Government jets cost 4500 euros per hour when they are not in use.

Idbatterim

i heard about the jet being used for the above purpose on the news! is it a sick joke or after being hald captive for months is an airbus or boeing not good enough?

lmimmfn

cmon, enough of the witch hunting for money, we need government jets end of story( although we did have to buy that Gulf Stream jet in full after that tosser Harney took it to Sligo for a day to open a mates/relatives fecking off license, the EU were outrages as they part funded it so we have to give them back their funding ).

thebman

Manic Moran wrote: »

Something is wrong with that number. E4,500 an hour is almost E40m per year.

The G-IV is an expensive jet, but it doesn't depreciate that much in a year. Even accounting for the salaries of the pilots and mechanics and steward, and the tea they're drinking while not flying, and the oil which leaks from the engines as they sit there and get overhauled on their annual services with the replacement of the various sub-components like O-rings which need changing if the aircraft is used or not, and the heater which is used to heat the hangar whilst the mechanic is drinking tea.... There's no way that's going to tally E40m.

NTM

shift outrage from her to the jet :rolleyes:

Manic Moran

Idbatterim wrote: »

i heard about the jet being used for the above purpose on the news! is it a sick joke or after being hald captive for months is an airbus or boeing not good enough?

There is precedent. Can't recall his name offhand, but the Irish hostage (Waite?) held for over a year in Lebanon was picked up by a Government Jet.

NTM

ednwireland

one of the best uses of a gov. jet in years IMO, certainly a better use than ferrying all those stupid politicians around.

cant really object to this i doubt she was in a mental state to change a few times in various airports after a 107 days been threatened to be killed (doubt theres a direct flight from khartoum to dublin)

FlutterinBantam

rsom wrote: »

Can anyone tell me how much it will cost to send the Govt jet to Khartoum to collect and bring home Sharon Cummins, the Goal worker who was released by kidnappers.

Thanks

Approx €8000 per flying hour on an annualised basis

= 20 x €8000= €160,000.

This is not operating costs by the way.

To govt in goodwill spin= priceless

rsom

ednwireland wrote: »

one of the best uses of a gov. jet in years IMO, certainly a better use than ferrying all those stupid politicians around.

cant really object to this i doubt she was in a mental state to change a few times in various airports after a 107 days been threatened to be killed (doubt theres a direct flight from khartoum to dublin)

No objection...but I do wonder if there was any alternative that might have been maybe 100k cheaper.

OS119

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Approx €8000 per flying hour on an annualised basis

= 20 x €8000= €160,000.

This is not operating costs by the way.

To govt in goodwill spin= priceless

theres no way that it actually cost €160,000 to fly a G-IV from Dublin to Khartoum and back - it just didn't. when you own the platform, pay the crew regardless of whether they fly or sit on their arse at Baldonnall, and you do all the first-line servicing yourself, the only actually cost is the fuel, and bringing the aircraft 20 hrs closer to servicing and end of service life. the crew would need to undertake a certain number of flying hours per month anyway, so the 'use' is being paid for whether its going to Khartoum or just doing 'log book' hours flying to Shannon and back.

a private medical evacuation flight would have been appropriate - particularly given that in hostage recovery situations you don't actually know what condition the hostage is in until you get your hands on them - but in real terms i wouldn't have a problem with this tasking.

asdasd

is it a sick joke or after being hald captive for months is an airbus or boeing not good enough?

Probably they were worried that after a few hours in the stopover in Heathrow she would have clamoured back on the next plane to Khartoum, anything to get out of there.

FlutterinBantam

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Approx €8000 per flying hour on an annualised basis

= 20 x €8000= €160,000.

This is not operating costs by the way.

To govt in goodwill spin= priceless

OS119 wrote: »

theres no way that it actually cost €160,000 to fly a G-IV from Dublin to Khartoum and back - it just didn't. when you own the platform, pay the crew regardless of whether they fly or sit on their arse at Baldonnall, and you do all the first-line servicing yourself, the only actually cost is the fuel, and bringing the aircraft 20 hrs closer to servicing and end of service life. the crew would need to undertake a certain number of flying hours per month anyway, so the 'use' is being paid for whether its going to Khartoum or just doing 'log book' hours flying to Shannon and back.

.

Read my post!

OS119

so if you know that it didn't actually 'cost' €160,000 to fly to Khartoum and back why post that figure?

FlutterinBantam

OS119 wrote: »

so if you know that it didn't actually 'cost' €160,000 to fly to Khartoum and back why post that figure?

That's why I put the sentence "This is not the operating costs by the way" into my post.

OS119

so why bother in the first place?

the only way to determine the cost of the operation is: the operating cost (a) + loss of future life (b) - cost of whatever it would have done otherwise (c) = what it actually cost (d).

FlutterinBantam

rsom wrote: »

Can anyone tell me how much it will cost to send the Govt jet to Khartoum to collect and bring home Sharon Cummins, the Goal worker who was released by kidnappers.

Thanks

OS119 wrote: »

so why bother in the first place?

Because somebody asked!!

the only way to determine the cost of the operation is: the operating cost (a) + loss of future life (b) - cost of whatever it would have done otherwise (c) = what it actually cost (d).

You are into actuarian territory now,not the way to figure out costs.

risks maybe ,but not costs;)

OS119

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

You are into actuarian territory now,not the way to figure out costs.

risks maybe ,but not costs;)

how can the 'cost' be more than what was spent and the flying hours used?

it cost a few thousand litres of AVGAS and 20 hours of airframe/engine life (minus the fuel and airframe/engine hours it would of used anyway).

the airframe was paid for long ago, the spares chain has to be paid for regardless of where the thing flies - and if you wish to keep it as an asset it needs to fly regularly - the crew are paid the same whether they fly to Khartoum or sit in the ready-room at Baldonnell.

if i drive from Glasgow to Birmingham it costs £25 in diesel. thats it. the 'overhead' costs of owning a car - the cash you spent on the day you bought it and the insurance - are the same whether you use it or not, they are the costs of owning an asset and have already been spent, and are not the costs of operating it and should not be used to determine whether a particular tasking gave VFM. the servicing costs are dependant on the mileage you do - but 20 airframe/engine hours and 14,000 (ish) miles of AVGAS and the subsequent spares/servicing do not add up to €160,000.

by all means decide whether its worth owning a G-IV when you could sell it for €xmillion, or whether the airframe/engine hours + fuel used meant that a particular sortie gave VFM, or indeed whether having a pair of state-owned jets on call means that ministers use them in a way that they wouldn't if they were contracted from a private company on a 'per hour' basis and the costs were transparent and open to public scrutiny, but don't mix up the different costs - because they are for different things.

FlutterinBantam

Annualised basis, thats what I said, annualised basis.

OS119

but 'annualised' costs are just made up figures because the aircraft isn't paid for on an annual basis, they don't give any indication either of the actual funds used or the recoverable funds you could get if you sold the asset - they mean nothing whatsoever.

i can see no point in posting an 'annuallised' figure unless you wish to muddy the water - nobody learns anything from it and its easy to refute, even to those who are staggeringly hostile to the way ministers abuse state assets for political gain.

the jet cost €x.ymillion in 1991, the only way i can see of usefully 'annualising' the cost of the aircraft is to determine whether the state borrowed €x.ymillion in 1991 and how much it cost to pay that back, otherwise its just makey-uppy figures which in no way inform the situation.

FlutterinBantam

I pointed all that out in my post.

If the person wanted the actual operational cost it's a different matter.Quite frankly I feel you are trying to muddy the waters.


I pointed all this out.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/odea-defends-836419m-cost-of-jet-travel-1909062.html

squonk

Ah come on! Considering all the crap our tax money has been used for (e-voting etc.) even plane related (ferrying JOD around the place). giving this girl a direct flight home after the experience she's been through is fairly decent in my book. She deserves it and I don't think any of us would complain if we were in her position. It was a nice thing to do and, whatever it costs, you can be sure that it's less than what your bunch of local TD's collectively claim on expenses this month.

OS119

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I pointed all that out in my post.

If the person wanted the actual operational cost it's a different matter.Quite frankly I feel you are trying to muddy the waters.


I pointed all this out.

no you didn't, you just said that it was the annuallised cost - as if it meant something and was 'real money' that if not spent on the G-IV could be spent on other things. which isn't true.

unfortunate the search function is broken, otherwise i could point you to previous posts i've made about the outrage of ministers using, or causing to be used, state assets for party political gain - so, i'm very much not trying to muddy the waters.

FlutterinBantam

OS119 wrote: »

no you didn't, you just said that it was the annuallised cost - as if it meant something and was 'real money' that if not spent on the G-IV could be spent on other things. which isn't true.


unfortunate the search function is broken, otherwise i could point you to previous posts i've made about the outrage of ministers using, or causing to be used, state assets for party political gain - so, i'm very much not trying to muddy the waters.

I think sir you will find i have no axe to grind there.

I s p e c i f i c a l l y said it was not operational costs

What has that got to do with this issue sir??

FlutterinBantam

squonk wrote: »

Ah come on! Considering all the crap our tax money has been used for (e-voting etc.) even plane related (ferrying JOD around the place). giving this girl a direct flight home after the experience she's been through is fairly decent in my book. She deserves it and I don't think any of us would complain if we were in her position. It was a nice thing to do and, whatever it costs, you can be sure that it's less than what your bunch of local TD's collectively claim on expenses this month.

I'm certainly not complaining.

Nice little publicity stunt though.

squonk

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I'm certainly not complaining.

Nice little publicity stunt though.

Yup, good for Mickey Martin in his leadership bid once they oust Biffo soon...

FlutterinBantam

He's doing all the right things sure enough.

OS119

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I s p e c i f i c a l l y said it was not operational costs

so why put up a figure you know has no basis in reality?

FlutterinBantam

Do you not know the difference between operational and actual.

FlutterinBantam

http://www.tribune.ie/news/article/2009/oct/18/cause-theyre-living-on-our-jet-plane-at-a-cost-of-/



Any more info you need to know

the_syco

There was a thread a while back about these jets being to ferry organs and stuff around for transplants, me thinks.

OS119

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Do you not know the difference between operational and actual.

yes, i do.

you seem to like skating around the issue, like you've read that somehow there's a formula that means the costs can be calculated in such a way as to bring about this ridiculously high figure but aren't sure what it is or how robust it is.

the airframe cost, assuming its not on HP (which we know its not), cannot be taken into consideration because the money is long gone and is in no way removing potential cash from other spending choices. if its not costing you anything - by which i mean money floating out of your pocket - then its not a cost.

FlutterinBantam

I have backed up the figures quoted from two different sources, are you disagreeing with those figures.