Tony,

My plane is primarily a business tool, too, but no airline can match it for time, money, or convenience.

In many cases, I can do a day trip for a business meeting, with 3-4 employees, where doing it by airline would take 3 days. Just in that one instance I have saved ALL of my yearly training in man days among my staff.

Recent example is a day trip to DC:

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N305 ... /KEVV/KHEF
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N305 ... /KHEF/KEVV

Departed 7:30 am CST, was back home 9:00 pm CST, and spent 9+ hours on the ground.

Just try and do that on the airlines as a day trip.

Or, as I will soon do, EVV to OKC. The earliest airline flight comes in at noon and takes 6 hours. In my plane, I can be there at 7:30 am if I takeoff at the same time, and that doesn't count an hour for security, so I can sleep later! When I get to OKC, rental car is on the ramp, load and go. That's way faster than commercial. Sometimes the GA airport is substantially closer to my final destination as well (though this is not true in DC or OKC, alas).

There's no way the airlines are cheaper or faster when looking at my total missions per year when you include the secondary costs and time associated with working around the airline schedule and limitations. If I lived right next to KATL, KDFW, KORD, etc, that might be different, but I don't, and the cost to live in those areas more than pays for an airplane here.

In addition, I can take things we me that I could never have on an airline flight (and that was the case with the DC trip and will be true for OKC as well).

The airlines are late 20% of the time and cancel or divert 2% of their flights (which means a hub round trip has an 8% chance of suffering a cancellation). My record is way better having canceled only 1 flight for any reason (including weather) in the past 8 years.

Mike C.

For reference of fat prop:

A fat prop and a proud Dad... Nice looking plane, great little copilot, and you seem to know your college football teams. What's not to like!

And then there are the lawsuits....

I'm in the same boat. As a company policy, our employees get too chose if they ride or not - no questions asked (i.e. no one feels like they are forced to fly). They can elect to travel by airline, and we don't fill the airplane with key employees. But it is a risk nonetheless.

Thanks, Alex, but I'm a proud Father-in-law and grandad! I'm not that young or good looking. That's Slone, who's married to my daughter Alex (her name), and their son, Tucker Wyatt.

And then there are the lawsuits....

I'm in the same boat. As a company policy, our employees get too chose if they ride or not - no questions asked (i.e. no one feels like they are forced to fly). They can elect to travel by airline, and we don't fill the airplane with key employees. But it is a risk nonetheless.

My whole business is a risk. If it wasn't, I'm not doing something right.

I never get involved in a project that looks like a sure thing. By the time all the risk is gone, the reward is too. I leave those for others.

Among my risks, a plane crash of top people is an insignificant factor, and something the business could survive in any case.

Mike C.

Same here.

We have bought airline tickets for someone who would prefer not to fly in the company plane.

This tendency is far less prevalent today in the turboprop than it was in the piston single, however. In some cases, this means going the night before or day after to make airline schedules work, so the benefit is sometimes significant.

The most common case is an employee spouse who objects, not the employee themselves. No problem, we respect that decision and do not try to convince them. Over time, however, this concern tends to fade, particularly when it means being home more often.

When/if we get a jet, I expect reluctance to be nearly non existent, but the option still exists. I will also be more willing to have the jet flown by a hired pilot taking employees somewhere when I am not going (presently don't do that in the MU2). I will be very particular about who that pilot is, however. This will increase the utility and benefit of the company plane if it doesn't require me to be useful.

My primary treatment for the risk is to train every 6 months (sim at least once a year) and not be stupid with weather, fuel, etc. That eliminates 95% of all accidents, and makes you better able to handle the remaining 5%.

Mike C.

Why the differentiation between the Mitts and Jet? Mitts more dangerous?

Sounds like you are the perfect candidate for the easy to fly SF50.......

Harder to find qualified pilots in the MU2 in my area, particularly ones getting enough flight time. Citation pilots tend to be more common and seem to have more work to keep them fresh.

Turboprops are more dangerous than a jet overall, except when it comes to runway manners.


Why would I want to go slower, less far, and carry less than I do know, for much greater cost?

The jet thing comes about because I have increased business on the west coast. The jet must have range to get there non stop. Right now, it is two legs in the MU2.

An SF50, with 4 people aboard, in winter headwinds at FL250 might take three hops to get there. Yuck. A Citation 560 would burn less fuel and probably makes it non stop. A Williams converted S550 definitely burns less than an SF50 and definitely makes it non stop.

Mike C.

I agree also, the SF50 would be a great fit for Mike.
He wouldnt mind the type rating as he is already use to the SFAR in his MU2.




Why the differentiation between the Mitts and Jet? Mitts more dangerous?

Sounds like you are the perfect candidate for the easy to fly SF50.......

If you gave me one for free, I'd sell it (quickly, before the market adjusts to the real value of the SF50) and use the money to buy a real jet.

Mike C.

It's a very thoughtful analysis Tony, but once you said "I don't have to have a new airplane", you could have stopped right there (or started a new thread). A used airplane will always beat a new one in terms of value, no point in comparing the two.

If you are not in a hurry, you can wait a couple of years and pick up a used SF50 for 1.5 mil or so, which will still be the same screaming deal amongst used peers as it is amongst the new ones.

There's been a fair amount of conversation about flying to ATP standards to finish a type rating. Having gone through it as a private pilot, I thought I'd share my opinion. Although I had a full plate going into my check ride to finish the type, the ATP aspect wasn't too daunting. Just think of it as flying without any slop. You just have to be precise with your altitudes, courses, speeds, intercepts, etc. it's not like you have to do something new, you just need precision. If you're on your game and in control, the ATP precision happens naturally. I didn't even think about it.

Same here, and that applies to a whole bunch of other work related stuff too....

Andrew