cost to travel biweekly by Cessna 421

Who's talking about business class and limos? I looked before I posted last time about the airline option and the tickets were about $400 one way last minute. People go way out of the way to justify the cost of flying themselves but on a long trip like this with non-stop options it's not possible.

Right, and the Fung-Wa bus is $50. I compared it with business class and a limo because that is the closest comparison to being flown in your private twin or jet. It also comes with the ability to change itineraries and pretty much guaranteed seats on the next flight. Cattle-car loading on some budget carrier is as much a comparison as city jail is a comparison with the Mariott.
 
Right, and the Fung-Wa bus is $50. I compared it with business class and a limo because that is the closest comparison to being flown in your private twin or jet. It also comes with the ability to change itineraries and pretty much guaranteed seats on the next flight. Cattle-car loading on some budget carrier is as much a comparison as city jail is a comparison with the Mariott.

I thought they were flying themselves in the story. And they will need some fictional ground transportation no matter how they get there.
 
I thought they were flying themselves in the story. And they will need some fictional ground transportation no matter how they get there.

They own at both ends, so I would suspect they do as many who do this do and have a car parked at both ends.
 
They own at both ends, so I would suspect they do as many who do this do and have a car parked at both ends.
Unless you're like me and rent a car every time you go to your alternate home (which I fly to on Southwest). No, limos though. :)

Speaking of parking, you also need to add the 2 weeks tie down or hangar to the expenses of flying yourself.

I'm not sure how realistic the author wants to get. The 421 idea was shot down because the pilots were too inexperienced. The fractional idea wouldn't work because of the other owners. Then there's the Bonanza which would be fun in good weather for a time or two. But I think real people attempting to do it every two weeks for the whole winter would get discouraged pretty quick, especially if they were delayed or stuck a bunch of times for weather. But they are fictional people so the author can adjust their attitudes at will. :D
 
The route from Calgary to Phoenix passes over some serious mountains. They will need to fly at least 15,000' around the Idaho-Montana state line, if they are on an IFR plan.

For that, they will need at a minimum a turbocharged plane with oxygen.

Considering how remote and rugged some of that terrain is, I can't imagine flying the route regularly with a piston single engine in winter.

I think they will need an instrument rating (which calls for more hours and training) for such a long route, unless the couple are willing to wait days or weeks for weather that is great all along that long route.

It will often not work at all in a piston powered plane, even with an instrument rating -- for example, tomorrow it will be overcast in the mountainous Utah portion of the route, with cloud tops at 25,000 feet. To avoid icing, you would need to fly over that, which would call for a pressurized turbine.

If your 100 hour couple wants to fly regularly in the winter from Phoenix, then El Paso might work just fine as a destination, considering the weather, distance, and altitudes. But not Calgary - a mission of regular wintertime flights on that route calls for a plane and training that isn't realistic for a 100 hour pilot.
 
Last edited:
The route from Calgary to Phoenix passes over some serious mountains. They will need to fly at least 15,000' around the Idaho-Montana state line, if they are on an IFR plan.

For that, they will need at a minimum a turbocharged plane with oxygen.

Considering how remote and rugged some of that terrain is, I can't imagine flying the route regularly with a piston single engine in winter.

I think they will need an instrument rating (which calls for more hours and training) for such a long route, unless the couple are willing to wait days or weeks for weather that is great all along that long route.

It will often not work at all in a piston powered plane, even with an instrument rating -- for example, tomorrow it will be overcast in the mountainous Utah portion of the route, with cloud tops at 25,000 feet. To avoid icing, you would need to fly over that, which would call for a pressurized turbine.

If your 100 hour couple wants to fly regularly in the winter from Phoenix, then El Paso might work just fine as a destination, considering the weather, distance, and altitudes. But not Calgary - a mission of regular wintertime flights on that route calls for a plane and training that isn't realistic for a 100 hour pilot.

I have a friend that makes pretty much the same trip in an Arrow multiple times a year.
 
The route from Calgary to Phoenix passes over some serious mountains. They will need to fly at least 15,000' around the Idaho-Montana state line, if they are on an IFR plan.

For that, they will need at a minimum a turbocharged plane with oxygen.

Considering how remote and rugged some of that terrain is, I can't imagine flying the route regularly with a piston single engine in winter.

I think they will need an instrument rating (which calls for more hours and training) for such a long route, unless the couple are willing to wait days or weeks for weather that is great all along that long route.

It will often not work at all in a piston powered plane, even with an instrument rating -- for example, tomorrow it will be overcast in the mountainous Utah portion of the route, with cloud tops at 25,000 feet. To avoid icing, you would need to fly over that, which would call for a pressurized turbine.

If your 100 hour couple wants to fly regularly in the winter from Phoenix, then El Paso might work just fine as a destination, considering the weather, distance, and altitudes. But not Calgary - a mission of regular wintertime flights on that route calls for a plane and training that isn't realistic for a 100 hour pilot.
You don't fly that route 'Direct', you come down the front of the range until you can cross it on a low route. There are plenty of options for this route that I wouldn't worry about getting stuck IFR if my schedule was flexible for a day or two.
 
There's no way this will make sense. The best thing to do is to re-write the article choosing two regional cities (closer together), in preferably a more mild-climate area. A 400-500 mile trip in the southern half of the US may work.

Otherwise, price out a king air or similar and a professionally crewed airplane -- forget them flying it themselves. A Pilatus might also do this if they had the required time to insure it.
 
Nothing about GA makes sense, yet people do this stuff all the time.
 
Nothing about GA makes sense, yet people do this stuff all the time.


The thing is that they don't do it 13 times a season (winter), voluntarily, in a small airplane, over this route and remain married at the end.

I flew over this area yesterday, east to west, with a two-hour airline delay for weather. Would I have preferred flying a Bonanza or a 421? No way.
 
Then there's the Bonanza which would be fun in good weather for a time or two. But I think real people attempting to do it every two weeks for the whole winter would get discouraged pretty quick, especially if they were delayed or stuck a bunch of times for weather.

Aww, come on - getting stuck in Bozeman for a week would be fun! There is just sooooo much to do there.
 
If your 100 hour couple wants to fly regularly in the winter from Phoenix, then El Paso might work just fine as a destination, considering the weather, distance, and altitudes. But not Calgary - a mission of regular wintertime flights on that route calls for a plane and training that isn't realistic for a 100 hour pilot.
I think the idea of the story is that they are from Calgary, spending time in Phoenix for the winter. Many Calgarians do this. It's like the eastern Canadians who go to Florida. Ok, the solution is to close up their Calgary house and stay in Phoenix for the whole winter. That way they only need to do the trip once.

Aww, come on - getting stuck in Bozeman for a week would be fun! There is just sooooo much to do there.
It could be Pocatello....
 
This situation calls for a machen superstar in nice condition, a pilot with a lot of time in type, pay him well , good food etc, nice motel. Otherwise go commercial.
 
I spent a week in Bozeman one afternoon (lived in Butt(e)), only drove through Poca.:goofy:

I've only been to the airport at Bozeman. Yellowstone Jet Center has good cookies...
 
I love to fly like everyone here, and fly my own plane even more, but as in everything, the way my brain works, is how many commercial flights can the couple do for the enormous amount of $$$$ this is going to cost them?

My guess is quite a few with no headaches other than what you deal with at terminals. I'm trying not to be a Debbie Downer, but like someone said I think on here, ...

"If it flies, floats, or ****s, ... it's cheaper to rent. ;):D

Piston powered GA flying excels at 200 - 600 mile legs. Semi-transcontinental is what jets are for. Flying in the winter over the Rockies sounds like a job for a jetliner to me as well.
 
OP, why not give your fictional characters a son-in-law or some other relative who is a freight dog and does the driving for them on these flights ? Still lets them own the plane, takes all the unlikely circumstances off the table, and you don'e have to contort your story to find a plausible way for it to work.

BTW when I was a young freight dog I fell into a deal like this with the owner's parents, I took them from their home in Morocco to their chalet in the French alps. The king air often developed some issue that caused me to stay over a couple nights in Courchevel. It was a tough place to get stranded compared to our usual fare at some mining town in central africa, but somehow I managed to get through it.
 
Back
Top