Ideas / suggestions for a twin
I'll second that about the P68. They have basically an extra 100 horsepower for a similar BEW. I used to be able to land one on a dime, and she was quite spritely into the air in most situations.
The reason why PNG is not full of them is it's a twin, and you have to pay to maintain an extra engine. Plus the after market support and spares is not a notch on Cessna, and there is not a large selection of good ones to choose from these days.
The reason why PNG is not full of them is it's a twin, and you have to pay to maintain an extra engine. Plus the after market support and spares is not a notch on Cessna, and there is not a large selection of good ones to choose from these days.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: sYDNEY
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
have you actually looked into the jet option?? If the boss is so keen, why not go and speak to CASA and get some facts. The small crustations are aimed at single pilot/private use so are well within the reach of a CPL with a bit of experience. Get an "approved" training course withthe purchase and perhaps some supervisory CandT from an existing operator and you could well be there. Could be more cost efective than outgrowing a piston twin then outgrowing a turboprop then looking at the jet.....
Having operated both types, I know which is simpler. No 1"/1000/minute or cowl flaps and it's pretty hard to shock cool a PW engine.
just a thought.
Having operated both types, I know which is simpler. No 1"/1000/minute or cowl flaps and it's pretty hard to shock cool a PW engine.
just a thought.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Mildura
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nomorecatering and tinstaafl, that is awesome thanks a lot, I will do some investigating.
I did some reading on the PA60 but they seem to be a maintenance hog and the common opinion is not to go anywhere near them, although the speed is impressive..
The shortest strips i operate from at the moment are around 700m, and it does get hot in this part of the world, how will the AC50/PA31/C414 etc. cope when its 40+ outside? (both engines that is, no need to lecture me on OEI performance of a piston twin).
bushy, what you say re. the quoted P charts is correct as i've done the comparisons, but having experienced STOL kit equipped 206's I would back the 206 every day!
I did some reading on the PA60 but they seem to be a maintenance hog and the common opinion is not to go anywhere near them, although the speed is impressive..
The shortest strips i operate from at the moment are around 700m, and it does get hot in this part of the world, how will the AC50/PA31/C414 etc. cope when its 40+ outside? (both engines that is, no need to lecture me on OEI performance of a piston twin).
bushy, what you say re. the quoted P charts is correct as i've done the comparisons, but having experienced STOL kit equipped 206's I would back the 206 every day!
PA31 P-Charts only consider temps to 36'C at sea level decreasing with height around ISA +20. The aircraft was never designed to operate in outback australia summer temps. In any case at high weight and temps you would legally need over 1000m with factors included (nil wind).
Engine temps would run very high, best to seriously consider a turbine aircraft for prolonged exporsure to those conditions.
Engine temps would run very high, best to seriously consider a turbine aircraft for prolonged exporsure to those conditions.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA31's have been operating legally and effectively in Alice Springs for about 40 years. And still do.
Alice Springs is 1789 feet amsl and has many 40 degree days.
Yes you do need long airstrips about 1200m on extreme days with big loads. So do C210's and most other aircraft.
P charts will tell you the story. There are some strange ideas and stories out there.
Alice Springs is 1789 feet amsl and has many 40 degree days.
Yes you do need long airstrips about 1200m on extreme days with big loads. So do C210's and most other aircraft.
P charts will tell you the story. There are some strange ideas and stories out there.
Last edited by bushy; 2nd Jan 2011 at 14:13.
This is an extract from an NTSB report involving a PA31 where the aircraft could not maintain altitude in the US; OAT 40 degrees C at 2000 elevation.
Lines in the POH/VG supplement end at 36C at sea level at 1789 amsl the lines extend to just over 34C.
Operating at 40C will lead eventually to an accident report statement as follows;
Unless of course there is an updated set of charts.
Report date was July 23 2000 rego N600EE
Based on both the pilot's report of the conditions at the landing site and the METAR from the closest aviation observation station, the density altitude on the surface was calculated to be 4,700 feet. The outside air temperature at the site, and the estimated temperature at the aircraft's cruise altitude, were outside of the temperature envelope for a positive rate of climb on the aircraft's single engine climb performance chart in the Airplane Flight Manual. According to Piper, the temperature lines on the charts are limits and no extrapolation can be made for points outside of the temperature lines.
Operating at 40C will lead eventually to an accident report statement as follows;
The fatigue fracture and separation of the No. 6 cylinder fuel injector line due to the company maintenance personnel's failure to comply with an Airworthiness Directive. A factor in the accident was the company's decision to operate the aircraft in environmental conditions, which were outside of the single engine performance capability of the aircraft.
Report date was July 23 2000 rego N600EE
Last edited by 43Inches; 2nd Jan 2011 at 08:22.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,875
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I swear I've seen a P 68 take off in les than 150 meters, 2pob and nill wind. I almost choked on my spit when I saw it leap off the ground from it's intersectional departure.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Wapenamanda
Age: 45
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are all of you talking about pistons?? Have you seen the price of AVGAS recently? On top of that you still have to do 50 hourlies on the buggers!!
Pay a bit more, get something with 1 or 2 PT6'es, 150 hours or more between inspections... your boss (as the owner) will be laughing... you (as the pilot) will be so happy you wont know what to do with yourself...
Dont let a lack of experience (CP) and AOC make you make the wrong move... PC12, Caravan, Conquest or Cheyenne is my 2 cents worth...
Pay a bit more, get something with 1 or 2 PT6'es, 150 hours or more between inspections... your boss (as the owner) will be laughing... you (as the pilot) will be so happy you wont know what to do with yourself...
Dont let a lack of experience (CP) and AOC make you make the wrong move... PC12, Caravan, Conquest or Cheyenne is my 2 cents worth...
And how many hours will you need on type or similar class to get any kind of insurance flying something like a PA-42? Unless the doc has clinics in Broome, it seems like a bit of overkill.
Everyone bear in mind this is not a 1000+ hr pilot applying for the CP position within the company (as he has already stated), so rather than the extremely (un)helpful cries of "It's a doctor buying! Get a GULFSTREAM!!!!"
, stick with something around the level of the P68 or even a Baron.
Buying new will eliminate the ongoing maintenance required with busted arse old PA-31's and SIDs for Cessnas and you will still have a decent retained value if an upgrade is required after a few years. But seriously, how many people are needing to be carted around at the moment?
The P68 is almost half the cost of the B58 and the glass fitted to either is fantastic compared to the steam driven gear. (Again without the ongoing costs of gradually upgrading everything to glass as it breaks.)
No experience with (new - such an animal?) commanders.
Everyone bear in mind this is not a 1000+ hr pilot applying for the CP position within the company (as he has already stated), so rather than the extremely (un)helpful cries of "It's a doctor buying! Get a GULFSTREAM!!!!"
, stick with something around the level of the P68 or even a Baron. Buying new will eliminate the ongoing maintenance required with busted arse old PA-31's and SIDs for Cessnas and you will still have a decent retained value if an upgrade is required after a few years. But seriously, how many people are needing to be carted around at the moment?
The P68 is almost half the cost of the B58 and the glass fitted to either is fantastic compared to the steam driven gear. (Again without the ongoing costs of gradually upgrading everything to glass as it breaks.)
No experience with (new - such an animal?) commanders.
Pretty much a C404 with PT6s instead of GTSIO-520s. So lots of room and reliable engines with rather longer TBO compared to the pistion Gitsos. Usual turbine exposure to unexpected high cost if an engine finds a novel way to make smoke. Not that a cooked geared Continental is cheap either. Not pressurised so you can't take much advantage of reduced fuel consumption at high(er) altitudes. Unless everyone uses supplemental O2, or course. Still, Caravans, Skyvans and their unpressurised ilk get by just fine.
Vulcanair will be bringing out a stretched twin turbine version of the P68 called the A-Viator in Feb/March this year for Avalon. 11 seat, newer RR versions of the Allison 250's, 210 Kts cruise, unpressurised and at this stage under $3mil delivered. Much more affordable than any other turbine twin on the market and burns less than a caravan.
Last edited by MakeItHappenCaptain; 6th Jan 2011 at 10:43.
Buying new will eliminate the ongoing maintenance required with busted arse old PA-31's and SIDs for Cessnas and you will still have a decent retained value if an upgrade is required after a few years. But seriously, how many people are needing to be carted around at the moment?
If you buy old just do a lot of homework and get a good one, then keep it in good condition.
As far as value is concerned generally I have sold all around what they were bought for with the older aircraft as they have already fully depreciated. Just be very careful of buying higher hour aircraft and make sure they are not approaching an airframe limit etc...
A new aircraft like a new car will lose significant value as soon as you take possesion of it.
The new aircraft still require much the same maintenance an old one does.
Corrosion, time lifed parts, breakages all mean more maintenance. Agreed the 100 hourlys still need to be done regardless, but SB's and AD's don't generally apply to a new airframe.
Anyone want to attest to the cost required to keeping a 40 year old airframe airworthy?