Replacing a C206/210 with a Caravan

[huntsman]

Obviously a Caravan is bigger and better than a C206/210, but also more expensive.

Could it be viable to replace one C206/210 with a Caravan?
What about putting the work for two C206's into one Caravan?

Anyone gone down that road successfully (or otherwise) before?

[300Series]

Can i drive the Van?

[Green gorilla]

Polar aviation has done it if you own the plane it works out well.

[DanArcher]

Considered a GA8 Airvan? lot cheaper than a caravan & seems a good replacement for 206, pitty it only TAS's at 120kt...

[206greaser]

Perhaps hold out on the Airvan. Bad run of late, but other than that an absolute cinch to fly, and they do carry a shirt load as well!

[No1Dear]

Provided you can put paying passengers in the seats the benefits of a 208 over a 206 are numerous.
One being from a pax point of view the noise level in the cabin is very comfortable compared with a 206 or any other piston engine machine for that matter.

[the wizard of auz]

The pitfall with the Caravan is the initial cost of acquiring one. even on a lease type arrangement your looking at nothing less than $30K a month. you need a lot of work to come up with that sort of monthly payment....... then add fuel and all the extras that go into making that $30K and your up for some serious bucks.
if you have the work and can carry the expense, they are a great working machine. If you don't have the work to support it, it will clean you out faster than pork through a duck.
I have been through this exercise quiet thoroughly recently, and basically the Van isn't a replacement for either the 206 or the 210. they are a whole different target market.

[Dick Smith]

The Caravan is an excellent aircraft but the cost of maintenance in Australia is incredibly high. I was criticised when I mentioned the 100 hourly which cost $78,900.92. Fortunately my 100 hourlies have come down. My aircraft has done about 1,500 hours total time. My last 100 hourly was $29,770.34 and the one before that was $16,767.14.

Each time when the aircraft went in there were not any noticeable faults. The aircraft is always hangared and in pretty well immaculate condition.

Anyone who is thinking of buying a Caravan would want to check the maintenance costs before entering into a lease or a purchase.

[Capt Wally]

I think 'Dick' & 'wiz' sums this one up pretty good. COST. Buying one is expensive in the first place but keeping it going is another matter.
As 'wiz' said,..................and basically the Van isn't a replacement for either the 206 or the 210. they are a whole different target market.
I used to fly for a guy who had a PA31 (an ex RFDS plane funny enough well b4 I got involved with them) & for a while there he contemplated replacing it with a Conquest or the likes. He did the sums & said just the cost of one turbine engine rebuild should it get cooked by an inexperienced driver would be more than the whole replacement cost of his PA31. Huge jump from pistons to turbines.



CW

[werbil]

One of the advantages of the C208 is dispatch reliability.

If they're paid for per seat you need to be able to fill every seat all the time.

They don't like being dunked into salt water on a regular basis - ours spend an awful long time in the hangar - a lot longer than the 50 year old DHC-2s.

79k for a 1,000 hour airframe on a 100 hourly on a land plane with no obvious problems :mad: - what did they find?

[Lefthanded_Rock_Thrower]

Wiz,

"Pork through a Duck", are you sniffing liquid paper again ?.

Don't forget tomorrow is "hug a retard day", don't freak out like you did last year, no one is trying to hurt you :}.

Agree with Wiz and Dick, the C208 is a completely different market, a great aircraft if operated correctly.

[Towering Q]

Don't forget tomorrow is "hug a retard day", don't freak out like you did last year, no one is trying to hurt you

He should be careful regardless...don't want anyone taking advantage of our Wiz.:suspect:

[empacher48]

The Caravan is an excellent aircraft but the cost of maintenance in Australia is incredibly high. I was criticised when I mentioned the 100 hourly which cost $78,900.92. Fortunately my 100 hourlies have come down. My aircraft has done about 1,500 hours total time. My last 100 hourly was $29,770.34 and the one before that was $16,767.14.

I would be keen to know what was scheduled to be done during those 100 hourly checks? Surely there was a lot of work done on the aircraft, as we have only had one check where we baulked at the price. Had something to do with a landing gear removal and check - apparently it has to be done. (I'm not the maintenance controller either, so not sure whether it is done on date or time).

[OCTA]

Dick you love bring up that huge 100 hourly don't you. Maybe it was something to do with them having to back date the gear removal AD that was three months overdue. Also The cessna guys at BK is probably the most expensive shop in Australia!

Great plane but you wouldn'y dream of replacing a 206 with one. Unless you've got money to burn!

[Dick Smith]

Empacher48, here is a break up of the main costs. I think the only bit that wasn’t required at most 100 hourlies was the fuel nozzle inspection and the starter generator.

I understand one of the problems is the way the Cessna documentation is written. Even if you have done fewer than 100 hours in the 12 month period, you not only have to do a 100 hourly, but also a 200 hourly and 400 hourly. Imagine that!

Here is a break up of some of the costings. If you want a copy of the entire invoice, give me a ring on 02 9450 0600 and I’ll fax it to you.

Interval A inspection - $1,805
Interval B inspection - $3,420
Interval C inspection - $3,990
Interval E inspection - $855
Interval F inspection - $855
Interval H inspection - $1,330
Interval I inspection - $570
Interval AC - $2,600
Radio periodic - $143
CPCP1R - $1,140
CPCP3R - $3,040
AD/RAD/43.47 – 115.00
Radio bench labour - $491.63
Starter generator overhaul - $285
Starter generator parts - $3,019.50
Fuel nozzle inspection - $570
Fuel nozzle subcontractors - $443
Parts (seals, o-rings, filters, nuts etc) - $1,313.79
Aileron tab rod ends/bolts replaced - $190
Aft passenger door seal replaced - $190
AP/PT6A/28 - $190

Plus other minor costs, which came to a total of $29,770.34 including GST.

[OCTA]

So really Dick what you are saying is if the aircraft was actually flown 500 hours a year the cost would be devided by almost 5 and the phase inspections would be alot less than what you are saying? So a normal Phase check would not cost $29,000. :ugh:

[Dick Smith]

OCTA, I’m really not sure of the answer. I find it all too complex. Of course if you flew 500 hours per year you would have to do five 100 hourlies and these seem to cost a small fortune even if they don’t have the other checks. Possibly someone else can answer this question.

It would be interesting to know some comparison yearly costs for running Caravans.

By the way, in the year that I spent $29,770.34 (including GST) on the routine maintenance, I only flew 40 hours in that aircraft!

[empacher48]

We do find that around that about $20,000 for a check is about right, mind you we do a lot more flying in ours than Dick does! But the $79,000 check must've had some pretty big items coming due - as I said earlier we had one that we baulked at the price, but they were large items that had to be checked due to coming due on date..

Mind you stuffing the engine in the front of a 206 or 210 is pretty cheap in comparison to cooking the PT6!

[Green gorilla]

Could replacing a couple of old twins make getting a Caravan more viable.

[neville_nobody]

Just make sure your pax are happy to get into a C208 before you go selling the twins!

[No1Dear]

Possibly in house maintenance for a reasonable size operator is more cost effective than out sourcing.
Seems to be the case with the successful operators.
No doubt they are a very expensive toy for someone to have a bit of a poke around in here and there.

[OCTA]

Sorry Dick if I was unclear. What I meant was that if the aircraft had of done 400 hours it would have had all those checks seperatly instead of at the same time and therefor would mean that each of the phase checks (or 100 hourlys what ever you maint system calls for) would have been alot less.