Buying a Baron for Training

Paveslave53

Paveslave53

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Dec 15, 2019
Messages
136
Display Name
Display name:
Paveslave53
So I posted about a twin for training, I’m thinking of selling my 182 since the market is so high for my aircraft and buying a twin to continue my training in. (Build hours) Is there specific years of barons that one should stay away from ? If I decide to use it as a ME trainer at some point as well as my personal aircraft? I would buy a Seneca for a rental or leaseback but good low time ones are hard to find and the Baron is a much more stout built aircraft. I haven’t worked a lot of them but the ones I worked on were very nice made machines compared to pipers. Insurance is going to be the big factor until I get some time. But if you had to pick one say in the 300 or less range what model and why would it be ?
 
As a general, nationwide comparison, the piston multiengine training market is very small compared to the piston single-engine market. It also tends to be a cost-sensitive market which is why the Piper Seminole, Piper Seneca, and Beechcraft Duchess tend to be the most popular multi-engine trainers. When the cost per hour is double to triple that of the typical light piston single, clients tend to look at the costs very closely. This is not a black-and-white, across-the-board rule; some markets have clientele with higher-end equipment desires. But these are the exception rather than the rule.

The Baron is my personal dream aircraft (maybe someday) but I wouldn't operate one as a trainer. The operating costs are too high, parts are too expensive and the aircraft is simply too pricey to acquire and keep airworthy, and insurance tends to be a deal-killer. Even if you found clients interested in renting the aircraft, there's a good chance you'd be operating in the red pretty deeply.

You'd be better off sticking with a Seminole. Those generally always hold their value and are the "Cessna 182" of the light training twin market. If you want to stop operating that twin and offload it, there is a flight school somewhere who will want to take a look at it.

Of course, if money is no object and you're not worried about a negative cash flow so you can own a nice airplane, that's a different story.
 
Everything @Ryan F. says is spot on. That being said, a local flight school to me DOES successfully and profitably operate a 55 Baron for about $400/hr wet. A lot of it depends on your location. It's not an impossibility, but isn't a slam dunk either.
 
texasclouds said:
What is your end goal for these multi hours?
Click to expand...

This. If money is no object and you are looking to keep a personal craft for yourself then go for it. We had the 55 Baron with 470s and we loved it. More costly than our 182RG though, and my husband already had 2000 hours total, IR and complex, when he got his ME. He flew the Baron regularly for work so “building multi hours” was built in to his mission. So my question would be what is your mission? Do you have somewhere to fly to, and can afford the expense? If not there may be cheaper ways to build multi hours.
 
Buying a twin for the 50 or so hours of multi that it takes to get on with a regional is probably the most expensive way to do it. If the longer term goal is to have a personal airplane, then the equation is a bit different. The problem with the twins that are commonly used as trainers is that the flight schools are snapping them up at a premium. The difficulty in finding a low time Seminole or Duchess has led to all sorts of airplanes being pressed into service and trainers. In the last few years then Twin Comanche has made a comeback after being unfairly tarred as unsafe by the use of the FAA's idiotic training standards back in the late 60's and early 70's.
 
I can always find somewhere to fly to, I guess my end goal is to get enough hours as quick as possible to get a job somewhere, 135,121 something. Not sure which I would rather do because I haven’t done either one. My only saving grace is that I am an IA so the Mx is easy for me and I get parts for cheap. I have friends that have worked barons for years that would be able to assist with any “issues” I count figure out. I don’t doubt the Seneca is way cheaper to operate but finding a Seneca 3 that Doesn’t have timed out motors or issues is tough. Not to mention the TSIO-360s are cheaper to get a factory re man then to overhaul. So your looking at 120,000 in just engines.Maybe I’ll just put 1,000 hours on my 182 and call it a day and worry about twin time as I need to.
 
Paveslave53 said:
I can always find somewhere to fly to, I guess my end goal is to get enough hours as quick as possible to get a job somewhere, 135,121 something. Not sure which I would rather do because I haven’t done either one. My only saving grace is that I am an IA so the Mx is easy for me and I get parts for cheap. I have friends that have worked barons for years that would be able to assist with any “issues” I count figure out. I don’t doubt the Seneca is way cheaper to operate but finding a Seneca 3 that Doesn’t have timed out motors or issues is tough. Not to mention the TSIO-360s are cheaper to get a factory re man then to overhaul. So your looking at 120,000 in just engines.Maybe I’ll just put 1,000 hours on my 182 and call it a day and worry about twin time as I need to.
Click to expand...

It helps being an IA. It certainly keeps my costs down for my Twin Comanche, which is the most economical twin to operate. But with the general shortage of mechanics, you ought to be able to open doors that an average low time pilot cannot. Find a 135 operator who could use a person who they can cross-utilize and see what you are work out.
 
Debating selling my 182S and using the profits to buy a Seneca, Use if for my own use and find students that need to do ME training in it……. Tough to let go of my 182 but with the market the way it is I can almost get a Seneca with no payment………. I have not seen any twins for rent in Northern NV……
 
Yeah I would have gone PA30 for this mission, and I love my baron.

I've seen sillier things though. To your original question, no, there aren't any to "avoid", they're all pretty nice.

The mention of a Travel Air ("Baby Baron" if you will) isn't a bad one, there are some gotchas in that line to be aware of.

For 50 hours, I'd seriously friggin rent.
 
I fly from NV to Texas quite a bit so a twin would be nice but I know its 3x the cost of the 182 for sure.
 
Paveslave53 said:
So I posted about a twin for training, I’m thinking of selling my 182 since the market is so high for my aircraft and buying a twin to continue my training in. (Build hours) Is there specific years of barons that one should stay away from ? If I decide to use it as a ME trainer at some point as well as my personal aircraft? I would buy a Seneca for a rental or leaseback but good low time ones are hard to find and the Baron is a much more stout built aircraft. I haven’t worked a lot of them but the ones I worked on were very nice made machines compared to pipers. Insurance is going to be the big factor until I get some time. But if you had to pick one say in the 300 or less range what model and why would it be ?
Click to expand...

I think this is a great idea. Have you looked at the 310? I looked heavily at the Baron when doing research in a twin. I ultimately went with the 310Q due to the larger cabin and it sits higher. The Baron has a 42in cabin, 310 is 48in. I haven’t had any issues finding parts for my 310. We have a great owners group.

If I could do it all over again, I would’ve found a 310 with the IO-550’s for the faster cruise speed and SE performance. I still think the 310Q is best 310 model.

Best of luck with your plan. I greatly enjoy twin ownership (except paying those mtx bills).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
My dad had 2 310s he kept one being a Q, I agree the 310 is amazing but it is a very mx heavy airplane.they are super nice.
 
Paveslave53 said:
My dad had 2 310s he kept one being a Q, I agree the 310 is amazing but it is a very mx heavy airplane.they are super nice.
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean by mtx heavy. I can’t imaging the Baron is any less mtx than the 310. I’m also an A&P on my 310 and can help if you have questions regarding my experience with the 310.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Fracpilot said:
Not sure what you mean by mtx heavy. I can’t imaging the Baron is any less mtx than the 310. I’m also an A&P on my 310 and can help if you have questions regarding my experience with the 310.
Fracpilot said:
Not sure what you mean by mtx heavy. I can’t imaging the Baron is any less mtx than the 310. I’m also an A&P on my 310 and can help if you have questions regarding my experience with the 310.

Not comparing the two, they are about equal in work load. How hard is it to get insurance?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/QUOTE
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
It all depends on your qualifications. I have over 7000 hours of ME time, fly professionally, and over 100 in the 310. My insurance still managed to increase. It’s about 3400/yr for me with $170k Hull Value.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Well if your ever looking for someone to split costs let me know I would love to get some 310 time, according to my insurance agent this year has made things much worse. Now I will need specific time 15-25 hours in type to even be considered.
 
Not a bad idea but it is "critical" to have at least one unfeathering accumulator.
Unfortunately, students learn the hard way after they can't restart an engine in the air without one or burn out their starter prematurely.
-Phil
www.accelerated-ifr.com
 
Paveslave53 said:
I fly from NV to Texas quite a bit so a twin would be nice
Click to expand...
Curious, what about NV to TX would warrant a twin? Don't get me wrong, I love twins, but it's all over land and there are plenty of single engine machines that can fly that route without an issue
 
I have a single, icing is a big one, more useful load,space, extra engine ish……. Build twin time.Use it to train as a MEI. That’s the main reasons.
 
Tantalum said:
Curious, what about NV to TX would warrant a twin? Don't get me wrong, I love twins, but it's all over land and there are plenty of single engine machines that can fly that route without an issue
Click to expand...

Speed.
 
kep5niner said:
Speed
Click to expand...
then surely a Mooney or Lancair or SR22T/TN would be the choices... ;)

Paveslave53 said:
icing is a big one
Click to expand...
agree on the redundancy and useful load.. but are twins known to carry ice better?


**I'm all for twins, my dream plane(s) are either an Aztec or Aerostar. I realize they're worlds apart, but both would give me something nothing else can. Insane speed and cool ramp factor, or rugged go anywhere hauler

schmookeeg said:
when none of this is rational
Click to expand...
haha good point! It certainly ain't. Especially twins.. but I've been bitten by the twin bug. Real planes have retractable gear and two engines haha
 
Tantalum said:
agree on the redundancy and useful load.. but are twins known to carry ice better?
Click to expand...
Some twins, Aztecs in particular, have a reputation for carrying ice well. Ice does a lot of bad things to an airplane, some of which are mitigated by the nature of a twin and others of which are mitigated by the airfoil on specific planes. Also, for a random sampling of 40+ year old airplanes, I think that deice equipment is much more common in twins than singles. So if you want a plane that gives you more of a safety margin if you run into icing, you shouldn't kick all the singles out of the room but you would be crazy not to invite the twins in before making your final selection.
 
*our club's Aztec has been down for a while sadly* I need to pony up and buy one, my last flight in it was a short hop to FLABOB for lunch

upload_2022-3-10_11-41-48.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top