Another which plane for this mission thread

S

SteveinNC

Pre-Flight
Joined
Dec 19, 2010
Messages
54
Display Name
Display name:
Steve C.
So, the mission is changing pretty dramatically along with our lifestyle due to empty nesting and downsizing etc.

The two biggest factors for me right now are flying with my dogs and speed. My wife and I want to do our main mission (700 nm) with our two medium size dogs in one hop.

I figure I need an honest 200 knots without having to put wife and dogs on o2...so that means pressurization.

I also need some kind of side loading doors (mirage or Seneca kind of thing) to get the dogs comfortably in the plane.

Summary is 200 knots, 4.5 hours fuel, pressurized (or able to do 200 without needing oxygen...which I don't think works), side loading, 600 lbs for pax/ bags, budget is 400-500 so it knocks out all turbine.

Only 2 planes seem to fit .. Mirage or cessna 421/340a

I don't necessarily mind getting my multi, but I'm not sure a 35 year old twin is the right call, so I'm thinking mirage.

Any thoughts on whether I'm missing anything?
 
How many hours per year? $400K-500K buys a lot of plane but, what is your budget per hour? And yes 200 knots is going to be hard without pressure.
 
A Riley P-337 Skyrocket with 150 gallon tanks will do it...they also make the Rocket II if you want a new one.:idea:
 
Need to know budget and how much space you're looking for. In the piston single world, you're pretty much looking at a Lancair IV-P. You could do a Malibu, but I've not been very impressed with them as planes.

The 340, 414, and 421 are all great planes. Yes, they are older, but a well cared for one provides you a ton of capability. Big issue will be insurance if you don't currently have a multi.

Another option, and more insurable, is a RAM T310R if you want to forego the pressurization. With O2, it'll do 230 @ FL190.
 
SteveinNC said:
budget is 400-500 so it knocks out all turbine.
Click to expand...
Look how much they ask for King Air C90 (not the bigger ones), you may be surprised. Yeah. Cheaper than Cheyenne, Twin Commander, Conquest, etc. Much cheaper.
 
You can buy a Cheyenne II for $400k. Of course, then you're burning about 65-70 gph for 230 KTAS.

A 421 would fit the mission fine. Expect to have an instructor following you around for a while until you get some hours to make insurance happy, as well as sim time.
 
180 Knots seems a lot more doable than 200. How important are those extra twenty knots? For the extra 23 minutes of cruise time, you open up a lot more options, including the modern Cirrus SR-22 and Cessna 400 models...
 
Just one man's opinion but pressurized piston airplanes are usually way too heavy, they just don't have enough power. Sure, they may climb up there, but get a little rime ice and they beg for lower. The ones that exist have to run engines really hard, they don't perform as well as turbo'd, but non-pressurized airplanes, and are, all things considered, too expensive for the extra couple of knots and weak cabin pressurization they provide.

Easy to say I suppose, but if you can forget about cost for a moment, I would look for an airplane that goes VFR direct really fast at 17500ft. Why? Because I would never fly IFR unless I had to. Pilots of this type of airplane have to be very adept at IFR, but would only do it when it's necessary. It's high enough to be above some of the weather, (and high enough to get in real trouble) and low enough so you aren't a prop-driven road block to all the jet traffic. Yes, we're talking some real money here...and someone in the herochair who knows what they're doing.

A Dash 10 powered turbo Commander or Cessna 441 will do nicely, as would any of the MU2s, Merlin IIIc. King Airs are very fine, if less performance for the buck. The real cogniscenti will tell you the piston airplanes that offer such performance are more expensive in the long run. Ever wonder why there are so few pressurized Navajos but so many Cheyenes?
 
Tom-D said:
Hennie's 310.
Click to expand...


He want's pressure, but my plane would do it at less than 1/4 of the costs of the others he's considering. Someone said T-310R and that is a plane I would never buy, you're better off with a 421, they cost almost the same to keep flying.
 
Henning said:
He want's pressure, but my plane would do it at less than 1/4 of the costs of the others he's considering. Someone said T-310R and that is a plane I would never buy, you're better off with a 421, they cost almost the same to keep flying.
Click to expand...

Funny, my friend who owns one hasn't found that at all...
 
Frankly...I may just be asking too much. The mission as I stated it really requires turbine power.

Maybe I should just compromise and drop the pressurization and the 200 knots. That way I'll have to make a stop (family bladder issues), but I could still get the side loading door and big cabin for the dogs

Somethink like a nice Seneca V or something. That would get me 170 ish without o2.

I have an sr22 right now, and usually flight plan about 170...wouldn't want to get lower than that. The sr22 is out due to cabin etc...really need that side loading or airstair and the big cabin for the mutts.
 
SteveinNC said:
Frankly...I may just be asking too much. The mission as I stated it really requires turbine power.

Maybe I should just compromise and drop the pressurization and the 200 knots. That way I'll have to make a stop (family bladder issues), but I could still get the side loading door and big cabin for the dogs

Somethink like a nice Seneca V or something. That would get me 170 ish without o2.

I have an sr22 right now, and usually flight plan about 170...wouldn't want to get lower than that. The sr22 is out due to cabin etc...really need that side loading or airstair and the big cabin for the mutts.
Click to expand...


I'll get you 180 knots on 21gph (it'll go faster but I run very low power for fuel and engine conservation) with 2 low time engines (150 & 350 hrs approx) new props and a 3300 hr airframe. To me a turbine engine needs a paying job.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
He's had enough friends with 421s to compare it to.
Click to expand...

He must have gotten a very cherry cared for one then, good for him. Most have them have been dogged hard all their lives flying checks and **** & blood. Poor Bob Gerace, his ate his lunch.
 
Henning said:
I'll get you 180 knots on 21gph (it'll go faster but I run very low power for fuel and engine conservation) with 2 low time engines (150 & 350 hrs approx) new props and a 3300 hr airframe. To me a turbine engine needs a paying job.
Click to expand...

If your typical mission is 700 nm, turbines can actually make sense - provided you have the cash. At $400-500k he can buy a C90 or a Cheyenne II, the real question is whether the hourly costs will be something he can tolerate for the speed.

Henning said:
He must have gotten a very cherry cared for one then, good for him. Most have them have been dogged hard all their lives flying checks and **** & blood. Poor Bob Gerace, his ate his lunch.
Click to expand...

That goes for any airplane. He bought a low-time plane that was cared for by its previous owners. If you buy a beat to **** 421 it will be an even bigger money pit. Need to compare apples to apples.

The 421 has the GTSIO-520s (which are good if you treat them right, but still expensive), plus pressurization on top of the T310R.

Plus, the way this friend of mine flies (maximum continuous power always), a 421 would probably find him some pretty poor engine longevity. The T310R also does much better out of the 2900 strip he's based at with the RAM conversion.
 
Henning said:
I'll get you 180 knots on 21gph (it'll go faster but I run very low power for fuel and engine conservation) with 2 low time engines (150 & 350 hrs approx) new props and a 3300 hr airframe. To me a turbine engine needs a paying job.
Click to expand...

I really need the club seating arrangement I think...for the mutts..sounds silly I know, but...it'll ensure the plane gets used and that the wife is happy.

Very important thing!
 
Not to discount Henning's pretty 310, but a 550 or TN550 powered A36 Bonanza will do 80% of what you want. 10-12000ft cruise will get you above all but a few mountains around here - without a tube in your nose and, even a 700nm flight is less than a hour difference, each way (170kts vs. 200kts.) The difference offered by turbine equipment and a professional pilot is the ability to go every day or night, extreme weather notwithstanding, @300kts...for 5 times more money.
 
SteveinNC said:
I really need the club seating arrangement I think...for the mutts..sounds silly I know, but...it'll ensure the plane gets used and that the wife is happy.

Very important thing!
Click to expand...


I have flown dogs and a whole variety of critters for 25 years and never had club seating, none of them ever complained...;)

I even had a cat that would fly with me in a Midget Mustang single seater. First time he stowed away he came over my shoulder halfway to work and curled up in my lap. Sucker had to spend a hitch offshore with me.:yesnod:
 
Last edited:
Henning said:
I have flown dogs and a whole variety of critters for 25 years and never had club seating, none of them ever complained...;)
Click to expand...

I'm sure..but for health / comfort reasons...long story, one of them is older..they need that type of cabin.

Again...I recognize the silliness here.
 
If that's the case then a 340 or 421 sounds like a good choice. Provided the $500-700/hr wet cost (estimated) is acceptable for you.

Just read an article in the Twin Cessna Flyer about a gentleman who upgraded from a 210 to a 421. Had a pretty easy transition overall, but did spend I believe 50 hours with an instructor.
 
Yeah...read that article too. Unfortunately his plane is down for months now with maintenance issue.

I just can't get my head around a plane thats almost as old as me...

Other than that...man...they are huge bang for buck.
 
Last edited:
SteveinNC said:
Yeah...read that article too. Unfortunately his plane is down for months now with maintenance issue.

I just can't get my he'd around a plane thats almost as old as me...

Other than that...man...they are huge bang for buck.
Click to expand...


Heck, my plane is 5 years older than me and in way better condition than I am...:rofl: It's all hours and care. The biggest thing you want to look for is a plane that's always had a hangar, it makes a huge difference in long term condition and care expenses. Unless very expensive, hangars will save you money across 10 years, heck, even expensive hangars can. Look at the pics of my plane and tell me how old you think the paint is.... It's not just paint either, avionics, interiors, windows... BTW, pull the back seat and lay in a pad and the pooches can have a huge den.;)
 
Henning said:
Heck, my plane is 5 years older than me and in way better condition than I am...:rofl: It's all hours and care. The biggest thing you want to look for is a plane that's always had a hangar, it makes a huge difference in long term condition and care expenses. Unless very expensive, hangars will save you money across 10 years, heck, even expensive hangars can. Look at the pics of my plane and tell me how old you think the paint is.... It's not just paint either, avionics, interiors, windows... BTW, pull the back seat and lay in a pad and the pooches can have a huge den.;)
Click to expand...

In general , I agree. It's just tough to find one you're certain has been cared for like that all its life etc. there's just more risk in general I'd say.

Like the idea of the pad in bag though!
 
SteveinNC said:
In general , I agree. It's just tough to find one you're certain has been cared for like that all its life etc. there's just more risk in general I'd say.

Like the idea of the pad in bag though!
Click to expand...

If you don't know what you're looking at and for I agree. Luckily I knew, that's why I bought it 10 minutes after seeing it. Provenance is important as well, know who owned it. When a rich pedantic master metal craftsman who wants everything perfect just spent a couple hundred grand taking care of all the issues the plane gets then sells it at completion because he needs the hangar for another project, that's a pretty good buying opportunity. Mine never made it on the market. My buddy who is his partner in the other project called me and told me it was for sale. I wasn't looking for a plane particularly but just couldn't pass it up. It's one of my all time favorites, the prettiest 310 made IMO and the conditions and times I couldn't pass it up. Hopefully tomorrow I'll get a call on a job it looks like I'll get and I won't have to sell it to get an amphib, I can have both.:D When I put the panel in I had no intention of ever selling it. Everything is low time enough that I'll likely never need to overhaul the engines and with the new props, my plane no longer has any ADs on it.
 
P-210 is "out of the frying pan into the fire" as far as determining condition goes.:rofl:
 
Henning said:
P-210 is "out of the frying pan into the fire" as far as determining condition goes.:rofl:
Click to expand...

I hear ya.. from what I understand its kind of a specialty plane - like a mirage. You really need a mechanic who knows them well.

Only reason I mention it is that it does fit the mission.

I have probably read too many richard collins books / videos where he mentions his beloved 210
 
He's a good friend and good pilot. The nose gear collapsed about two weeks after the article was published.

Ted DuPuis said:
If that's the case then a 340 or 421 sounds like a good choice. Provided the $500-700/hr wet cost (estimated) is acceptable for you.

Just read an article in the Twin Cessna Flyer about a gentleman who upgraded from a 210 to a 421. Had a pretty easy transition overall, but did spend I believe 50 hours with an instructor.
Click to expand...
 
A Cessna 340 is a very capable pressurized twin, I've flown my friend's 340 from the right seat and it's as stable as a heavy truck, very quiet inside the cabin, and very fast and comfortable, but it sure burns fuel at an astounding rate. It's only economical if you fill it full of passengers and baggage and going on a long cross-country flight. My friend's brother owns a turbine-converted P210 and it's almost as fast, but uses less fuel (Jet-A vs 100LL).
 
Last edited:
The 340 will make 200 KTAS only at high altitudes that are feasible only for long trips. During 3+ years of ownership I had only a few trips at such speeds.

Neal Howard said:
A Cesna 340 is a very capable pressurized twin, I've flown my friend's 340 from the right seat and it's as stable as a heavy truck, very quiet inside the cabin, and very fast and comfortable, but it sure burns fuel at an astounding rate. It's only economical if you fill it full of passengers and baggage and going on a long cross-country flight. My friend's brother owns a turbine-converted P210 and it's almost as fast, but uses less fuel (Jet-A vs 100LL).
Click to expand...
 
How about the Extra 400?

Here's an ad for one asking $400k. It goes 188 knots or so according to Wiki, is pressurized, and has only one piston engine, which is obviously less expensive to run than a turbine. I know, I know, it's a bit of an orphan, but it has its niche.
 
jpower said:
How about the Extra 400?

Here's an ad for one asking $400k. It goes 188 knots or so according to Wiki, is pressurized, and has only one piston engine, which is obviously less expensive to run than a turbine. I know, I know, it's a bit of an orphan, but it has its niche.
Click to expand...

Interesting, I didn't know you could still get the TSIOL engine. I always was intrigued with it, I saw Tom's do a lot of 414 conversions with them 20+ years ago and I don't see any around anymore. I asked at Tom's last year when I stopped in and talked to some of the mechanics about them and they said they were a nightmare besides eating up all the useful load. Bummer thought I, a 350hp liquid cooled engine with a 2000hr TBO would be great. BTW, that 188kts is What we call a 'Marketing Number":rofl: Considering it's not a geared engine, the ICPs are going to be awful high for 315hp at 2500rpm.

Looks like RAM is overhauling them at around $75,000, I think that will overhaul BOTH TIO 541s on a Duke!

I think you can operate the PA 46T or TBM cheaper lol.

Crew: 1
Capacity: 5 passengers
Length: 9.57*m (31*ft*5*in)
Wingspan: 11.5*m (37*ft*9*in)
Height: 3.09*m (10*ft*2*in)
Empty weight: 1,430*kg (3,153*lb)
Max takeoff weight: 1,999*kg (4,407*lb)
Powerplant: 1 × Continental TSIOL-550-C Voyager
6-cyl. horizontally opposed liquid cooled turbocharged intercooled fuel-injected direct drive piston engine, 261*kW (350*hp) for takeoff, 242*kW (325*hp) continuous
Performance
Cruise speed: 348*km/h; 216*mph (188*kn) KTAS at mid weight, 90% power, 3,658*m (12,001*ft)
Never exceed speed: 387*km/h; 241*mph (209*kn)
Range: 3,889*km; 2,417*mi (2,100*nmi)
Service ceiling: 7,620*m (25,000*ft)
Rate of climb: 7.1*m/s (1,400*ft/min) at MTOW - ISA
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
He's a good friend and good pilot. The nose gear collapsed about two weeks after the article was published.
Click to expand...

I read that on the TTCF forums. Not fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top