- Joined
- Mar 2, 2005
- Messages
- 15,263
- Location
- Southeast Tennessee
- Display Name
Display name:
This page intentionally left blank
My wife says it looks funny
Doesn't look funny to me at all, looks damned fine!
My wife says it looks funny
That looks sweet! I want one.
I wonder how big of a donation you and I would have to make to get our own bell tower? [insert sarcasm emoticon]
(That, IMO, was one big firkin waste of donation money)
Gig ‘em. If y’all are just farmers.
I would start with a King Air B200, 90's/early 2000s model, G1000, Blackhawk, and all the Raisbeck mods, to build up some multi-turbine experience. I would also immediately place my order for a Pilatus PC24, and once that was delivered would likely put the King Air on leaseback with someone.
1) Find a really good lawyerThis is the type of thread that explains why most lottery winners are broke within a few years. Many think the money will never run out...but it does. Unless you are getting "up there" in age, you should take the annuity to insure the money doesn't run out. It also allows you to pay the taxes on the winnings over the life of the annuity. I'm pretty sure I could comfortably live on 53 million per year (before taxes) for 30 years, I don't need it all up front.
In your fantasy, I'd recommend flying a few options besides the B200 first.
King Airs are solid airplanes and there are good reasons why they have the status they do. That said, they're not the most fun or interesting aircraft in the class. Maybe you'll find them fun enough (I find Navajos fun, and they're trucks), but there are other options that you might find more interesting to fly. Not knocking the King Air, just making the point.
What would they be?
I guess I've been partial to the King Air ever since I worked the line at college at an FBO that had a B200 for charters. Getting some stick time in Dave's C90 didn't hurt either.
I must admit, I was quite impressed with JT's 425 as well... And there are missions I would love a Twin Otter for, and the Dornier SeaStar is appealing too, if only it was actually being produced!
I guess one of the main things I like about the King Air is that it'd be very easy to sell or put on leaseback - Its main mission would be as my primary cross-country aircraft until the PC24 was delivered.
I would think you'd get tired of having those surgeries every day...especially if you didn't give yourself time to heal.Oh, almost forgot. Boobs, different ones daily, foreverrrrrrr!
Pretty much anything.
Keep in mind King Airs are generally the lowest performers in their respective competitors. A C90, for instance, is significantly slower than a Cheyenne I/II, 425, or MU-2 short body. A 200 is significantly slower than a Cheyenne III, 441, MU-2 long body
or the Piaggio P180...
But the King Airs are stable, easy to fly, and have ramp presence, plus really nice interiors for the passengers and they're well supported. I wouldn't turn one down, but if I won $1B+, I'd spend my money on something that is more interesting.
I would think you'd get tired of having those surgeries every day...especially if you didn't give yourself time to heal.
What does it look like if those King Airs get the Raisbeck mods (specifically, the wing cuff and strakes, both of which significantly reduce drag) and the Blackhawk engines? The engines alone are supposed to be worth 20-30 knots, and the Raisbeck mods 10.
That is an entirely different animal - It has more of a jet-like mission than turboprop.
I will confess, the other reason I've always been smitten with King Airs is that I had an opportunity to ride right seat on that same B200 I was talking about earlier shortly before I started my flight training, and we landed on a runway that I believe was only 2500 feet long at the time. (It has VGs added.) Then, we took off from the same runway. I was quite impressed with that performance, and runway performance is a key thing to me. It means more usable airports, and getting closer to the destination via air.
Like a PC24?
And there you have one of the best reasons why a King Air might make more sense vs. the others if runway performance matters to you that much. I've found that it doesn't matter much to me, since the vast majority of runways I frequent (and want to frequent) are 4,000+ ft. Laurie's company operates King Airs and that's one of the benefits of that airplane for their mission - they fly into a lot of small, remote strips for their MedEvac purposes and the King Airs do it well. What they don't do well is fly fast or particularly far or efficiently. The other benefit is that they're easy to fly.
Sure, but we were talking turboprops. The PC-24 is an interesting jet but I'll also admit to not knowing a ton about it. I actually like some of the Citation Mustangs and the Phenoms in the single pilot personal jet category, but I'd be more likely to get a Lear just because, and then keep some qualified SICs on speed dial (having another pilot in the household who would qualify helps that equation).
Something that really drove it home for me was when I got to fly the Hawker. The actual destination was Cresco, IA which has a perfectly good GA field (KCJJ), but with a runway that's far too short for the Hawker. So we flew an hour to KRST, which is an hour and fifteen minute drive from Cresco. A King Air could have flown directly to Cresco in 1:10 and saved an hour door to door (not to mention 1000 pounds of fuel).
In fact, the owner had been planning on taking his King Air that weekend, not the Hawker, probably for that very reason. Unfortunately for him, the King Air had some sort of maintenance issue.
For the record, I won $4 which paid for my cup of coffee this morning.