Getting back in to flying and aircraft selection

[cirrusmx]

Get the king air with a pro pilot. For business flying it is alway better to have someone thinking only about flying while you go about your business for the whole day. You can fly the plane everytime,but you will have a pilot that will make it safe. I try to separate business with piloting as it can become dangerous. ie, getheritis, fatigue, distractions, carelessness, etc. You can learn perfectly fine on a king air flying besides a pro.

 

[Trimup]

What is the goal of that exercise rather than getting the airplane you want, and putting the person in the right seat that you need to initially insure it ?

Beyond that I don't yet know as I am unsure if the optimum solution looks more like a TBM/PC12, a King Air/Conquest, or a Mustang/Eclipse/Phenom..

Lets say it is a strategy more than a goal, dictated by things both known and unknown.

I know I don't want to get in over my head and end up dead.
I don't yet know what airplane I ultimately want.
I know an aircraft with a limited performance envelope can also lead to trouble like say this http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20101102X13215&key=1

One of my missions is to the KEGE.

 

[Trimup]

I fly a Pilatus for someone in a similar situation as you. He's a private pilot but too busy with his businesses to take flying seriously.
Where are you located? Geography could factor into a different mindset.

As soon as the sale closes I intend to be a private pilot too busy with flying to take business seriously.

Midwest

That being said, there are only a few airplanes that fit your ultimate mission so narrowing down the options won't be too bad..

Which few airplanes seem like the fit to you?

 

[Tony_Scarpelli]

A trust yet to be created will own the aircraft, and I have confirmed my personal liability and umbrella insurance is unaffected by any decision I make to fly aircraft, (but not if I buy a pitbull or dig a swimming pool go figure) so the hull is what is at risk if I self insure.

When I bought my Comanche (moved up from VFR pilot in a Cherokee) they were quoting a high insurance rate so i self insured until I had 100 hrs. Then the rate dropped significantly like 66%. They were most worried about my forgetting to let the landing gear down, or anyway letting the airplane get ahead of me.

I could have bought liability for the same low rate as a new pilot as after I had the 100 hrs in type. most of the additional cost was like you said the Hull value.

Even though you have a umbrella policy you can also get liability on the plane for not significantly more than a ATP might pay.

Insurance aside, I had an acquaintance who bought a Turbine Prop Malibu and he went into it from a Cessna 172. The only 2 planes he ever flew. Turns out the Prop jet was easier to fly with fadec control of the engine.

He got his VFR and IFR had about 120 hrs or so by the time he did both. Then got another 55 hrs of real cross country flying. He upgraded to the Turbo prop and had to get something like 50 hrs duel(because of his lack of Complex hours, they preferred 100 hrs). But by the time he got 250 hrs and his commercial rating he never doubted taking business partners or family with him.

It could be that by the time you get a Turbine and get your IFR rating you will be well on your way to achievable insurance, then if you want for confidence get the commercial rating at 250 hrs.

 

[JHW]

I think it's great that you're taking such a rational approach to this, but i really think you will not be happy with a 182 for long. I'd encourage you to look for something with a little more capability. At least go for a ride in an A36 and a 210 and see what you think.

 

[Tony_Scarpelli]

I think it's great that you're taking such a rational approach to this, but i really think you will not be happy with a 182 for long. I'd encourage you to look for something with a little more capability. At least go for a ride in an A36 and a 210 and see what you think.

If he did get an intermediate plane a Turbo Bo/Turbo 210/ Turbo Comanche would be closer to speeds that he will be flying in a jetprop. As wood a twin...if he thought he could end up in a twin then maybe the transitional plane can be a small twin to get those hours logged. Travelair/Twinky. Easy to buy a $50k bird and self insure on the hull while logging 200 hrs of twin time and complex.

 

[JHW]

If he did get an intermediate plane a Turbo Bo/Turbo 210/ Turbo Comanche would be closer to speeds that he will be flying in a jetprop. As wood a twin...if he thought he could end up in a twin then maybe the transitional plane can be a small twin to get those hours logged. Travelair/Twinky. Easy to buy a $50k bird and self insure on the hull while logging 200 hrs of twin time and complex.

true, but with the singles you mentioned he will be able to take the family if he decides he wants to. My family doesn't mind riding in a travel air but they've grown up with GA and know to pack light.

I really think of he sits in a TN A36 with leather interior and club seating, the checkbook will come out on the spot.

 

[Morne]

As stated my thought is to switch from 182 to Silver Eagle turbine powered 210 after I have about 500 hours. No way no how am I single piloting a King Air with my family onboard at 500 hours.

We are a bit alike. I also planned to do 500 hours in my 182 prior to upgrading (to a twin). I'm halfway there and already chomping at the bit. I wish I'd have bought a 210 in the first place.

We have a guy at my home drone that has a Phenom. What an incredible personal jet. The PC-12 is also very capable. Any of the King Air series is a classic choice that doesn't go out of style.

If I were you, knowing you might want the Silver Eagle, I'd look for a 210 model that qualifies to be converted into a Silver Eagle. That way, whenever you feel ready to upgrade you can do so without having to sell your first bird.

My startup is still pretty young (a bit over a year) and I learned to fly so that I could be more involved in it. I'm glad for your success and wish you a ton of fun flying!

 

[wabower]

Can anybody explain why a Silver Eagle and a P-210 are different other than the power plant? If that is indeed the only significant difference, why would anybody want the less reliable option in any single? What bogey-man issue causes the "ooooh you better fly a piston-popper first?"

We are a bit alike. I also planned to do 500 hours in my 182 prior to upgrading (to a twin). I'm halfway there and already chomping at the bit. I wish I'd have bought a 210 in the first place.

We have a guy at my home drone that has a Phenom. What an incredible personal jet. The PC-12 is also very capable. Any of the King Air series is a classic choice that doesn't go out of style.

If I were you, knowing you might want the Silver Eagle, I'd look for a 210 model that qualifies to be converted into a Silver Eagle. That way, whenever you feel ready to upgrade you can do so without having to sell your first bird.

My startup is still pretty young (a bit over a year) and I learned to fly so that I could be more involved in it. I'm glad for your success and wish you a ton of fun flying!

 

[Trimup]

Can anybody explain why a Silver Eagle and a P-210 are different other than the power plant? If that is indeed the only significant difference, why would anybody want the less reliable option in any single? What bogey-man issue causes the "ooooh you better fly a piston-popper first?"

For me the issue is not the turbine itself, I think it is the fact that in most airplanes the turbine comes as part of a package including higher speeds, retractable gear, instrument capable, FIKI, etc. The combination all at once is what I think can lead pilots in to situations where they get behind and end up an NTSB statistic. That being said I am now considering 50 hours in a rental with a CFI and then a move into a Silver Eagle with at least whatever additional CFI time the insurance company dictates as one of the viable options.

 

[wabower]

Smart move. The speeds, gear, FIKI, prop, pressurization, etc. are the same other than that the yellow arc goes away and top of green arc becomes VNE. If you're planning to spend most of your flying life looking at turbine gages, there's no reason to spend any of it with piston-powered planes.

Fuel management is a bit more complex due to extra tankage, but not a difficult task. After a few days in the plane you'll never look back.

For me the issue is not the turbine itself, I think it is the fact that in most airplanes the turbine comes as part of a package including higher speeds, retractable gear, instrument capable, FIKI, etc. The combination all at once is what I think can lead pilots in to situations where they get behind and end up an NTSB statistic. That being said I am now considering 50 hours in a rental with a CFI and then a move into a Silver Eagle with at least whatever additional CFI time the insurance company dictates as one of the viable options.

 

[Ted]

Ultimately, turbines are easier to fly. If you're going to go turbine, I'd agree there's no point in messing around with pistons. I like pistons because I'm weird, but also admit that I'd be going turbine if I won the lottery or sold to a Fortune 500.

It does sound nice to be conservative and move up slowly, but it has limited use. As an example, I spent 100 hours with a guy who was upgrading to a Navajo after 1000 hours of 172 time, mostly instructing. The guy was a good stick, but it was clear that the 172 time did almost nothing of use with respect to his ability to learn and fly the plane. If anything, there were a few bad habits of things that he could get away with in a 172 that would be very bad in the Navajo.

 

[Alexb2000]

I've never understood the step-up logic either. Aside from basic skills I consider time in type to be as critical for safety as anything. How about a TBM and a full time CFI for a 2-3 years? They were built as a turbine to begin with, hold there value extremely well, have a reputation for great build quality, and you can actually use the aircraft to go somewhere. Once you have 500 hours and a couple of turns through flight safety I would think you would be far more comfortable in something like a TBM vs. 500 hours in a 182 and stepping out by yourself into turbine land after a minimal transition.

I recommend the OP call Wayne and find an aircraft that has some resale market and one that will meet your needs then let the training be developed from there.

 

[Trimup]

Smart move. The speeds, gear, FIKI, prop, pressurization, etc. are the same other than that the yellow arc goes away and top of green arc becomes VNE. If you're planning to spend most of your flying life looking at turbine gages, there's no reason to spend any of it with piston-powered planes.

Fuel management is a bit more complex due to extra tankage, but not a difficult task. After a few days in the plane you'll never look back.

Beyond the orders of magnitude improvement in reliablity, the freedom with a turbine to select any power setting at any time without regard for mixture control, or cooling issues is clearly a big operational and ultimately a safety advantage.

 

[dell30rb]

For me the issue is not the turbine itself, I think it is the fact that in most airplanes the turbine comes as part of a package including higher speeds, retractable gear, instrument capable, FIKI, etc. The combination all at once is what I think can lead pilots in to situations where they get behind and end up an NTSB statistic. That being said I am now considering 50 hours in a rental with a CFI and then a move into a Silver Eagle with at least whatever additional CFI time the insurance company dictates as one of the viable options.

Good plan, you'll save yourself a lot of time and money VS buying/selling a plane.

Once you get through the instrument rating in the 210 you'll be good at actually flying the plane and you will likely meet whatever hour minimums the insurance company specifies.

Yes you do have a turbine FIKI airplane with radar and low time pilots have a history of getting in trouble with those VS something like a 172. But just because you have all that stuff does not mean you need to fly in weather that requires using it.

You mention that you are selling your company and it sounds like you will be flying for pleasure more than business. In that case just do what the rest of us do, take extra time on trips knowing you might have to wait out weather you are uncomfortable flying in. You can expand your knowledge faster by studying and hiring an experienced pilot to fly with you every now and then.

Its the low-time guys who buy expensive airplanes and then fly for business or otherwise put themselves in situations where they need to get from point A to point B and poor weather coupled with a green pilot equals disaster.

The keys to safe flying are personal minimums and recurrent training. Not necessarily thousands of hours.

 

[Ted]

Yes you do have a turbine FIKI airplane with radar and low time pilots have a history of getting in trouble with those VS something like a 172. But just because you have all that stuff does not mean you need to fly in weather that requires using it.

Yep. When I bought my de-iced/radar Aztec at 225 TT, Bruce made a comment along the lines of too much plane. Instead of the 10 hours I couldve done the rating in, I spent about 40 with an instructor working at using the tools, and worked my way up in terms of what I would deal with over hundreds of hours.

 

[Trimup]

I've never understood the step-up logic either. Aside from basic skills I consider time in type to be as critical for safety as anything. How about a TBM and a full time CFI for a 2-3 years? They were built as a turbine to begin with, hold there value extremely well, have a reputation for great build quality, and you can actually use the aircraft to go somewhere. Once you have 500 hours and a couple of turns through flight safety I would think you would be far more comfortable in something like a TBM vs. 500 hours in a 182 and stepping out by yourself into turbine land after a minimal transition.

I recommend the OP call Wayne and find an aircraft that has some resale market and one that will meet your needs then let the training be developed from there.

I would probably have to hire the CFI full time and have them relocate to my location to actually make that workable. What number should I use for decision making purposes $50K? $75K? $100K? per year.

 

[wabower]

Yep, and you'll appreciate the differences even more when you start using it for travel. KEGE isn't a particularly tough place to go, and gets easier with every new published procedure. But it's much easier when you can comfortably stay above the rocks or get back above them quickly when you decide to adios. I still think the B-200 is the sweet spot for all the turbines, simply because it does so many things so well, including the ability to actually fly on one if the other one takes the day off.

Beyond the orders of magnitude improvement in reliablity, the freedom with a turbine to select any power setting at any time without regard for mixture control, or cooling issues is clearly a big operational and ultimately a safety advantage.

 

[Alexb2000]

I would probably have to hire the CFI full time and have them relocate to my location to actually make that workable. What number should I use for decision making purposes $50K? $75K? $100K? per year.

If you offered a CFI $50K and the chance to fly a turbine they'd be camped out on your lawn. I think it could be done for much less, although I would spend the money to get a really experienced turbine pilot; also one that has a lot of time in whatever aircraft you decide on. People may scoff, but spending a year or two flying with someone like that and your skills will be well ahead of your TT.

 

[ronnieh]

What Wayne said, what Wayne said, what Wayne said. If you have the means just buy a B 200 and skip the clown planes if you want reliable and capable transportation.
Also I would not get too hung up on a "CFI" in the right seat. Get your multi instrument as quick as you can in a rental then hire a pilot. One with experience like an old retired freight dog or perhaps a retired corporate pilot for the right seat. If he happens to be a CFII and MEI then fine. Then you can learn how to travel in a plane. You most likely will not learn much about instrument flying during your training. Get 3-400 hours like this, then switch to a contract pilot for the bad trips. I suspect $50,000 would cover a years worth the first year. After that I suspect a contract pilot will be in the $400/day range.
You have a good attitude and a good plan. Good luck.

Edit: and what Alex said

 

[wabower]

Unless you're really "off the grid" you shouldn't have much problem finding an instructor. Around here they're like carpet beetles and you need to watch your step.

I would probably have to hire the CFI full time and have them relocate to my location to actually make that workable. What number should I use for decision making purposes $50K? $75K? $100K? per year.

 

[Trimup]

Unless you're really "off the grid" you shouldn't have much problem finding an instructor. Around here they're like carpet beetles and you need to watch your step.

I made the mistake of asking some questions at the FBO desk last time I was out there and now I have every CFI in the area calling and emailing me, but they are all Cessna/Piper guys. There are some Kings, Bravos, CJs, LJ45s hangared here but no PC12/TBM/Conquest and no CFIs with much turbine experience either.

 

[w_privett]

Piston power over 500hp saves no money and only serves to feed the children of maintenance engineers. Likewise pressurization with piston power.

Singe engine turbines are good for firefighters and cropdusters. This because these pilots expect to wind up in a meadow sooner or later.

Moving to twin turbines, we will focus on beechcraft and everyone else. In the 6-12 seat class there is no one else worth considering so let us stick with beech. The C90 is has little merit, it costs as much to maintain as the B200, and it is slower in proportion to its fuel burn vice the 200. The 200 hauls more weight and bulk, the same distance on the same fuel, getting there faster.

Past the King Air 200 lies the Beech 1900 (for people) and the Antonov AN24 (for boxes)

So the natural order of aeroplanes is:

aztec/310/baron58
B200
B1900 / AN24

choose one. Consider nothing in between.

 

[wabower]

If you can condense the training into a short time period, hiring a F/T guy-gal might be an option, but not my first choice.

A while back I helped a SV guy in San Jose with a CJ1 deal. He was nervous about finding a pilot/instructor (among other things) so I ran a single ad on the 350 website, wondering what the response would be to a part-time job that I considered a crappy opportunity. I had to pull the ad after 24 hours due to the flood of applicants. Some were obviously time-builders who respond to any inquiry, but a number were impressive high-time folks who just wanted a different gig.

Bottom line for pilots is that the supply-demand imbalance will always favor the owner, so just figure "if you buy it, they will come."

I made the mistake of asking some questions at the FBO desk last time I was out there and now I have every CFI in the area calling and emailing me, but they are all Cessna/Piper guys. There are some Kings, Bravos, CJs, LJ45s hangared here but no PC12/TBM/Conquest and no CFIs with much turbine experience either.

 

[ronnieh]

Again, what Wayne said. You will not need to relocate an instructor. There will be some experienced turbine pilots available wherever you are.

 

[Trimup]

Piston power over 500hp saves no money and only serves to feed the children of maintenance engineers. Likewise pressurization with piston power.

Singe engine turbines are good for firefighters and cropdusters. This because these pilots expect to wind up in a meadow sooner or later.

Moving to twin turbines, we will focus on beechcraft and everyone else. In the 6-12 seat class there is no one else worth considering so let us stick with beech. The C90 is has little merit, it costs as much to maintain as the B200, and it is slower in proportion to its fuel burn vice the 200. The 200 hauls more weight and bulk, the same distance on the same fuel, getting there faster.

Past the King Air 200 lies the Beech 1900 (for people) and the Antonov AN24 (for boxes)

So the natural order of aeroplanes is:

aztec/310/baron58
B200
B1900 / AN24

choose one. Consider nothing in between.

I just don't think the turboprop twin market is that clear-cut. There seem to be plenty of advocates for the Conquest over a King here in the states and on the cubic dollar end the P180/II over everything including the comparably sized turbofans.

 

[JHW]

I just don't think the turboprop twin market is that clear-cut. There seem to be plenty of advocates for the Conquest over a King here in the states and on the cubic dollar end the P180/II over everything including the comparably sized turbofans.

You're not going to win that argument with winnie. For 25 years I've watched him campaign that you can waste a lot of money on airplanes that are "cheaper" than a king air. And he usually seems to be right.

 

[Trimup]

If you can condense the training into a short time period, hiring a F/T guy-gal might be an option, but not my first choice.

A while back I helped a SV guy in San Jose with a CJ1 deal. He was nervous about finding a pilot/instructor (among other things) so I ran a single ad on the 350 website, wondering what the response would be to a part-time job that I considered a crappy opportunity. I had to pull the ad after 24 hours due to the flood of applicants. Some were obviously time-builders who respond to any inquiry, but a number were impressive high-time folks who just wanted a different gig.

Bottom line for pilots is that the supply-demand imbalance will always favor the owner, so just figure "if you buy it, they will come."

Really great input thank you very much. Coming from tech where people are always the scarce resource tends to make one think it is like that in other areas, interesting to know it definitely isn't that way for this.

 

[Trimup]

You're not going to win that argument with winnie. For 25 years I've watched him campaign that you can waste a lot of money on airplanes that are "cheaper" than a king air. And he usually seems to be right.

I haven't heard anybody say Conquests are cheaper than Kings just faster with more range. "Cheaper" is definitely not part of any description for a P180/II.

 

[docmirror]

Three pages and we've left the T182 in the dust.

Man, I love spending OPM!
(NTTAWWT)

I can't disagree with anything Wayne has said, he's been there and done that. Once again though I counsel getting glass panel and a TAA type plane. The turbine has one and only one lever. It starts at one spot, takes off at another spot and cruises at a slightly different spot, and that is just about that.

All the other stuff is going to be technically very advanced for someone(like me) who had grown up on steam gauges and is quite lost with anything beyond a 430W. I think the avail information, and the way it's presented can be overwhelming to the returning pilot, and systems understanding takes on a whole new meaning with TAA planes. Of course, I'm guessing that a large part of the turbine fleet, even the converted planes have glass panels.

 

[Trimup]

Three pages and we've left the T182 in the dust.

Man, I love spending OPM!
(NTTAWWT)

I can't disagree with anything Wayne has said, he's been there and done that. Once again though I counsel getting glass panel and a TAA type plane. The turbine has one and only one lever. It starts at one spot, takes off at another spot and cruises at a slightly different spot, and that is just about that.

All the other stuff is going to be technically very advanced for someone(like me) who had grown up on steam gauges and is quite lost with anything beyond a 430W. I think the avail information, and the way it's presented can be overwhelming to the returning pilot, and systems understanding takes on a whole new meaning with TAA planes. Of course, I'm guessing that a large part of the turbine fleet, even the converted planes have glass panels.

The Tuesday after Easter the FBOs 182T and I have a date with a CFI, so not left in the dust entirely, but looking less and less like it makes sense to buy one.

 

[gismo]

Really great input thank you very much. Coming from tech where people are always the scarce resource tends to make one think it is like that in other areas, interesting to know it definitely isn't that way for this.

Worst case might be you'd have to pay to send an otherwise qualified CFI/freight dog to SimCom or Flight Safety for week to get the specific training needed to satisfy the insurers (and you). Just make sure you've got a contract that says he pays you back for said training on a pro-rated basis if he doesn't stick with you for a couple years.

BTW, please tell me more about the vendor for the umbrella policy you have that would cover your liability when flying an aircraft. I have tried for years to come up with something like that but every such policy I could find specifically excluded private flying.

And one more thing WRT liability, regardless of who or what entity owns the airplane, if you are doing the flying you will be personally liable. So without liability insurance to cover that you'll make a juicy target unless you've managed to hide/shield all of your assets from a judgement. Even then someone's likely to try pretty hard to break through the shielding.

 

[gismo]

As stated my thought is to switch from 182 to Silver Eagle turbine powered 210 after I have about 500 hours. No way no how am I single piloting a King Air with my family onboard at 500 hours.

I missed that, my bad. Still, flying at turbine speeds and altitudes may tax your experience bucket at 500 hrs unless you've gotten a good "education" on the issues that lie there. To some extent, the KA might actually be a better risk than the turbine 210.

 

[Trimup]

BTW, please tell me more about the vendor for the umbrella policy you have that would cover your liability when flying an aircraft. I have tried for years to come up with something like that but every such policy I could find specifically excluded private flying.

Felton Berlin and Erdman Insurance.

 

[Ted]

I'd figure that going from a P210 Silver Eagle to a KA200 would be about like my friend who went from 172 to Navajo.

I think you're smart getting a bit of rust off, and maybe just build a few hours in rented planes if it makes you feel better. Get your multi wherever makes sense. Then go for it, and have fun.

 

[nosehair]

My best driving analogy would be something like: Yes I want to know how to avoid getting myself in to a situation where a skid on a slippery road is likely, but I also want to have sufficient practice managing actual skids so that if it happens I can deal with it.

Regardless of what you ultimately decide to buy and fly, keep your analogy in mind: you won't be able to get that specific training in your high performance machine, so you will need to do some 'slippery road skidding' practice in a seperate machine. But don't skip it. That is the number one rerason most pilots show up on the NTSB reports - "Lack of stick and rudder skills immediately before uncontrolled impact".

 

[docmirror]

BTW, please tell me more about the vendor for the umbrella policy you have that would cover your liability when flying an aircraft. I have tried for years to come up with something like that but every such policy I could find specifically excluded private flying.

The discussion I had with two major insurers was a real eye opener. The first gal I talked with was very energetic, and was really interested in umbrella, whole life, some forms of investment schemes related to my family and other long term investments I had going. I kept getting back to liability coverage for me operating a GA plane, and our third visit was real interesting. They wrote the binder of coverage, and right on the face page was a big underlined WARNING: these coverages are in effect for the insured where the insured is NOT involved in the use, operation, maintenance, (etc) of an aircraft as the principle pilot, or required crewmember. She got back to talking about the investment opportunities and I just said 'cya!'.

Second guy made one phone call and said, 'no way'. I asked about motorcycles and he said we could work something out but GA was no way.

 

[JHW]

I missed that, my bad. Still, flying at turbine speeds and altitudes may tax your experience bucket at 500 hrs unless you've gotten a good "education" on the issues that lie there. To some extent, the KA might actually be a better risk than the turbine 210.

I'm not so worried about the hours. I had little more than that when i went to sim school for the AN24 initial and was in a class that included a few 5K + hour guys. We all started equal by any measure that matters. That is to say, we all died in the sim on our first flight.

With limited hours of experience, you're better off having those hours in the airplane you're going to fly.

 

[wabower]

I disagree. The turbine power management, aircraft operation and SOPs and disciplines for the Kerosene 210 are much more like a B-200 than the other comparison. Differences will be more pull to rotate, flare a bit higher, learn the M/E drills.

I'd figure that going from a P210 Silver Eagle to a KA200 would be about like my friend who went from 172 to Navajo.

I think you're smart getting a bit of rust off, and maybe just build a few hours in rented planes if it makes you feel better. Get your multi wherever makes sense. Then go for it, and have fun.

 

[Ted]

I disagree. The turbine power management, aircraft operation and SOPs and disciplines for the Kerosene 210 are much more like a B-200 than the other comparison. Differences will be more pull to rotate, flare a bit higher, learn the M/E drills.

Point taken, but in the comparison of my friend, he had no issue with power management, operation, or SOPs. It was the pull to rotate, flare, and ME drills that gave issues.

Edit: I'll amend that. Operation was an issue, as well as judgement with systems like radar, de-ice, weather, etc. That was my biggest reason for being there once we established how to operate the plane without dying. So those would be more similar with the 210/200 comparison.

But my sample size is small and perhaps not the norm.