Best aircraft for the job?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2005
Location: west sussex
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Best aircraft for the job?
I have a requirement for a business aircraft and would like to know everyones thoughts on the most suitable. Our requirements are:
Single pilot plus a minimum of 3 maximum 6 seats
IFR capability
De-iced
Take-off and landing around 800-1000m
Cost effective
Modern
Turbine or piston
Glass cockpit preferred.
Standard sector length around 200-250nm
I have one particular aircraft in mind but would be really grateful if I could take advantage of all the knowledge and experience out there before making an order,
All the best
J. Seagull
Single pilot plus a minimum of 3 maximum 6 seats
IFR capability
De-iced
Take-off and landing around 800-1000m
Cost effective
Modern
Turbine or piston
Glass cockpit preferred.
Standard sector length around 200-250nm
I have one particular aircraft in mind but would be really grateful if I could take advantage of all the knowledge and experience out there before making an order,
All the best
J. Seagull
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: EU land
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The sector and runway length makes it better for turbo-prop.
With this TODAs You can consider Pilatus PC-12 if doesn't need to be twin.
Plus it beats others on the "cost efective" factor - when already bought.
With this TODAs You can consider Pilatus PC-12 if doesn't need to be twin.
Plus it beats others on the "cost efective" factor - when already bought.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cessna T303. Not pressurized though. It won't make much of a difference in flight time whether you go turbine or piston on a 250nm sector, however the piston will be much cheaper to operate. The older King Airs lack speed but have high direct operating cost compared to a multi engine piston. Plus in order to get decent fuel flows on the turboprop, you need to fly high enough, which might not be possible in crowded airspace.
I guess it depends on the outfit and budget that the aircraft is needed for, so it's hard to define the right aircraft on given factors.
I guess it depends on the outfit and budget that the aircraft is needed for, so it's hard to define the right aircraft on given factors.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: trippin' around the world...
Age: 41
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Piper PA46, either piston or turboprop, single pilot and 4 seats available. Ceiling 25k feet and an endurance of 1000 NM more or less...if you have to operate it as a private....if you have to make aerotaxi or something like that it doesn't work...no single engines allowed for that! 
Bye
Bye
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Bristol
Age: 54
Posts: 867
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a 250nm sector I would expect a piston to take 1:40-2:00, whereas a Kingair 200 about 1:15. That's quite a difference. Whilst it would certainly be cheaper, I'm not sure I agree with your statement that older kingairs lack speed? In comparison to 303's or newer Kingairs? If you're going to go Piston - I'd go with a 421 for these secors.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: 04°11′30″N 073°31′45″E
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jonseagull is searching for a modern jet or turboprop...the newest C421 has 30 years... And sure not Glass Cockpit (preferred).
I think that the King Air 90 is the right choice
- A lot of used machines, from 300k$ to 3m$
- New plane has glass cockpit
- Fast
- 2 turbine ar better than 1
- Pressurized
- Can take off in an airstrip of 650mt
- Lovely to fly
Just my 2 cents
I think that the King Air 90 is the right choice
- A lot of used machines, from 300k$ to 3m$
- New plane has glass cockpit
- Fast
- 2 turbine ar better than 1
- Pressurized
- Can take off in an airstrip of 650mt
- Lovely to fly
Just my 2 cents
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,096
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Hello!
He writes "turbine or piston". There is one C421 at my home airport with low hours, immaculate paint, pretty interior, low-time engines, vortex generators and a newly installed Avidyne (and/or Garmin?) glass cockpit that comes very close to what he is looking for. Aeroplanes like that one sell for less than the cost of a single turboprop engine...
And if he keeps the price difference to a King Air in his bank account, he can operate the Cessna on the interest alone. Hard-to-find spare parts included. As an additional benefit, it is more quiet inside than the K.A.
But honestly, without knowing more (What budget? Shall the aircraft generate revenue through an AOC holder? Type of license/flying experience? Unpaved runways?) it is difficult to answer the question.
Regards,
Max
Jonseagull is searching for a modern jet or turboprop...the newest C421 has 30 years... And sure not Glass Cockpit (preferred).
And if he keeps the price difference to a King Air in his bank account, he can operate the Cessna on the interest alone. Hard-to-find spare parts included. As an additional benefit, it is more quiet inside than the K.A.
But honestly, without knowing more (What budget? Shall the aircraft generate revenue through an AOC holder? Type of license/flying experience? Unpaved runways?) it is difficult to answer the question.
Regards,
Max
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Didn't have spareparts issues yet with the T303, a/c based close to Egelsbach.
If 20 Minutes time advantage on each leg is worth spending 4 times the price of a T303 just on acquisition costs and justifies twice the direct operating costs, then go for a King Air. Don't expect a free ride in the King Air market. There is a reason for some to be so dirt cheap. There is a reason as well for the PC-12 to cost so much compared to a used KA200. They don't compare on build quality, systems layout and DOC.
If 20 Minutes time advantage on each leg is worth spending 4 times the price of a T303 just on acquisition costs and justifies twice the direct operating costs, then go for a King Air. Don't expect a free ride in the King Air market. There is a reason for some to be so dirt cheap. There is a reason as well for the PC-12 to cost so much compared to a used KA200. They don't compare on build quality, systems layout and DOC.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Southern England
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a 303 and think that they are great aeroplanes - however 6 up you wont get 250nm plus reserves - more like 100nm plus them with luggage
I think a Baron might work though and it has a better cruise if you want a piston, they are still made and I think the later ones have glass approved EASA (although not absolutely sure). Only downside is they are a little cramped in the back
Turbine - apart from the King Air, a Cheyenne might be an option and would be cheaper - they seem well used in Germany but havent seen that many operated in the UK
If you dont need pressurised you could look at a Chieftain which should do 170kts cruise and will give you the payload you need and will operate out of 1000 metres - you could probably also find some work for it outside if you got it on an AOC
For me its whether you have 200k or £1.0m and the associated running costs will vary accordingly.
Also bear in mind Avgas has a life and is likely to become more difficult to find, and as I found myself check the basic weight on each aircraft - these can vary by 2-300lbs which is a lot of fuel/pax
However, if you are flying over water alot, despite the current trend for a single turbine, believe me it does give you a better feeling having two donkeys attached (also when flying in true IFR if you ask me) but then 35 years into my flying perhaps I am just turning soft. The oft quoted PT6 arguement is OK but I have also had chip lights come on etc etc when in a turbines so they do sadly go from time to time
On a normal 250nm leg I have rarely heard anyone say that they wish they had got there 15-20 minutes quicker either which is normally the argument for speed (i.e. turbines) I can appreciate the difference on say an 800nm leg though
Hope you have luck getting whats right for you though!
I think a Baron might work though and it has a better cruise if you want a piston, they are still made and I think the later ones have glass approved EASA (although not absolutely sure). Only downside is they are a little cramped in the back
Turbine - apart from the King Air, a Cheyenne might be an option and would be cheaper - they seem well used in Germany but havent seen that many operated in the UK
If you dont need pressurised you could look at a Chieftain which should do 170kts cruise and will give you the payload you need and will operate out of 1000 metres - you could probably also find some work for it outside if you got it on an AOC
For me its whether you have 200k or £1.0m and the associated running costs will vary accordingly.
Also bear in mind Avgas has a life and is likely to become more difficult to find, and as I found myself check the basic weight on each aircraft - these can vary by 2-300lbs which is a lot of fuel/pax
However, if you are flying over water alot, despite the current trend for a single turbine, believe me it does give you a better feeling having two donkeys attached (also when flying in true IFR if you ask me) but then 35 years into my flying perhaps I am just turning soft. The oft quoted PT6 arguement is OK but I have also had chip lights come on etc etc when in a turbines so they do sadly go from time to time
On a normal 250nm leg I have rarely heard anyone say that they wish they had got there 15-20 minutes quicker either which is normally the argument for speed (i.e. turbines) I can appreciate the difference on say an 800nm leg though
Hope you have luck getting whats right for you though!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The one thing that has not been mentioned:
buy an airplane for which a simulator is available.
Don´t go the cheap route, newbies flying with on aircraft rating. DANGEROUS.
The single most important thing after experience is training. No glas cockpit will help you whe you get lost in an emergency because of lack of training.
Therefore, I´d opt for a B200, "Raisbecked" with the proline 21 cockpit.
Reliable, proven, easy to fly in and out of short strips, good SE perf, carries shiploads of ice, good on the sector lenghts mentioned with a comfortable ride. (with cabin sound damping installed) And plenty of training possibilities available, there is a sim even in Farnborough I think?
buy an airplane for which a simulator is available.
Don´t go the cheap route, newbies flying with on aircraft rating. DANGEROUS.
The single most important thing after experience is training. No glas cockpit will help you whe you get lost in an emergency because of lack of training.
Therefore, I´d opt for a B200, "Raisbecked" with the proline 21 cockpit.
Reliable, proven, easy to fly in and out of short strips, good SE perf, carries shiploads of ice, good on the sector lenghts mentioned with a comfortable ride. (with cabin sound damping installed) And plenty of training possibilities available, there is a sim even in Farnborough I think?
(some theoretical ideas only) :
-) to judge cost-effectiveness, an estimated number of flight hours per annum should be known
-) another major factor is the requirement (or lack thereof) for pressurisation ; the sector length of 200-250 NM seems to exclude needing such altitudes, though.
-) to judge cost-effectiveness, an estimated number of flight hours per annum should be known
-) another major factor is the requirement (or lack thereof) for pressurisation ; the sector length of 200-250 NM seems to exclude needing such altitudes, though.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Location: Location:
Age: 53
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry chaps you're all wrong......
425 or a 441 Conquest
For the 441 with -10 engines
Faster than a kingair, further, higher.
Buy the right one from the US and it'll probably have airliner style avionics, theres a beautiful one living in Jersey, new paint and interior.
Problem is finding one
Heres a Nice Connie 1 3000 Hours!!!
Clicky
425 or a 441 Conquest
For the 441 with -10 engines
Faster than a kingair, further, higher.
Buy the right one from the US and it'll probably have airliner style avionics, theres a beautiful one living in Jersey, new paint and interior.
Problem is finding one
Heres a Nice Connie 1 3000 Hours!!!
Clicky
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi,
I'd go with the Kingair, anytime. BE20 or BE9L, it doesn't matter.
Here's my 2 cents worth: there's plenty of rated crew available. Finding the right maintenance and operator shouldn't be a problem either. The only obstacle is the single-crew insurance cover (even if it's certified as such...)as far as i know, but again, with the right operator, no sweat at all.
Any feedbacks on insurance requirements on operating Kingairs single-crew, Ladies/Gents?
Regards,
booze
Ps.: Beechcraft and PT6A...you can't go wrong with that two...
I'd go with the Kingair, anytime. BE20 or BE9L, it doesn't matter.
Here's my 2 cents worth: there's plenty of rated crew available. Finding the right maintenance and operator shouldn't be a problem either. The only obstacle is the single-crew insurance cover (even if it's certified as such...)as far as i know, but again, with the right operator, no sweat at all.
Any feedbacks on insurance requirements on operating Kingairs single-crew, Ladies/Gents?
Regards,
booze
Ps.: Beechcraft and PT6A...you can't go wrong with that two...
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: NW
Posts: 269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having bought planes for the boss...unless there are other factors, like 'we need to spend this amount of money' or 'we can only spend this'...you do need to specify a budget, or you will be chasing planes all over.
Single pilot., 3-6 pax, going in and out of 3000 ft fields...is at the ragged edge of most jets minimum runway requirements, and beyond 99.9999% of most single pilot jet captains...I know, I had six SP waivers from 550s to Ultras.....if you typical turboprop captain tries to land at 100 kts..he's gonna have a hard time stopping that King Air in 2500 ft...so much of this discussion really centers on the pilot you have...if he's a hot shot...then you can buy more plane...
You mention you need glass cockpit..but not pressurization...that's a bush league move and tells me that your more worried about gear to tell you where you are then being comfortable in the cabin..
All this said...for me, with this type of profile, money no object...I would probably get a Conquest 1...you don't get the Conquest two as your not going to have that APU at a 2500ft field...and Garrets need love...PT6s are bullet proof...if your pilot is weak ...a 421 will live in the shop due to shock cooling and such...so a C340/414 is better...as we go down the line, if turbochargers are too much for this guy..then something like an Aztec would be pretty bullet proof for him to learn on...it twins are beyond him...a Lance...could carry the peeps, make the range, and get into those runways....
If your pilot needs a Glass cockpit, but is willing to forgo twins, pressurization, ect....I would suggest renting van at the airport...and just driving to your destination...
Single pilot., 3-6 pax, going in and out of 3000 ft fields...is at the ragged edge of most jets minimum runway requirements, and beyond 99.9999% of most single pilot jet captains...I know, I had six SP waivers from 550s to Ultras.....if you typical turboprop captain tries to land at 100 kts..he's gonna have a hard time stopping that King Air in 2500 ft...so much of this discussion really centers on the pilot you have...if he's a hot shot...then you can buy more plane...
You mention you need glass cockpit..but not pressurization...that's a bush league move and tells me that your more worried about gear to tell you where you are then being comfortable in the cabin..
All this said...for me, with this type of profile, money no object...I would probably get a Conquest 1...you don't get the Conquest two as your not going to have that APU at a 2500ft field...and Garrets need love...PT6s are bullet proof...if your pilot is weak ...a 421 will live in the shop due to shock cooling and such...so a C340/414 is better...as we go down the line, if turbochargers are too much for this guy..then something like an Aztec would be pretty bullet proof for him to learn on...it twins are beyond him...a Lance...could carry the peeps, make the range, and get into those runways....
If your pilot needs a Glass cockpit, but is willing to forgo twins, pressurization, ect....I would suggest renting van at the airport...and just driving to your destination...