Clueless Aviation Experts
My pet peeve in aviation is aviation experts who have no expertise in aviation. If a “would be” aviation expert is wearing a pilot’s costume or using aviation jargon out of context, an aviation expert that has no expertise in aviation is still a “would be”, not an expert.
For example, I recently read an article in Professional Pilot Magazine which immediately set off my pet peeve alarm. First off, the writer says he is a licensed pilot, which immediately means to me that he is a private pilot. If he was anything other, he would say he is commercial pilot or simply an ATP. It also tells me that he never flew for anyone, and that he never ran an actual flight department. So he does not know “jack” about aviation operations…just like the guy pictured above.
This article called “Value Optimization—The New Market Dynamic” is a detailed analysis of understanding the financial exposure of buying a used aircraft.
Let’s start off with the title indicating that this is a “New Market Dynamic”. Is he crazy or what? Ever since aircraft have been made out of metal, and the FAA has been involved, maintenance exposure has been a part of buying and operating aircraft. Who doesn’t know that?
Any professional pilot or appraiser knows exactly where an aircraft is when they examine it, and what the next five to ten years of required maintenance costs are going to be. It is not a guess on their part; this is known to all professionals.
The writer in this article says he did some analytical work for JSSI which supports his claim to expertise. Well, I did some analytical work for JSSI, In fact, I created JSSI and co-founded JSSI with Rick Haskins and Ronnie Zilberbrand in 1989. So I know a little something about this.
Additionally, I am not just a licensed pilot. I am typed in 5 jets and checked out in 52 aircraft with over 17,000 total flight hours. I flew for some of the biggest corporations in the world.
So what is our neophyte pundit writer trying to say? He is saying that understanding aircraft evaluation is a “New Market Dynamic”. To me, it is not.
I detect from this article that the writer pundit is really motivated by new manufacturers to push new aircraft sales and to deter older aircraft buyers by implying that somehow older aircraft are worthless. Well sir, I beg to differ with you.
His primary explanation is that older aircraft require more extensive inspections and no one sees them coming.
One of the specific purposes of a pre-buy inspection is to completely understand the aircaft’s current condition and upcoming work. Everyone sees it coming! The author also lumps all of his various ratings based on a type of aircraft, not individual aircraft. That is utterly absurd! No two aircraft in any model are going to be exactly the same or, in some instances, even close. I certainly know of 30 year old aircraft that are in much better condition than some five year old aircraft.
All the other numbers and charts and information in the article are also useless simply because each and every aircraft, starting from the week after it was built, is going to have different cycles and hours. They will all require scheduled maintenance at different times. This means gross and blanket assumptions with detailed percentages about pricing by types are simplistic at best.
There will be a pre-purchase inspection, and the professionals who perform the inspection will lay out a detailed snapshot of that aircraft’s condition at that time. This will Include what inspections, AD’s, and upcoming work up will be for the next five years, expressly for that aircraft.
To suggest that a person that who an afford to buy a jet aircraft is too incompetent to have a pre-purchase inspection, or to get a detailed report about the condition of the aircraft is to suggest that the buyer is an idiot. Is that what the author is trying to say, or is it really about acquiring the author’s “magic” services?
Erudite Solutions for Business Aviation