Real World Small Aircraft Selection Help

[puffy]

I am attempting to identify a few, or one, small aircraft that has at least a 850 nm range.  It would be ideal if it could handle six passengers (well, pilot + 5 pax).  The Cessna 185F Skywagon peaked my curiosity but I cannot fully determine if it has that range.  

 

Do you have a suggestion for me to look at?  

 

Thanks,

 

[eaglewing7]

What is your definition of a small aircraft?  For different people it can mean a lot of different things...

 

I'll throw one suggestion out, as a proof of point...

 

Piper Seneca III, full fuel is 123 US gallons useable.  Cruise burn is approximately 20 gallons per hour.  Endurance of approximately 6 hours.  Range depends on TAS, which can vary, but say around 140KTAS.  Range of 840nm.  And thats pushing the aircraft.  Odds are with six passengers, you will not be able to load full fuel.

 

Your expectations are frankly unrealistic, unless you get into turboprops, and then you can get the range you are looking for, but the acquisition cost is much higher.  PC-12, TBMs, King Air C90 would all be options.

 

Interestingly enough, if you were to shrink your passenger expectation down, to say max. four, you could use a 172, which often have max. range upwards of 900nm.  But, the same scenario occurs where you cannot haul four people, with full fuel.  The range you've specified, and the payload, gets you into turboprop category aircraft.

[puffy]

Good information.  4 pax is doable.  Refueling stops are also acceptable.  I was trying to come up with a short list of small aircraft that would meet the requirement straight away.  Now onto list two of alternative aircraft taking into consideration smaller range.  The 6 pax would still be nice.

[eaglewing7]

As I said, there are plenty of six seat aircraft out there, but very few of them will be able to haul full fuel and have all six seats occupied.  

 

Your best bet is to get something with a few extra seats, say eight, as in a King Air C90, or the PC-12 which can be up to nine seats, would be best, but turboprops are expensive to get into, versus piston twins.  That way you have a better chance of being able to haul six people with plenty of fuel.

 

As for four seat aircraft, the same sort of issues come in, a 172 can haul four people, but generally never at full fuel.  The same goes for the Cherokee or Warrior, four seats, but generally never full tanks/people.

 

If you want to carry four people and lots of fuel, a six seat plane would be ideal (as odd as that sounds).  If you want to carry six people, eight seats, etc...

 

Of course, this will all depend on the actual aircraft, taking into consideration the weight and balance limitations, aircraft weight, etc. Passenger weights are also very important, if you want to haul around "larger" people, your going to need a bigger plane.  Six lightweights, well, you might be able to get away with it.

 

I do have to ask though, what are you looking to do with this information?  Are you looking to purchase an aircraft?  

[puffy]

I am wanting to purchase a plane.  I am putting the cart in front of the horse as I am not licensed yet though my plan is to start flying lessons this summer.  Knowing what kind of aircraft would fit the bill, so to speak, will allow me to prepare for the eventual plane I wish to acquire.  If money were not the object I think the Piaggio P180 would be the ideal aircraft.

 

Once again thank you for the information you have provided.  I have found it valuable.

[Oliver]

If you don't mind me asking, what is your budget for your purchase? It'll play quite a large role in determining which types of planes fit the characteristics you're looking for. 

[eMko]

And please mind also that 6 hour in a small airplane are not that low amount of time. If not anything other, you'd need to use at least some "range extending" tricks - not for extending a range of an airplane of course but the passengers ;-)

 

http://www.chickenwingscomics.com/?p=775

[puffy]

$250K.    

 

I understand the saying about "out flying your passengers!"

[eaglewing7]

No offence intended, but your not going to get much with that budget.  Getting a PPL will cost somewhere in the neighbourhood of $10,000-15,000 (depending on the hours it takes you to complete the licence).  I ended up spending around $12,000 up here in Canada.

 

Your commercial licence is where things start getting really expensive.  Depending on the aircraft you intend to fly, you'll want to consider a multi-engine rating (which is ridiculously expensive), but should only take around ten hours (mine ended up costing around $5000 for ten hours).  You may want to do your multi-IFR, and if you do decide to take that route, make sure you a prepared well ahead of time, because then you can do that rating in the least amount of hours, otherwise your going to spend an asinine amount of money.  An all in amount for a CPL can be upwards of $50,000-$70,000+.

 

Now, if your budget of $250,000 is separate from your training budget, you have a better chance of getting an aircraft with some capability.  But, if they are combined, you may end up spending close to half of your budget (especially if your training is done in the US).

 

Your budget realistically limits you to older airframes (which is fine, because brand new airframes are ridiculously overpriced), and you are limited to piston singles and piston twins.  Which is again fine, because you've changed your expectations already.

 

Looking on controller.com (a US/Canadian aircraft sale site), with a maximum sale price of $250,000, you can get some pretty damn nice aircraft, and at just below to just over $100,000.  Your best bet, especially when/if you get your licence, would be looking in the four to six seat range, piston single or piston twins.  Cessna 180/182/185/210/206 for the singles, or the 414 which is a twin, but is a lot of aircraft for a low time pilot.  Piper Cherokee 6/Saratoga (although I've heard they can be a real dog with a load on), Senecas (your best bet is a Seneca III, they are generally the best for hauling larger loads, whereas the newer Seneca Vs, are designed more as IFR birds, so the additional avionics make it difficult to haul larger loads).  Beech Bonanzas (plenty of beautiful older Bonnies out there), Barons (piston twin, pretty capable).  

 

The best advice I've heard is, stay below your maximum budget when buying, that way you've got room to make upgrades as necessary, maintenance, insurance (which will be high for a low time pilot, best bet is to stay away from twins until you've got more hours), hangarage, etc...

 

As for your ideal aircraft if money were no object, the Piaggio, there's a reason why there aren't many around, they are awful aircraft if you are trying to haul any sort of load.  If they are light, they are alright...

[Oliver]

No offence intended, but your not going to get much with that budget.  Getting a PPL will cost somewhere in the neighbourhood of $10,000-15,000 (depending on the hours it takes you to complete the licence).  I ended up spending around $12,000 up here in Canada.

 

Your commercial licence is where things start getting really expensive.  Depending on the aircraft you intend to fly, you'll want to consider a multi-engine rating (which is ridiculously expensive), but should only take around ten hours (mine ended up costing around $5000 for ten hours).  You may want to do your multi-IFR, and if you do decide to take that route, make sure you a prepared well ahead of time, because then you can do that rating in the least amount of hours, otherwise your going to spend an asinine amount of money.  An all in amount for a CPL can be upwards of $50,000-$70,000+.

 

Now, if your budget of $250,000 is separate from your training budget, you have a better chance of getting an aircraft with some capability.  But, if they are combined, you may end up spending close to half of your budget (especially if your training is done in the US).

 

Your budget realistically limits you to older airframes (which is fine, because brand new airframes are ridiculously overpriced), and you are limited to piston singles and piston twins.  Which is again fine, because you've changed your expectations already.

 

Looking on controller.com (a US/Canadian aircraft sale site), with a maximum sale price of $250,000, you can get some pretty damn nice aircraft, and at just below to just over $100,000.  Your best bet, especially when/if you get your licence, would be looking in the four to six seat range, piston single or piston twins.  Cessna 180/182/185/210/206 for the singles, or the 414 which is a twin, but is a lot of aircraft for a low time pilot.  Piper Cherokee 6/Saratoga (although I've heard they can be a real dog with a load on), Senecas (your best bet is a Seneca III, they are generally the best for hauling larger loads, whereas the newer Seneca Vs, are designed more as IFR birds, so the additional avionics make it difficult to haul larger loads).  Beech Bonanzas (plenty of beautiful older Bonnies out there), Barons (piston twin, pretty capable).  

 

The best advice I've heard is, stay below your maximum budget when buying, that way you've got room to make upgrades as necessary, maintenance, insurance (which will be high for a low time pilot, best bet is to stay away from twins until you've got more hours), hangarage, etc...

 

As for your ideal aircraft if money were no object, the Piaggio, there's a reason why there aren't many around, they are awful aircraft if you are trying to haul any sort of load.  If they are light, they are alright...

Yeah that's why I wanted to double check what the budget was. I couldn't have said it better myself, EagleWing. The budget aspect first striked me when the PC12 was brought up. You won't pay less than 1-1.5 mil for a decent one (and that's being VERY conservative). They go up to over 2 mil USD. 

Not to mention, if your budget isn't separate and you're looking at a twin, you'll be paying a significant amount more for twin training. At my flight school the 172 with G1000 is around 169 with fuel, and the Seneca is $289. I'd suggest going for a single engine as well before you venture in the twin territory. It's best to become a great single engine pilot before tackling on multi engines. 

[eaglewing7]

The budget aspect first striked me when the PC12 was brought up. You won't pay less than 1-1.5 mil for a decent one (and that's being VERY conservative). They go up to over 2 mil USD. 

 

And around $4,000,000.00 new, the same goes for the King Air lineup.  Although, you could pickup a C90 for around $500,000-800,000.

 

 

 

Not to mention, if your budget isn't separate and you're looking at a twin, you'll be paying a significant amount more for twin training.

 

I wouldn't necessarily suggest purchasing an aircraft before you begin your training, especially since some people very quickly realize that they don't want to, or cannot become pilots (there are a variety of reasons why this happens).  For just getting your PPL, you may as well just rent a schools plane, and then when you are done your licence, purchase what ever piston single you are interested in.  If you want to get a twin, get your multi-engine rating in a similar twin, or purchase the twin, and get trained in your own aircraft.

 

 

 

It's best to become a great single engine pilot before tackling on multi engines. 

 

There's no reason why you couldn't get your PPL, and then move straight into multis.  The only challenge going into multi-engine aircraft, and this is really type dependant, is generally learning to deal with turbochargers (most nowadays are automatic waste gates anyway), constant speed/full feathering propellers (which are fairly easy to operate, but are fairly complex to gain a good working understanding of), and retractable landing gear (and not just remembering to raise and lower it, but also knowing how it works, and how to trouble shoot when something breaks).  The other issue most people have is getting used to handling an aircraft that has a GTOW upwards of 6,000 pounds (when they've been flying 152s at 1670 pounds GTOW, and 172s at 2400 pounds GTOW), and one that cruises 50+ knots faster, and lands damn near at cruising speed for most training planes.

 

I should also mention that just because you get a multi-engine rating, doesn't mean you are really qualified or capable of handling one as PIC solo.  With ten hours of multi time in my logbook, I was more than capable of getting a great mark on the flight test, and completing the exercises/drills in a competent manner, but I wouldn't want to try and go out and fly the aircraft by myself without more time on type.

Edited June 26, 2014 by eaglewing7

[puffy]

Thank you for the excellent information provided.  It has made me reconsider the tools of my goal but not the goal!  I am researching flight schools now and hope to have something lined up in the next month.  My intent is for personal travel and not commercial in the sense of transporting paying passengers but that does exclude the sport pilot class.

 

I may resurrect this thread as questions arise.

 

Once again, thank you.

[Hangar]

Don't forget to factor in the cost of annual fuel, maintenance, fees & insurance...for both the plane and keeping your private ticket current....deep pockets are typically in order.