Best aircraft for 100 hour-per-year pilot

spiderweb said:
I wondered about them. I remember that Piper felt unfairly blamed for a rash of accidents, but I cannot remember why.
Click to expand...

Similar problem with the Bonanza. Sadly, less capable pilots finding ways to exceed the limitations of a fairly capable aircraft.
 
No object fun? An Ensign Eliminator, but only 100 hrs a year would probably make it terrifying.

No object usable? Malibu Turboprop, but probably not worth it only for 100 hrs.

Reality? A used A36 if I'm lucky. Maybe a Malibu piston (unpressurized) otherwise.
 
I will always be partial, but it really can be a fantastic airplane. I couldn't think of a better single to fit our needs. To be at FL 250 at 195 kts using only 16 GPH is really hard to beat. The Malibu is a very complex aircraft that does require the higher level of flight training and higher maintenance needs. I have to pay the bills on mine like all of my customers.

I think it's worth it, Kevin
 
Fearless Tower said:
Similar problem with the Bonanza. Sadly, less capable pilots finding ways to exceed the limitations of a fairly capable aircraft.
Click to expand...

Right, now I remember. That's why I would be concerned about myself, as a 100 hour-per-year pilot. But then again, I guess I'd do annual training at a place like Simcom or something.
 
kmead said:
I will always be partial, but it really can be a fantastic airplane. I couldn't think of a better single to fit our needs. To be at FL 250 at 195 kts using only 16 GPH is really hard to beat. The Malibu is a very complex aircraft that does require the higher level of flight training and higher maintenance needs. I have to pay the bills on mine like all of my customers.

I think it's worth it, Kevin
Click to expand...

How practical is it to be in, say, a 4 person partnership?
 
spiderweb said:
Wow. That sounds very very capable for not that much gas!
Click to expand...

Did you see the fuel usage numbers, weight, and power produced by the new lighter turbine Robinson had Rolls Royce produce for the new T66 Turbine helicopter? I'd like to see somebody take that baby and make a single engine turboprop.
 
spiderweb said:
How practical is it to be in, say, a 4 person partnership?
Click to expand...

It can be great, if the partners are right for each other, the plane, the mission, and financially matched.

Even a 2-person partnership can be awful, given the wrong 2 people in it!
 
spiderweb said:
Right, now I remember. That's why I would be concerned about myself, as a 100 hour-per-year pilot. But then again, I guess I'd do annual training at a place like Simcom or something.
Click to expand...

100/ year is adequate for a Bonanza. It's not a multi-turbine-waterski-amphib-bulldozer-howitzer-magma-lander, after all.
 
I maintain a number of Malibus that are owned by a group of people. One group started off with a 310P flying it as much as 600 hrs a year then moved on to a Mirage/ Jetprop. The Jet prop hit 700 hrs of use last year. Another group has a 310P that sees 400 hrs a year.

They seem to be more reliable when flown a lot each year. We've picked our use up this year, I hope my old Malibu will hang in there.

Kevin
 
TangoWhiskey said:
Did you see the fuel usage numbers, weight, and power produced by the new lighter turbine Robinson had Rolls Royce produce for the new T66 Turbine helicopter? I'd like to see somebody take that baby and make a single engine turboprop.
Click to expand...

Ah no! I know there's an article in the AOPA magazine, so I should check that out!
 
Ben, if you are going to consider a 4 person partnership, you are going to need something "mainstream" e.g, ordinary. You won't find four guys, equally financially capable, understanding of each other's travel needs, and willing to do Flight Safety.

I'd go back to a Saratoga or Lance. Not glamourous, but Jim Allphin at Executive Air can take care of you. Insurance will not crush you. And with only two up and a Cello, String Bass or two, it has lots of reserve climb.

Normally aspirated for your neck of the woods, too.
 
bbchien said:
Ben, if you are going to consider a 4 person partnership, you are going to need something "mainstream" e.g, ordinary. You won't find four guys, equally financially capable, understanding of each other's travel needs, and willing to do Flight Safety.

I'd go back to a Saratoga or Lance. Not glamourous, but Jim Allphin at Executive Air can take care of you. Insurance will not crush you. And with only two up and a Cello, String Bass or two, it has lots of reserve climb.

Normally aspirated for your neck of the woods, too.
Click to expand...

I think you're right. And I do have about 60 hours in a Saratoga. It really is a great compromise between room, payload, and speed. Slower than a Bo, but not by much--and much wider.
 
A well-equipped Vans RV-10.

Fast, roomy, extremely fun to fly, climbs like a rocketship and being experimental, you can equip it with whatever gadgetry you please and legally work on it yourself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top