readily available used parts, longer inspection intervals with the LUMP, and more local shops with legacy experience to choose from.

The "newer is cheaper" myth is what you sell to your clients, but I think it is quite wrong in this case.

The "nobody can do what Mike does" is also a myth. I'm not doing anything all that special, just paying attention and being at least somewhat involved in the maintenance strategy. Most of what I do I learned from others already doing the same thing, so I am clearly not unique in this regard.

Mike C.

Are you willing to publish actual numbers like I do?

Show us what it costs over 3 or more years, every dollar for parts, programs (if any) and maintenance.

If a 525 is cheaper to maintain than my V, which is the general claim and reason to spend more for them, that should be easy to demonstrate with actual numbers.


How do you know the planes not mentioning PP or PT are not on those programs? My impression is that those programs don't have the buyer carry over value that the engine program has so they aren't mentioned very often in the ads. The presumption a plane is not on those programs if they are not mentioned may be wrong.

What I know is that when the yearly price increases to PP and PT are announced, there is a lot of unhappy people on CJP complaining about it. This tells me that there are a lot of people on those programs, but it is a declining number as the financial burdens increase.

What I know is that if I bought a CJ3, my cost of operation would be at least double my V when all costs are considered. The cost of capital alone exceeds my entire yearly budget on the V.

Mike C.

Chip,

I would have assumed [apparently erroneously] that most of your clients were high net worth individuals likely using small and midsize jets for them + sales/C-level team at a reasonably large private company. In that, I'd assume that many don't actually get 150 hours/year on their airframe, but instead have their airplane flying key executives 1-2x/week or so.

But your post above means I'm way off base.

Are your clients coming more from corporate flight departments or from business settings that put their aircraft with charter companies when the aircraft isn't in use?

Maybe I don't have a grasp on how most buyers use 5-9 seat aircraft.

Our clients come from all walks of life, we do a very broad range of aircraft, in fact I'm considering posting a list of the models we do here so that I can eliminate some confusion.

We have clients that are W2 employees who have made good investments and we have clients that have fairly large companies, meaning hundreds of employees, guys that certainly fit the high net worth individual description. We have a fair number of clients who have built and sold their companies.

We have clients who buy airplanes and put them with charter companies and we have clients who are charter companies, we have purchased a CJ2+, CJ3 and a PC12NG for one 135 client in the last couple of years.

We have several clients who are doctors and several who are attorneys. The only thing that is consistent is that we have hot spots, most of our business is referral, so we will have random places with multiple clients, like Lafayette, LA for example.

The one thing that 99% of our clients have in common is that they are nice people. I probably shape that number because I don't have much patience with mean people.

Also, it varies, but close to 50% of our business is actually turboprops. We have a King Air and two PC-12NG's in work right now.

For the owner flown operator, I am definitely not unique in operating 100-150 hours per year.

You keep trying to claim I am a unique operator, but that's really not the case. There are lots of legacy owner operators out there doing basically what I am doing and doing it well. I maintain it at a local shop and I buy parts carefully, that's it. This is basically no different than someone who owns a 172. I'm not doing anything magical here and I readily help others replicate my success.


It has everything to do with total operating cost, what it truly costs to fly one of these airplanes. Hiding the other costs is just selective blindness.

By your logic, I should buy a factory new CJ4 with a factory warranty valid for a few years. No maintenance costs! The DOC is very low! Just put fuel in it!

That of course is total BS. Buying a new CJ4 would be extremely more costly than flying my V because you are paying for $12M of capital and the first years of market value depreciation. A CJ4 would cost me well over $1M per year to fly in true total costs, maybe $2M the first few years. It is ridiculous to ignore those costs.


By the time you pay the increased sales tax, the property taxes, the higher insurance, and the cost of capital, doubtful. The higher hull value also exposes you to far more downside risk if the market values drop.

On a $3M loan to buy a CJ3, that's $240K interest per year. That's double what I pay to fly my V, and you haven't put fuel into the CJ3 yet.


Are you talking about those fictious C&D numbers? Where a bunch of people make stuff up and then you pay for those numbers thinking they have true value? C&D really have a great business model as long as they can find enough customers like you.


I burn maybe 3000 gallons more per year, About $12K. Why do you think that is hard to overcome? Did you do the math?

The extra fuel cost for a V is only a fraction of the Williams tax, and that is hard to overcome.

The entry price for a CJ3 is now about $3.5M more than a V. An 8% loan is $280K per year just in interest to cover that difference. Now that is even harder to overcome.


It is obviously because the people who hire you believe what you say. That's called selection bias.

Please keep telling people not to buy legacy airplanes and spread all sorts of FUD about them, claim they are expensive, they break down, etc. That allows the rest of us who know better to get what we want cheaper. In some sense, the more you push your views, the more wrong you views get since the legacy airplanes get cheaper. The opposite of a self fulfilling prophecy.

Mike C.

What owner wants to sell and tells only you? They must be idiots if they do that.

Mike C.

It is obviously because the people who hire you believe what you say. That's called selection bias.

Mike C.

Totaled $63K. $352/hour. Avionic issue, but no Doc 10, so perhaps a "typical" year?

I presume since you didn't mention it, you are on no programs. If that's not true, you need to include those costs.

There is also about $85K in engine program costs for your 179 hours. Yes, I will pay for my engines at some point, but it won't total what you are paying to Williams.

In round numbers, $150K in maintenance for 179 hours, $840 an hour.

Are you sure that's cheaper than a V? It sure doesn't feel like it. And this plane was only 15 years old, mine is 34 years old now.


Can I go through my costs and remove my "bad luck" expenses, too?

Bad luck is part of owning an airplane, any airplane. My hydraulic AOG event was bad luck, ended up about $9K.

Avionics won't cost me much since my stuff is basically on the general repair schedule Garmin charges for everybody down to a 172. A GTN 750 flat repair cost is tiny compared to the Colins or Honeywell stuff. People rally underestimate avionics maintenance costs in these jets with the factory systems.

PS: You mentioned fire bottles. I don't think you have to hydro those any more. I don't. This was something I asked for and got from Textron. So now my bottles don't have to be removed for hydro ever again. Saves money!

Mike C.

Mike didn't call them idiots.

Mike said they WOULD be idiots if they only told YOU they were selling.

If a seller wants good market value, you need to make it known to more than one potential buyer. Duh!

The point was Chip's claim to exclusive knowledge of off market airplanes for sale is bogus. The fact he says sellers are not idiots is true, and that's why I am certain Chip is not the only person who knows about planes for sale.

Mike C.

Mike didn't call them idiots.

Mike said they WOULD be idiots if they only told YOU they were selling.

If a seller wants good market value, you need to make it known to more than one potential buyer. Duh!

The point was Chip's claim to exclusive knowledge of off market airplanes for sale is bogus. The fact he says sellers are not idiots is true, and that's why I am certain Chip is not the only person who knows about planes for sale.

Mike C.

Hi Mike,

I just want to weigh in on the above. As someone who fashions themselves as a bit of disciple of yours (you were one of the major drivers, along with James Crossno and Tarver, for pushing me away from a turboprop and into a jet), we are fairly unique. My mechanic takes care of around 15 Citations based at my home airport. Models range from my 501 all the way up to a Sovereign, but mostly CJs. He has told me that I am the ONLY one of his customers that are heavily involved in maintenance. Everyone else just wants it fixed ASAP, even the owner/operators. He loves me because I take care of all of the boring stuff like sourcing parts, shipping things to be hydro'd, etc. But I am fortunate that my job allows me to time shift my work so I can spend 4 hours at the airport during the work day and make up that work time in the evening. Not everyone has that luxury.

But I think the main difference is that flying (and owning an aircraft) has become a hobby for me. I geek out on troubleshooting, finding parts, reading CJP and BT, etc. That is rare. Most people view a jet as a tool to accomplish a business or personal need for travel and don't want to spend their free time learning how an ACM works or troubleshooting a windshield bleed air issue. Those people would rather have a different hobby and spend their leisure time doing that vs maintaining their airplane.

Neither is right or wrong, just different. I guess that is what is so frustrating to me when I read your banter with Chip. You don't actually realize how unique you are and that things that are simple and/or desirable for you may not be so for others. Both your and Chip's approaches are correct, but for different people.

Multiple people have literally posted in this thread that they are customers of Chip and that they are happy with the service he provides. Different strokes for different folks.

Totaled $63K. $352/hour. Avionic issue, but no Doc 10, so perhaps a "typical" year?

I presume since you didn't mention it, you are on no programs. If that's not true, you need to include those costs.

There is also about $85K in engine program costs for your 179 hours. Yes, I will pay for my engines at some point, but it won't total what you are paying to Williams.

In round numbers, $150K in maintenance for 179 hours, $840 an hour.

Are you sure that's cheaper than a V? It sure doesn't feel like it. And this plane was only 15 years old, mine is 34 years old now.


Can I go through my costs and remove my "bad luck" expenses, too?

Bad luck is part of owning an airplane, any airplane. My hydraulic AOG event was bad luck, ended up about $9K.

Avionics won't cost me much since my stuff is basically on the general repair schedule Garmin charges for everybody down to a 172. A GTN 750 flat repair cost is tiny compared to the Colins or Honeywell stuff. People rally underestimate avionics maintenance costs in these jets with the factory systems.

PS: You mentioned fire bottles. I don't think you have to hydro those any more. I don't. This was something I asked for and got from Textron. So now my bottles don't have to be removed for hydro ever again. Saves money!

Mike C.

Yes, don't let people remove them unnecessarily, could trigger a hydro to reinstall them, and all that hazmat shipping and cost.

Squibs can be replaced in the airplane without removing the bottles. I just did one of mine. They just unbolt from the bottle. The bottle pressure remains intact.

If you do need to hydro them, Obrien seems to be the best place. Even Textron uses them (but a great mark up to its customers). Obrien can reclaim the Halon, hydro, and put it back in thus saving the cost of new Halon.

Mike C.

Yes, don't let people remove them unnecessarily, could trigger a hydro to reinstall them, and all that hazmat shipping and cost.

Squibs can be replaced in the airplane without removing the bottles. I just did one of mine. They just unbolt from the bottle. The bottle pressure remains intact.

If you do need to hydro them, Obrien seems to be the best place. Even Textron uses them (but a great mark up to its customers). Obrien can reclaim the Halon, hydro, and put it back in thus saving the cost of new Halon.

Mike C.

Is this a 525 thing? It really annoys me when companies use their leverage to extort revenue from their captive customers.

I just had my blow down bottle hydro'ed by Obrien on my V. $135. Turned it around in 24 hours. No mention of any proprietary seals.

It annoys me that this bottle is a 3 year hydro. That's taking it out way too often. It also has a 24 year life and has to be replaced at that time (2032 for me). It would cost only a few pounds to replace this with a 5 year hydro and infinite life bottle since it is so small. Then my costs to manage this bottle would go down. I can also use the extra few lbs up front, too.

This are the little annoying recurrent things that could be improved.

The allowance of leaving a past hydro bottle in place doesn't help for the emergency gear bottle because it gets exercised and refilled every gear inspection (every 3 years for me) and thus must be in hydro to be refilled. This is unlike the fire bottles which don't get exercised at all and they have an infinite service life.

Mike C.