Misc

With the 100 percent bonus depreciation rule in effect, 2011 was a good year to buy a new aircraft for business use. But to claim the benefits of the bonus, you need to get your filing details in order and not overlook the record keeping necessary to justify the bonus claim. Further, to avoid getting afoul of the IRS, it’s critical to understand what business use really is. As for 2012, the bonus will be 50 percent, but if combined with allowable expensing elections, you can still claim a sizable chunk of depreciation to reduce your tax burden and make the cost of a new airplane for business use more appealing than it otherwise might be.

Your thorough reports provide a very valuable service to your readers. Unfortunately for your readers, the March 2011 report on private pilot test prep was not up to your usual high standards, in my view. For example, regarding King Schools, your reporter had two major complaints. First was the price. But thats because you compared the King Schools price for six courses with everyone elses price for a single course.

Your review of in-the-ear headsets was interesting, but you might want to give a little more space to custom eartips. I bought my Lightspeed Mach 1 with custom eartips as an integrated package, which includes a negotiated, reduced fee for the audiologist and saves a little cash. But either way, its we’ll worth it. With custom earmolds, the Mach 1 is so comfortable I cant feel its presence on my head or in my ears. It also stays in place much more securely than with foam tips, so we’ll that I removed the over-the-ear clip from the left earpiece/mic unit and it still doesnt budge. And, contrary to your quote from the competition, although the low-frequency attenuation isn’t as good as the best ANR earcups, the high-frequency noise reduction is as good as the best head-crushing vise Ive worn.

Sunglasses (see December 2010 Aviation Consumer) are always a great subject. I purchased Veldalo Titanium sunglasses a few years ago after reading about them in Aviation Consumer. This was my first encounter with copper-rose (Blue Blockers) sunglasses and I loved them. They worked best at twilight, amplifying contrast. A problem I had was my glass cockpit displays, which had a washed-out look. I got a pair of free glasses at the last Consumer Electronics show in Las Vegas. While the glasses look funky to my friends, they work great, are comfortable and let me view my glass panel with no problems.

In 2003 when we looked at the aircraft loan market we said, “If rates go much lower, the money will be free.” Well, theyre lower. And though the money isn’t free yet, its cheap to those who can qualify. The recent financial chaos means there’s no wink-wink, nudge-nudge approval, but it also means that the surviving lenders are looking for those qualified buyers. There’s less competition in the loan market and some big players, like Sovereign Bank, have pulled out. Reselling and securitization of loans isn’t the market it once was. This means a greater reliance on equity lending-borrowing against the value of the aircraft-and tougher standards for the borrower.

As a retired professor of economics, I cant resist adding to your article on product support in the March 2010 issue. First, all of us realize that producers are in business to make money. Period. No matter how much we might like to believe their warm and fuzzy marketing pieces, without profits, they leave. The fundamental accounting equations: Total revenue minus total cost equals profit. Repairs and support are costs for any producer

Nice article in the February 2010 issue on the Cirrus SR20. I would like to add some comments/corrections. I own the number two all-electric SR20 (s/n 1269) having taken delivery in January 2003 (boy, was it cold up there then). I have 650 hours on it now and generally have been very pleased with it. You mentioned a $1200 cost for replacement of the reefing cutters every six years. There are two of these and at slightly over $1000 each, its slightly over $2000 to do the job. The number two alternator is a 20-amp B & C unit, same as used on the Bonanza, not the 35-amp unit you referenced. The carbon fiber wing used in the G3 is 50 pounds lighter than the original wing. That, plus the 50-pound increase in gross weight gives you a nice 100-pound increase in useful load.

For many of us, the mention of a repo man may conjure images of Emilio Estevez hunting down a 64 Chevy Malibu with aliens in the trunk. But the sad truth is that repossessions happen on aircraft just the way they do on any other vehicle bought on credit. There’s a common misconception that these aircraft go back to the manufacturer. They don’t. They go to the bank that financed the sale and now has an aircraft owner defaulting on their loan. Thats a sad day for the owner, but, perhaps, an opportunity for you-if you want a light Cessna or a Bell helicopter. Banks (or finance corporations) don’t want to own aircraft. So much so that our sources tell us they will do almost anything to work with the buyer to avoid taking the aircraft. But it does happen (perhaps more so these days) so there are systems in place to try and recoup some of the loss. For most major finance outlets, that means the repod aircraft goes to a dealer who then resells it. It turns out the right to do this is highly prized and closely guarded information among aircraft dealers. We tried to find out where youd be likely to find a repo Diamond or Cirrus and had only limited success-and where we did have success it was as off-the-record information only.

Ive now used the DX (via AirBrief) on a few flights. I find it better than any plate system I have used. Including government plates, Jepp Q service and JeppView on a tablet PC. Page turns are a bit slow and it doesnt have real zoom as you say. I have used both the terminal books and downloaded the airport I was flying to using airbrief.com for the destination airport. The fact that you can get to airbrief.com via the Kindle is great. The single airport PDF reduces the hassle factor significantly.

Congratulations on a great article on the 210. Thoroughly enjoyed it. However, one comment caught my eye on page 27 “Owners report…annuals that run around $2500 to $3000.” Sorry, I don’t buy that. In 2003, when I was looking for an aircraft, I purchased a used 1982 TR182. I would rather have had a T210 but, being picky about my maintenance, I was not sure that I could afford to maintain the aircraft properly. I settled happily on the TR182, which has been a great airplane. Since 2003, my annuals have been: These are the out-the-door costs and, by the way, the 2004 and 2008 annuals were owner assists-not Cessna service centers, but reputable mechanics. I believe that what you are showing is the basic shop charge for the annual inspection. I think that this could be very misleading. I suggest that you show total costs for the annual and include the shop basic annual charge if you like. That would give a much more realistic cost of ownership to prospective buyers. If I were to believe those annual numbers, maybe I should have purchased a T210.

I enjoyed your article on four-place cruisers in the March 2009 Aviation Consumer. However, I would like to set the record straight on a couple of points and provide another perspective regarding resale values and what defines “best value.” Regarding production volumes of the DA40 versus the SR20, more DA40s have been produced from startup through the end of 2008 than total SR20s through 2008, even though the SR20 has been in production three years longer. Since 2003, the DA40 has outsold the SR20 every year. Here are the statistics to support that. You commented that the purchase price for a comparable used SR20 is generally less than a DA40. As you can see from the numbers above, the higher price of the DA40 cannot be attributed to lower production volume as you supposed as there have been 20 percent more DA40s produced than SR20s. The difference is more likely driven by the markets acknowledgement that the DA40 is an overall better value than the others, resulting in higher demand. Having an airplane retain more of its original value is hardly a negative. Less depreciation equates to a lower overall cost of ownership as owners recapture a larger proportion of their original investment on sale. This factor is often overlooked by prospective owners when evaluating the true cost of owning an airplane. True value is much more than purchase price. Its also operating costs, insurance costs, maintenance costs and investment recapture upon sale.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with your evaluation of three landing lights available to general aviation aircraft. (See March 2009 Aviation Consumer.) I think it will be extremely useful to many aircraft owners who have to wonder what the best option for landing lights really is. However, I am writing because I believe that my company, Laminar Flow Systems Inc., has available a Final-Light LED landing light which would have produced quite a different result, if it could have been included in the tests. I am not faulting Aviation Consumer for not including it-the Final-Light is only just now becoming available, although I showed it a Oshkosh a year ago. It comes with an FAA DER approved 8110-3 form included in the $350 to $400 price. Since there is no immediate prospect of a new test happening, I have made a video of a similar test, which included our Final-Light as we’ll as the ones AC tested, and some other combinations. You can see the video at http://snipurl.com/euzla. You can also find it on YouTube by searching “LED Landing Light Test.” I cannot pretend to the impartiality of the Aviation Consumer tests, but I will state that all the lights were tested under the same conditions. I will also be sending Aviation Consumer a Final Light in the hope that you will get a chance to evaluate it soon.