Any one have experience with one of these jets? Can you get close to break even chartering these? I found an updated one, good hours on the gold maint. plan etc. Meets the sound requirements. Looks good in and out. It has a wing x-ray inspection coming up in 10 months. I realize that could get expensive. I would like to have this on charter at my local regional airport and use it for business and personal. Would like the charter to help cover some expenses of keeping the jet around. Thanks
DonV is an excellent resource for this stuff; I'm sure he will chime in. Until then: If you charter it, keep in mind that your insurance will be higher, the maintenance requirements will come up much faster due to FAA regs, and the plane will have to pass a very detailed inspection which may or may not add cost in order to bring it into compliance. Its easy to chase your tail here, as the plane makes no money sitting still, but wear and tear from others using it adds up, too. Quickly in some cases. Most people I know operating jets have a very slim profit margin. Are you planning to apply for your own 135 or place it in an existing charter co? If you're applying...whew, good luck. I've been in the que for a year now after I was urged by the FISDO to get my app in quickly (which I did) because they had "a light work load and it should only take a few months".
What's your mission? Seems to me you're inquiring because you want a cheap way to own a jet. I think Hawkers are boat anchors. There's a reason they're cheap. It's because you'll be buried in it.
The 700 was a good airplane in its day. Of course, it's day ended about about 20 years ago. Keep in mind that it is the product of British engineering from the 1970s, with all that implies. And it is 30+ years old now. So don't expect it to be all that reliable. It is no different than buying a cheap XJ-6-- it may be cheap to buy, but it won't be cheap to own. As for chartering it, if it is currently on 135, is RVSM, current on all of its inspections, service bulletins, etc then you might be able to offset some costs. One important reason why chartering would make sense is that MSP has a minimum use clause, so you will have to pay for, I think, 150 hours per year whether you fly or not. Could be 300. Avionics are something to check into. If it isn't RVSM, forget it. Most likely, you will need to upgrade the FMSs, if it has FMSs. Units like the Universal UNS-1M are not supported at all now, and the GNS-XLS is not far behind. If you have to hire and train your own crew to fly it 135, I doubt if you will even be able to recoup costs, let alone make any money. If there is a 135 operator nearby that will operate it for you and already operates Hawkers, that will help a great deal. The bottom line is that if you can afford to operate it, you can afford to buy something better. Like an 800, for starters.
I was checking in to different chartering companies and the most common jet all of the small guys offer are the 700's. I checked into buying and it seemed like a good deal. Here is the 700a I was looking at. 1977 HAWKER 700A Jet Aircraft For Sale At Controller.com 800's are twice as much some times Triple.
I've seen that plane around Boca airport. It does look pretty clean . Many of those didn't have freon ac so you could heat up pretty quickly on a taxi way in summer time. Also no TRs are good from a maintenance standpoint but not so much from a short field standpoint. I would guess fixed costs to keep that thing flying would +- $4k per hour with a minimum util of 300hrs per annum
There are good reasons 800s cost more to buy-- but certainly won't cost any more to operate than this airplane, and the 800 will be worth more when you go to sell it. The 700 will be excluded from a fair number of charter customers due to it's age. No TRs are a good thing on a Hawker-- it doesn't need them and they are one more thing to maintain.
You know, if you are determined to buy an old jet, I'd seriously consider a Sabre 65. It has a comparable cabin to the Hawker, is much faster, more efficient, and has much more range. You can take a Sabre 65 to Hawaii, for instance, or anywhere else in the world. A Hawker 700? No. Yet, I think a Sabre 65 is going to be the same purchase price, or maybe less, than a 700.
Cool. Another advantage is that some (all?) of the Sabres have hard points on the wings so you can shoot rockets and stuff. I think they have the same wings and tail as the F-86 Sabrejet...
I was very surprised when I saw this article about this world record speed set by a Sabre 65. Love the shape of the windows too. There are two for sale in Donaldson Center in Greenville, SC. One was owned by some sort of ponzi schemer-I think it is still available. http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/402944/forfeiture-document-filed-in-federal-court-in.txt FX AVIATION Swiss Team Breaks Record for Around-the-World Flight, Despite Encountering Volcanic Eruption | Popular Science Image Unavailable, Please Login
Eddie would have an assistant drive a transporter with his 355 and 275 NART to FCA Florida Region Sebring track events back in the late '90s- early 2000s. Eddie would fly down in his Sabreliner. Not sure if it was a 65 or not. By the time I got home to Orlando, Eddie would be back home in Lexington, N.C. My uncle Phil got to fly the some of the Sabreliners in the General Dynamics corporate fleet. Really liked them. I asked him once why GD didn't go with JetStars and he said it was largely operational costs. Someone feel free to start a JetStar thread!
The Hawker guy emailed me today to sell the jet quickly due to new jet purchase he will take in the 400's. I don't see any anywhere for 400's. This plane is good on inspections till the 48 (which could be a big one) in 12/13. Owner is a large medical lab company not going through a broker. They flew in it monthly. At $450k does this plane make sense. Its on msp gold and has rsvm.
Never understood why a BizJet needed 4 (count 'em 4) engines. I'm sure there was an operational costs issue...
Let us know how it goes! If you fly it much, you will be spending that much each year. If you intend to not fly a whole lot, I would strongly suggest that you find out what the minimum usage requirement for MSP is-- you might end up paying that whether you fly or not.
The JetStar started out with two engines, but they weren't powerful enough. When they looked at the engine options of the time, 4 smaller engines were the best choice.
Low-cost jets are that way for a reason. I'm not trying to dissuade you, but the LAST decision during the purchase process is the make/model. Your average trip length, load factor, annual budget, etc., will tell you what plane you need. Finding a shop capable of properly maintaining it will be a challenge. If they haven't had one under their care, their mechs will be doing OJT on your dime. No one makes money chartering, but it helps offset your ownership costs. Insurance for 135 has risen dramatically since 9/11, for no good reason, but one needs it and it raises the hourly. You need to look at what the competitors in the area operate. If they charge $200 less per hour, their plane is what the customer will go for. I would steer you towards a Citation Ultra or Bravo; lower DOC, so more customers will use it. Easier to find mechanics and pilots. Granted the Citation doesn't have the ramp presence of the Hawker, but it costs much less per hour, burns a lot less fuel, and will generate more revenue per year.
