I believe a Yak 18T can squeeze 3 little ones across the back?
Good for short-field as well

The seats are a bit hard, but you can just flip it inverted to relieve any numbness:ok:

Without wanting to commit thread drift;

There's lots of Piper, Supercub, Cessna reports as well. Should we assume they're badly built too?

If you flew a Maule once only, then surely you're not best placed to pass judgement on it? If an owner of such an aircraft is ready to sing it's praises, I would count that more valuable advice.

There are, according to G-INFO, 31 Maules currently on the UK register. There's only 38 Mooneys and 30 Barons too, but I don't think it could be said that there's a lack of a market for those types in Europe either.

Now back to the original question! ;)

What about a Cherokee Six? You said you wanted to stay away from 6-seaters due cost, but prehaps a fixed-gear, non-turbo version would compete in operating/purchase costs with something like a Cessna 210 etc.

Also depends a bit on how long you intend to keep the plane. Little Ones don't stay little for long !

Other than that, I'd probably go down the C206/210 route. Easier to load than a Cherokee 6 (might be a factor convincing management ;) ), good views and great all-round a/c.

The Maule is a very well built aircraft, and a very proven one, too. Nothing experimental about it. They're strong, they work well in rough conditions, are excellent short field machines.

The airframe is seldom disparaged by those who know what they're talking about, and well respected by those who who do.

Can anyone offer operating cost comparisons between a TB20 and C206 and C210? Also any info on a C182 carrying a 5th seat?
Enough on the Maule please! I am sure those who love 'em, love em', and those who don't, don't.

I fly the 182 quite a bit. While it's a great a/c, frankly I don't think it is suitable for the mission profile you propose. The baggage area is not much larger than on a 172 and the 5th seat would take up half of that. Touring with 5 in a 182? Not really an option.

I can't let that one go!
 

9.5 gph, at 7000', 120 kts TAS.

Okay, it's not 140, or 180 - but then it doesn't cost the same to buy something that quick (with 4-5 seats) either.

It is fantastic in Africa or Alaska, it is also good in Europe etc.

Ask about, they have a great reputation (for their cost) - apples to apples, please! Mine's a 1995, 1700h on the tach, panel mount gps, dual navcom, constant speed prop, cost was comfortably under USD60K.

For our original poster, for Eur100K he gets, in all but name, a new airframe. Or he spends 80K on aircraft, plus his FAA IR, plus all the electronics he can get in there, plus costs of flying it back, plus taking the wife for a 5* week to the Bahamas to convince her that it doesn't look so bad.

Sam.

PS at the risk of going 'subjective', I also like how she looks!;)

Go for a PA32 Saratoga / Lance (great range if you don't load all the PAX), a Bonanza F33A (very nice to fly, lower autonomy, 5th seat as an option), or a C210... or if you can afford it, a P210, then you'll get better IFR capability.

Any owners of aforementioned types have any operating cost spreadsheets to pm me? All info greatly appreciated. looking at private G-reg or N-reg, 200 hrs pa.

Apparently Robin DR 400/180 or DR 500 can have a 5th seat option - any views on these?

Flown them, but not much. From memory (been a while) beautiful a/c to fly, great vis (important for the little pax) and rather spacious. Could work for you.

I second the TB20 but I don't think all have 5 seats officially. Mine is a 2002 TB20GT and there are just 2 seat belts in the back.

Reportedly some U.S. owners have removed the middle seat belt because it saves on insurance premiums (fewer passenger seats).

Otherwise, the TB20 is a great plane, the best of the lot of you want something "nice" and very capable.

However, for long legs (I don't mean womens' legs) you need to consider the creature comfort. A 5-seater will have no room to move about if you have 5 crammed in there. I fly many 5+ hour legs with my girlfriend and she often likes to climb in the back seat and have a sleep, or make some food, or just have a stretch. Or use the "loo" (the plastic bottle thingy) with some dignity. Anyway, with survival gear (a raft, a bag with some stuff like a GPS and a radio/EPIRB) that's one seat gone.

One ends up with a much bigger and much more expensive to operate plane...

Re operating cost, this depends much on age. An aluminium airframe should cost next to nothing for the first 15 years or so, assuming it has not been maintained by apes (quite an assumption especially if you take it to big JAR/EASA maint companies). So it's a tradeoff between a new/newish plane and low maint costs, and an old one with less spent up front but lots and lots spent regularly afterwards.

Euro 100k might buy a right old heap. Any IFR 4/5 seater for Euro 100k is going to be in a state. A good TB20 is 2x that.

I would dispute that, especially with fuel prices going the way they are market values are dropping.

I paid considerably less than Euro 200K for my TB20 - it's not a GT variant, but it's no heap either as a few people here will know. I know of a very nice example for sale in the UK for Euro 134K at current exchange rates - and that's a '98 model.

I agree CM and in fact once flew in yours but you got that one cheap because the last-1 owner was most keen to sell. That plane was priced about 30% below MV, clearly for an immediate sale.

Euro 100k is a bit tight especially allowing for some work needing to be done.