$135K -- What a bargain!

Ken Ibold said:
Drooling just a little here.

But then, I always DID want a hangar queen!
Click to expand...
I'm not that knowledgeable on that many birds but first appearance it looks like a decent catch. I'd wonder about it's performance and operating costs.

But, what do you mean by "hangar queen"? I'm getting the impression it wouldn't be a great buy.

Engines are half normal life and a new annual. Where is it coming up short?
 
KennyFlys said:
I'm not that knowledgeable on that many birds but first appearance it looks like a decent catch. I'd wonder about it's performance and operating costs.

But, what do you mean by "hangar queen"? I'm getting the impression it wouldn't be a great buy.

Engines are half normal life and a new annual. Where is it coming up short?
Click to expand...

It's a real runway hog, but sure is nice after you level off at altitude. My grandfather has owned two Beech Dukes (first one was destroyed in the 1979 tornado in Connecticut) for a long time and loved flying them dearly.
 
im wondering why so cheap myself...but im not one to judge the prices planes should be...i have no clue...but seems like alot of airplane for such a little cost...
and a hangar queen is like a garage queen for cars...meaning, they never leave the hangar and they just sit in there all clean and pretty and never touched..

personally when i look at cars to buy that are garage queens, i am hesitant becasue alot of times something like this that never gets used, and then all of a sudden its used on a regular basis, things start to break...

Ant
 
You get even more useful load if you rip out the inoperative radar.
 
"Club seating? Pshawww."

Oh, that didn't work? How about this?

"That'd never make into and out of Gaston's"

Feel better now?
 
It's becoming more clear why the rascal is so low on price.

Is it a matter of it being under-powered for decent use or what? I get the impression the power loading is pretty bad.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
KennyFlys said:
It's becoming more clear why the rascal is so low on price.

Is it a matter of it being under-powered for decent use or what? I get the impression the power loading is pretty bad.
Click to expand...

They had a pretty in depth Duke article in AOPA Pilot some months ago. It seemed to be a combination of slightly underpowered engines and a somewhat unexpectedly draggy profile.

They sure are pretty though.
 
AeroSolutions are the same folks who are selling my beloved 118PB.

Another plane I won't be doing my checkride in. I switched to 118PB once I soloed... I considered buying it but they were asking too much for a plane really close to total overhaul...
 
woodstock said:
AeroSolutions are the same folks who are selling my beloved 118PB.

Another plane I won't be doing my checkride in. I switched to 118PB once I soloed... I considered buying it but they were asking too much for a plane really close to total overhaul...
Click to expand...
I bought my current airplane from Aerosolutions. Top notch organization.

(And remember the asking price is set by the seller, not the broker. Feel free to low-ball. I did. And won.)
 
Something isn't quite right. The Duke was registered in June, and now it's for sale at about $30K below Vref? It's obviously priced to move, but I've never heard of someone flipping a plane that quickly to lose money. It could be that the owner's economics have suddenly changed, as plenty have in the last six months. But a little digging around wouldn't harm a prospective owner.

Regards,
Joe
 
The potty seat in the rear makes me chuckle.

"Well that's a really good point Frank. Make sure you bring that up a the board meeting. Excuse me while I drop my shorts in front of you."
 
The Duke is a great airplane when it's not in the shop, which is seldom. I know a couple of guys here locally who bought one at a bargain basement price and then put it in the shop to clear up a few problems. That was 18 months ago and it still isn't flying.

I thought the panel looked photoshopped at first, but the larger image looks real.
 

Attachments

  • 73984140.jpg
    73984140.jpg
    203.1 KB · Views: 29
Hijack time!!

Chip, I appreciate your new avatar; methinks the only solution to MLB's addiction to outa the park home runs and light-speed pitching is for the owners to pay in zero attendance; that way the players can't be payed salaries equivalent to the national debt, so they won't be able to afford the 'roids.

Oh, and to keep in on topic, I am supposing that the CRT to the right of the Garmin is the radar?
 
Not surprised to see this; I'm willing to bet there's nothing wrong with it.
It's just that piston twins for non-commercial use are not economically feasible for as many folks nowadays, between the cost of fuel and the aging of the fleet... not to mention insurance (and training required for it), etc...The demand has plummeted, as far as I know.
It would be nice, though, to have one just to sit in and make airplane noises. :D
 
The conversion to turboprops that was in AOPA or Flying a couple of months ago looked really nifty. On the other hand, then your turning you 135K plane into a 250K+ plane, so . . .

The twin I've always wanted was one of the 5xx series Aero Commanders. I flew in one once (in the right seat, it was a charter) before I got my PPL and fell in love with it.

~ Christopher
 
jwriteclub said:
The conversion to turboprops that was in AOPA or Flying a couple of months ago looked really nifty. On the other hand, then your turning you 135K plane into a 250K+ plane, so . . .
Click to expand...
You're off by a smidge. Two new PT6As will set you back about 600K.
 
Ken Ibold said:
You're off by a smidge. Two new PT6As will set you back about 600K.
Click to expand...
Even if you did the conversion and updated instrumentation and other avionics, would it even be worthwhile? Certainly, useful load would be pretty significant. That's assuming total costs came out to around $800k between the plane as is, engine conversion and maxed out avionics.
 
KennyFlys said:
Even if you did the conversion and updated instrumentation and other avionics, would it even be worthwhile? Certainly, useful load would be pretty significant. That's assuming total costs came out to around $800k between the plane as is, engine conversion and maxed out avionics.
Click to expand...
Add a couple hundred grand for the conversion and the avionics. And this particular airplane is listed as having "fair" paint and interior. So fix that and you're certainly over a milllion. And the thirstier turbines eat up the range.
 
Skypilotcfii said:
The AFM Single-Engine Climb Chart indicates the following information:
Single-Engine Climb
Max Gross Weight 6,775 Pounds
Power
Up Flaps Up Cowl
Flaps Open Inoperative Propeller Feathered
Climb Speed 110 knots OAT 89 degrees F/33
degrees C Pressure Altitude 4,000 feet Rate of
Climb•••About 125 ft/min (Calculated)
Click to expand...

Wow... That's pretty bad.

With the turbine conversion, the Duke would be a really nice bird.
 
Skypilotcfii said:
The AFM Single-Engine Climb Chart indicates the following information:
Single-Engine Climb
Max Gross Weight 6,775 Pounds
Power
Up Flaps Up Cowl
Flaps Open Inoperative Propeller Feathered
Climb Speed 110 knots OAT 89 degrees F/33
degrees C Pressure Altitude 4,000 feet Rate of
Climb•••About 125 ft/min (Calculated)
Click to expand...

Why did people buy them to begin with? 125fpm on one? Yikes.
 
The Royal Turbine is a very interesting machine.

For those of us who might like ultra high performance, two engines, smaller size (compared to a King Air or Pilatus.

As a former partner in a JetProp Malibu, I can attest to the beautiful work these folks do (at Rocket Engineering). The JetProp Malibu is superb. But - the airframe is not one of my favorites.

Now ... the Duke? Love the airframe. Darwin working his magic on this beautiful machine...... must be nice.

Flying the Royal Turbine is on my list of things to do!

http://www.royalturbine.com/phpix3/index.php?album=RoyalTurbine&dispsize=512&start=0

Rocket Engineering doesn't mess around. These super cruisers are taking flight. He's probably got a few on the mod floor at any given time now.

The handling characteristics should be superb and .... 4000 fpm ... nice.
 
Don't be silly Ken.
Duke not like to fly.
Duke Love Hangar
Duke Love runway.
Duke detect bank account.....
 
The good news is that if you buy the Duke for $135k and ... god forbid ... there is no more 100LL, your investment hasn't been a waste. Just order up a couple of PT6's:-)

Here's the spec sheet comparison.

http://www.royalturbine.com/docs/RoyalTurbineFlyer.pdf

This should be much more fun than a TBM700.
 
Last edited:
Actually, according to their figures, you get the same IFR range with the conversion, and you pick up ~ 50 kts.

~ Christopher
 
jwriteclub said:
Actually, according to their figures, you get the same IFR range with the conversion, and you pick up ~ 50 kts.

~ Christopher
Click to expand...

Fly one. (The Royal Turbine)

This airplane is like having a tiger by the tail.:hairraise:
 
Bill Jennings said:
Why did people buy them to begin with? 125fpm on one? Yikes.
Click to expand...

Most light and medium twins really need to be loaded a couple hundred pounds lighter than the max to have much climb one one at high DA.
 
Beautiful beautiful plane. I've always loved them. I've never had to pay to keep one flying.

It seemed like a good idea at the time, back when dinosaur juice was cheap and jet engines were big....
 
lancefisher said:
Most light and medium twins really need to be loaded a couple hundred pounds lighter than the max to have much climb one one at high DA.
Click to expand...

I didn't really think those numbers looked that bad considering how that's at gross and it's a Duke. Most likely it won't be flying at gross. But I don't know the first thing about this stuff.
 
What does an Apache Annual run?

(I ask this not out of idle curiosity, but because it is one of a couple of airplanes on my list).

~ Christopher
 
jwriteclub said:
What does an Apache Annual run?

(I ask this not out of idle curiosity, but because it is one of a couple of airplanes on my list).

~ Christopher
Click to expand...
About $6,000, unless you total it when the nose gear folds.:(
ApacheBob
 
KennyFlys said:
I'm not that knowledgeable on that many birds but first appearance it looks like a decent catch. I'd wonder about it's performance and operating costs.

But, what do you mean by "hangar queen"? I'm getting the impression it wouldn't be a great buy.

Engines are half normal life and a new annual. Where is it coming up short?
Click to expand...

No, actually, they are half TBO, for the TIO-541s, they are at normal lifes end. When it comes time to do them and the props, you're looking at a quarter of a million dollars.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top