Thinking of upgrading  
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Tower Hobbies
Enter up to 4 keywords or Tower stock numbers
Logged in as Guest



Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
       


Mustang Exhaust - Kit
Seller:  tony-howard
Details:   $35.00   |  9/21/2008   |  Classified Ad
We will rotate YOUR AD in this spot if you select "Forum Featured" when placing or editing your ad!

All Forums >> Radios, Batteries, Clubhouse and more >> Full Scale planes, cars, helis, boats >> Airplanes - Full Scale >> Thinking of upgrading
Page: [1] 2   next >   >>  

Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 5:18:21 AM   
DAN_CFIIMEI


 

Posts: 140
Joined: 3/22/2004
From: Rice, MN, USA
Status: offline 		I currently own a C172R and a PA28-140, and I am thinking I am wanting to sell them/ trade them in to upgrade to a twin. What I am asking is, I am looking for a twin engine plane, that gets good range- 1000+nm would be nice, and would after trade in, be less then 200,000 dollar difference. I would like it to be a six seater, any ideas?


Note- I was quoted 137,000 on the C172 and 31,500, for the PA28-140.

< Message edited by crasher_2009 -- 8/31/2006 5:24:31 AM >

_____________________________

What's Flying?
       Post #: 1

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 5:52:49 AM   
Taildragger726



Posts: 777
Joined: 1/28/2004
From: N Ft Myers, FL, USA
Status: offline 		B58 Baron,,,or a B55. Big engines or small, your choice.
400 series Cessna ??

< Message edited by Taildragger726 -- 8/31/2006 5:54:18 AM >


_____________________________

Also known as N726AC

(in reply to DAN_CFIIMEI)
       Post #: 2

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 6:36:36 AM   
Robby



Posts: 2071
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: SheCarGo, Sillynoise, IL, USA
Status: offline 		My choice would be Cessna 310...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_310

http://www.aircraftdealer.com/aircraft_for_sale/Cessna_310___320/146/page-1.htm

The above will provide basic specs of various years and current market on various years..

Not to be rude here,, but hopefully you have enough hours with rating to be able to afford the insurance..

_____________________________

You won't find Nirvanna if you don't have any nerve ...

(in reply to Taildragger726)
       Post #: 3

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 10:22:42 AM   
DT56


 

Posts: 156
Joined: 3/15/2005
From: Lucedale, MS, USA
Status: offline 		I like the Aerostar and Cessna 310R.

But, if you're a low time multiengine pilot, don't overlook the late model Piper Aztec F.
The Aztec has great low speed handling qualities and good short field performance. The F model has a different horizontal stab from earlier models and has better handling. It's also available with ice protection, an important consideration for your neck of the woods. The only "problem" with the Aztec, is that it's just not as "sexy" as some of the other twins.

Robby mentioned a very important consideration with the insurance. Insurance requirements are incredibly stringent these days. Without significant experience (usually in type), the insurance company may require you have a check pilot with you for considerable time. If on the other hand, you've logged 1000+ hours of multi, with at least 250 in type, you can probably be insured at "reasonable" expense.

Light twins can be a great comfort at night, over water or IFR. If flown carefully by a proficient pilot, it can provide remarkable utility. Mismanage an emergency, it will surprise you how quickly it will kill you.

A light twin is not twice as safe as a single engine plane. It is more than twice as dangerous.

Good luck with the decision!

DT56

(in reply to Robby)
       Post #: 4

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 12:36:42 PM   
Robinaire



Posts: 759
Joined: 9/7/2002
From: West Palm Beach, FL, USA
Status: offline 		I'll go along with DT56 on the Aztec bit. When I was an American dealer & FBO back in early 70s, I variously used Aztec, 310, Aero Commander 560F, and Twin Commanche & Twin Beech for charter/light freight. The 310 and Commander were, at least to me, a bit "twitchy" in weather. The Aztec, though not quite as fast as the 310, was like a comfortable old shoe! Actually, in the Cessna 310 line, if you need the seating, the Skynight would be worth a look too. But I'm definitely an Aztec fan. Lee Robinson W. Palm Beach, FL

(in reply to DT56)
       Post #: 5

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 2:35:31 PM   
Tripower455



Posts: 402
Joined: 1/14/2005
From: Naples, FL, USA
Status: offline 		Keep in mind that just because it has 6 seats, you may not be able to actually carry 6 people, fuel and baggage.........

I have always like the Beech products. The B-58 is my favorite non warbird piston airplane......

(in reply to Robinaire)
       Post #: 6

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 2:54:21 PM   
Flyfalcons



Posts: 6100
Joined: 7/27/2002
From: Bonney Lake, WA, USA
Status: offline 		The 310R is a fantastic light twin! I flew one for 500 hours a couple years ago; it's a wonderful pilot's airplane. However, I will say that 1000 miles is not within the capability of the airplane, especially if you need an alternate. With full tanks you are looking at about a 600 mile range plus reserve, and a payload with full tanks of roughly 1000 pounds. The two rear seats are a little small for two grown adults, especially on longer flights. Overall though I loved flying the 310R normal and turbo versions. If you really are planning on taking six people a thousand miles, you may want to consider a 400 series Cessna like the 414 if your budget allows; it's roomier and more capable. The 340 might also be something to look into.

_____________________________

Ryan Winslow

Cub flying - the new EXTREME SPORT!!! (evarrr)

(in reply to Tripower455)
       Post #: 7

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 3:18:24 PM   
normgoyer


 

Posts: 723
Joined: 5/18/2006
From: Apple Valley, CA, USA
Status: offline 		Yes, the trend is not to twins. I highly suggest you check out the Piper line of 6 place recip powered aircraft and the Cessna 206 series. Twins have proven to be not as safe as singles. If you need the twin time for an ATP job get the smallest oldest one you can find, an Apacge, Aztec or 310 and build the time and dump it. Insurance and fuel costs plus added repair costs make twins a bad deal. Out in SoCal we have folks that are having a very hard time unloading their twins, Norm

(in reply to DAN_CFIIMEI)
       Post #: 8

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 3:23:31 PM   
DAN_CFIIMEI


 

Posts: 140
Joined: 3/22/2004
From: Rice, MN, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Robby

Not to be rude here,, but hopefully you have enough hours with rating to be able to afford the insurance..


I fly charter, I had done some F/O programs, with the B737 and Lear 45 after college to get some experience, but just found it was kind of not what I wanted. Then my father-in-law said that he would like to use me as his pilot for his king air 350, I accepted, but then he ended up getting rid of it, because it used too much fuel. I prefer to just fly light twins now along with Cessna Caravans. Initially I started my rating by flying the 310, so I have time in it. I went to college to be a pilot, but found the pay was so bad, I went off to law school (just graduated a few years ago from Law School). Now I do both, I am mainly into law now, though. I have plenty of Multi. Engine time.

And yes I know just because it is a six seater, doesn't mean it can hold that many. I just want the performance of it.

_____________________________

What's Flying?

(in reply to Robby)
       Post #: 9

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 5:05:50 PM   
DAN_CFIIMEI


 

Posts: 140
Joined: 3/22/2004
From: Rice, MN, USA
Status: offline 		What about a Piper Navajo?

_____________________________

What's Flying?

(in reply to DAN_CFIIMEI)
       Post #: 10

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 6:40:41 PM   
DT56


 

Posts: 156
Joined: 3/15/2005
From: Lucedale, MS, USA
Status: offline 		The Piper Navajo series are great aircraft, with good load carrying ability and handling for a cabin class twin. That's one of the reasons they are so popular with part 135 freight operators.

The PA31-325CR (325HP counter rotating engines) is an especially easy handling airplane. If you need a little more room and load carrying ability, the Chieftain PA31-350 (350 HP engines) is a great choice. They are both terrific instrument platforms, with ice protection and radar available. Finding a low time airframe is becoming increasingly difficult due to it's extensive employment in the charter industry.

The Navajo series are classified as medium twins, as such the operating and maintenance costs are considerably greater than probably any light twin. A thorough pre-purchase evaluation of a particular aircraft is definitely in order (unless money isn't an object!).

Colemill of Nashville, used to offer performance enhancements that add some utility and value to the Navajo.

One of our local trial lawyers, Dick Scruggs, used to operate a Navajo before moving on to Citations, Lears and finally a Gulfstream.

I know it's a tough decision, but someone's got to make it!

Enjoy!

DT56



(in reply to DAN_CFIIMEI)
       Post #: 11

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 6:43:21 PM   
DAN_CFIIMEI


 

Posts: 140
Joined: 3/22/2004
From: Rice, MN, USA
Status: offline 		Ok, so I looked through some different publications, and conclude the following:

1- All these following aircraft either meet or exceed my range requirements, along with my price range.
2- With all of these because of the price, depending on which one I choose, price wise, I could still keep my Cherokee.
3- These planes, although I guess, some maybe single engine, it still meets my requirements, but I would prefer a twin.

These are the aircraft:

Beech 50 Twin Bonanza
Beech 60 Duke
Cessna 335/340
Cessna 206T
Piper Navajo
Piper Cherokee Six

So, which one would you chose, and why?


_____________________________

What's Flying?

(in reply to DAN_CFIIMEI)
       Post #: 12

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 7:04:42 PM   
MTT



Posts: 558
Joined: 1/18/2002
From: West Chester, OH, USA
Status: offline 		Most of the above named twins would be a good choice, with one exception : The Aerostar !
Do your self a favor, and stay away from it !

I have worked in GA maintenance for approx. 15 years, some of it on aerostars ( unfortunately ), and they are a nightmare, maintenance wise.

Also, I would stay away from the Beech Duke, it is a very nice airplane, but the engines are very expensive to maintain, and rarely make their TBO.

Best choice for you, IMHO, would be the Cessna 310, not as sexy as the Beech Baron, but also not as pricey, and it's a good, solid aircraft, easy to maintain, and parts are plentiful.


_____________________________

Michael
I care about rising air !

My HP

(in reply to DAN_CFIIMEI)
       Post #: 13

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 7:09:23 PM   
Flyfalcons



Posts: 6100
Joined: 7/27/2002
From: Bonney Lake, WA, USA
Status: offline 		Plus 310 prices are down now because gas is so expensive.

_____________________________

Ryan Winslow

Cub flying - the new EXTREME SPORT!!! (evarrr)

(in reply to MTT)
       Post #: 14

RE: Thinking of upgrading - 8/31/2006 7:32:06 PM   
normgoyer


 

Posts: 723
Joined: 5/18/2006
From: Apple Valley, CA, USA
Status: offline 		Hi Michael, when I owned the four FBOs we loved Dukes, turbo Barons, Aerostars and even Mooneys because they kept our mechanics busy and helped us pay our bills every month. Everything is relative. Norm

(in reply to MTT)