Ideas / suggestions for a twin
 

Hello,

I work for a company who is going through the motions of upgrading our (very nice 800 hour old) Cessna 206 to something faster and with better payload. My boss has a liking for things that go fast and are new, and will no doubt end up with a CJ1/2 or similar one day. The problem with a jet at the moment is that the new aircraft will be the first twin added to an AOC and i dont like my chances of getting a Chief Pilot approval to operate a citation or kingair with my hours.

My boss is quite sold on the Vulcanair P68 as they are quite economical and the only aircraft out of the 3 piston twins in production that is certified for 7 seats to fit his family of 6 and myself (yes the rear seat is available as a bench and will fit the 3 smallest children).

The other options for a new piston twin are the G58 baron and Seneca. Im endorsed on both and with The G58 costing $1.5M+ and having less useful load than the P68 and burning over 130 Lp/h it doesnt make any sense. The Seneca is a Seneca and that is enough said.

We are based in Mildura and there is a lot of legs between 100 and 250NM that are done privately with only 2 or 3 passengers, but for charter operations it would be nice to carry up to 5 passengers to Essendon/Adelaide/Albury/Canberra etc. and perhaps Bankstown. The P68 wont allow this and also with a TAS of around 150Kt is no faster than the C206 which will get 150+ on a good day.

So after a lot of research and number crunching, im still quite lost and have started looking at older piston twins as the answer. A good B58 or C310 will cost $250,000+ and i understand that they are older and require more maintenance and have recurring problems (SID's for the Cessna, maintenance costing a bomb for the Baron) but for the $1M that a new P68 costs you could buy a lot of maintenance.

I am just after some real world numbers for the older piston twins from any operators or owners; things like BEW and MTOW's, Fuel burn numbers, actual TAS, and most importantly maintenance costs and reliability. Feel free to message me if you dont want to post these things on a public forum. I'm willing to look into anything from the 310/B58 up to PA31/C421 size.

Interested to hear some (hopefully) non biased opinions, thanks in advance.

i'm a big fan of the aerocommander! love the 500 but if your after a rocket ship go the 690. :ok:

If you want something that will do what your 206 does (short, rough unprepared strips) etc, and lift a good load, your best bet is the much maligned Islander. You'll get an honest 140KIAS out of them (not somebodies dream of what they're getting in other gear -I regularly used to thrash the arse of 206/207 with/without belly pads, STOL kits and other assorted bits of fruit over a 40 minute sector), short-field performance has to be experienced to be believed, comes with seats for 10 adults and will literally fly with anything that'll fit inside the door. They're renowned as "an accountants aircraft" in terms of operating costs. They're relatively simple to fly and maintain for a twin -and they say the only thing that's better than a new Islander is a Used Islander!!!
Not sure what purchase prices are running at these days, but you'd get a good honest airframe for a decent price I would think. The only caveat that springs to mind would be the SB170 status... make sure it's up-to-date. The inspections are a bitch, expensive and recurring.

Welcome back Dunza, how about a Caravan? :ok:

C310R Anyday
 

You will not beat a nice C310R on any front. Best useful load. Biggest cabin. Biggest nose locker and therefore easy to keep in C of G. Simple engines to maintain. An honest 180 Kt TAS. Very reasonable purchase price. Yes they have SID's but if it has been completed by a reputable LAME you will have no problems. The maintenance will still be far cheaper than a B58 of similar vintage. I know this comment will be howled down by the critics however have a look around and do what the Jones's do.

Groggy

Your wanting what all business owners want (TriMedGroup rings a bell where have I heard that b4? Dr's/chemists?) They want to go from their comfy yet limited SE 6 seater to something that's not much of a jump up operating cost wise but want a lot more from it. Yr talking about an entirely different ball game here. C206 great plane in it's class but in order to have an airframe go faster carry more or same (6/7 bums) in a twin package you will need to jump miles up the ladder. A light jet is a whole other game. Yr boss likes fast a new you say, yr C206 sale price would be lucky to buy a couple of turbine wheels etc, that's how much a jump yr boss is thinking here:-)
Still if the need is there then money will have to not be the impetus for making the right choice.
Beech C90 or any Beech for that matter would be a good choice. Reliable, fast & will carry the bums needed, & will land on the ruff stuff also. But they are not cheap! Going from a piston plane to a turbo prop means $$$$$$.
C310? yeah not too bad but awful things pax wise for access.
Islander? Flying noisy slow box............pass:E
Seneca?..........pass:E
PA 31...........another big jump up from the C206 but even though still very popular few around these days that are sweet.

Out of the twin piston jobs to do what you ask here the AC50 Shrike might be worth a look at. Tough, good load carrier (7 bums) reliable donks with props way above the ground for ruff stuff & fast enough to cover most of what you want. Trouble is they like all the other twins in that class are old, find a good one & yr set:ok:

Basically it's either piston twin or Turbine twin (SE if yr game !) Pick one they are both very different beasts, then stick to it:-) The little 'slowtation' looks pretty but is a toy amongst small jets but once you have flown a small jet you won't want to go back to 'boats':E

Wmk2

i second the AEROCOMMANDER!!!!!
biggest cabin and best payload.

Will carry the same load as a chieftain, over the same distance for less fuel at the same speed - 165kts +/-

still has the rear bench seat, so is available for 7. Fuel system is a doddle, and STOL is great too.
High props mean less damage on stone/dirt/gravel runways and NON TURBO-CHARGED!!!!!!

I loved my time on 'em.

IF I was ever going to buy a twin for myself, the AC50 would be it!



on the negative..... engineers hate em!

Jober - Forgot about the new islander, but as i said my boss likes toys that go fast and doing a 350-400NM leg in a Bongo at 120Kt GS isnt really going to take his fancy.

Green Goblin - Sorry has to be M/E for the charter side of the operation. CASA dont exactly hand out ASEPTA approvals. Did have a look at an Oasis Caravan though and it was very sexy indeed.

Wally 2 - You might have seen our 206 around with the Tristar Medical Group logo on the tail. Never said anything about cost being prohibitive, its more a case of finding a suitable aircraft and run with it. And by the way the 206 sale price would buy a whole PT6 and some as well.

Hasherucf - Ive spoken to most of the owners of the new P68s in Australia personally and not one of them had a bad thing to say about the support, or the aircraft itself.

The reasons the P68 is so appealing being: 7 seats, easy and cheap to maintain (nearest LAME is an hour flight away and doesnt have instant availability should something serious go wrong), high wing - there is a lot of possibility of DSE/CFA work around the area, decent space inside with the option of club seating and a large passenger door, high prop clearance as there is a few dirt strips that we do go into. The club seating is a major plus, as it is used for business related flying.

One day in the future we will have a jet, there is no questions about that, but at the moment we need something that CASA will let us put on an AOC with a CP with minimal twin time.

Has anyone (besides Todd Kelly) got any experience with a Panther PA31? Fuel flows and TAS etc.?

Dolling up an older airframe isnt a worry, like I said the new P68 is a million clams before you turn the key on delivery. Are there any good Shrikes out there that GAM dont already own?

Thanks again.

Yep.....AC500 Shrike, can't beat 'em. Just happen to know where the best one in Australia is, and it up for grabs. There are a couple of ****ters on the market and you will want one with the spar DONE. The engines are just out of the 12 yr for com ops, so will need topping. Sounds as though yours may be pvt ops?

Not saying you are, but please don't goof me around, we don't want dreamers or tyre kickers. If you want the details on the Shrike, PM me.

'39

Not in the game anymore and therefore out of touch but what about a PAC750?

Some very rough rounded figures,

Seneca II $250-$300ph + 100lph 160 TAS MTOW 2070kg BEW 1250-1450kg (ZFW limit)
Baron 58 $300-$350ph + 130lph 180 TAS MTOW 2450kg BEW 1550-1700kg
Navajo $400-$450ph + 150lph 175 TAS MTOW 3100kg BEW 1900-2100kg (ZFW limit)
Chieftain $450-$500 + 170lph 175 TAS MTOW 3250kg BEW 2000-2200kg

Max weights and zero fuel weights can all be dependent on vortex generator kits and specific models. The figures are for a working aircraft doing moderate hours a year and can vary greatly also depending on how much you pay for parts, maintenance and yearly utilisation.

Go the Shrike :E

YouTube - Bob Hoover in his Aero Commander Shrike

Navajo with panther conversion on it? 200kt true (iirc) spend a bit of cash on the interior and there ya go. Saw one awhile back with the panther kit on it, leather interior and headrest mounted screens to IFE.

Or, a C208 would be nice, but the twin would give you charter IFR if required unles you got the 208 ASEPTA approved

Don't buy a Beech, Hawkers product support and parts prices are a laughing stock within the industry. The only ones who like 'em are pilots!

I would have to agree with Matty on that one. All Beech machines are pigs to work on, expensive to maintain and parts prices make Cessna look like a discount warehouse.

They look and sound sexy and are nice to fly though.

The Nevergo or Shrike would be good for you mission profile, but check the spars on the Shrike really well.

Courses for horses really, and opinions are like ar*e holes, every pilot has one!:D

good luck

PA39 - Thanks

osmosis and nick and anyone else who suggests a S/E turbine - see what i wrote re. ASEPTA... it is too hard for a start up operator.

43inches - thanks, that is exactly what i was after

After looking at what the yanks can do with an old Shrike or Navajo, I am impressed and they make the money that you pay for a new piston aircraft completely ridiculous, poor resale value and killer AD's being of course the main problem with spending money on an older airframe.

The former charter operator in Mildura operated a deathstar and a navajo for a long time and they seemed to work out quite well for him. Both of these would be good for company use as well.

The researching will continue, and please feel free to keep contributing. Fact rather than opinion being preferred thanks.

If you're boss is even entertaining those sort of numbers and has a discerning taste for speed and comfort then I'd suggest that you get your boss a demo ride of some sort on a Kingair. Faster, more comfortable and much nicer to fly than anything else mentioned and pressurised to get above the weather.

There is somwhere in Australia an Aero Commander 690FL with turbo charged Lycoming IO720's fitted, a modernised panel, two Garmin 430's fitted, not likely to be on the market, but a very good all round machine I would think.

PA42-1000, after that you need jets to get better performance.

Only need the intake/intercooler modifications, the winglet and four blade props are a waste of time.