Too much airplane?

Fearless Tower said:
There is some truth to this. I lost 25 kts when I went from the Baron to the Twin Beech. But with the stand up cabin, onboard potty and 6-7 hrs of fuel, I get that speed back by not having to stop and refuel ever 2-2.5 hrs.
Click to expand...
You do realize that you just heard "economy cruise" and said "Twin Beech," don't you? I have serious plane envy but it sounds like you may need an intervention for your 100LL addiction.
 
bradg33 said:
Absolutely I did. My primary mission is personal travel with my wife. Occasionally we'll take 2 other people with us, but a lot of our flying is just the two of us. We just upgraded from a 4-seat Super Viking (which admittedly met all of our needs) to a 6-seat Twin Bonanza that'll carry more than I'll ever put in it. Why? Comfort, combined with my desire for some redundancy for night flying. While the Twin Bo is overkill for our mission, it's like flying around in a big ol' Cadillac. Nobody ever says "I wish I was more cramped in here..." It's not the fastest airplane in the fleet, but it makes a respectable speed in extreme comfort (not to mention style...).
Click to expand...

I got a chance to look at a Twin Bo the other day. I want one. A baron is more practical but the Twin bo is a beast
 
arkvet said:
While I agree with your premise I will suggest that if a little extra fuel burn makes one go broke or at the least creates a hangar queen then the mistake was buying the plane to begin with.

Letting a plane fly less because of a higher fuel burn, IMHO, makes absolutely zero sense considering the overall cost of ownership. Emphasis on the "IMHO".
Click to expand...

I agree! If you aren't "going somewhere," pull back the throttle, slow down and burn less gas . . .
 
bradg33 said:
I still own my share of the Viking, though it feels a bit like climbing into a clown car now :)
Click to expand...
So I made the mistake of reading your message to my wife. She immediate pulled up a picture of a clown car and starting laughing. Now, every time we go out to the Bellanca she is going to call it a clown car. I wish you had just said "cozy sports car" or something more dignified. Can you really put three people in the front seat of the TBone?
 
iamtheari said:
You do realize that you just heard "economy cruise" and said "Twin Beech," don't you? I have serious plane envy but it sounds like you may need an intervention for your 100LL addiction.
Click to expand...
My situation is a bit different, and I was not trying to sell the Beech 18 as an 'economical' aircraft, just using the example of how going slow but eliminating a fuel stop actually has merit.
 
dell30rb said:
I got a chance to look at a Twin Bo the other day. I want one. A baron is more practical but the Twin bo is a beast
Click to expand...
T-bones are very nice/cool airplanes. Especially if you can get a well maintained one with the air stair door.

I would have considered a T-bone, but they really take up about the same real estate as a Beech 18. I figured if I was going to have to pay for that much hangar space, I might as well go for the whole enchilada.
 
Rob58 said:
So I made the mistake of reading your message to my wife. She immediate pulled up a picture of a clown car and starting laughing. Now, every time we go out to the Bellanca she is going to call it a clown car. I wish you had just said "cozy sports car" or something more dignified. Can you really put three people in the front seat of the TBone?
Click to expand...

You can. With three across up front or in back, it would be about like sitting 2 across in the Viking or a Bonanza. You'll fit, you'll just be a little cozy.
 
Fearless Tower said:
T-bones are very nice/cool airplanes. Especially if you can get a well maintained one with the air stair door.

I would have considered a T-bone, but they really take up about the same real estate as a Beech 18. I figured if I was going to have to pay for that much hangar space, I might as well go for the whole enchilada.
Click to expand...

The air stair looks really cool, and has a great ramp presence, but I've spoken to a few owners who say they'd take the overwing door if they could do it over again. Depending on how many people you have and luggage, I'm told the air stair can make loading and getting (the pilot) in a little tricky. Mine's super easy to load (cavernous rear baggage, plus the nose), though it is a big climb up onto the wing. Once up there, getting into the back seat is a cake walk.

What's the wingspan on the Twin Beech?
 
Fearless Tower said:
My situation is a bit different, and I was not trying to sell the Beech 18 as an 'economical' aircraft, just using the example of how going slow but eliminating a fuel stop actually has merit.
Click to expand...
I got that. I just think it is the first time that those two things (economy cruise and Twin Beech) were ever mentioned together by private pilots. Although I guess it compares favorably to the DC-3 or C-46 in that regard. It's all a matter of relativity.

bradg33 said:
What's the wingspan on the Twin Beech?
Click to expand...
Wikipedia says 47'8" wingspan, 34'2" long, 9'8" tall. Compare with Twin Bonanza at 45'3" wingspan, 31'6" long, 11'4" tall. It seems like Fearless Tower's point about hangar space is probably spot on.
 
iamtheari said:
Wikipedia says 47'8" wingspan, 34'2" long, 9'8" tall. Compare with Twin Bonanza at 45'3" wingspan, 31'6" long, 11'4" tall. It seems like Fearless Tower's point about hangar space is probably spot on.
Click to expand...
I think the early models are probably 47'8".

Mine is a G model with the longer tips (better slow speed handing and higher gross landing weight.
 
JCranford said:
Oh money is definitely in play here. This particular plane is right at the top of the budget we set, but its really really nicely put together.
Click to expand...

There are two definitions of "too much airplane". One is an airplane that's beyond a pilot's skill and experience level (think 200 hr PPL in a Lear 23). The other is one that's beyond the owner's financial resources. If you buy an airplane you can't afford to fly the usual result is some combination of insufficient maintenance and insufficient piloting currency. Never a good idea to use your last dollar to buy an airplane for personal use, there's a good chance you'll need an additional 10-20% of the purchase price for surprises and you need to have enough left over to pay yearly for insurance, hangar, an annual, engine reserves, and at least 100 hrs of fuel.
 
Grum.Man said:
Within reason yes. I can do 245 kts on 15 gph or I can do 160-170 kts on 8-9 gph depending on altitude. Regardless, I am burning 22 gph on takeoff but usually pull the power back on climb out.
Click to expand...
Really fast!
 
gsengle said:
Here is the issue as I see it for me.

I have a go fast go far airplane.

Go fast go far airplanes aren't good or fun or sometimes even safe for "low and slow". They aren't as easy to preflight or pull out of the hangar... they're more complex and more "work" to fly.

What I need is a cub or a husky I can fly with the doors off, when I'm not flying the go fast go far airplane.

It's not that it's too much, it's that it's focused on one mission...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Hence a quasi quick bush plane, skywagon or a Maule or helio, cruise decent but can still land anywhere, plenty of fun to just mess around in and for short to Med range travel your time door to door often is less than a faster Bo or the like since you don't NEED a airport to operate out of.
 
James331 said:
Hence a quasi quick bush plane, skywagon or a Maule or helio, cruise decent but can still land anywhere, plenty of fun to just mess around in and for short to Med range travel your time door to door often is less than a faster Bo or the like since you don't NEED a airport to operate out of.
Click to expand...

Yeah, believe me Ive looked at the Skywagons (as you know cuz Ive asked you about em!). Its just hard to find a good 180 or 185 in my budget. The ones I find outfitted like I want are north of 150K. I love Maules but they don't have the speed I want. As Ive told my wife in our many airplane discussions, there is no 'do everything' plane (at least in our price range). You ARE going to compromise somewhere, be it speed (whether fast or slow), load, range, comfort, whatever. The ones we have been looking at lately do just about everything we want except fly slow and be cheap to own.

EDIT:
Here's a perfect example:
http://www.skywagons.com/_aircraft_for_sale/N2262T/N2262T.html
Love it, but $155K isn't gonna happen.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top