An ANN Reader Talks About The Downside of RVSM

By Mark Conner, Chief Pilot, Dycom Industries, Inc.

Most corporate operators see this as a winning move for the airlines and a financial burden to us. True that the airlines will save money by cruising at more efficient altitudes but the cost to my corporation is significant with little reward.
 
The cost to conform our late model LearJet 35A was over $180,000 in direct cost. If one includes the cost of nearly a month of downtime for the modification, that number might easily be doubled. We will see little if any reward as our cruise is usually above RVSM altitudes. Moreover, the FAA placed a huge burden on part 91 operators to submit a manual covering operations and maintenance procedures. This should have been covered by the SCT's continued airworthiness instructions and a new FAR 91 regulation covering RVSM operations. This time and expense to small flight department is not insignificant.
 
Many turboprop operators have chosen not to spend the money to modify their aircraft. They will now be forced to operate at inefficient altitudes. Moreover, the weather they used to top will now force either a circumnavigation or a cancellation of the flight. This hurts general aviation as it makes planes more expensive to own, or operate and reduces the utility of a huge number of planes.
 
Many operators of older jets have found conformity to RVSM cost prohibitive. There is a whole generation of older LearJets, Citations, Hawkers, and Saberliners that will be doomed. Their values have steadily dropped and operating costs have risen due to high fuel flows. For example, older Lear 24 can be had for little more than the price of a good Navajo with an operating cost over $1500 per hour. This made them ideal for owners who operated infrequently and were willing to foot the bill for fuel as long as they didn't have to face a multimillion-dollar debt service. These planes are destined to be sold to third world countries for little more than their salvage values.

RVSM has not been a friend to General Aviation. It is yet another move toward the restrictive type of airspace that plagues Europe. I cannot help but ask how long until the rest of General Aviation is as restricted and costly as it is now in Europe. How long before legislators, in the name of national security and airline profitability, add the next level of bricks on the tomb of General Aviation?

FMI: http://www.faa.gov/ats/ato/rvsm1.htm