5th seat in a single
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
From: High seas
5th seat in a single
Anyone recommend the best single to go for with 3 adults and two (very) little ones (1 & 3 yrs old)?
I want to stay away from 6 seaters and twins due to costs.
350-400 nm typical so reasonably quick, IFR capable.
I appreciate the 5th seat is not for adults.
Nothing too flash, only have 100K euro to play with.
I want to stay away from 6 seaters and twins due to costs.
350-400 nm typical so reasonably quick, IFR capable.
I appreciate the 5th seat is not for adults.
Nothing too flash, only have 100K euro to play with.
Last edited by Squeegee Longtail; 20th May 2008 at 19:35.
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 2
From: USA
You're really left with six seat options..the rear seats are often narrow enough that they're best suited for children, anyway. For the performance, trying to squeeze a lot of people into a small airplane can be a losing proposition.
A Cessna 206 or 210, or a Cherokee 6 might fit your bill nicely if you can find one in your price range.
A Cessna 206 or 210, or a Cherokee 6 might fit your bill nicely if you can find one in your price range.
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 3,077
Likes: 1
From: Oop North, UK
Try the TB10/20 nice aircraft and ideal I would say for 3 + 2. TB10 seems about your price range http://www.avbuyer.com/AircraftSales...aftResults.asp
(select Socata for manufacturer)
(select Socata for manufacturer)
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
From: High seas
Thanks Foxmoth, I understand the TB10 is 120 knots cruise? the TB20 (early models) around 140-150? Is the extra cost (purchase & operating ) worth the extra speed? any other considerations between these two (I have only flown TB9)? Is a 5th seatbelt option available?
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
From: notts
5th Seat choices
The TB10 has the fifth seat as standard. TAS 118kts but tanks holding in excess of 200ltrs which gives the aeroplane a good range.
Subject to your bladder, range can be more important than speed. The more refueling stops then the more time lost. Landing to re-fuel can be extremely time consuming. Sometimes an enroute divertion for fuel will be owing to no fuel at the destination, a real bore.
You could possiby find a good Cessna 206 which has six seats (4 + 2), has excellent range, thirsty but fast at circa 150 kts. The Cherokee 6 300 previously mentioned is a superb carrier with a very good range but is thirsty at only 130kts.
Both the Cessna 206 and the Cherokee 6 have good short field performance which may be an important consideration giving access to local strips.
For 100 euros you have a reasonable choice.
Subject to your bladder, range can be more important than speed. The more refueling stops then the more time lost. Landing to re-fuel can be extremely time consuming. Sometimes an enroute divertion for fuel will be owing to no fuel at the destination, a real bore.
You could possiby find a good Cessna 206 which has six seats (4 + 2), has excellent range, thirsty but fast at circa 150 kts. The Cherokee 6 300 previously mentioned is a superb carrier with a very good range but is thirsty at only 130kts.
Both the Cessna 206 and the Cherokee 6 have good short field performance which may be an important consideration giving access to local strips.
For 100 euros you have a reasonable choice.
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 3,077
Likes: 1
From: Oop North, UK
And you could of course go for:-
http://www.airshows.org.uk/2006/airs.../foxmoth_1.jpg
Though I will admit it falls a little short on the IFR capability!
http://www.airshows.org.uk/2006/airs.../foxmoth_1.jpg
Though I will admit it falls a little short on the IFR capability!
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 2,212
Likes: 0
From: Anywhere
Have operated a TB20 with 2 adults up front and two female adults plus female child (8 years old) in the back. Comfortable enough on a 2 hour flight between the UK and Paris. The limitation however is you can't exceed 509lbs on the rear seat (shouldn't be a problem with the scenario you post)
If you can find one within budget I would really consider the 20 over the 10 if you're going to be lifting 5 people. The extra 70HP makes all the difference in performance, plus the extra speed means they're not seated for as long.
As for Homeguards figures for the TB10 - compare that with 336 litres and 145Kts TAS. I get a fuel burn of 50l/hr @ 2500-3000ft, reducing to 43l/hr @FL110. Get a 20 and you will never look back (but after a while you do hanker after a 21
).
If you can find one within budget I would really consider the 20 over the 10 if you're going to be lifting 5 people. The extra 70HP makes all the difference in performance, plus the extra speed means they're not seated for as long.
As for Homeguards figures for the TB10 - compare that with 336 litres and 145Kts TAS. I get a fuel burn of 50l/hr @ 2500-3000ft, reducing to 43l/hr @FL110. Get a 20 and you will never look back (but after a while you do hanker after a 21
).
Professional Student
Joined: Mar 2005
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 678
Likes: 25
From: My Secret Island Lair
How about a Maule? The M-7-235 has five seats, can be outfitted with IFR kit, is reasonably quick, and can be built with either a nose or a tailwheel depending on your preference.
The new list price starts at around 120,000 euros, so you could probably pick up a decent second hand model for around 100,000 I'd guess.
http://www.mauleairinc.com/Our_Plane..._b_c/index.htm
The new list price starts at around 120,000 euros, so you could probably pick up a decent second hand model for around 100,000 I'd guess.
http://www.mauleairinc.com/Our_Plane..._b_c/index.htm
Professional Student
Joined: Mar 2005
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 678
Likes: 25
From: My Secret Island Lair
I think there are a few Maule pilots out there who will disagree with you! Care to back that up? I've never come across anything to suggest so.
Certainly the many bush pilots in the US who fly them seem to be happy with them.
Certainly the many bush pilots in the US who fly them seem to be happy with them.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,876
Likes: 1
From: Here
Hey, who's that dissin' ma Maule?!
I have an MX7 180B, land on a sixpence, cruise 120kts TAS. IFR, over 7 hours to fumes (9.5gph, 73 gals useable). I can take the family (parents, 2 kids), luggage and full fuel. In that configuration I'm getting to aft limits of cofg but still have way to play on MAUW. The 235 comes with 5 seats.
If you're not on for the tailwheel option, then get the tricycle.
Do some internet research, people are pretty happy with their Maules (and you get a LOT for your dollar/euro).
Even better, buy now in the US (dollar on the floor), fly it back (which I'm doing with mine next week) and still save a load of money. Not happy (unlikely but possible), sell it in Europe for a profit!
Sam.
I have an MX7 180B, land on a sixpence, cruise 120kts TAS. IFR, over 7 hours to fumes (9.5gph, 73 gals useable). I can take the family (parents, 2 kids), luggage and full fuel. In that configuration I'm getting to aft limits of cofg but still have way to play on MAUW. The 235 comes with 5 seats.
If you're not on for the tailwheel option, then get the tricycle.
Do some internet research, people are pretty happy with their Maules (and you get a LOT for your dollar/euro).
Even better, buy now in the US (dollar on the floor), fly it back (which I'm doing with mine next week) and still save a load of money. Not happy (unlikely but possible), sell it in Europe for a profit!
Sam.
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
From: High seas
Thanks for the Maule idea. On paper it is a great option, however it just doesn't LOOK right. My other half just said "no way I'm getting in that". That's the opinion of an aviationally ignorant passenger, but it says something.
For me planes (and boats) have to look right as they are emotionally charged purchases, and the Maule is UGLY - even more so in tricycle config.
I know that shouldn't figure in my choice, but it does!
Sorry for the offence to Maule owners, beauty is in the eye of the bill payer.
For me planes (and boats) have to look right as they are emotionally charged purchases, and the Maule is UGLY - even more so in tricycle config.
I know that shouldn't figure in my choice, but it does!
Sorry for the offence to Maule owners, beauty is in the eye of the bill payer.
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,876
Likes: 1
From: Here
Beauty could be expensive! 
You should still look at buying in the US and flying the aircraft back (estimate USD10K for the flight back, add that to the price and make your comparison). Check, but I believe you can still import via Denmark at 0% vat.
N register also means FAA IR if you want to take that option later.
Sam.
You should still look at buying in the US and flying the aircraft back (estimate USD10K for the flight back, add that to the price and make your comparison). Check, but I believe you can still import via Denmark at 0% vat.
N register also means FAA IR if you want to take that option later.
Sam.
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
From: the air please
Do some internet research,
Sorry but your 9.5gph is what ? at 50% power ? Doing 80KTAS ? Tell me what your fuel burn is with that lousy 120KTAS ? 15gph ?
I flew a Maule once, this is nothing for Europe, Africa maybe. The poster asked for reasonably quick, IFR, 5 seater, that is not the Maule.
About the dollar, that is for every plane, prices are dropping DAILY... sellers are screaming for a deal, you can get 30-40% off asking price these days.
sell it in Europe for a profit!