Best six place twin for short strip?

paflyer

paflyer

Final Approach
Joined
Jul 26, 2010
Messages
7,152
Location
PA
Display Name
Display name:
PAFlyer
Contemplating an airpark with a 2200 foot paved strip, about 400MSL, no obstructions over 50ft on either end.

Looking for suggestions on best 6-seat piston twin to comfortably be able to get in/out without undue risk or superior pilot technique (not that I'm not superior...), under say $100K acquisition.

I figure an Aztec, Twin-Bo, others?
 
paflyer said:
I wouldn't think that pusher config is a good idea with "rough" fields, as they put it...
Click to expand...

Look where the main gear is, it doesn't appear to be too bad. The key is how fast can you get those prop tips clear.
 
Henning said:
Look where the main gear is, it doesn't appear to be too bad. The key is how fast can you get those prop tips clear.
Click to expand...

The possible problem I see is that while operating on rough fields, gravel/dirt, the tires will throw rocks into the props.

Otherwise it looks interesting. If it was only turbo charged for the high density altitudes I operate from.
 
You need an Aero Commander. I could takeoff lightly loaded in 600ft in my old 520. Fully loaded it did about 1000ft. And they can land on anything with those big mains. A real bush plane.

I would look at a 500B model - they're bullet proof and reliable.

1777196.jpg
 
Zeldman said:
The possible problem I see is that while operating on rough fields, gravel/dirt, the tires will throw rocks into the props.

Otherwise it looks interesting. If it was only turbo charged for the high density altitudes I operate from.
Click to expand...

They have a rock guard behind the wheel IIRC. It may well be possible to get a turbo one, but regardless I don't think you can get in one for $100k. Aztec makes a really good choice as do the early light Commanders.
 
Really a Baron isn't bad either, but an Aztec will work shorter with more load.
 
B350ATP said:
Why a twin ?
Click to expand...
Why not?

Load, more options over water/terrain/night, roomy interior, the usual.

How about any of the cabin class twins, C4xx? What I'd REALLY love is a Duke, but that's not for anything less than 4000'.
 
For under 100k, I think you're SOL

You could find a nice 206, which has that mission written all over it.

But if you MUST have a twin and can find some more change, you'll want a BN2 islander. Maybe a hopped up Commander

islander.jpg
 
paflyer said:
Why not?

Load, more options over water/terrain/night, roomy interior, the usual.

How about any of the cabin class twins, C4xx? What I'd REALLY love is a Duke, but that's not for anything less than 4000'.
Click to expand...

Plus a 6 place twin can be bought for less than most 6 place singles. Granted maintenance and fuel burn will quickly make up the difference.
 
Skymaster!



:: ducks ::
 
paflyer said:
Why not?

Load, more options over water/terrain/night, roomy interior, the usual.

How about any of the cabin class twins, C4xx? What I'd REALLY love is a Duke, but that's not for anything less than 4000'.
Click to expand...

Beech 18 is the only cabin class twin I would do short strips with 6 seats and luggage.
 
James331 said:
For under 100k, I think you're SOL

You could find a nice 206, which has that mission written all over it.

But if you MUST have a twin and can find some more change, you'll want a BN2 islander. Maybe a hopped up Commander

islander.jpg
Click to expand...

No way you can touch a BN-2 for near $100k. They are money makers. Money makers are usually priced out of the reach of typical personal GA users.
 
Aztec. Not the fastest, not the sexiest, but we used to run them in and out of 2300-foot strips in the coal mining areas of the Appalachians, and we could go places and haul things the Barons and 310's couldn't. Just remember that if you lose one on takeoff out of an airport like that, you're no better off than if you lose one in a 206 at that airport, and maybe worse, since a 206 with one engine out isn't trying to turn around and bite itself in the butt.
 
Ron Levy said:
you're no better off than if you lose one in a 206 at that airport, and maybe worse, since a 206 with one engine out isn't trying to turn around and bite itself in the butt.
Click to expand...
Which brings us back around to the C-336/7. 'Course, although they were sold with as many as six seats installed, it's nowhere near a legitimate six-person airplane.
 
Pilawt said:
Which brings us back around to the C-336/7. 'Course, although they were sold with as many as six seats installed, it's nowhere near a legitimate six-person airplane.
Click to expand...
Well, the second engine in a 336/337 won't fly you out of one of those airports any more than the second engine of an Aztec, just fewer control issues to complicate the problem. OTOH, if you operate that Islander with only six aboard, you might be in a lot better shape since you'll be a lot farther below MGW, and being light makes for large improvements in one-engine-out climb in a piston twin. That's how Bruce Chien does it -- he never loads his Seneca more than will allow balanced field length in the situation (elevation, runway length, obstacles, etc). He gives up a lot of potential load carrying ability, but he knows for sure the airplane will allow a safe ending to a single engine failure at any point from brake release to clearing the runway after landing.
 
Last edited:
Ron Levy said:
Rather more than a six-seater (pilot plus 9, IIRC), but still a very good choice (or a Turbo Islander at higher elevations).
Click to expand...
But not very fast, 140Kt.
 
paflyer said:
Always liked the 337's- just not particularly roomy, and not much baggage space.
Click to expand...

I actually really like the 336/337 as well, but it seems to have a less than stellar reputation on this board, so I thought I'd throw it out there. :)

It's not a true six seat airplane anyway. Honestly, I'm of the same opinion as some of the others - the airplane the OP is looking for doesn't exist for less than $100K.
 
You can. You can get a Commander 680 for well under $100K because everyone is terrified of geared engines. Completely unfounded, geared engines are just as reliable as anything else.

aerocommander680-7.jpg
 
I've got time in the Islander, the Aztec and both the Cessna 336 and 337. If I were looking to operate a light twin out of a short runway, without question, it would be an Aztec, a very well maintained Aztec.
 
Too bad you didn't ask the question last month. My Dad just sold his 78 turbo Aztec with Robertson STOL about a week ago for $100,000. Had a nice panel and camera windows and floor. He has had several Aztecs over the years and flew them all over Mexico into some really short strips. Great rugged load hauler with 6 real adult seats. Don
 
I have had a Navajo in and out of pretty short strips, including some grass strips. I wouldn't hesitate basing a Navajo at that strip. I am not sure that I would go out on a hot day at full gross weight, but then I might never need to do that.

However, for your budget, the Aztec will do the job. The E model is the best of the bunch, IMO. With its carrying capacity, you probably won't be at gross often.

The Commander may work too, but I don't have any experience with them.
 
Kristin said:
I have had a Navajo in and out of pretty short strips, including some grass strips. I wouldn't hesitate basing a Navajo at that strip. I am not sure that I would go out on a hot day at full gross weight, but then I might never need to do that.

However, for your budget, the Aztec will do the job. The E model is the best of the bunch, IMO. With its carrying capacity, you probably won't be at gross often.

The Commander may work too, but I don't have any experience with them.
Click to expand...

Why do you like the Aztec E more than say an F?
 
The F is heavier. They were trying to get rid of the Aztec's tendency to pitch up when you extend flaps. The result was an airplane that was about 100-150 lbs heavier and as a result carried less. It also has some more contraptions to maintain related to trying to eliminate the pitch up. When you know what to expect, it is easy to deal with. I quit putting approach flaps down at highers speeds and mostly save flaps for final. Running the electric trim forward as you are extending approach flaps does much to counter that as well.

The E has cockpit improvements that the earlier Aztecs did not. In fact, the later E's had improvements over the earlier E models.
 
Kristin said:
The F is heavier. They were trying to get rid of the Aztec's tendency to pitch up when you extend flaps. The result was an airplane that was about 100-150 lbs heavier and as a result carried less. It also has some more contraptions to maintain related to trying to eliminate the pitch up. When you know what to expect, it is easy to deal with. I quit putting approach flaps down at highers speeds and mostly save flaps for final. Running the electric trim forward as you are extending approach flaps does much to counter that as well.

The E has cockpit improvements that the earlier Aztecs did not. In fact, the later E's had improvements over the earlier E models.
Click to expand...

Thanks, good info. Any opinion of Turbo E Aztec's (good, bad, performance)?
 
More expense and more weight. If you need it, then it is a very good system. If I had to routinely fly in and out of the inter-mountain west, that is probably the plane I would have. Kansas and points east, I would stick with the normally aspirated as it is not worth the cost and weight penalty. It is a good system though. I am more familiar with that system in a Navajo where it works great.
 
Kristin said:
More expense and more weight. If you need it, then it is a very good system. If I had to routinely fly in and out of the inter-mountain west, that is probably the plane I would have. Kansas and points east, I would stick with the normally aspirated as it is not worth the cost and weight penalty. It is a good system though. I am more familiar with that system in a Navajo where it works great.
Click to expand...

Thanks again.
 
I flew my Aztec C into a 2500 foot grass field last month, no issue at all.(note that is an actual picture of my plane)

As to price, I paid $33K for my Aztec in Dec 2011, which was flown to my prebuy from New York (~500miles). First annual was about $5-6K. Now no glass, but it was a capable booted IFR airplane (dual VOR's, DME, ADF, AP and weather radar)

At $100K you are priced near the top of the pack. BTW, don't look in TAP and believe the prices... those are the ones not selling. Be aggressive in your offers, don't fall in love and be ready to move.
 

Attachments

  • AztecGrass.jpg
    AztecGrass.jpg
    40.1 KB · Views: 58
abraxas said:
What has been your most expensive annual to date? That first one?
Click to expand...

Yeap.. although the 2nd annual with a different mechanic was close. My third one (with the same mechanic) was about $4k. Now note, that's just airworthy and recommend items. I put metco wingtips on this year, and last year it was flap gap seals. The first year I added vortex generators and shoulder belts and with those two, you should budget them in.

Also if you run them at 75% power they are gas hogs. I run mine at 18-20 gal/hr, LOP and oversquared and can count on 160-165mph indicated up to about 6500 feet. About 50-55% power.

I think the comment that capn' Ron made was most important is if you are going from short fields you need to treat them like singles and look to see what you have in front of you. I also followed Bruce Chin's advice about twins as well.. but in the case of the Aztec with standard tanks you're giving up very little flying it 200lbs under gross. I can count on one hand the times I've departed within 400lbs of gross and never closer then 200lbs from gross (that was will all seats full and full fuel... there was a sale and the runway was 10,000 feet long... old SAC base)
 
Last edited:
stratobee said:
You can. You can get a Commander 680 for well under $100K because everyone is terrified of geared engines. Completely unfounded, geared engines are just as reliable as anything else.



aerocommander680-7.jpg
Click to expand...


I've always just loved how those look. They have various other shortcomings besides the geared engines, for sure, but for looks, they're just sexy. ;)
 
2200ft isn't that short unless it's at altitude. You can probably get by with any of the usual suspects, baron, seneca, 310. Definitely aztec is the way to go for short strips though.

I take my travel air in and out of our farm strip all the time with ample room. 1800ft long and the grass usually isn't cut as short as it could be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top