Yet another Which Plane? Thread. With a twist

[jsstevens]

OK. My employer/partner (it's sort of complicated) is currently training to be a pilot. Partly at my instigation. I am a certificated PP-ASEL working (albeit slowly) on my IR.

We are expanding our (Orlando) business into the Hampton Roads area of Virginia and Huntsville Alabama. We also make trips to Washington DC. We came this close to buying a Cirrus, but I talked them out of it because of the reimbursement rules the FAA chief counsel put out. We are now discussing the need for a 6 or 8 passenger plane (OK, really we need to _carry_ 3 or 4 people with enough fuel to make the trip) to make those trips. We'll have to have a pilot for the near term but our medium term hope is to get trained and eventually be able to handle the piloting duties ourselves.

Given that, what are our real options? Later C-210? Malibu? Pilatus? TMB-850? King Air?

I'd say our budget is capable of handling ~$1 million - and used in good condition is OK.

OK, cry havoc and unleash the suggestions!
John

 

[PBristolJr]

3-4 person plane and a 6-8 person plane is quite a difference.

 

[wabower]

The price range of your choices runs between ~150k and 2.5 mil. You might want to fine-tune those numbers a bit as a first step in the selection process.

OK. My employer/partner (it's sort of complicated) is currently training to be a pilot. Partly at my instigation. I am a certificated PP-ASEL working (albeit slowly) on my IR.

We are expanding our business into the Hampton Roads area of Virginia and Huntsville Alabama. We also make trips to Washington DC. We came this close to buying a Cirrus, but I talked them out of it because of the reimbursement rules the FAA chief counsel put out. We are now discussing the need for a 6 or 8 passenger plane (OK, really we need to _carry_ 3 or 4 people with enough fuel to make the trip) to make those trips. We'll have to have a pilot for the near term but our medium term hope is to get trained and eventually be able to handle the piloting duties ourselves.

Given that, what are our real options? Later C-210? Malibu? Pilatus? TMB-850? King Air?

OK, cry havoc and unleash the suggestions!
John

 

[jsstevens]

3-4 person plane and a 6-8 person plane is quite a difference.

Not if you count fuel. The SR-22 GTS will carry ~550 or 600 lbs with enough fuel to fly from Orlando to Dulles. Realistically, that's a 2 person plane - for that trip.

John

 

[Everskyward]

Your profile says you are from Orlando. Is that where the airplane would be based?

 

[jsstevens]

Your profile says you are from Orlando. Is that where the airplane would be based?

Yes. I edited the original.

 

[dukeblue219]

3-4 person plane and a 6-8 person plane is quite a difference.

I read that as:
We'll need a pilot plus 3-4 full adult passengers and a few bags, and gas for a 600nm (?) business trip. So, he's looking at 6-8 seat planes, which actually sounds reasonable to me.

It sounds like a Baron would work without nearly the expense of a King Air or TBM850, but I am not an expert...

Edit: Now I see that the budget is $1MM which definitely opens up options...

 

[Henning]

OK. My employer/partner (it's sort of complicated) is currently training to be a pilot. Partly at my instigation. I am a certificated PP-ASEL working (albeit slowly) on my IR.

We are expanding our (Orlando) business into the Hampton Roads area of Virginia and Huntsville Alabama. We also make trips to Washington DC. We came this close to buying a Cirrus, but I talked them out of it because of the reimbursement rules the FAA chief counsel put out. We are now discussing the need for a 6 or 8 passenger plane (OK, really we need to _carry_ 3 or 4 people with enough fuel to make the trip) to make those trips. We'll have to have a pilot for the near term but our medium term hope is to get trained and eventually be able to handle the piloting duties ourselves.

Given that, what are our real options? Later C-210? Malibu? Pilatus? TMB-850? King Air?

I'd say our budget is capable of handling ~$1 million - and used in good condition is OK.

OK, cry havoc and unleash the suggestions!
John

My 310 does the trip nicely, but the King Air is probably the best for the mission.

 

[DavidWhite]

You could get an older C90 for less than 1 million. I don't know what makes a good King Air though, for all I know the ones I've seen could be piles of ****.

 

[dukeblue219]

How often do you plan to fly? All year round?

 

[jsstevens]

How often do you plan to fly? All year round?

Year round as practical. Obviously weather and plane have to match. I can easily see 4 or more trips per month to various of these locations.

John

 

[wabower]

Trip to DC requires ~3 hours in a C-90. A trip of that length will be much more comfortable, predictable and productive with pressurized cabin, FIKI, potty, club seats (if you want to work or visit) and some ability to move around the cabin. With a pro pilot doing the driving, you can sit in front as much as you like and then go to the back to work, visit or sleep for the remainder of the trip.

Decent specimens can be purchased for less than $500k, with price range roughly equivalent to Cessna 421 and later 414A. Upsides are reliability, quality, residual value, very little unscheduled MX. Downsides are increased fuel burn and mandatory 6-year inspections of prop and gear that add ~$500/mo to MX budget.

The trips to Alabama have some of the same issues, but not a critical as those to DC. I'd encourage you to charter or (preferably) lease one of each for a trip or two and see what blows your skirt.

 

[jsstevens]

Trip to DC requires ~3 hours in a C-90. A trip of that length will be much more comfortable, predictable and productive with pressurized cabin, FIKI, potty, club seats (if you want to work or visit) and some ability to move around the cabin. With a pro pilot doing the driving, you can sit in front as much as you like and then go to the back to work, visit or sleep for the remainder of the trip.

Decent specimens can be purchased for less than $500k, with price range roughly equivalent to Cessna 421 and later 414A. Upsides are reliability, quality, residual value, very little unscheduled MX. Downsides are increased fuel burn and mandatory 6-year inspections of prop and gear that add ~$500/mo to MX budget.

The trips to Alabama have some of the same issues, but not a critical as those to DC. I'd encourage you to charter or (preferably) lease one of each for a trip or two and see what blows your skirt.

Excellent idea on the lease to try out. I will float that the next time we start talking about this. I know part of the charm was being able to fly ourselves, but I'm probably a year away from a CPL and even then, I wouldn't want to handle much more than a 210 or Malibu.

John

 

[wabower]

I do this stuff for a living, and am somewhat insistent that clients "try before they buy" in order to match expectations and reality and avoid surprises. Airplane selection, purchase and ownership equations don't require any rocket-surgery mental exercises, but are a bit more complex than they appear.

When people count the seats in an airplane, they often assume they are like seats in a Suburban and all can be filled along with hauling most of what they own in the bag compartment. You have obviously determined that this isn't always true, and that figuring out which trade-offs are most important is a big part of the drill.

The most frequent miscalculations are those in which owners allow themselves to idealize the usage of their airplane while ignoring or minimizing the disadvantages that were apparent from the get-go. Back in the day these decisions were called "Tampax-ad thinking" (buy this product and you can swim, play tennis, ride horses, etc).

Watching clients change planes as their needs change over time is an interesting process.

Currently, a client with a Citation-III wants to sell his plane because he sold his business and doesn't need it.

A client with a Citation-II wants to sell it and buy an Excel or XLS to obtain better range, amenities and stand-up-cabin comfort.

A group wants to sell their F-90 and buy a Citation II or V because they need to take more people on branch office trips and are expanding into oil fields further from Texas. Their decision is more difficult because they want more speed for the longer trips but must continue to support their close-in activities with short trips for which a jet isn't the best choice.

Another guy wants to sell his 340 and buy an F-90 because he can.

Some guys in Mexico are interested in acquiring a nice 340.

I'm very happy with my Cessna 180 taildragger because I no longer travel much and like grass airports.

Excellent idea on the lease to try out. I will float that the next time we start talking about this. I know part of the charm was being able to fly ourselves, but I'm probably a year away from a CPL and even then, I wouldn't want to handle much more than a 210 or Malibu.

John

 

[alaskaflyer]

I do this stuff for a living, and am somewhat insistent that clients "try before they buy" in order to match expectations and reality and avoid surprises. Airplane selection, purchase and ownership equations don't require any rocket-surgery mental exercises, but are a bit more complex than they appear.

When people count the seats in an airplane, they often assume they are like seats in a Suburban and all can be filled along with hauling most of what they own in the bag compartment. You have obviously determined that this isn't always true, and that figuring out which trade-offs are most important is a big part of the drill.

The most frequent miscalculations are those in which owners allow themselves to idealize the usage of their airplane while ignoring or minimizing the disadvantages that were apparent from the get-go. Back in the day these decisions were called "Tampax-ad thinking" (buy this product and you can swim, play tennis, ride horses, etc).

Watching clients change planes as their needs change over time is an interesting process.

Currently, a client with a Citation-III wants to sell his plane because he sold his business and doesn't need it.

A client with a Citation-II wants to sell it and buy an Excel or XLS to obtain better range, amenities and stand-up-cabin comfort.

A group wants to sell their F-90 and buy a Citation II or V because they need to take more people on branch office trips and are expanding into oil fields further from Texas. Their decision is more difficult because they want more speed for the longer trips but must continue to support their close-in activities with short trips for which a jet isn't the best choice.

Another guy wants to sell his 340 and buy an F-90 because he can.

Some guys in Mexico are interested in acquiring a nice 340.

Sounds like someone could herd all these guys into a conference room with an attorney and a notary and rotate unit ownership one position counterclockwise around the table.

 

[wabower]

My thoughts exactly, but they are hard to trap. Let me know if you figure out a way to make it happen.

Sounds like someone could herd all these guys into a conference room with an attorney and a notary and rotate unit ownership one position counterclockwise around the table.

 

[dell30rb]

If you and your boss are really both interested in being able to play PIC now and again turbine is probably out of the question for now. You need a step-up plane.

There are a ton of cabin class, pressurized piston twins on the market.

 

[wabower]

Why do you think any twin is different insofar as time-building is concerned?Many pilots go directly from their MEL trainer to turbine twins with appropriately trained CFI's on board as PIC. I can provide a long list if you're interested.

If you and your boss are really both interested in being able to play PIC now and again turbine is probably out of the question for now. You need a step-up plane.

There are a ton of cabin class, pressurized piston twins on the market.

 

[Henning]

If you and your boss are really both interested in being able to play PIC now and again turbine is probably out of the question for now. You need a step-up plane.

There are a ton of cabin class, pressurized piston twins on the market.

Which are all riskier and more difficult to operate, makes no sense to avoid turbines if you have a turbine mission. 'Step up' planes, especially at this level, are a huge waste of money, much cheaper to hire a pro to fly with you for the first year / 100hours in the King Air.

 

[jhausch]

Wayne, why Cessna 400 series instead of a C90 or older 200?

 

[wabower]

Say again? I put the laptop down for more than an hour, so the short-term memory dumped.

Wayne, why Cessna 400 series instead of a C90 or older 200?

 

[Ted]

If it's 3-4 people and wanting to make the trips non-stop, then you're pretty much looking at a twin or a turbine. The other question becomes how important it is that you get to your destinations. IOW, the Capabilities of a Cirrus or Malibu are significantly less than with the Twin Cessnas and the turbines. Wayne's a good resource here.

You've got a good learning curve, and will need to expect to hire a pilot for at least the first year as you and your boss get your training up to the appropriate level. One person I know in a similar situation to you bought a Cessna 340, and pays someone to fly it, even though he's a rated pilot. He's still low time, and is more comfortable having someone else flying while he's tired at the end of a business day. The other thing he likes about the 340 is that he can afford anything that could possibly come up on it... repeatedly. That's important with an airplane of this financial fortitude.

The turbine Commanders also offer a pretty economical package for a turbine twin that'll do 270 kts. I found the things easy to fly, and 270 kts on 75 GPH isn't bad. I didn't enjoy flying them, but many people do, so maybe there's just something wrong with me.

 

[jhausch]

Trip to DC requires ~3 hours in a C-90. A trip of that length will be much more comfortable, predictable and productive with pressurized cabin, FIKI, potty, club seats (if you want to work or visit) and some ability to move around the cabin. With a pro pilot doing the driving, you can sit in front as much as you like and then go to the back to work, visit or sleep for the remainder of the trip.

Decent specimens can be purchased for less than $500k, with price range roughly equivalent to Cessna 421 and later 414A. Upsides are reliability, quality, residual value, very little unscheduled MX. Downsides are increased fuel burn and mandatory 6-year inspections of prop and gear that add ~$500/mo to MX budget.

The trips to Alabama have some of the same issues, but not a critical as those to DC. I'd encourage you to charter or (preferably) lease one of each for a trip or two and see what blows your skirt.

Wayne, why Cessna 400 series instead of a C90 or older 200?

Say again? I put the laptop down for more than an hour, so the short-term memory dumped.

I re-read, too. Guess I focused too much on second paragraph .....

Oops. Carryon....

 

[Anthony]

My thoughts exactly, but they are hard to trap. Let me know if you figure out a way to make it happen.

Virtual conference room. Set up a web/video meeting.

 

[wabower]

We would probably need it for a couple of months. Do they come with facilities for long-term stay?

Virtual conference room. Set up a web/video meeting.

 

[poadeleted20]

Year round as practical. Obviously weather and plane have to match. I can easily see 4 or more trips per month to various of these locations.

If you want a serious business machine for trips of these lengths, you want turbine power, de-ice, radar, the works. The TBM sounds like a good choice if you've got the money -- a used TBM 700 should do the mission just fine, with a price tag of $1-1.5M. Meridian is pretty close to that, too. PC-12 is out of your price range, and a Malibu won't carry the load that far. King Air 90 is another good choice (as are the other entry level TP twins like the Cheyenne), but will cost more to operate than the single-TP's.

 

[Tom-D]

If you want a serious business machine for trips of these lengths, you want turbine power, de-ice, radar, the works. The TBM sounds like a good choice if you've got the money -- a used TBM 700 should do the mission just fine, with a price tag of $1-1.5M. Meridian is pretty close to that, too. PC-12 is out of your price range, and a Malibu won't carry the load that far. King Air 90 is another good choice (as are the other entry level TP twins like the Cheyenne), but will cost more to operate than the single-TP's.

You got the right..

The cost of maintenance on aircraft of that type will bankrupt most small companies.

 

[wabower]

A buyer must calculate the financial impact of tripling the purchase price from $.5 to $1.5 mil vs the hoped-for own/op cost reductions of one engine/prop and give some weight to the inherent loss of redundancy when eliminating fan 2.

If you want a serious business machine for trips of these lengths, you want turbine power, de-ice, radar, the works. The TBM sounds like a good choice if you've got the money -- a used TBM 700 should do the mission just fine, with a price tag of $1-1.5M. Meridian is pretty close to that, too. PC-12 is out of your price range, and a Malibu won't carry the load that far. King Air 90 is another good choice (as are the other entry level TP twins like the Cheyenne), but will cost more to operate than the single-TP's.

 

[Ted]

FWIW, the Cheyenne II we figured was about $1,000/hr to operate. Commander about $1,100.

 

[N747JB]

You can't pay more than $550K for any 421C even with fresh engines, new paint and interior and a glass panel. A 414/421 is the minimum you need for this mission, plenty of them from $150-500k, but lots of King Air 90's for under a million bucks, probably 80% of them are priced at or under $1,000,000.00 lots of maintenance to think about with turbines. They don't break as often, so they are reliable, but the scheduled stuff ain't cheap and the cost of stuff that breaks will make a grown man cry. Wayne is the resident King Air expert and can shed light on the ones to look at and ones to avoid. The older ones are 220-230 knot airplanes, 400 series Cessnas will average 200 knots at 40 GPH. You definitely want something pressurized for these long legs. Higher a "babysitter to ride right seat for a year or so is a great idea, insurance will be based on him as PIC, instead of you. With my Citation, the savings on insurance for a high time co-pilot was almost the cost of hiring one! I didn't hire one, except for the first 50 hours, but it was an option.
Do a little research on ownership costs, it's not just buying fuel and a $1500.00 annual.

 

[Ted]

If you're doing a $1500 annual on a pressurized Twin Cessna, you aren't even opening the cowlings!

 

[N747JB]

If you're doing a $1500 annual on a pressurized Twin Cessna, you aren't even opening the cowlings!

Ted, I wasn't referring to my annuals, just that the cost of any of these airplanes, piston or turbine is going to the a LOT more expensive than any piston single. And that had better be factored into the ownership equation, or the ownership cycle will be rather short!
I met a guy that owned my old 414A RAM V, in Destin one day, he bought it because it was reasonably priced, he considered himself a man of means, or at least that was the impression we got. He then proceeded to ***** about a $2000.00 repair, when we walked away. My wife just laughed and said, he really doesn't know what he's getting into, does he? About a year later I saw that it was for sale, seems the gentleman decided to give it back to the seller/lien holder, less one trashed engine.

 

[Ted]

John, I know you're well aware of the cost of ownership, I just wanted to make sure our friend considering purchase was aware!

There are lots of things you can do to save money, but it still ain't cheap... We figure $300/hr wet on the 310 is our cost, and that's with us doing a good bit to save money. Probably double that cost for a 414/421 for most owners.

 

[dell30rb]

A local charity owns and operates a 414 for a few years now and they estimate their operating costs at $700-750 per hour.

Wayne i'll certainly take your word on the turbine thing. Now that i think about it a pressurized twin piston is possibly more complex than a turbine. I have not flown either so don't know.

 

[Ted]

A local charity owns and operates a 414 for a few years now and they estimate their operating costs at $700-750 per hour.

I don't doubt it. Part of what keeps our costs "low" is LOP operation, along with pushing for discounts/donations on parts and labor. But we don't cut corners on quality, which is also part of why our costs are low. It's cheaper to do it right once.

Wayne i'll certainly take your word on the turbine thing. Now that i think about it a pressurized twin piston is possibly more complex than a turbine. I have not flown either so don't know.

It does all depend on the mission. We had a lot of flights in the Navajo that would have killed us financially in the Cheyenne or Commander. But for the OP's stated trips, a turbine would make sense.

 

[wabower]

There's no significant difference. Performance and systems are similar, turbines are simpler to operate than pistons since mixtures are controlled automatically and thereby eliminate the need for pilot interaction. King Airs are significantly hardier and more robust than piston twins in terms of shop visits required. No turbos, exhaust systems, engine rigging, vacuum pumps, dinky alternators, oil changes, etc.

Last year a client friend flew his F-90 249 legs totaling 248 hours on 109 separate days with only two unscheduled shop visits other than the phase inspections which required a week of down time. The unscheduled visits were for nuisance autopilot-related issues that didn't ground the plane and were conducted during routine trips. During that same (approximate) period, a 421 owned by another friend required at least one shop visit per month, some of which required several days, for 236 hours of flying. Some were "catch-up" issues, some were routine oil-change and tires, but each required towing the plane to the shop and scheduling around the inconveniences.

Due to an affiliation with a MX shop that specializes in these planes (cabin-class twins and turbines) I've been able to track invoices and actual costs for many of these planes for a number of years. ANFL when operations of any of them are involved, but the prevailing tendency among owners is to underestimate the actual costs and hassles of the piston twins when they compare the two types. Both will occasionally bring tears to your eyes, but the crying time is roughly equal except for the $500/mo accrual for King Air's mandatory prop and gear inspections on 6-year intervals.

The proof of the pudding is that nobody who moves from a piston to a turbine ever wants to go back. OTOH, cost of Jets vs turbines are a real test of mettle insofar as own-op expenses are concerned. Small dogs are advised to stay on the porch.

A local charity owns and operates a 414 for a few years now and they estimate their operating costs at $700-750 per hour.

Wayne i'll certainly take your word on the turbine thing. Now that i think about it a pressurized twin piston is possibly more complex than a turbine. I have not flown either so don't know.

 

[N747JB]

A local charity owns and operates a 414 for a few years now and they estimate their operating costs at $700-750 per hour.

Wayne i'll certainly take your word on the turbine thing. Now that i think about it a pressurized twin piston is possibly more complex than a turbine. I have not flown either so don't know.

I don't have Wayne's MANY years of experience, but I've owned a Conquest II, a Citation II S/P, two 414's and now a 421. I can tell you without a doubt the turbines are easier to operate, once you get up to speed. They just do what they are supposed to, every time. OK, almost every time. No shock cooling issues, fly the approach at 170 knots, dump the power at the marker if you need to. No mags or spark plugs to mess up, they are like diesel tractors, as long as you can crank them, they'll run forever.
Warning, once you burn a little Jet-A it's hard to get used to avgas again.

 

[Gubbins]

Since we have all these experts on this thread I have to grab the opportunity to ask if someone let us know what is a typical (wet) hourly operating cost for a KA C90? I had been told $950/hr but looking at the numbers for a 414 mentioned above at $750/hr it must be higher than that?

 

[wabower]

Like all other planes, hourly costs depends on usage, length of trips, cycles and other factors that impact absorption of fixed costs by increased use. Fuel cost is $350-500/hr. depending on where you are based. At ADS, you'll pay ~$6, at Athens, TX, $3.90 if you can (or choose to) tanker.

To obtain useful estimates, create an annual budget based on 100 hours of use with incremental increases at 50 additional hours.

Since we have all these experts on this thread I have to grab the opportunity to ask if someone let us know what is a typical (wet) hourly operating cost for a KA C90? I had been told $950/hr but looking at the numbers for a 414 mentioned above at $750/hr it must be higher than that?

 

[Henning]

Since we have all these experts on this thread I have to grab the opportunity to ask if someone let us know what is a typical (wet) hourly operating cost for a KA C90? I had been told $950/hr but looking at the numbers for a 414 mentioned above at $750/hr it must be higher than that?

Not necessarily, depends how much you fly, works both ways as well. If you don't fly much and never intend to end life your engines you can actually get really cheap calculations due to the relatively low cost of keeping them in tune until you're done. A recip cabin twin only makes sense as a family plane or such. When business class dispatch reliability is required, so is a turbine. It is possible to maintain turbine like dispatch reliability but the cost will run similar to operating a turbine, you just spend less money more often with the recip. The real reason that turbines are tricky is that $250,000+ engine repair hit. As a private plane, you eat that. As a business asset you deduct it at least.