AP68TP-600
 

The Vulcanair AP68TP-600 turboprop would fit the bill pretty nicely.
I have just completed my type rating on the one in Australia and the aircraft has exceeded my expectations.
This aircraft is about 50 knots faster than a Cessna Grand Caravan on the same fuel flow. And it has better STOL characteristics too, takeoff over 50' at MTOW is only 620 metres (2,040'). Combined with a trailing-link undercarriage, and the availability of reverse thrust the thing can be down and stopped in under 500 feet. Rough fields no problem.
This one appears to make book figures in cruise. At 10,000' we were getting exactly 210 KTAS at Recommended Cruise power. It is probably the most stable aircraft I have ever flown - a great IFR platform.
The one I flew had 8 seats installed: pilots, a forward club seating arrangement with well over a metre of legroom and about 6" more headspace than a P68C, plus another two seats aft. That leaves a huge space for bags etc. with few weight and balance issues.
It does have a MZFW limitation which limits the payload to ten standard occupants and no bags. The 'advantage' of that is that you can carry more fuel even when you have maximum payload: you can plan 445 air nm at 10,000' with IFR reserves at Recommend Cruise power.
Typically equipped you are looking at about 10% more dollars than a Grand Caravan. If you want to start logging twin turbine time you could recommend it to your Boss!

Gold
 

Gold! - I was smelling a salesmans pitch until I read this bit - then I knew it was true..... Hey, you can't take as much as you'd like but at least you can go further....


(not even commenting on the poster's handle being suspicially like part of the aircraft name....

UTR

445 anm!!!!!!!!!!!

Thats not enough to get it out of sight on a dark night.

........yeah 'jas'I was thinking the same thing but it looks about right with max payload leaving around 3 hrs endurance or 450 miles with res @ the typical crz speed. EOI is 270 fpm, sheez scary numbers but better than a PA31 on a hot day which would have a neg sign in the front of it !:-)
A couple of 'Gomad' donks, those engines are in everything from a kids go-kart to the heli commodore of the skies, the B206:-)
Take a look at a cockpit photo on Airliners .net, you would swear it came straight from Apollo 13! Ancient & cluttered!:-) If you can handle all those gauges you'd never be able to fly an Airbus you'll get bored instantly!:-)

Wmk2

My favourite:
http://images.wikia.com/austinpowers...tin_powers.jpg

Try 30 months..!

And for the oversized party bus - if there was actually more than 1 in existance and there was good parts back up, and it wasnt the first of its type to go on a CASA AOC, and we had $2.3M..... then we would probably still spend half as much on one of these: 1982 CESSNA CONQUEST II Turboprop Aircraft For Sale At Controller.com?


Should have an aeroplane by the end of the month with all things going well though, will come back to this thread then and let you all know how it goes.

Standing by!! You decided on the Conquest then? Hope all goes well!

That's a nice piece of kit there 'TriMed' that coonquest:-) I hope you guys are ready to buy new pants with deeeep pockets now yr about to launch into twin pres turbo prop.Fast, flash & requires lots of cash :) The C206 will seem like a kids pedal cart in comparison:-)


Wmk2

Actually there are 10 flying in various counties aound the world, not one. As for first on an AOC, already happening.
2.3 Mil, bargain for a new twin turbine. Priced a new King Air lately?
Vs second hand Conquest? Don't touch a thing for the first 5000 hours or so. No downtime for ongoing inspections, SIDS, etc. just basic 100 hrlys.
$650 an hour WET operating cost really isn't bad.

Love how GA aviation is happy with operating the equivalent of an XB Falcon with all the accomanying maintanance costs.:ugh:

Next one should be off the production line by the end of the year.

Cockpit really ain't that bad, Wal. Trust me, did 80 hrs in a week and a half. New KAP 150 worked fine. :ok:
Little narrower than a Van admittedly, but plenty of headroom.

Since when does any GA plank take max pax without a fuel reduction.:rolleyes:

Anyhoo, let's see if trimed's company has actually bought anything by this time next year....

About the day they invented the PA32-300.....sometime late in the sixties i believe..............................

Realistically, crap.

Sample, Standard Empty Weight. 827 kg (ones I flew were more like 900+)
6 x pax @ 77 kg 462 kg ( VERY low assumption, excludes 7th kiddy seat)
316L useable fuel. 228 kg

Total 1517 kg

Leaving a grand total of 25 kg for baggage.

This calculation is based on the factory standard airframe. Any optional equipment (eg. elec trim, ext power receptacle, avionics) all has to go on top of the standard weight to get to the Basic Empty Weight.

Not buying that one. (Argument or aircraft.)

PC-12, though, will have to have a look at that one. Probably fits the case, probably too expensive for trimed though. Wiki reckons max payload with full fuel is 539 kg. Accurate, eoc? (Don't know for which type they're quoting)

Addenum: Pilatus website quotes 458 kg payload with max fuel. Sorry, eoc.

But Mr Viator's pitch was that - after you've put 10 pax in (with no bags), and the fuel you need to get to safeway, you'll still have less than MTOW. Somehow that's an advantage - which I guess it is, in case safeway is closed and you have to go further down the road to get to coles.

He'd be better off pitching the added safety benefits of SE climb performance from taking off at less than MTOW.

I know plenty of other aicraft have MZFW limits - but I've never seen anyone try to claim it's an advantage!

Whoops - didnt mean we got a conquest (I wish..), more that $2.3M could be more effectively spent in our situation on something like that.

MakeItHappenCaptain - I dont know about comparing a low time conquest to an XB falcon.. also the $800,000+ price difference will buy a lot of maintenance on a C441 or the like and it will take more payload further in less time. Not really comparing apples with apples there I suppose.

Working for AirItalia I suppose your job is to push aircraft to people, much like every other bloke out there trying to flog me an aeroplane. Could you PM me the details of the AOC that it is being added to as I would love to have a chat to the person considering operating it. Also 3500 TBO on the rolls so not sure where 5000 comes from.

Also whats with everyone using 77kg as a standard pax weight.. Cant think of the last time I had anyone on board that weighed this, I plan on min 100 Kg per person inc bags.


Cheers,

Alistair.

I'm sure you've looked on their website, but just in case,

Cessna Aircraft for Sale : Used Twin Piston Aircraft for Sale

You asked for good example 402/404, these guys turnover quite a few.

Also for your requirements and seeing you considered a shrike, this 680 has all specs you were looking for.

Commander 680 Twin Piston Aircraft for sale on AvBuyer.com

I currently fly the 680 with the io-720, and while I still think the Titan is one of the nicest twins I've flown, the 680 is up there next to it and handles very similarly. Quite stable. 400hp per side, tas 180, 2544kg bew, mtow 3863. Pm me for more details. Side note, it does burn more fuel - 160/hour average.

Cheers
RC

Tri, was referring to structural inspections, time lifed components etc.
Doesn't matter if they haven't hit tbo if their calender life is out and I'm pretty sure something that old (read as year of manufacture) is gonna have continual items coming due.

Not trying to sell it. Not working for Vulcanair at the moment. Just believe in the product.:ok:

EOC, happy to stand corrected. Not 100% up on PCs.

http://i1205.photobucket.com/albums/...in/th_0022.jpg
Don't think this cockpit is exactly Apollo either. No more engine gauges per engine than a Caravan has. Two control levers per engine. Easy!

The Conquest 11 is a pretty honest beast, and really 280 kts plus and a fuel burn of 500lbs/hr is not bad. In BC/A it has had a few reviews and always comes up in front of everything else. Seems to be a number of C441's, being looked in the USA of late to be brought back to OZ.