What Next
I have flown both the C340 and the 303 on a year contract for a building company servicing two large factory sites in the middle of no where.
We selected the 303 because both sites were reached through disused airfields and both had 500 meters of usable runway with broken runway beyond.
The 303 had amazing undercarriage and short field ability but was let down by the engines.
The 340 was a poor climber compared to the Seneca Five although pressurised.
All to their own but I have a soft spot for the Seneca
Pace