Aerial Perspective: Flying Dollars and Sense

Remote sensing, whether film camera, digital mapping camera, multi/hyperspectral camera, lidar, radar, or geophysical, can be accomplished from a wide range of circumstances and platforms. One of the most common methods in use today is airborne data acquisition. The use of aerial platforms for the collection of information about the Earth, or objects on the Earth, can be traced back to the mid-19th century when tethered balloons and film cameras were used to record images of the Earth's surface. Even though the basic technique is the same today, the sensors and the aerial platforms are much more capable and complex.

The aerial platforms available today include satellites, airplanes, helicopters, and UAVs (unmanned aerial vehicles). Within this group, airplanes and helicopters provide tremendous flexibility at reasonable costs and are widely used by most companies for airborne data acquisition. But the question that is increasingly critical to every business plan is whether to own or lease the aircraft. This is a very important and complex consideration.

Just as most pilots dream of owning their own aircraft, many companies engaged in acquiring data remotely from the air also endeavor to incorporate aircraft ownership into their operations. The reasons vary. Some are valid; some may not be.

The first decision is to determine the best aircraft for the work. The questions involved are complicated and answers are sometimes tough to discern. Typical mission profiles, priorities relative to performance, reliability and safety, and budget will generally drive this decision.

Fixed Wing (Airplane) or Rotary Wing (Helicopter)?

Helicopters are uniquely suited for certain types of work but are very expensive to operate. Airplanes, on the other hand provide a very stable platform for many applications and are relatively inexpensive to operate. The decision to go with an airplane or a helicopter should be apparent based on the primary type of work to be performed.

Single or Twin Engine?

This is an ongoing debate in many aviation circles. There are exceptions of course, but generally speaking, twin engine aircraft can go faster, carry more useful load, provide system redundancy, and afford better climb performance than their single engine counterparts. However, twin engine aircraft are also more complex and cost more to operate. One thing that is important to mention here: if you have an engine failure in a single engine aircraft, you will land. In a twin, you may have enough power to continue flight to a suitable landing site such as an airport. However, don't assume that just because an airplane has two engines it can continue flying. All conventional twins will lose approximately 80 percent of their ability to climb after an engine failure. Despite common assumptions, twins do not have twice the power of a single. They have the required power divided between two engines. Look very carefully at single engine performance if you are considering a twin engine airplane for your remote sensing platform.

Piston or Turbine Engine?

We all know what piston engines are; we have them in our cars. Piston engines for airplanes are quite common, fairly reliable, and relatively inexpensive to own and operate. There are two key things to consider. One is the power that is produced. Piston engines, even the largest available, are limited to around 300 horsepower each. There are much larger, more powerful, radial piston engines out there, but they are not usually found in aircraft suitable for remote sensing. Turboprops, jet engines coupled to a propeller, generally produce from around 450 horsepower to 2,000 horsepower and more. Remember the 80 percent loss of climb ability after an engine failure mentioned before? Having more power translates not only to greater overall performance, but also to greater overall safety. Federal Aviation Administration studies indicate that piston engines in aircraft have a failure rate, on average, of one every 3,200 flight hours while turbine engines have a failure rate of one per 375,000 flight hours. Accordingly, for every turbine engine experiencing a failure, 117 piston engines will have failed. In other words, turbine engines are more than 11,700 percent more reliable than piston engines.

Although turbine powered aircraft are typically more expensive to buy and to operate than their piston powered counterparts, they do provide an unparalleled degree of performance, productivity, and safety. One additional factor to consider when deciding on the type of powerplant to have in your aircraft is fuel. Piston engines use avgas while turbines use jet fuel. Avgas is currently readily available in the United States, but is increasingly difficult to find in most other parts of the world. Some industry experts claim that avgas will soon become difficult to obtain in the United States as well. Jet fuel, on the other hand, is, and will continue to be, available everywhere in the world.

Other Considerations?

Of course, there are other variables that can't be quantified or discussed in this format. Some companies won't care what the costs are—owning is something of value to them at any price point. Others won't accept the headaches and liability that come with owning at any cost and will seek alternative methods of flying their sensors. Mathematical analysis can't accurately weigh these factors accurately; philosophy, insight, and instinct might offer better guidance.

New or Used?

If you get to this point in the decision making process, you are probably in the market for an aircraft. New aircraft typically provide the latest in technology and features, but come at a very high price. Used aircraft can sometimes appear to be a bargain, but could have hidden problems that can be very expensive to rectify down the road. Don't forget about the airframe modifications to accommodate the sensors. So what should you do? Many believe that an aircraft broker or consultant can be invaluable during this process. Having an expert on your team can help prevent costly mistakes.

So How Much?

Now that the type of aircraft has been decided on, how much does it cost to own and operate an airplane? The answers vary from the very fuzzy "If you have to ask, you can't afford it" to a more tangible, but simple "four times the fuel burn, every time." As with many analytical problems, aircraft ownership is ruled by a complex set of variables that can't necessarily be evaluated independently.

There are fixed costs that routinely occur whether the aircraft is flying or not. These fixed costs include acquisition of the aircraft, loan payments, one-time improvements (avionics upgrades, camera hole installation, electrical power and interior modifications, paint), mandatory recurring inspections, GPS database subscriptions, in-cockpit weather information subscriptions, charts and publication subscriptions, taxes, insurance, and tie down/landing/hangar fees. In many cases, fixed costs can actually incorporate significant variable costs. For example, required routine inspections are performed to uncover unknown maintenance deficiencies. The cost to address deficiencies found during an inspection can vary dramatically. Fixed costs will also include your pilots; pilots must be paid, insured, trained, and maintained.

Each hour that the aircraft is operating also generates numerous variable costs. Variable costs include fuel, oil, and engine and propeller reserves. Mandatory engine and propeller overhauls are quite costly. Most owners set aside a set amount of cash for each hour flown to cover these predictable, albeit high costs.

The alternative to owning and operating your own aircraft, of course, is to lease or rent an aircraft when you need one. Depending on your location and your requirements, local providers of remote sensing aircraft may be difficult to find. Dynamic Aviation specializes in providing aircraft and aviation infrastructure to agencies and organizations with exacting data needs but lacking aviation expertise. We do not own aerial cameras or remote sensors; our customers do. We do offer versatile aerial platforms into which a variety of technologies can be installed to acquire data of all types. By allowing our customers to allocate their capital to technology—not aircraft— we make it possible for our customers to operate more efficiently and effectively.

Like every other business decision that must be made, there are pros and cons to every option. Carefully consider your mission requirements, your resources, and your goals. Then enjoy the view!

About the Author

Steven E. Scates is a member of the sales and marketing team at Dynamic Aviation. He holds a BS in aerospace administration from Middle Tennessee State University. A former U.S. Army Aviator, Mr. Scates is an instrument rated, commercial pilot qualified in single- and multi-engine airplanes and helicopters.

» Back to our September 2007 Issue