Need Help Picking the right Cabin Class

U

USAF-LT-G

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jan 30, 2017
Messages
193
Display Name
Display name:
USAF-LT-G
Hi guys -

So i'm finally at the point where I'm ready to pull the trigger on a piston cabin class for the mission I fly, but I need some help finding the right aircraft. I've been looking a lot at the 421C but the maintenance factor has me pulling back on that. For example, i just read today that not only are the engines extremely picky and must be flown precisely, but that the plane itself can also not be flown more than 2 trips at a time before something breaks and has to be fixed.

Here's the mission requirements:

Twin Piston - I'd prefer non turbo, but not sure if this is realistic. I hear Turbo's a whole nother level of maintenance to work on.

Pressurized - Need to get to the higher altitudes, options over mountains to the west and on top of most weather. Passengers refuse to wear masks unless it's an emergency.

FIKI - an absolute must, i'm in an area where ice pops up all the time

Useful Load - Must be able to carry at least 4 full size adults + option for at least 2 more plus baggage

Potty - I got kids and grandparents, most trips I make need an option for a lavatory on board (even if it doesn't flush)

Seating - Must have a club seating option

Instrumentation - Doesn't have to be stellar.... but I'd prefer a WAAS approved / equipped GPS, a solid auto-pilot, and a simple avidyne as opposed to a steam 6 pack.... but not necessarily a must.

Speed - I can sacrifice. As long as it stays in the air, can make long hauls without stopping, I'd trade off speed for the rest.

Reliability - Good track record, not a ton of mishaps, stable, etc.

Maintenance - Here's the kicker. I want a plane I can relatively / reasonably do the maintenance on myself, either directly or something worked out with a mechanic to supervise. And I'd rather have a plane that doesn't kill me on needing a cylinder replaced every 2 flights.

Are the 414 and 421 really my only options here??
 
What's your budget?

How about a Navajo/Chieftan/Cheyenne?
What about a bit of a downgrade to a 340?
Would you consider turboprop and a Cessna 441?
 
" my understanding is the Navajo is non-pressurized" Wrong. Pressurization is available.


421. I flew both 421s and P-Navajos. Both are hangar queens...the last P-Navajo I flew caused me to shut down the left engine and then restart it while climbing out of Oakland...flew it back to Seattle and it sat for six months with the left engine removed. The 421s (two As and a C, IFIRC), never let me down. If you are going to fly over mountains and your pax do not want to wear oxygen, pressurization is mandatory.

Bob
 
Last edited:
Mtns2Skies said:
What's your budget?

How about a Navajo/Chieftan/Cheyenne?
What about a bit of a downgrade to a 340?
Would you consider turboprop and a Cessna 441?
Click to expand...

So, my understanding is the Navajo is non-pressurized.... that's a must for me. I'm honestly not familiar enough with the 441, 340s to know enough about their record or if they fit the mission. Most people have said go towards the 421 / 414 up to this point.

Budget wise, I want to purchase something used in the $150k range, which I understand is at the low end of the 421c / 441 categories. (several out there.... with 700 - 1000 left before TBO). I would think turboprop would completely throw out the maintenance budget with extra inspections and such.
 
I like Cessna 414's. Properly operated, turbo maintenance isn't anything to worry about, besides you are pretty well stuck with them if you want pressurization and mountain crossing capabilities.

The 421 is great also, but you will want to learn how to keep the gear boxes from wearing out prematurely.

The Aerostar might work as well.
 
Stickman said:
I like Cessna 414's. Properly operated, turbo maintenance isn't anything to worry about, besides you are pretty well stuck with them if you want pressurization and mountain crossing capabilities.

The 421 is great also, but you will want to learn how to keep the gear boxes from wearing out prematurely.

The Aerostar might work as well.
Click to expand...

Aerostars aren't cabin class.
 
I think you'll find that if you talk to people who actually operate 421s, they'll tell you a different (and better) story than those who do not. Like any other airplane with geared engines (my Twin Bo for example), they have a bad reputation that's perpetuated mostly by folks who either haven't flown/owned one or who had a particularly bad example.


If I were looking at a complex,high-end piston twin like a 414 or 421, I'd probably also be seriously looking at KA90s or a MU2, which can be purchased in the same ballpark as a nice 421.
 
MauleSkinner said:
I would think "the low end" of the price range for an airplane that is known for maintenance requirements is probably a bad place to be looking.
Click to expand...

True... though I should have caveated that with that price range being "well maintained".... the ones in that range have pretty decent log records to boot.... just don't have the latest avionics, and little more wear and tear on the interior.
 
To get to altitudes that pressurization is needed your going to need a turbo.
To get size you need you are going to need a big plane!! 6 ppl plus luggage looking at a MU2 style body but will be out of price range.
Maybe an older geared twin commander but they need TLC flying as well.

Need to look at mission requirements and either throw more money at it or sacrifice something.
 
I just re-read the post again, and saw your budget. You don't want a $150k cabin class twin (at least not one that's turbo'd/pressurized). Absent some unusual circumstances, an airplane in that range is going to have LOTS of deferred maintenance or other issues. Not necessarily a deal breaker for someone who doesn't mind a project and can turn a wrench, but your dispatch reliability isn't going to be very good.
 
benyflyguy said:
To get to altitudes that pressurization is needed your going to need a turbo.
To get size you need you are going to need a big plane!! 6 ppl plus luggage looking at a MU2 style body but will be out of price range.
Maybe an older geared twin commander but they need TLC flying as well.

Need to look at mission requirements and either throw more money at it or sacrifice something.
Click to expand...

I can play with the budget a little bit... but I want to be under 200k when i sign the check. Ideally closer to 150k, but realize that may be a stretch.
 
bradg33 said:
I just re-read the post again, and saw your budget. You don't want a $150k cabin class twin (at least not one that's turbo'd/pressurized). Absent some unusual circumstances, an airplane in that range is going to have LOTS of deferred maintenance or other issues. Not necessarily a deal breaker for someone who doesn't mind a project and can turn a wrench, but your dispatch reliability isn't going to be very good.
Click to expand...

I don't mind, and in fact actually "enjoy" turning a wrench.... as long as I'm "authorized" to turn a wrench. But I'm not looking to get out a welding torch and a rivet gun, and start making an airfoil (in fact i know nothing of welding), it's about the one skill i just don't have. As long as it's within the capability. I fly between 100 - 150 hours currently. I don't know a ton about what I can or can't do from a maintenance perspective, but i've been thrown some tid-bits of information along the way. This will be my first genuinely single owned and hanger'ed aircraft. I've waited a long time because I wanted to ensure that whatever I buy will be a longer term buy option (not a, "crap... this doesn't do what i need it to do" after 6 months of owning). I consider this either my first and last purchase ever. Or my 2nd to last purchase.
 
USAF-LT-G said:
I don't mind, and in fact actually "enjoy" turning a wrench.... as long as I'm "authorized" to turn a wrench. But I'm not looking to get out a welding torch and a rivet gun, and start making an airfoil (in fact i know nothing of welding), it's about the one skill i just don't have. As long as it's within the capability. I fly between 100 - 150 hours currently. I don't know a ton about what I can or can't do from a maintenance perspective, but i've been thrown some tid-bits of information along the way. This will be my first genuinely single owned and hanger'ed aircraft. I've waited a long time because I wanted to ensure that whatever I buy will be a longer term buy option (not a, "crap... this doesn't do what i need it to do" after 6 months of owning). I consider this either my first and last purchase ever. Or my 2nd to last purchase.
Click to expand...

A $150k pressurized, cabin-class twin is going to spend a LOT of time in the hangar and it'll likely bleed you dry on MX costs.
 
If you are serious about cabin class cessna twins, you need to do several things:

1. Join the twin cessna flyers org. You will get much more informed answers than what you’ve gotten so far.

2. Be honest with yourself about the financial wherewithal to purchase ANY cabin class piston twin. A $150k C-421 is a plane that has been sitting a bit with lots of deferred maintenance. That plane will take another $150k to bring up to snuff.

3. Operating & Maintence will be expensive. It will cost you about $60-$70k per year to fly 100hrs. Can you swing this and write a five figure check if needed? If the answer is “no”, then you should not buy ANY cabin class twin.

Go in with eyes open. Don’t kid yourself. You May be better off with a light twin. $25-$35,000/yr is the price to fly one for about 100hrs per year all in. It will get you 90% of cabin class performance at lower altitudes. You’ll just need to plan your routes accordingly.
 
I think your proposed budget is about 1/3 of what you need for purchase, and your variable operating costs are going to be in the neighborhood of $400/hr. Maybe a better solution is to buy in the lower end of the range (like 58P Baron) and take the airlines when you can’t fit the people. A good 58P or Cessna 340 is still going to cost more than what you’ve budgeted, but it may be attainable.

As for turning wrenches yourself... it’s the same for all certified aircraft. You can do preventative maintenance yourself (oil changes, etc.) and anything bigger must be done under the supervision of an A&P.

Examples of preventative maintenance:

1. Removal, installation, and repair of landing gear tires.

2. Servicing landing gear wheel bearings, such as cleaning and greasing.

3. Servicing landing gear shock struts by adding oil, air, or both.

4. Replacing defective safety wire or cotter keys.

5. Lubrication not requiring disassembly other than removal of nonstructural items such as cover plates, cowling, and fairings.

6. Replenishing hydraulic fluid in the hydraulic reservoir.

7. Applying preservative or protective material to components where no disassembly of any primary structure or operating system is involved and where such coating is not prohibited or is not contrary to good practices.

8. Replacing safety belts.

9. Replacing bulbs, reflectors, and lenses of position an landing lights.

10. Replacing or cleaning spark plugs and setting of spark plug gap clearance.

11. Replacing any hose connection, except hydraulic connections.

12. Replacing and servicing batteries.

13. Making simple fabric patches not requiring rib stitching or the removal of structural parts or control surfaces. In the case of balloons, the making of small fabric repairs to envelopes (as defined in, and in accordance with, the balloon manufacturers' instructions) not requiring load tape repair or replacement.

14. Replacing any cowling not requiring removal of the propeller or disconnection of flight controls.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
@USAF-LT-G - Its too bad it needs to be a twin and cabin class. Excepting the potty, wouldn't a P210 (Turbo Charged w/FIKI) fit a lot of your requirements and hopefully cheaper after the initial acquisition.
 
If you are looking at a $150,000 C-421, just remember it is that price for a reason.

Nobody wants it.

I have more than a couple thousand hours in a C-414. I have had more trouble with the pressure mags than the turbochargers. And I can count on one hand how many times a pressure mag acted up. The engine doesn't quit, it just develops a slight miss at altitude.

The 414 cabin is actually roomier than a KA-90. I consider the KA-90 more as a trainer than a useful airplane.

The 421 engines require a gentle hand. Horse the throttles around like a 172 and you will crack cylinders. Almost the same in the 414. Finesse is heaven to the engines. Plan descents well in advance. I usually pulled 3 inches 5 minutes before starting the descent, then one inch per 500 to 750 fpm loss in altitude, or 1 inch per minute.

The only gear problem I ever had was on take off and the gear retracted half way and stopped. No going up or down. I used the bottle to blow the gear down, which was surprisingly louder and rougher than I expected but I had three greens. The problem turned out to be a broken wire.

With all planes I have flown, the 414 could use a little more HP to suit me, but even coming out of Phoenix in the middle of summer was not too awful bad. I have flown over the Rockies at FL220, but FL200 would have worked just fine.

Have you looked into the C-425.??
 
Stickman said:
I like Cessna 414's. Properly operated, turbo maintenance isn't anything to worry about, besides you are pretty well stuck with them if you want pressurization and mountain crossing capabilities.

The 421 is great also, but you will want to learn how to keep the gear boxes from wearing out prematurely.

The Aerostar might work as well.
Click to expand...

I was fortunate in that the chief pilot of the 135 operation that ran the 421s was ex-military fighter pilot who was really into mechanical issues and who taught me how to handle the geared engines. None of the three 421s in the fleet had gear-drive problems.

Bob
 
6+ adults + bags, a lav, FIKI, sole ownership. That’s a tall order.

One turbine is better than two piston engines.

PC-12.
 
And this is exactly why I haven't bought my own plane yet. Just when I think I have a clearer picture.... everything becomes foggy again, and the AHRS goes out, and a loss of comms, gliding blindly....

Twin is a must. I see no reasonable way to own any type of turbine (regardless if turboprop / single turbine) unless someone tells me otherwise. $60-$70k maintenance planned a year isn't unreasonable, but i'd "prefer" not to write a $70k check all in one blow.... engine replacement / overhaul aside. Would I "PREFER" to pay 60 - 70K in maintenance a year? Hell no! I'd prefer 35k a year...
 
USAF-LT-G said:
And this is exactly why I haven't bought my own plane yet. Just when I think I have a clearer picture.... everything becomes foggy again, and the AHRS goes out, and a loss of comms, gliding blindly....

Twin is a must. I see no reasonable way to own any type of turbine (regardless if turboprop / single turbine) unless someone tells me otherwise. $60-$70k maintenance planned a year isn't unreasonable, but i'd "prefer" not to write a $70k check all in one blow.... engine replacement / overhaul aside. Would I "PREFER" to pay 60 - 70K in maintenance a year? Hell no! I'd prefer 35k a year...
Click to expand...

You keep saying “must”

What do 90% of your flights look like for distance and passengers?

How often do you make these flights?
 
Could try to drum around your local fields and see if anybody is looking for a partner in that kind of plane. A partnership is doable in a twin but hard to find IMO.
 
TCABM said:
You keep saying “must”

What do 90% of your flights look like for distance and passengers?

How often do you make these flights?
Click to expand...

If I'm going somewhere.... I'm going somewhere... 90% are over 500NM (a TON of midwest to far east coast). 50% of those are between 800NM - 1200NM (KDPA - KHOU or Dallas as an example).

PAX = 2 + 1.5 60%
PAX = 1 - 25%
PAX >= 4 15%

That being send.... Trending to 4 and greater in PAX.
 
421 for $150K sounds like a horrible idea.
 
Guys, there are 421s out there for way less than 150k. The 421's I've seen (closer to $179k posted) have pretty damn clean logs, coming directly off 135 operations, and still have about 1/2 life on their TBOs. I realize there's bad stuff out there, i'm not about to go invest in a plane that is a piece of crap / problem prone. But 135 ops / clean well maintained logs at that price point.... what's incredibly wrong about that?
 
USAF-LT-G said:
Guys, there are 421s out there for way less than 150k. The 421's I've seen (closer to $179k posted) have pretty damn clean logs, coming directly off 135 operations, and still have about 1/2 life on their TBOs. I realize there's bad stuff out there, i'm not about to go invest in a plane that is a piece of crap / problem prone. But 135 ops / clean well maintained logs at that price point.... what's incredibly wrong about that?
Click to expand...

Remember what needs to be documented in a logbook. Work performed. What work wasn’t performed or has been deferred?

I’m with the other guys that say you aren’t going to find a good 421, particularly a C model for 150k no matter what the logs look like.
 
USAF-LT-G said:
If I'm going somewhere.... I'm going somewhere... 90% are over 500NM (a TON of midwest to far east coast). 50% of those are between 800NM - 1200NM (KDPA - KHOU or Dallas as an example).

PAX = 2 + 1.5 60%
PAX = 1 - 25%
PAX >= 4 15%

That being send.... Trending to 4 and greater in PAX.
Click to expand...

A36

Gives you most of what you want.
 
Ahhh, the old champagne on a beer budget problem! How about a nice 680FL Commander? Or maybe I could interest you in a Mooney Mustang,...no, wait! A Meyers 400 interceptor! Just to get you in the right frame of mind, buy a mid ‘90s Mercedes S600. Do the words wooden and yacht (in the same sentence) trouble you? Any of the aforementioned could provide you with the kind of obscene maintenance bills that only a 20-series Lear owner would appreciate.

Kidding aside, your budget could net you some very fine airplanes, though none of them pressurized. As a previous poster mentioned, pressurization makes an airplane HEAVY. Secondly, the only way (piston) airplanes get to altitudes requiring inflating the cabin is turbocharging, or supercharging, or both. People of means get around this problem by buying turbine airplanes that make plenty of power to get up high, pressurize the cabin with bleed air and still have enough mojo to shed ice with hot props, boots, heated windshields, even heated trim tabs! They got to have that stuff because they get you just high enough to get in big trouble with ice, convective weather, etc,. A 690 Turbo Commander has 717hp per side, derated from 1,000hp. A pressuized Navajo (the most powerful light piston twin I can think of) has 425hp per side, and a well known reputation for ventilating the cowlings with spewn engine parts. Ditto cheap 421s.

Your money could net you a nice Baron or 310 or 210 or Lance/Saratoga or excellent V-tail Bonanza or Comanche C. If you want lots of room, Twin Bonanza, some have a couch! They’re cheap!
 
P-Navajo! Damn good airplane if you can foot it. The geared engines are the only thing I'd be cautious about
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top