business / pleasure aircraft

Hmm, granted paved but we are 3500 feet here, meet 135 accelerate/stop and climb out well, even with a good load.

But Ohio is flat as a modern supermodel so that counts too.

I have never flown it with more than 2 other people in it myself.
 
Skylane81E said:
Hmm, granted paved but we are 3500 feet here, meet 135 accelerate/stop and climb out well, even with a good load.

But Ohio is flat as a modern supermodel so that counts too.

I have never flown it with more than 2 other people in it myself.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Light load it's not much of an issue, and even at gross you'll be able to get out of a 3500 ft strip and meet the accelerate/stop. However the obstacle clearance isn't as good.

Up on the Canadian gravel strips where I took the PA-31-310, you've got obstacles. I wouldn't take the Chieftain there. Now, Chieftains operate out of there. But the margin between the 310 and 350 makes me prefer the 310.

Remember, the reason Piper petitioned for the 350 HP engines and counter-rotating props were because the plane needed them.
 
Would this traveling with samples be considered "furtherance of a business?" Do you plan on getting your commercial.
 
Thanks again.
Being based in Central Oregon is helpful as I can access Oregon, Washington and most of Idaho without crossing the Rockies. Most of the trips would be east or crossing the Cascades. I can access most of Idaho from the southwest. I understand flying in the winter would be something to be considered very carefully. Question is a turbo a necessity? Am I better to get a well outfitted 182 and take longer to get there on my longer legs? If turbo is a necessity then it looks like I will have to look at raising my price range. I have flown a 182 and I like the airplane. I have not been in a Mooney. I think I will stop at the local airport and see if I can at least sit in one. I like the idea of the Bonanza but I think that is out of my price range with 6 seats and retract. Maybe in the future.
 
Knowing some pilots who fly the Cascades they are constantly dealing with ice there. So budgeting some money for a little deice equipment may be wise, just don't expect it to always save you.
 
RRman said:
Thanks again.
Being based in Central Oregon is helpful as I can access Oregon, Washington and most of Idaho without crossing the Rockies. Most of the trips would be east or crossing the Cascades. I can access most of Idaho from the southwest. I understand flying in the winter would be something to be considered very carefully. Question is a turbo a necessity? Am I better to get a well outfitted 182 and take longer to get there on my longer legs? If turbo is a necessity then it looks like I will have to look at raising my price range. I have flown a 182 and I like the airplane. I have not been in a Mooney. I think I will stop at the local airport and see if I can at least sit in one. I like the idea of the Bonanza but I think that is out of my price range with 6 seats and retract. Maybe in the future.
Click to expand...

Do you work for CCI? at LaGrange Or? If that is the case, you do not have to cross the Rockies much, if at all. (look at the route Boise, Burley, Rock Springs) and getting into Puget Sound is easy thru the gorge.

And Remember the early 210 is nothing more than a C-182RG at 1/4 the price. Flying it is very similar to the 182 with better speeds and loads.
 
Last edited:
Skylane81E said:
Knowing some pilots who fly the Cascades they are constantly dealing with ice there. So budgeting some money for a little deice equipment may be wise, just don't expect it to always save you.
Click to expand...

No one lives very long flying the North Cascades in the winter IFR in less than a 777.

VFR ,,, it an easy do, and many times the gorge will get you around the high rocks.
 
Tom-D said:
No one lives very long flying the North Cascades in the winter IFR in less than a 777.

VFR ,,, it an easy do, and many times the gorge will get you around the high rocks.
Click to expand...
'
Hiyup, but a hot prop might save your rear by giving you a little extra time to get the hell OUT of the ice.
 
Skylane81E said:
'
Hiyup, but a hot prop might save your rear by giving you a little extra time to get the hell OUT of the ice.
Click to expand...

I've never been one for liking the idea of getting de-iced props but not wings. You have other things you can do with props - increase the RPM, for one. But wings, they ice up, it's hard to get that ice off.

Either get the equipment, or don't. And either way, be really careful with ice.

Signed,
-Someone who pretty much only flies FIKI planes anymore, and is no stranger to ice
 
I very very rarely fly FIKI planes, and I do fly a lot of IFR, what is my secret? Don't fly into icing conditions. It's not hard. It just means sometimes you don't go. Just need to decide how much "going" really means to you and realize that carries a significant cost.

Some folks push pretty dangerous icing conditions with almost no outs with inadequate equipment. They get away with it for awhile - but with time they end up killing themselves. It's not because they didn't have FIKI it's because they operated outside of their ability.

Just be real about what you can and cannot do. That's all it takes.
 
jesse said:
Just be real about what you can and cannot do. That's all it takes.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

The problem I notice is that a lot of people with inadequate equipment make excuses for why it's ok to fly in conditions they shouldn't.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
Exactly.

The problem I notice is that a lot of people with inadequate equipment make excuses for why it's ok to fly in conditions they shouldn't.
Click to expand...
And that's the trick with having partial equipment. Knowing that it doesn't let you fly into ice. If you can avoid falling into that trap having the equipment beats having nothing if you ever do blunder into ice.
 
Skylane81E said:
'
Hiyup, but a hot prop might save your rear by giving you a little extra time to get the hell OUT of the ice.
Click to expand...

Friend of ours flys a PC-12, he says even the PC 12 gets iffy going over Victor 2 out of PAE.
 
RRman said:
Longest flight legs would be 4 - 6 hours with the exception of Arizona which would only be a couple of times a year.
Click to expand...
"4-6 hours" tells me nothing. In a Cessna Mustang, that could be halfway across the country. In a Cub, that might not be even halfway across the state.

I am not a 135 pound adult I weigh 200 lbs and my other passenger depending on who goes would weigh between 150 and 200 pounds.That puts me between 500 - 600 pounds before fuel.
Click to expand...
That's useful information.

How about a turbo arrow or a turbo 182RG? I saw some turbo arrows on tradeaplane that would be in my price range.Would these fit the bill? Would the Mooney still be in the ballpark?
Click to expand...
You'll probably find that most Turbo Arrows have full fuel payloads in that range, so you'll have to check the individual aircraft paperwork to be sure it will hold 600 lb with enough fuel to make your stage lengths (whatever they are). Figure on 10 gph and 135 KTAS, and run the numbers. A Mooney would indeed be in the payload ballpark, but how happy a non-turbo Mooney would be in some of the areas you want to fly. A Turbo 182RG would handle your mission very comfortably, but my initial gut feel is you may not find a good one for $80K, although in the current markent, who knows?
 
Last edited:
MBDiagMan said:
Would this traveling with samples be considered "furtherance of a business?" Do you plan on getting your commercial.
Click to expand...
It would be that, but you only need a private to make these sorts of flights yourself under 61.113(b). However, without a commercial, you'd have to do it solo, as under Mangiamele, you couldn't be reimbursed for the cost of flying with someone else aboard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top