Go back to 121 or Rent a plane
 

So, I have a bit of a dilemma.

I'm prior 121 current working in a federal agency. I'm a GS-13 ($90k/year) and my pay will top out at the top of GS-14 ($135k/year) in today's dollars without any additional promotions. Good salary, very stable, retirement plus 401k.

I have time as an FO and CA in the 121 world, currently have about 2500 hours with 1900 being 121 and have been out of work (CFI only) since 2009. There are some opportunities to go back into 121 flying, but I also have the option to be a 1/4 in a Skyhawk. Prices are fairly affordable, and operating costs would be about $60/hour.

If in the same boat (family, mortgage, bills, 529 plan for the kids, good insurance, etc) which would you choose? We have enough savings to last a while if I went back 121, could likely upgrade before the end of year if not sooner...but I worry about the stress on the family. Same time, I don't know if flying on weekends in a small plane would bring me a whole lot of aviation satisfaction. Is there anyone on here who's been in this situation?

Opposite Side/No 121
 

How many years do you have as a fed? How big is your TSP?

I'm also topped out at my grade, 22 years, FERS, decent high 3, and a nice TSP balance. 208 hours annual (with 240 carry over) and 104 sick/year can't be beat. I've been a GA pilot for 20+ years and have done the club, partial owner (Mooney), and now rental thing. I have rental access to an Arrow, and a couple of 172s. The Arrow can be easily taken for multiple days.

I get my challenge (the satisfaction you spoke of) flying IFR, and fun puttering over the lake, and taking newbies for their first flight. The wife has friends all over, so I get to fly x-cty as often as I (and budget) allow. I have also squeezed flights for work (adhering to the government's reimbursement rules!)

I'm home every night, and I fly when/where I want too. I'd be on the lookout for a group of guys with a complex a/c to buy in to, rather than the 172.

Why stress the QOL?

Thanks for the info.

I've toyed with the idea, figured ways to make the pay work for a bit until upgrade, etc...don't know if my heart is in the current job, and I could see it being in the airline gig. The issue is that while my heart would be there, nothing else about it makes sense.

May look for partnership opportunities, or try this partnership out for a year to see if it makes sense to continue doing something similar to that.

I have a long time till retirement (24 more years before I'd have 30 vested) and the TSP has done pretty well during my first 6 years of employment, additionally my high 3 should be pretty good if I top out on the payscale before that. So if doing this with logic involved, it makes no sense to move...but is flying really about logic?

where can you upgrade by the end of the year?

anticipated growth at TSA. Fleet is moving from approximately 28 aircraft to close to 70 with options for additional flying. Numerous FO's on property do not have time to upgrade, and won't for the foreseeable future. Company is currently hiring CQFO's off the street to ensure adequate coverage.

One note on partnerships. It's easier to get into one, than to get out.

Noted. :) thanks!!!

Ive been in your shoes (GS-14) for over 8yrs now. 10K+ hours, former 121 major. You would be crazy to leave the feds in my opinion. Work to live and fly for fun!
V/R

How much would the 1/4 share in the skyhawk cost total investment? Are you talking a very new skyhawk or an old one? Do you really want the only plane you have access to, to be a skyhawk? That will probably get old very fast!

The skyhawk is $1500 annually to covering insurance, hangar fee, and taxes. Operational costs are between $55-65/hour depending on how much you fly. One year commitment on the share.

It is an older skyhawk (1979) but equipped ok for GA, KLN90, I-Pad/Forflight App w/mounts/gps/weather.

If i owned it, I'd probably not go further than a couple hours away max, and that only on occasion. Just wonder if I'd use it enough to justify paying for it. I am intrigued by the idea of not having large investment costs up front to "purchase" the share.