Irrespective of which aircraft you choose as the ideal machine, those types above 5,700 kg have distinct limitations brought about by CASA regulations and CAO 20.7.1b.
Firstly an aircraft above 5,700 kg may only plan to a destination at night which has an approved instrument approach procedure and for which the aircraft is appropriately equipped and the pilot is qualified. (Jepps AU-602 para 1.9.1.) However there is nothing to stop the aircraft departing such an aerodrome. If you move from a B200 to a B350 this requirement becomes an impediment. And yet both aircraft are very similar and operate in the same performance category and similar speeds!
Secondly for those aircraft engaged in charter or RPT operations the landing distance required shall be equal to or better than 1.67 times the distance required to bring the aeroplane to a stop. (CAO 20.7.1b para 11.1.)
Given take-off at MTOW and landing at MLW for type, sea-level at 35 degrees celsius, flaps approach for take-off and down for landing, the following figures apply:
B350 4154 ft and 2750 ft (4592 ft factored 1.67)
C560 3710 ft and 2970 ft (4960 ft factored 1.67)
Some may suggest that the factoring is to allow for failure of prop reverse/thrust reversers but the AFM's are based on use of brakes alone! Two perfectly good aircraft hamstrung by government regulations!
BIK,
Both aircraft will uplift a tonne or more of pax and bags plus around four hours fuel. Piedmont faxed specs on a ‘99 model B350 recently with 1560 hrs total time for $USD 3.5 million. If you were paying $5.5 mil for a new one Raytheon would need to toss in a lot of extras such as maintenance and spares for a couple of years!
Gaunty,
Thanks for the complement on the stable. I am working on a Sovereign with an Excel as a fall-back but we have other priorities and a lot of bean counters to convince!