Airplane options
10-05-2009, 09:07 AM
#1
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 78
Airplane options
I have been asked by a local company new to aviation to come up with some options for the air travel needs. They have chartered in the past and are looking at purchasing. Being new to ownership, dispatch reliability is going to be a priority. The mission is a follows:
2-5 pax load
All weather capable
Known Ice
Based out of 3200 ft strip at 1000 ft
Mission length 175-255 nm
$600K, would be glad to do for less though
My initial thoughts are Seneca, Baron, Navajo, Cessna 340, 400's, King Air 90's, and Cheyenne.
Please provide any insights.
2-5 pax load
All weather capable
Known Ice
Based out of 3200 ft strip at 1000 ft
Mission length 175-255 nm
$600K, would be glad to do for less though
My initial thoughts are Seneca, Baron, Navajo, Cessna 340, 400's, King Air 90's, and Cheyenne.
Please provide any insights.
10-05-2009, 09:18 AM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 233
1977 BEECHCRAFT KING AIR 200 Turboprop Aircraft For Sale At Controller.com
PIPER NAVAJO CHIEFTAIN PANTHER, Used PIPER NAVAJO CHIEFTAIN PANTHER, PIPER NAVAJO CHIEFTAIN PANTHER For Sale At Controller.com
Panther Navajo/Chieftain would be good for a little extra performance if you don't want to go the turbine route. Sounds like pressurization may not be that big of a deal if you're only doing hour flights.
Good luck.
PIPER NAVAJO CHIEFTAIN PANTHER, Used PIPER NAVAJO CHIEFTAIN PANTHER, PIPER NAVAJO CHIEFTAIN PANTHER For Sale At Controller.com
Panther Navajo/Chieftain would be good for a little extra performance if you don't want to go the turbine route. Sounds like pressurization may not be that big of a deal if you're only doing hour flights.
Good luck.
10-05-2009, 09:34 AM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 194
The first question is whether they should even be looking at ownership. They need to take a hard look at how many hours they are chartering and the true costs of aircraft ownership. The liability issue also needs serious consideration.
That said, if all things line up in favor of the aircraft, I would probably point them towards a Baron. You can get a well equipped, late model in that price range. Comfortably carry 5 pax and good performance.
Kingair and Cheyenne are good airplanes, but for $600,000, you are going to be looking at some old, tired airframes. A couple years of operating and maintenance costs could easily exceed the purchase price of the airframe.
Same for twin Cessnas, Navajos, Aero Commanders, etc... None of these airplane is going to be less than 20-25 years old. However, there are some very nice "tip-to-tail" rebuilds available on the Navajos and Commanders.
That said, if all things line up in favor of the aircraft, I would probably point them towards a Baron. You can get a well equipped, late model in that price range. Comfortably carry 5 pax and good performance.
Kingair and Cheyenne are good airplanes, but for $600,000, you are going to be looking at some old, tired airframes. A couple years of operating and maintenance costs could easily exceed the purchase price of the airframe.
Same for twin Cessnas, Navajos, Aero Commanders, etc... None of these airplane is going to be less than 20-25 years old. However, there are some very nice "tip-to-tail" rebuilds available on the Navajos and Commanders.
10-05-2009, 01:00 PM
#4
The NeverEnding Story
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,618
IMO you'd be hard-pressed to find a good turbine airframe inside that acquisition budget...MAYBE a Cheyenne.
Panther Navajo, Baron 58, 310R, and Seneca IV/V would all be good economical options for those mission requirements...with a Cessna 340 or 414 being good if you needed/wanted a cabin-class airplane.
Panther Navajo, Baron 58, 310R, and Seneca IV/V would all be good economical options for those mission requirements...with a Cessna 340 or 414 being good if you needed/wanted a cabin-class airplane.
10-05-2009, 02:50 PM
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 115
If there is anyway they can justify the extra expense to get into a turboprop it would be well worth it. The problem with the older recips is they are older. Unless you get into a very well maintained ship it can be a pain.
If they are open to a single engine turboprop look at a 10 year old Meridian. They are weight limited but if you are only going a few hundred miles there will plenty of useful load saved from fuel and it would work great. The Caravans are still over a million and not pressurized. The older Meridians are around $800K to $900K. Good luck.
If they are open to a single engine turboprop look at a 10 year old Meridian. They are weight limited but if you are only going a few hundred miles there will plenty of useful load saved from fuel and it would work great. The Caravans are still over a million and not pressurized. The older Meridians are around $800K to $900K. Good luck.
10-06-2009, 05:41 AM
#7
Flying Farmer
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Position: Turbo-props' and John Deere's
Posts: 3,160
For the trips you are looking at, I would steer you away from a turbo-charged plane. Higher Mx costs, and they truly are going to benefit you on longer trips anyways, or mountainous terrain.
I've got 2000hrs in C310's, and I can say the R-model is by far a great airplane. You can fit 6 total, but it will be a tight fit for the two in the very rear seats. If they are only going to be there for an hour, might be tolerable. It has plenty of baggage space too, and a "full-deice" is very common, but a Known-Ice is harder to find, but they are out there.(difference is alki-windshield vs. Hot-plate). You can get one with the Colemill converision and now you take an already great plane and make it faster(IO-520's(285hp) to IO-550's(300hp)), climb better, etc... I've only ridden in one that was converted, but I was very impressed.
I think the Baron would also be a good fit in this case. Little more roomy in the back than the C310, and has the "Name" some folks care about, some don't. Will cost slightly more than C310.
C340 is of course cabin-class, some people think that this is the only way to go. If your clients have this thought, then the C340 will give better DOC's than the 400 series. Not familiar with it's useful loads etc.. But I know you should be able to sacrifice a lot of fuel to compensate for loading the cabin easily. But as I mentioned before, I wouldn't be looking at TC'd aircraft for your mission type.
I work for a piper dealer, and will confirm anything you want about those products. Seneca's are once again going to be cramped in the back. Some do have A/c systems though, but 4 in back will be interlocked knee-to-knee. Has some baggage in the nose, not as much as the C310.
Cheyenne's. If you find one in your price range, it'd be safe to say it needs work, or will need work in the very near future with either timed out engines, paint, interior, etc.. Definately consult a Mx shop that knows Cheyennes well before buying. They are great planes, I've flown them, but there are some gotcha's.
Meridian is a good single alternative. You can sacrifice fuel and go. You get turbine reliability, FIKI, and flexible altitudes as the cheyenne will get you, just not the total weight/range/baggage/2-engine combo that the cheyenne will get you. Still be hard to find one in your price range.
C208 Caravan: Not a bad choice either for the fact you are doing short range missions, so the slower speed really isn't going to make a dramatic difference on travel times, has a bullet-proof engine, and carries a lot. I'm skeptical on the new TKS-FIKI equipped, I prefer boots myself, but these planes need respect(as any do) when left outside in conditions where ice can build. CHECK THE STINKING WING!!! I have no idea what these things run for.
Navajo's: Once again, great airplane, predecessor to the Cheyenne. They have been used in short-range flying for Airnet, and some other freight guys, so they do the short hops, I'd once again sway against just because of TC'd engines, but it's not my decision.
I've got 2000hrs in C310's, and I can say the R-model is by far a great airplane. You can fit 6 total, but it will be a tight fit for the two in the very rear seats. If they are only going to be there for an hour, might be tolerable. It has plenty of baggage space too, and a "full-deice" is very common, but a Known-Ice is harder to find, but they are out there.(difference is alki-windshield vs. Hot-plate). You can get one with the Colemill converision and now you take an already great plane and make it faster(IO-520's(285hp) to IO-550's(300hp)), climb better, etc... I've only ridden in one that was converted, but I was very impressed.
I think the Baron would also be a good fit in this case. Little more roomy in the back than the C310, and has the "Name" some folks care about, some don't. Will cost slightly more than C310.
C340 is of course cabin-class, some people think that this is the only way to go. If your clients have this thought, then the C340 will give better DOC's than the 400 series. Not familiar with it's useful loads etc.. But I know you should be able to sacrifice a lot of fuel to compensate for loading the cabin easily. But as I mentioned before, I wouldn't be looking at TC'd aircraft for your mission type.
I work for a piper dealer, and will confirm anything you want about those products. Seneca's are once again going to be cramped in the back. Some do have A/c systems though, but 4 in back will be interlocked knee-to-knee. Has some baggage in the nose, not as much as the C310.
Cheyenne's. If you find one in your price range, it'd be safe to say it needs work, or will need work in the very near future with either timed out engines, paint, interior, etc.. Definately consult a Mx shop that knows Cheyennes well before buying. They are great planes, I've flown them, but there are some gotcha's.
Meridian is a good single alternative. You can sacrifice fuel and go. You get turbine reliability, FIKI, and flexible altitudes as the cheyenne will get you, just not the total weight/range/baggage/2-engine combo that the cheyenne will get you. Still be hard to find one in your price range.
C208 Caravan: Not a bad choice either for the fact you are doing short range missions, so the slower speed really isn't going to make a dramatic difference on travel times, has a bullet-proof engine, and carries a lot. I'm skeptical on the new TKS-FIKI equipped, I prefer boots myself, but these planes need respect(as any do) when left outside in conditions where ice can build. CHECK THE STINKING WING!!! I have no idea what these things run for.
Navajo's: Once again, great airplane, predecessor to the Cheyenne. They have been used in short-range flying for Airnet, and some other freight guys, so they do the short hops, I'd once again sway against just because of TC'd engines, but it's not my decision.
10-07-2009, 06:47 PM
#8
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 78
Thanks for all the great advice folks. I am curious about the zero fuel weights of various airplanes. Can 5 pax +1 pilot travel 1.5 hours in many of these airplanes.
How about
Cessna 340
Navajo CR, Chieftain
Cessna 310
Piper Seneca III, IV, V
Beech Baron 58
I am leaning towards the PA-31's in the different variations. Mainly the CR version with the 325hp and VG's . I think this would be a great fit that would be able to take full seats 2 hours and have enough gas for a distant alternate.
How about
Cessna 340
Navajo CR, Chieftain
Cessna 310
Piper Seneca III, IV, V
Beech Baron 58
I am leaning towards the PA-31's in the different variations. Mainly the CR version with the 325hp and VG's . I think this would be a great fit that would be able to take full seats 2 hours and have enough gas for a distant alternate.
10-07-2009, 07:22 PM
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 233
01-23-2010, 06:27 PM
#10
New Hire
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 2
What airplane did you end up with ? I am trying to come up with the same... but with a little longer legs....(up to 650nm maybe 900nm on a rare trip) Was thinking BE20. Did you buy or lease ?
How would someone get info on all the operating cost's? Should I call a broker? The company that may be interested would just want to sign a contract for the flying. They aren't really interested in buying, but may later down the road. I don't have a million bucks so leasing is probably my only option. Any ideas ?
Thanks,
TC
How would someone get info on all the operating cost's? Should I call a broker? The company that may be interested would just want to sign a contract for the flying. They aren't really interested in buying, but may later down the road. I don't have a million bucks so leasing is probably my only option. Any ideas ?
Thanks,
TC
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
