Notifications
Clear all
Topic starter
Attention aviation buffs, please educate me.
The VI Daily News' story about the above topic stated that $2.5 million of the $3.3 million loan from GERS to Seaborne was for overhaul maintenace on two of its planes that required every 3 years.
Doing the math that's $2.5 mil / 2 planes / 3 years / 365 days = $1141.55 per day that needs to be allocated per plane for overhaul maintenance. I assume daily maintenace is another allocated operating expense.
Are these numbers accurate, fudged, or vary based on the age of the plane? A quick look at Wikipedia said a new Twin Otter DHC-6 cost $2 million.
I'm only familiar with gov't corruption and kickbacks not airplane repairs.
Posted : January 16, 2010 12:24 pm
deleted, better answer below.
Posted : January 16, 2010 12:49 pm
Here is more specifically on Seaborne. Looks like operating in salt-water marine environment puts additional requirements on D checks. Perhaps it is for two planes after all.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/03/13/323780/is-vikings-new-twin-otter-worth-its-salt.html
And I quote:
"Nonetheless, as Seaborne's seaplanes operate in salt water, they must undergo major overhaul every three years at a cost of about $1.5 million each, which is about equivalent to the bluebook value of the actual aircraft."
Posted : January 16, 2010 1:04 pm
The cost of a new otter is 15million not 2 million as per wiki!
Posted : January 16, 2010 1:22 pm
Yes, in my quote they talk about a "blue book value" for the comparable DHC-6, meaning the same type/age as the one Seaborne runs. So yes, presumably they could just discard their planes every 3 years and buy other used Twin Otters at about the same cost 😉 However, the supply of used planes is kinda limited, and most Twin Otter operators probably don't just want to part with them. Plus - you still have to do the D check at the same price anyway, its not like the other guys will do it for you and then sell 🙂 🙂
So the bottom line is - it is nice that we have penny-wise people here but I think Seaborne isn't really ripping anyone off.
Posted : January 16, 2010 1:32 pm
Plus most of any used planes of this type would have been used in the same environment otherwise they probably wouldn't be for sale.
Posted : January 16, 2010 1:47 pm
I don't understand the concern about a company that provides a much needed service with an excellent safety record, the amount of a "Loan". What's the Point here?
Posted : January 16, 2010 2:09 pm
On the radio I heard about the GERS loans. The seaborne loan was said to be for maintenance, aircraft accusition and operating expenses.
Carambola was also loaned 16 mil for operating expenses and maintaining the Marriott brand
Posted : January 16, 2010 5:16 pm
If nothing else this serves to show why ticket prices are not $29 each way or something like that between islands.
It does drive me a crazy to think that I can go from Baltimore to say Cleveland for like $39 each way on Southwest but have to pay 3 times as much to go to a much closer St. Thomas...but a breakdown in costs like this make it clear why this is the case!
Sean
Posted : January 19, 2010 9:25 pm
