My office is 110 miles from my house, and 80 miles from the local airport. Though I telecommute most of the time, I always wish I was flying on those days I go to the office. If I had a plane, I would. And I’d also get an Instrument rating so I could fly as often as possible. Eighty miles seems like a good distance to commute by GA aircraft.
I used to work in Orange, CA, and a guy at the office lived in Big Bear. He had a Cherokee 140 that he would fly to work, a distance of 100 miles. He gave it up and sold his plane after a friend (fatally) crashed in IMC on approach to Fullerton; but considering L.A./Orange County traffic, and the quality of life living in the mountains, I think he had a pretty sweet set-up. Inexpensive plane, low fuel burn, loads of time saved.
But you have to consider that flying involves more than kicking the tire, lighting the fire, and going. You need to get to the airport, get the weather, file a flight plan (for IFR), perform the preflight check, etc. (Not to mention that there is some ground travel at the other end of the flight.)
So assuming you own an airplane, and that airplane is relatively inexpensive to operate (Cherokee 140 or 160, Cessna 150/152 or 172, or similar), what is the shorted distance you would consider it ‘worth it’ to use it for commuting?
I used to work for a San Diego company that did contract work for another company in Mountain View. One of the founders of the Mountain View company had a private plane, and every so often he and some of his colleagues would fly down and visit us. That’s way farther than 110 miles though, and it wasn’t a daily commute.
Is it possible this could ever be economical? That would never even occur to me. It feels like you’d burn more fuel on the takeoff than you would driving 100 miles in a reasonably fuel efficient car. That doesn’t even count the differences in upkeep, insurance, and getting to and from the airports. It would be freaking awesome though.
Depends on traffic, I guess. I have often flown from either Meacham (KFTW) or Flying Oaks (2TE2) to Love Field in Dallas (KDAL) when picking up relatives arriving on Southwest. I can’t prove it actually saves time, but avoiding the horrific traffic snarls across the DFW metroplex is worth it. I’ve done it in Arrows, Cherokee 140, and a 172 on occasion.
Minor anecdote. I knew (15 years ago) someone who commuted daily from 2TE2 to KMWL (45 minute drive) in a 150. He kept a beater car at his work destination, so he could drive either way when weather prevented his flight (home or to work).
In case you’re wondering 2TE2 is a marvelous little grass strip that’s convenient to us DFW-ers who live on the west side. It’s like going back in time (link is a video of a landing there).
People fly between the Hawaiian Islands, and most of them aren’t all that far apart. The repeated takeoffs and landings were what led to that accident in the 1980s where part of the top of the plane peeled away and a flight attendant was sucked out and fell to her death.
I’m impressed at the guy who flew the 140 out of Big Bear regularly. That’s a lot to ask of the old 140 with those Hershey bar wings, especially with any significant load.
Anyway, it’s not the time you save, it’s the journey when you fly. I’d fly as little as 50 miles and consider it the best part of my day. And if need be, you can curl up in the back seat of the 172 (kind of) and wait for minimums.
Recently I was on a Delta flight from Portland (PDX) to Minneapolis-St Paul (MSP). My seatmate was a Delta pilot. (We were in coach.) He commutes from PDX to MSP where he then works trans-Atlantic flights. He flies MSP to London, Paris, or Rome, etc., stays the required minimum, and returns to MSP. Then he commutes back to PDX and home for a few days before doing it all over again.
ETA. Oh yeah. Forgot to mention our row got excellent service on that flight.
He was near six feet tall, and pretty fit. Flights were solo, and AFAIK he didn’t carry anything more than a briefcase. No idea how much fuel he carried, but he was flying light.
I hate driving with a passion, these days, my plane has spoiled me. Even a 50 mile air route I would do daily since I live about three minutes walking distance to my airport before I’m in my hangar. So the rest would depend on how much commute was left from the airport to where I was going. Keeping it in the hangar, your pre-flights are fairly quick without missing anything, and anything being wrong.
I wouldn’t hesitate to do the 80 mile daily commute provided the airport I was landing at, wasn’t too far from the airport.
Don’t forget the experimentals either, that’s what I fly, they are often more inexpensive to operate than the certified planes.
It really depends on the area. I’d say it is a little higher where I’m at, but not by much. I pay $100 a month for my hangar and 100 LL runs $4.79 in my area right now. Many areas, it is $250 or more a month for hangars, and $6-8.00+ for 100LL. Some planes fly on mogas. I was using it in my right tank for cruise, until they forced retailers to start using up to 10% ethanol grade mogas mandatory in my area. Some still use it, and I think my plane would be fine on it too, but I’m still checking my equipment for compatibility.
On my RV-6, annual condition inspections run $350 if you shop around, and have it ready for the mechanic, and you also put it back together. If you built much of your experimental yourself, you get to do your own, and save that expense. Insurance is no higher than what you would pay for a new car if you have a reasonable amount of flight time in type of plane, or you can choose not to have it and would still be legal with the exception of a few airports that require you to have at least liability, but that’s rare.
In no wind conditions, I get 23-24 mpg all day long down low and about 26-28 up high, cruising about mid 180’s which beats a good deal of cars gas mileage while they are lucky to average out at 60 mph. On short commutes, you can often shave off another 10% on miles since you’re flying in a straight line generally, about 20% on the longer commutes.
Parts tend to be a bit higher on a plane, and way higher on many of the engine parts themselves especially if they are certified. Experimental planes, there is more choice, but still high.
It generally takes a higher initial investment for a plane if bought new. But buy an used older plane, fly it for ten years, and I wouldn’t be surprised if you sold it for the same price you paid for it by taking care of it, even in today’s lousy economy. On at least new cars, I think ten years worth of use, you might be getting 15-25% of the price you paid for it.
Dad paid $10,200 for a Cessna 172K in the mid-'70s, and sold it in the mid-'80s for $19,000. He paid $19,000 for a Skylane in the late-'70s, and sold it in the late-'80s or early-'90s for $38,000.
I had a thought while I was sitting in traffic Friday: If you own an airplane, you want to fly it. If you commute with it, you get to fly it more. If you’re flying anyway, may as well get some practical use out of it!
I remember those days, because my broke ass kept saving money every year to try to buy one, but every year they kept rising so much, it would be out of my budget. I finally gave up. It was crazy. It was impossible to lose money on it during those times. These days, with the economy terrible, the prices seem to be about neutral after owning them for a few years. Definitely a buyers market these days.
The rise in used airplane prices in that era may have been scarcity-induced, because Cessna stopped making light singles for almost a decade and the other manufacturers cut way back. Inflation was a big part of it, too. Now, prices more closely reflect typical depreciation patterns.
And, the more frequently an airplane is flown, the *fewer *the maintenance problems it develops, especially with the engine.
Some years ago I was working at a site that had its own airstrip and several people commuted by air. They also had an air shuttle service to other sites round the country.
You talk about a fuel-efficient airplane. I’m wondering about the following:
If we take a small, fuel-efficient airplane, how many gallons would it usually consume to fly 100 miles? I’m aware that this can vary with conditions and equipment, but what’s the ballpark?
It seems to be largely a question of trading money for time which in some circumstances can definitely be worth it, even for someone’s commute and not for military/medical purposes. I can see that for people whose time is very precious, it could be worth it to use a helicopter to go from one place to another a few miles away in a traffic-jammed city, for example.
Your typical single engine small plane gets between 10 and 15 mpg. Aviation fuel goes for around $6/gallon these days although many planes can use auto fuel.
