Tom,

I fully understand your point and agree. I'm just saying that the "nickel and dime" maintenance items on my airplane were not from the turbos or pressurization. I'm not saying that my airplane was a maintenance hog by any means, it just always seemed to be something that needed attention; hydraulics would lead the list. Even that was slop simple with most parts available from the NAPA store, but it was recurrent.

Jg

I can pretty comfortably say that I spend two to three times the labor on the nickel and dime items on the piston twins (my Aerostar, customers C-414 and 421C) than I did on my customers C-441. Almost all of that time was related to the engines and related systems.

John, I think you may have taken my comment a little bit the wrong way. I meant it to be somewhat tongue and cheek while being factual at the same time. My only point is, all aircraft, not just Aerostars, will definitely be more expensive to maintain as systems are added and the aircraft gets older. Many try to escape this truism, however, it’s just not possible. Add more things just means more things to break. Even if they are non moving parts they will eventually corrode or decay over time and this will cost. It is what it is. No escaping it. I was not trying to single you out personally.
While I wish I had all of the benefits that pressurization and turbos provide, I love the simplicity of the NA Aerostar. What I don’t have can’t break. What can’t break will never cost me anything. One of these days I may have a 700 and that is the only model I will get if and when the time comes. Right now I’m enjoying the benefits the 600 model provides for me.

Tom,

We are in complete agreement.

Whether you are talking about cars, boats, or airplanes, age becomes a huge factor in maintenance, especially with the electrical system. Hydraulic and electrical gremlins made up the bulk of the maintenance gremlins I chased with the 601P.

When I refurbished both the 180 and 195, I spent a small fortune having every wire in the airplanes replaced with new.

What you say about each system adding cost is dead on. Adding four turbochargers on the A* is not far removed from adding a 3rd engine. I watched two friends, each of whom bought nice 58P's damn near go to the poor house trying to keep them in the air. They could both afford it but they rarely had access to a flyable airplane.

The A* was better, but still, I don't care to go back to the hassle of chasing mechanical gremlins.

Jg

I hear you John. They are old machines. And yes, I have replaced just about everything. Engines, props, all new interior and all glass avionics, fuel hoses, hydraulic lines, hydraulic hoses, all cables, winglets, wing extensions, complete airframe inspection replacement of cracked or corroded parts, six puck brakes, new exterior paint design, all new led's throughout interior, exterior, rebuilt Janitrol Inconel heater including replacement of all ducting, I know I've forgotten something, just can't think of it right now. Anyway, you get the point. It's pretty much a brand new airplane. But, I'll tell you, those hydraulic gremlins are a pain in the ass. I don't think you ever completely get rid of them.

Every time we had a sudden cold snap, I would go to the hangar expecting to see some hydraulic oil. I was rarely disappointed. As you know, it was nothing significant, fix when able, but still, a pain in the ***.

And the **** sagging gear doors.

All the above said, the A* is still the only pressurized, piston twin I would ever own.

Jg

In two years, never had gear door sag or any issues with the hydraulics.
Now, I had an electrical fault that took a long time to chase down and fix. I do not recall all the details except it started with a blown alternator on the left engine that spiked the power and blew out the other alternator on the right engine. This on the way home in the rain from a BT Max Knoxville get together!

After a fair amount of debugging, per the mechanics, after forty years; we discovered the factory reversed the left/right connections behind the hat rack and there was a bad over voltage breaker which disguised all sorts of issues.

Tim

I understand it was how planes were constructed at that time, but for me, hydraulics have always been a pain in the ass. Just all that ducting running around everywhere, prone to corrosion or mechanical failure on a vibrating platform. Can't win. So glad electric actuation is taking over completely. Not that they can't develop faults, but at least they're pretty much of the kind "working or not working" with not much in between.

I don't fly a lot, but I've only been unable to dispatch once in over six years. Newer and more reliable would be nice, but I can fix a lot of stuff with the difference in capital cost.

I keep trying to fall in love with A*'s and the one posted F/S recently here on BT had me tempted to try again. 240-260 kts and pressurization is very alluring. It only takes a few posts from guys who have actually run and maintained them to snap me back to reality again. I hated the never-ending maintenance on my Seneca II and the C340 I flew. I hardly recall a single flight where there wasn't some squawk to be concerned about. It's entirely the opposite experience with my SR.

If I could just jump an A* 700 from time to time and it was someone else's problem to maintain, I'd probably love it.

In five years, I cancelled three flights for mechanical reasons.

But: I never planned a major trip that I did not go out the day before for a shake down flight. Several of those ended up at the shop so I could be ready the next day.

Jg

You pay to play. There is no free ride. Cirrus isn’t even on the same planet as the Aerostar. There is not even a remote comparison. Kind of like comparing the NFL to a PeeWee league.

Pretty much anything we do has three costs: money; time; and hassle.

After 50 years of buying and owning "things" and watching others buy and own "things", I am personally enlightened. My PERSONAL conclusions.

The first decision toward a purchase is almost always monetary. "Can I afford a beach front house?" "Can I afford a Prevost RV?" "Can I afford a King Air?" Particularly early on in a person's adult life when they have little experience with "owning", a yes here seems to end the decision making process. So they purchase the item and in a fairly short time of use, learn that they really don't use it that much, "just no time". Then, they have a hurricane come through and damage the beach house or condo. OH! didn't think about that. Getting it cleaned up and repaired dominates two or three months of their life.

Then, they sell and the first consideration is likely not money, but time and hassle.

As you get older and more experienced you begin to value your time more than anything else. If you are fortunate enough to have always lived within your income, you likely can afford just about everything you ever "thought" you wanted, but you don't. You'd rather have the time and not have to worry about the next thing to break with your little used material possession.

I went from the Mooney Bravo to the Aerostar because, at the time, all three children were in the D.C. area. Low IFR over the Appalachians is not a comforting thought and I was doing it ALL THE TIME. The twin engines of the Aerostar solved that, the pressurization made the trips more comfortable, but the increase of "hassle factor" over the Bravo was ten fold.

The cost of the Aerostar was not even a consideration. We live well within our means. Getting rid of the "hassle" of the Aerostar was an emotional god send.

I love the 180 and the 195 but six hours to D.C. and an hour drive in from Manassas is a hassle. First class tickets from Memphis to Reagan and Pre-check make the trip a pretty relaxing affair. I don't miss the Aerostar but I do miss the Bravo.

Jg

Well said John. That’s kind of why I stick with my 600. I would love the speed and pressurization of a 700, however, I have also seen the costs and the hassles of owning a 700. I oscillate back and forth on this. I will fly until I die. Hopefully it will always be with an Aerostar. I can’t ever see myself downsizing unless I have to. I have never had an airplane this capable, simple and fun.
My first thought before I buy anything is do I need it and I have to prove it to myself. Then it’s do I want it more than I need it. If I get past that step then it’s can I afford to maintain it. That’s always the million dollar question. Cost of purchase is nothing compared to cost of ownership. Or, if you want to limit cost of ownership, your cost of purchase will be way up there. No free lunch.

Jg,

Get a Cirrus. Single engine, simple like the Bravo.
However; the chute pretty much does the same emotional factor as the second engine in low IFR situations.

Tim