Help! We're buying a twin.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Americas
Age: 59
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Help! We're buying a twin.
Our little consortium (four of us - Engineer, Financier, Builder and Salesman) have decided to expand the fleet from two to three machines. A suitable piston twin is the game plan. We are experienced private pilots, all in excess of 5000 hrs and all with over 500 hrs on twins.
To gather as much information and constructive input from all view points we are asking for PPRUNE's members to offer their two cents worth as to what we should buy.
The shopping list is as follows:-
Budget - 600K U.S.
3000' paved and/or grass strip.
The four of us (with the clubs) is 1200 lbs.
Typical single sector 800 km.
Lots of winter flying (IFR and possible icing conditions)
A great panel is essential (IFR again).
Stable and predictable handling (the family will be onboard).
Mountain flying (Nothern Rockys) is often undertaken.
Hourly running costs, while important are not driving the selection.
We do like are gadgets and gizmos!
So do we buy big but older and invest with upgrades?
Or buy smaller, newer and more upto date.
Many thanks for your input.
P.S. Please no salesmen or commercially interested partys - except to offer impartial data and/or opinions.
To gather as much information and constructive input from all view points we are asking for PPRUNE's members to offer their two cents worth as to what we should buy.
The shopping list is as follows:-
Budget - 600K U.S.
3000' paved and/or grass strip.
The four of us (with the clubs) is 1200 lbs.
Typical single sector 800 km.
Lots of winter flying (IFR and possible icing conditions)
A great panel is essential (IFR again).
Stable and predictable handling (the family will be onboard).
Mountain flying (Nothern Rockys) is often undertaken.
Hourly running costs, while important are not driving the selection.
We do like are gadgets and gizmos!
So do we buy big but older and invest with upgrades?
Or buy smaller, newer and more upto date.
Many thanks for your input.
P.S. Please no salesmen or commercially interested partys - except to offer impartial data and/or opinions.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: uk
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cheyenne. 600k will get you a nice one. Cheyenne 1 with 2 500hp pt6's, reliable,al the gizmos you could want, and quick.plenty of room for you all as well. The piston alternatives are pretty much the 421 or the Duke. The Duke is lovely but thirsty and with some pretty rare engines. The 421 wont get off in the strip length you want but its a fab aircraft. Unfortunately it has a rap for engine problems, but the biggest bills will be for general maintenance assuming you look after the engines correctly. I owned one and she was lovely, but eyewateringly expensive when the time came for overhauls etc etc. Beware of airframe/exhaust ad's as well.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd get Twinstar for that budget, with full TKS. Turbo's, great for high alts, undercarriage built for the D-Jet and is damn tough (grass), superb range (LA to New Orleans on full tanks). The others will cost an arm and a leg to maintain and won't have the G1000.
Double your budget though and you could get a Royal Turbine conversion to the Duke.....now that would be fun
Double your budget though and you could get a Royal Turbine conversion to the Duke.....now that would be fun
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Anywhere
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For all the Twinstar merchants (Al - I know you're a fan)
4 fully grown adults - plus 4 sets of Golf clubs - you're having me on.
VERY late model Aztec (1980) if you can get one, De-iced with an Oxygen fit and Turbo charged. Failing that Baron 58P.
The four of us (with the clubs) is 1200 lbs.
VERY late model Aztec (1980) if you can get one, De-iced with an Oxygen fit and Turbo charged. Failing that Baron 58P.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it was my money would buy a 58P Baron but there are a number of aircraft that would do the job but the twinstar is not one of them!
The Aztec is a good workhorse but nothing flys like a Beech.
The Aztec is a good workhorse but nothing flys like a Beech.
Spoon PPRuNerist & Mad Inistrator
I would suggest that
Are mutually exclusive in a piston twin.
SD
3000' paved and/or grass strip.
The four of us (with the clubs) is 1200 lbs.
Typical single sector 800 km.
The four of us (with the clubs) is 1200 lbs.
Typical single sector 800 km.
SD
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want something new then the 42 is almost the only aircraft BUT it will definitely not take four adults and the clubs.
I have tried it many times (well not with four and the clubs). It is possible with three with half the back seat down with the tube behind providing a reasonably long "hold" section, but even then it is light bags - no power caddies!
If you dont want to to worry about weight with four of you (ever) and want to bundle in all the clubs, power caddies and the kitchen sink the Aztec is a fine aircraft. Loads of performance, happy into and out of rough grass strips and good in weather. Spend some money on an old one and you can have a superb machine - and they can be had relatively cheaply with the depressed market in twins.
The Cheyenne is also superb. The editor of Flyer has owned one for years and written some excellent articles about some of the missions flown.
You should get hold of Flyer from two months back - they undertook a survey of all of the popular twins - well worth a read for an unbiased resume.
I have tried it many times (well not with four and the clubs). It is possible with three with half the back seat down with the tube behind providing a reasonably long "hold" section, but even then it is light bags - no power caddies!
If you dont want to to worry about weight with four of you (ever) and want to bundle in all the clubs, power caddies and the kitchen sink the Aztec is a fine aircraft. Loads of performance, happy into and out of rough grass strips and good in weather. Spend some money on an old one and you can have a superb machine - and they can be had relatively cheaply with the depressed market in twins.
The Cheyenne is also superb. The editor of Flyer has owned one for years and written some excellent articles about some of the missions flown.
You should get hold of Flyer from two months back - they undertook a survey of all of the popular twins - well worth a read for an unbiased resume.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you can share it two at a time I know where there is a Grumman 8F8 Tiger Cat.....that is a real performer...burns a bit of fuel at max speed but what the hell....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Americas
Age: 59
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are not that Fat!
It is true that the four of us with clubs actually comes in at 1167 lbs, myself I only push 180 after a big meal!!
We don't lug the beer down south its alot cheaper to buy it there!
By the way we are all between 5"8" and about 6' tall.
Some interest points from you all, very greatful for your inputs.
Yep! Pistons are the flavour of the month, we all love PT6s but we cannot quite justify that luxury (yet) the brides will kill us!!
We don't lug the beer down south its alot cheaper to buy it there!
By the way we are all between 5"8" and about 6' tall.
Some interest points from you all, very greatful for your inputs.
Yep! Pistons are the flavour of the month, we all love PT6s but we cannot quite justify that luxury (yet) the brides will kill us!!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Derbyshire
Age: 67
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
$600,000 at todays prices
Buy a Navajo Cheiftain or the Cheyenne, Cheiftains can be bought in the states for very little now and can still be brought in vat free via Denmark Will get off grass strips and short runways and have known ice and ifr kit on board if you get the right one.Not the cheapest of things to run but will take you most places, though un pressurised is a pain Twin turbo props in the cheyenne will be costlier to overhaul but the fuel will be a lesser expence and those p&w's are renown for being reliable so I am told. I have just spent close on three months looking for a twin that will take weight and take it as far as I WANT TO BE ABLE TO GO AND UNTILL YOU GET TO THE BIGGER TWINS THEY JUST DONT HAVE THE GRUNT. Sorry for the caps lock .
Someone pointed me in the direction of a merlin that has got speed climb power and grunt but their history and serviceability is a no -no. Mind you these days you can buy a learjet for that kind of money if you fancy using it somewhere else..?Or get a bigger group and buy a Cheyenne III as they are the dogs do dahs ....
Someone pointed me in the direction of a merlin that has got speed climb power and grunt but their history and serviceability is a no -no. Mind you these days you can buy a learjet for that kind of money if you fancy using it somewhere else..?Or get a bigger group and buy a Cheyenne III as they are the dogs do dahs ....
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dunno ... what day is it?
Posts: 273
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd go for the PA31. I suspect the Navajo will take 4 with clubs for 430 nm, but if not or the field is an issue how about a PNav - pressurised Navajo I think has 425 hp a side rather than 310, so should get off in 900 m and the improved max all-up and TAS at FL170 or so should get you there!
I like the Navajo. Maintenance costs are high, and I would suggest getting the heat exchangers to replace the crap heater, but it is very comfortable and capable. Have done 130 kts level with one engine feathered.
P.S. I am over 6' and comfortable in any seat of the Navajo.
I like the Navajo. Maintenance costs are high, and I would suggest getting the heat exchangers to replace the crap heater, but it is very comfortable and capable. Have done 130 kts level with one engine feathered.
P.S. I am over 6' and comfortable in any seat of the Navajo.
Last edited by Life's a Beech; 6th Dec 2007 at 23:55.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cessna 404
A Cessna Titan would do it.
Used to operate one out of 924m (3020') on public transport, 550m privately.
Up to 8 in the back, or less with more room/club interior/potty. Lockers everywhere. Huge useful load, ours could lift about 1250 KG.
Easy to fly, dead stable, handles ice and impossible to land badly (trailing link) - I know I've tried.
Acres of panel space for as many gadgets as you can afford - Chelton Highway in the Sky would look good.
Approx. 1400 litre tanks means upto 8 hour range. Simple fuel system - 1 massive wet wing each side, much better than earlier cessna twins (upto 6 tanks).
Not prone to as many of the serious SID's that the other older cessna twins are. Seem to remember the fin was lifed to about 25,000 hrs in the UK.
Geared engines means props only do 1700rpm in the cruise, much easier on the ear than a lyc. TIO540.
Downsides - engines, engines and the engines. Get new motors, learn how to look after them, never do any single engine work in your own aeroplane (borrow someone else's or get a 402 just for training), never lend your aeroplane to anybody and keep to number of different pilots to a minimum. If you can look after them they are the smothest most reliable things available at 375 HP short of a turbine.
Its unpressurised and only plods along at about 180 Knots or so, unless you give it really big licks and it'll do 183 Knots.
They're getting to be a bit of a sort after beast now and if you can find a good one it won't depreciate.
Used to operate one out of 924m (3020') on public transport, 550m privately.
Up to 8 in the back, or less with more room/club interior/potty. Lockers everywhere. Huge useful load, ours could lift about 1250 KG.
Easy to fly, dead stable, handles ice and impossible to land badly (trailing link) - I know I've tried.
Acres of panel space for as many gadgets as you can afford - Chelton Highway in the Sky would look good.
Approx. 1400 litre tanks means upto 8 hour range. Simple fuel system - 1 massive wet wing each side, much better than earlier cessna twins (upto 6 tanks).
Not prone to as many of the serious SID's that the other older cessna twins are. Seem to remember the fin was lifed to about 25,000 hrs in the UK.
Geared engines means props only do 1700rpm in the cruise, much easier on the ear than a lyc. TIO540.
Downsides - engines, engines and the engines. Get new motors, learn how to look after them, never do any single engine work in your own aeroplane (borrow someone else's or get a 402 just for training), never lend your aeroplane to anybody and keep to number of different pilots to a minimum. If you can look after them they are the smothest most reliable things available at 375 HP short of a turbine.
Its unpressurised and only plods along at about 180 Knots or so, unless you give it really big licks and it'll do 183 Knots.
They're getting to be a bit of a sort after beast now and if you can find a good one it won't depreciate.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brussels - Twin Comanche PA39 - KA C90B
Age: 51
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go for the Aerostar !!!!!!!!! Since you guys have the expierence, this pressurised twin is perfect in my opinion!!
For example: Aerostar 601P: dirt and sand no problem, i have read stories about loosing the left engine at rotation still climbing out to the pattern altitude on a hot day at 4000ft runway elevation.
Cruises 240ktas at 20.000ft on 36gph or does 210ktas on 24gph!
Goes 1100nm trips, the 601P has better economy than the 700P
I haven't been in one, but i sure hope i will one day!!
For example: Aerostar 601P: dirt and sand no problem, i have read stories about loosing the left engine at rotation still climbing out to the pattern altitude on a hot day at 4000ft runway elevation.
Cruises 240ktas at 20.000ft on 36gph or does 210ktas on 24gph!
Goes 1100nm trips, the 601P has better economy than the 700P
I haven't been in one, but i sure hope i will one day!!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Derbyshire
Age: 67
Posts: 182
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: uk
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aerostar, hellish fast, cg problems with fuel tank, v complex to operate and a pain to work on. Not sure about getting off in the space available.
Aztec. Great ship. maintenance v expensive and parts are now getting hard to find. Turbo ones especialy so. Check the single engine performance at the weights you are talking about(there isnt much!). On the plus side it has the lowest fatal accident record of any twin. It has a super cub wing and some pretty benign stall characteristics. An Aerostar will bite you with no warning.
Aztecs are great machines on grass and the undercarriage will take a beating, just watch out for prop clearance. Bloody noisy as well, get some anr headsets for the pax!
Pnavajo even rarer beast, when they go wrong they are v expensive and might be out of action for a loooong time whilst somebody finds or remanufactures a part. Avoid.
Navajo. Roomy cabin, but not much more actual grunt than an aztec. If you get a nice one with counter rotating props and the beefier engines it night be worth it. good ground clearance and robust gear.
Chieftain. As above but operating costs start to mount as you are now on the cusp of small turboprop complexity and utility.
Diamond twinstar. forget it. Nice idea but its a 2/3 person machine. When they make a 6 seater with a bigger cabin it might be worth it.
Djet is out of your price league and you cant buy one yet anyway.
If 600k really is your budget why not go for the reliability, safety and performance of a pt6. A cheyenne 1 will set you back around 55k with halftime engines(3600tbo I think?). Thats around 3 hours round trip for your mission, airconditioned, and pressurised.
Northern rockies...summer...hot and high.. engine failure piston, wife and kids on board???? same scenario in a turboprop .....??
A caveat to the above. Most twin fatal crashes are caused by loss of control after the engine failure, rather than an off airfield landing under control.
Whatever you get, get thorough(and continuing) proficiency training.
P.S I also owned an Aztec pre 421 days and I loved her to bits, built like a tank, handles like an airliner. 600k....buy 2?
Aztec. Great ship. maintenance v expensive and parts are now getting hard to find. Turbo ones especialy so. Check the single engine performance at the weights you are talking about(there isnt much!). On the plus side it has the lowest fatal accident record of any twin. It has a super cub wing and some pretty benign stall characteristics. An Aerostar will bite you with no warning.
Aztecs are great machines on grass and the undercarriage will take a beating, just watch out for prop clearance. Bloody noisy as well, get some anr headsets for the pax!
Pnavajo even rarer beast, when they go wrong they are v expensive and might be out of action for a loooong time whilst somebody finds or remanufactures a part. Avoid.
Navajo. Roomy cabin, but not much more actual grunt than an aztec. If you get a nice one with counter rotating props and the beefier engines it night be worth it. good ground clearance and robust gear.
Chieftain. As above but operating costs start to mount as you are now on the cusp of small turboprop complexity and utility.
Diamond twinstar. forget it. Nice idea but its a 2/3 person machine. When they make a 6 seater with a bigger cabin it might be worth it.
Djet is out of your price league and you cant buy one yet anyway.
If 600k really is your budget why not go for the reliability, safety and performance of a pt6. A cheyenne 1 will set you back around 55k with halftime engines(3600tbo I think?). Thats around 3 hours round trip for your mission, airconditioned, and pressurised.
Northern rockies...summer...hot and high.. engine failure piston, wife and kids on board???? same scenario in a turboprop .....??
A caveat to the above. Most twin fatal crashes are caused by loss of control after the engine failure, rather than an off airfield landing under control.
Whatever you get, get thorough(and continuing) proficiency training.
P.S I also owned an Aztec pre 421 days and I loved her to bits, built like a tank, handles like an airliner. 600k....buy 2?