If I waited a couple years, my budget would likely be larger. I just don’t want to wait to until my kids are too big to want to hang out with me before I make the move to a larger, more safe and more capable airplane.

By owner operator standards, I have a relatively meager and strict budget. My business doesn’t allow me to depreciate my airplane. I have paid a small fortune maintaining my 421C at TAS and currently wrapping up an extensive Garmin avionics upgrade that cost almost as much as the airplane and will be the nicest panel money can buy. The common sense part of my brain says to tap the breaks and wait a year or 2 when my budget can tolerate more airplane but, that’s no fun and not the BT way!

I kicked the tires on a 501SP and spoke with Tarver once or twice. I do like the flexibility of being able to get in and out of very short runways. My family and I travel for fun and often make spontaneous trips based off what they are learning about in school. Book report on New Hampshire, learning about Lincoln prompts a trip to Springfield, etc.

How short?

The accel go distance in a 421C (1976 model) on a 30 C (only 86 F) day at sea level is 12,210 ft. Wow!

In a 501SP, the accel go distance is 3530 ft.

Landing, over 50 ft obstacle, 421C is 2340 ft, 501SP is 2410 ft, essentially the same, and the 501SP number improves with use of TRs.

Both planes at max weights.

In ISA conditions, 15 C, 0 MSL:

421C accel go: 5000 ft.

501SP accel go: 2930 ft

421C landing: 2300 ft

501SP landing: 2330 ft (no TRs)

When I traded my MU2 for a Citation, I thought I would have to give up some short runways.

Nope.

I did lose turf runway capability in my V, but the 501SP is rated for turf.

Outside of turf, I doubt you can find a runway you would be comfortable with in the 421C that I couldn't use in the Citation.

KLUM landing runway 36 (3470 ft) and using less than half of it, and I wasn't very aggressive.



Mike C.

Wow I guess I didn’t realize the numbers were that close between a 421C and a 501SP. That video of yours is quite impressive! I can’t believe you could stop that quickly!

Another consideration with the TC & 501SP would be range. Many of the TC have long range fuel tanks eliminating a need for a fuel stop. The majority of my flights are 500NM so it wouldn’t matter but I do like to go to Florida several times a year and a 501 with my whole family would likely need a fuel stop at roughly 1000-1100NM trip. Also, 2 of my kids a very young (2 years and a newborn) so they have lots of stuff. TC has so much storage. 501SP is a little tight on space.

you might want to reconsider the MU2. Mine has been pretty economical maintenance wise. $10-12K per year for 100/200hr inspections, $16K for a 600hr inspection. Only one unscheduled event in 4 1/2 years of ownership, that was $3K. In fairness I have a Hot Section due this year along with a 600hr inspection, so I am looking at $100K or more. The good news is hot section intervals on TPE331 engines are 1800hrs and this is for all of them. I think that after this year it is unlikely I will be looking at this amount for major expenses for a while. You are in Ohio, close to the factory service center in Aiken SC. You are also close to Bruce Byerly for Commander service as well FWIW. MU2s are a better ride in turbulence due to the high wing loading. No expensive calendar items like gear overhauls either. They are still very well supported by the factory despite the last ones being made in 1986. Mitsubishi is putting on a PROP seminar in September in Dallas for folks interested in MU2s. You could learn a lot about them as well as talk to owners to get their experiences.

Jeff Axel

I have a mental block with MU2. My uncle who is also a pilot, had a good friend that had a tragic ending in a MU2. Hard to get my mind around owning one at this point.

I have been in touch with Bruce. He has given me some good information. I’m also making a trip over the Eagle Creek on Tues. Apparently, they are also into the TC.

Chase,

You have just spent big dollars upgrading your 421.

I can only assume it’s the panel you always wanted.

Keep it.

If you are worried about S/E performance, commit to flying with family 500-1000# under max gross.

Sure your range will be limited (by choice), but regular folks don’t want to spend more than a couple hours away from a water fountain and a bathroom.

If one of your well maintained engines has a bad day, that light, that loss of power won’t be as big a deal.

Worst case, 100K and you are back in business.

Turbine engines are great, smooth and reliable, but when something goes badly (to include ingesting a bird) 100K is where things start.

You have a plane you can afford.

Best case, you find a buyer who will pay a fraction of what you have invested in your 421, and you find a seller willing to sell a turboprop in your (lowish) price range, that won’t have the avionics you really want, and the odds are good the maintenance it’ll need in the first year you own it will be more than what you’re paying for your 421.

That’s my .02.

I don't usually get on the brakes that much, so when I do, it is surprising. Even so, I wasn't doing the max braking. The brakes are very different than what you are used to.

The approach speeds are also quite low, often in the 90s and sometimes high 80s. That contributes to less runway. It is much slower than an MU2 on approach.

Takeoffs are quick and short. Here is a departure on solid ice 2 inches thick on a cold day:



Yes, we had enough runway by the book in case we had to abort. The brakes held to 65% N1 so we had more surface friction than you might think. Ground roll was 1200 ft, zero to liftoff/100 knots in 16 seconds. Performance like this may cause involuntary expressions of joy.


KFDY to KEYW (furthest point in FL) is 1000 nm, so anything closer in FL would be easier, like KSRQ is 820 nm. You should be able to do just about anywhere in FL with high reliability in the 501SP. Secret is to fly high and to use long range cruise. You are still flying way faster than the turboprops so winds make less of a difference (but you will still curse them even in a jet!).


Nose and aft baggage are pretty generous, but not pressurized. You can put quite a lot of stuff in the cabin. I really doubt it wouldn't do your missions.

There is a 12,500 lbs gross up option for the 501SP so you likely don't run out of useful load.

500 nm is reasonable in a small jet, it doesn't save you much over a 300 knot turboprop, but the real reason is comfort and safety.

Mike C.

A 1980 421C has the trailing link gear and usually weighs in around 5200 lbs empty. Gross is 7450 lbs. 1000 lbs under gross is 6450 lbs. You have 1250 lbs useful load. You can load your family, bags, and the reserve fuel, and then you have no fuel for the trip.

Any family trip of non trivial distance is going to be near gross for the 421C. This means engine failure at certain times will be challenging.


Turbine insurance usually includes FOD protection, which includes ingesting a bird.

Ingesting a bird rarely happens. You aren't at bird altitudes very much in turbine equipment.

Turbine engines rarely fail.

When they do have problems, many times it is not that big of a bill. Very few times does it involve major parts of the rotating group where the money is. It can happen, but it is highly unusual.


Having a plane setup the way you want is good and keeping it surely is an option. The 421C is probably the best traveling airplane burning avgas.

But don't be scared away from turbine engines by piston pilots who expect engines to fail often.

Turbine airplanes break down far less often than piston ones. That feature alone is a "speed" of sorts, dispatch reliability. A bicycle has better ground speed than a piston airplane in the shop.

Mike C.

Logically, you are completely correct. I should just hold on to my 421C. I have had the avionics upgrade from hell. I will share the full story some other time. This is likely making me hate the 421C more than it deserves but there is no question a turbine is better. Finding one that won’t eat through cash in maintenance and upgrades is the trick. I likely spend 30-40k per year maintaining my 421C. Does that seem to be in the ball park for conquests, TC & 501SP? The unknowns and unexpected are understandably much higher in those airplanes.

Cheyenne will do it. My mission is my wife + 4 kids under age of 12. Plenty of space for everyone+bags, fits in a larger T-hangar and will also fit your budget, especially in terms of capital cost. 240-250kts (depending on temps) at FL180-FL240 burning ~400lbs/hr is what I generally see. Also a good stepping stone if you ultimately think you want to move into a single pilot Citation as they are a cost effective way to build 500+ hours of turbine time.

I went from a 421 to a King Air E90 w/135s and have never looked back. I’m pretty sure my cost per mile is lower on the KA than in the 421, and I know it’s in the shop a LOT less.

Maintenance will be about the same with the same shop for the two airframes, except for the damn gear inspection. That will add $35k every 6 years.

The King Air just works. Not the fastest airplane out there, but the cabin is amazing. Easily the most comfortable plane I fly, especially for tall passengers & pilots.

I also fly and instruct in Citations (anything in the 500 series) and the 441. Citations are great, but the cabin is tight and they burn a LOT of fuel. The 441s… fast and insanely efficient (close to 300kts on ~500lbs/hour) with crazy range, and they can haul a great load. However, they have gotten quite expensive unless you’re willing to take on a project bird. The biggest downside are the damn fuel computers. I fly several 441s and the black magic that’s between the power levers and the motors is… well, it’s interesting.

For a family hauler, it’s really really hard to beat a King Air.

Robert

Respectfully, if I was going to make that half step into a turbine, I would probably stick with the Cessna line and go with a 425. I prefer if I was going to make another step up, to move into a largely improved safety, performance such as a TC 840, conquest II or maybe reconsider a 501SP.

I like King Air’s and considered buying before I bought my 421C. My main complaint with King Air is there are so many that seem to have been ridden hard and put away wet. You really need someone who knows them well to do a good prebuy before you commit. They also have gotten pretty expensive. Good luck finding something good under 1M. What I love about the TC 840 is crazy performance, ~300kts, very economical, 5000 TBO’s, enormous cabin, amazing useful load, easily fly 1000NM, good support in my area (Close to Eagle Creek & Bruce Byerly). They are a stretch capex wise for me. Most go in the 1.3-1.4M range. Maybe I can get lucky and nab one in the 1.1-1.2M range.

That's about what I spend for my Citation V so far.

I post my numbers here on BT. For maintenance and parts:

2022: $42,794 (phase 1-4 inspections, fixing latent bugs, ACM overhaul)
2023: $21,845 (hydraulic AOG event, 10,000 hour inspections)
2024: $12,645 (tires, battery, no major inspections)

I am due for phase 1-5 this year, so probably $60K this year, maybe? Assuming that, I will average $34K per year. I also have about $8,000 of spares inventory (set of tires, oil, ignitors, misc) that is included in the above totals but not used yet. Planning ahead lowers costs.

Once I get past the phase 1-5 this year, then very light maintenance the next 2 years, then phase 1-4, then light maintenance for another 2 years again, then a phase 1-5 again (in 2031, 6 years from now). The 3/6 year inspection cycle is a huge benefit.

I am more hands on and involved than most owners, so my numbers are not typical for the hands off owner. See if you can find a local shop you can work with, there isa lot of Citation experience out there.

My V doesn't have onerous SIDs like the Conquests does. I went through the 10,000 hour inspections (in 2023) for a total of about $6K.

Fuel dominates my expenses which is good since it scales with use. I fly less, it cost me less, I fly more, it costs me more. Sunk capital costs you whether you fly or don't fly. Last year my fuel average was $4.35, so don't look at list prices for Jet-A, few pay that.

Mike C.

Not worth it. You will soon wish you had something faster/better.

The cruise speed should at least start with a "3" so you get at least 200 knots groundspeed in a 100 knot headwind. King Air 90 in a 100 knot headwind? No thanks.

The 441 is an awesome plane, so you have to decide if you can swing the purchase price. Probably takes $1.5M to get a decent one, which is actually down somewhat from 2-3 year ago, as most rubines are.

Decent 501SP is probably $600K. $900K cheaper than a 441 is $45K to $90K per year in capital expense (5% to 10% return on money) and that helps offset the operating costs.

You don't know where the market is going, but if I sold my Citation V right now, I'd probably get back every dollar I have spent on it, operating expenses included. Free flying a jet! But, not for sale, it is a keeper.

Mike C.