Whats the ideal plane for me?

[mountainman]

Hello BT'ers!

So I am getting to the point where it could make sense for me to purchase a plane, and am looking for some thoughts...

I live in Kelowna, British Columbia and would make frequent trips to Edmonton, Alberta (roughly 330nm trip). Id also fly down to southern California 2-3 times a year.

I have a wife and a 1 year old daughter who would join me on the trips relatively frequently.

Looking in the twin-piston market…i.e. P58 Baron, Cessna 340, etc...

Im interested in hearing thoughts on what people here feel would suit best.

Thanks for your input!

[fish4life]

Not sure the budget but I see a lot of king air c90's for sale for not bad prices which might be overkill but would give you good performance in pressurized comfort over the rocks

[Colonel Sanders]

Stock C340 can't carry any weight in the cabin
if there's any fuel in the wings. Inhibiting. People
try to patch it with VGs, RAM engine upgrades
but I still find it marginal.

I am a fan of C421. Ensure it is equipped with
known ice. Only problem is that pilots love to
destroy the engines. It is not hard to fly. For
SPIFR I recommend a nice big IFR GPS with a
good autopilot.

I have never flown a P Baron but have heard it
was such a capable machine, the bastards at
Beech stopped making it because it was cutting
into their King Air sales. A strong endorsement.
I have no idea what the maintenance is like on
the P Baron but like anything with Beech, the
parts are going to cost as if they were made
from solid gold.

Look at Navajo, too. Problem is they're all so
high time and so worn out. There's one just like
that on the infield here, with no props. You could
probably buy it for a couple cents on the pound.

I presume you have a few bucks. You're going
to need them.

Free advice: don't buy a project. Buy a flying
airplane. It will cost more initially, but will cost
less in the long run.

Question: can you get insurance? Most insurance
companies will run screaming from a low-time
pilot that has no retractable or multi time. I'm
guessing you have around a thousand hours?

[Scout44]

Although I admittedly don't have experience on type, sounds like a mission for a Seneca to me.

[jpilot77]

I wouldn't want to do that trip regularly in a Seneca. At least a Navajo, but better a C414 or C421. Or ideally a King Air or a PC-12.

[ahramin]

I'll second the Navajo if you can find one in good shape. I've seen way too many guys buy a 310, and then a Seneca, and then a Baron, and then a Navajo, and then they're happy. If you're going to be flying in fair weather only, go straight to the Baron. If you're going to be flying in BC in weather, go straight to the Navajo.

Don't worry about the insurance. Anyone is insurable on a piston twin with 100 hours on type.

[Rowdy]

I quite like the Baron myself. It all depends on the specific mission. The Navajos are pretty hard to beat for performance/capabilities and cost. Just need to find one in decent shape!

[Canadian Skyhawk]

These are all good planes, however it all depends in which conditions and comfort you want to fly and how much peace of mind you desire. Oh, also how much money you want to spend.

We've already determined that you are going to be crossing the Rockies with people (and probably some stuff) regularly, that you'll be taking longer trips occasionally and that you have already settled on a twin. Given that a nice twin (not a project aircraft) already equipped with a modern A/P, GPS and at least a reasonable amount of time left before engine overhauls will cost close 300K or more, I would right away consider a turbine twin; It'll fly higher, faster, be pressurized and have more reliable and forgiving powerplants. Operating costs will be similar to a piston twin. The higher fuel burn is more than compensated for lower Jetfuel prices and faster speeds. Initial outlay will be the same or just slightly higher than an equivalent piston twin.

As was mentioned above, there's lots of King Air 90s for sale, but for less money and way more performance, I would go for a short body MU2: 300+ kts, fuel sipping engines (though noisy), long (5400 hour) and less expensive TBOs, and great Mitsu factory support - yes, even after more than 25 years following the end of production. This airplane is not, however, for novices, and in my opinion absolutely requires a professional initial sim training (mandatory under an SFAR in the USA). Many if not most MU2s are operated privately in the USA.

Good luck!

[MUSICMAAN]

C337 Skymaster with boots would fit your needs perfectly.

[B52]

I'd give the 340 a miss, a PA31 is like a Suburban while the Baron probably has better
leather and solid feel to it that you only get with Beech.

It's also known as the doctor killer.

[goldeneagle]

You are going for business, then you want to arrive relaxed, not stressed out from a long haul in marginal performance. From Kelowna to Edmonton, in the winter, that rules out the ho, and a lot of others mentioned here. 340 can do it, but not a lot of leeway to put stuff in the cabin after filling tanks with fuel. 421 is quiet, and has a much more comfortable cockpit for 2 to 3 hour legs, and, much better capability for that initial climb up thru the ice into the blue sky.

For your mission profile, I would not even consider anything unpressurized. You cannot arrive semi relaxed for a business meet, if you just spent 2 or 3 hours sucking on an o2 mask, possibly concerned about avoiding the worst of the weather, and that's exactly what will happen in a ho. For the YLW -> YEG hop in the winter, you are going to leave with tanks full, no matter which airplane you choose. Add one or two more bodies, and that 340 looks nice, but it'll be heavy, it's going to climb like a dog, and you will struggle at times to get over the ice. 421 in comparison, with full tanks and a couple bodies, will be light in comparison, and climb like a homesick angel compared to that 340 with the same load. You'll be fat, level, and happy on top when the 340 is halfway up.

But more important than anything else, for your mission profile, do NOT consider average conditions when you choose the performance level you need. You need to choose performance based on the worst situation you expect to deal with, and buy accordingly. On real nice days, you'll have lots of capability 'in the bank' so to speak, and arrive at destination feeling comfortable and relaxed. But, on those 2 or 3 days when it's not nice,and you have to go, you will arrive mildly stressed, but feel it was a manageable trip. Buy low on the performance curve, and on those couple of days, you'll arrive terrified, and, start contemplating just how nice the back seat of a westjet really looks. Then the airplane will end up for sale, and you will leave a ton of money on the table during the process, because airplanes ALWAYS sell for significantly less than you paid, particularily an airplane that has scared the owner a time or two.

Bottom line, my perspective, that mission profile involves jumping over high rocks, so, non pressurized is a non starter. The whole point of a business aircraft, is to arrive on your schedule, not the airline schedule. If you arrive frazzled and worn out, it defeats the purpose of the airplane. Something with the perfomance of the 421 should be the minimum you consider, and, in all honesty, if you cant afford a citation, then in reality, you should probably just buy 10-packs from WestJet.

[MUSICMAAN]

Check PMs

[Colonel Sanders]

the 421 should be the minimum you consider, and, in all honesty, if you cant afford a citation ...

Citation is MUCH easier to fly than 421. It has
two levers and two rudders pedals. And there
are some real deals out there.

PS If you calculate the per-mile cost, a 501 isn't
that far off a 421.

[Big Pistons Forever]

I occasionally fly a corporate Cessna 340. This one has the RAM VII mod (335 hp) and Vg's (6400 lb Gross weight). It will carry 4 people + bags and full standard fuel (166 Gals). The RAM mod made a huge difference as Climb is now 600 FPM better than before and it will now do an honest 200 kts cruise speed. The down side is the smalish cabin and a ridiculously complicated fuel system.

Personally I like the C 340 although in terms of cabin comfort nothing will beat a C 421. Either way these are not cheap airplanes. This owner figures on $ 750/hr at about 150 hrs a year not counting the cost of the money. Another guy I used to fly for had a corporate C 421C. He figured about $ 900 an hour for about the same usage.

[black hole]

Not discussed here; is the performance level single engine. You are going to be flying in the mountains. VFR or IFR if you choose a twin that will not maintain 10000 ft on one engine you might as well settle on a single and VFR mountain passes. Just a thought???

BH

[Rookie50]

I occasionally fly a corporate Cessna 340. This one has the RAM VII mod (335 hp) and Vg's (6400 lb Gross weight). It will carry 4 people + bags and full standard fuel (166 Gals). The RAM mod made a huge difference as Climb is now 600 FPM better than before and it will now do an honest 200 kts cruise speed. The down side is the smalish cabin and a ridiculously complicated fuel system.

Personally I like the C 340 although in terms of cabin comfort nothing will beat a C 421. Either way these are not cheap airplanes. This owner figures on $ 750/hr at about 150 hrs a year not counting the cost of the money. Another guy I used to fly for had a corporate C 421C. He figured about $ 900 an hour for about the same usage.

I will no longer complain about my 182 RG. Wow that is a few dollars.

[l_reason]

I vote for a diamond DA42 and this is why: modern, easier to operate, 1/4 the work load, normal size hangar (cheaper), you can pull it out on your own, quiet, certified for known icing, 12.5 gph @170kt. Your wife and girlfriend will both like the way it looks and feels in the right seat, it has a more modern engine then your john deer lawn tractor, you will probably live longer then you would if you owned a PA31 or C-421.

Now look at the numbers


DA42
TAE Centurion or Austro
Prop: MT 3 Blade
Avionics: G1000
XM Satellite Weather and Radio
Traffic Advisory System
Interior: All Leather
Features: 270 Horsepower
Useful load 1,174 lbs
Fuel capacity 79 US gal
Fuel Jet A1
T/O distance, ground roll* 1,130 ft
T/O distance 50 ft obst* 1,730 ft
Landing dist ground roll 1,069 ft
Landing dist 50’ obst 1,877 ft
Rate of climb, sea level* 1,280 ft/min
Max operating altitude 18,000 ft
Max SE ceiling (std day) 10,000 ft
Cruise speed @ 80% 172 ktas / 12.5 gal/hr total
Economy @ 60% 151 ktas / 8.8 gal/hr total
Stall, full flaps, gear down 56 kias
Stall, clean 62 kias
Landing gear operating 194 kts
Max demo crosswind 20 kts
Range @ 80%, ext fuel 917 nm
Range @ 60%, ext fuel 1,129 nm

Known icing
http://www.diamond-air.at/news_detail+M562ea3e53e1.html


PA31 180kts at 30gph. Built in 1977

Driving a BMW, Benz, caddy, Acura family car or a 1990 3/4 ton Chev Suburban.
I know what I'd rather take on a road trip.

[ahramin]

Stall, full flaps, gear down 56 kias

What is the single engine ceiling?

[iflyforpie]

For the asking price of the Diamond, you can buy a lot of fuel and maintenance. Training too, which has a lot more bearing on safety than the type of aircraft.

[Rookie50]

I think if I flew out there, and had the $, for that kind of regular mission, I would research a turbine conversion, Cessna P210. (assuming i could find one)

Like to hear thoughts on that idea. Personally I would favour SE turbine over a piston twin.

The DA 42 is interesting but I believe both the useful load and SE climb is pretty weak. Needs more power, and is not a cheap ride.

[Navajo Flyer]

If you are gonna get a 421 you might as well get a turbine. At least it will not be in the hangar undergoing maintenance. 421's are an AME's retirement plan. They are poor performers, burn lots of gas, slow, runway lovers. Low TBO and expensive when it comes to overhaul. They are nice and quiet in flight - but that's about it. It's amazing nobody has suggested the 414. The 414 has the same cabin as a 421 but with direct drive engines. Little less power, but with the lighter engines, you don't need as much power. 414's cruise at the same speed, if not faster, as a 421 at 70% the fuel. Hands down the 414 is the winner if you want/need something pressurized. Get a 414 with some sort of RAM mod and some VG's and away you go!!

[Colonel Sanders]

421's are an AME's retirement plan

With incompetent pilots flying them, sure.

There are precisely two things you need to learn
how to operate a GTSIO-520 engine to TBO, but
none of the prima donnas can be bothered to learn
them.

In the right hands, a great engine. In the wrong
hands, a maintenance nightmare.

You could just as easily say that a Pitts (or any
tailwheel aircraft, really) is a maintenance nightmare
because they keep getting wrecked and need to
be constantly rebuilt. Well, yes, with incompetent
pilots.

[Big Pistons Forever]

The C 421C I used to fly was sold with both engines at 1400 hrs SMOH. It had all original cylinders, turbo's and all exhaust components except for one tail pipe which was replaced due to pin hole corrosion. There is no reason this engine should cost anymore to maintain than a direct drive TSIO 520, although it is about 10 K more expensive to overhaul. However it is significantly less forgiving of less than optimal pilot technique and it burns much more gas than the direct drive engines in the C 340 (286 lb/hr vs 198 lb/hr)

Pop quiz: you are flying along high and happy in your C 421 and you feel the sudden onset of a mild but continuous vibration, what should you do ?

[Colonel Sanders]

The C 421C I used to fly was sold with both engines at 1400 hrs SMOH

Q.E.D.

Listen to the mayor of London. At the risk of offending
people, not everyone is born with the same brains. Not
everyone can fly a 421 (or a taildragger) without spending
a lot more money than they need to.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/11/28 ... t-elitism/

Economic equality will never be possible because some people are too stupid to get ahead in the modern world, said Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, in a speech that is igniting a wave of criticism

I'm sure that the Honorable Mayor Johnson would have
a word or two to say about the subject of a 421 (or
taildragger) being too much airplane for some people.

sudden onset of a mild but continuous vibration, what should you do ?

No one cares, BPF. They just want to wear white shirts
with gold bars and big watches and RayBans and fly Airbuses
so they can complain for the rest of their lives about how
much they hate their jobs.



PS Answer to your pop quiz:

http://wwwapps3.tc.gc.ca/Saf-Sec-Sur/2/ ... -05-15.htm

Not that any of the white shirt/gold bar crowd could care less.

[Big Pistons Forever]

.

Good job !