I'm picking up my B200 Monday.

It's less ego-bruising to say "It uses too much runway" instead of "I can't afford it."

I'm picking up my B200 Monday.

It's less ego-bruising to say "It uses too much runway" instead of "I can't afford it."

Thanks, and congrats to you as well!

I didn't think the P180 had any bad tendencies as far as flying safety. The incredible pressurization is a big bump in single-pilot safety as far as I'm concerned - although you have to wear a mask to take advantage of the top altitudes.

There were other factors in my decision. I was a fan of the B200's universal serviceability, and I am a fan of planes that take off and land slower. From all the published numbers I've found, the B200's published takeoff and landing distances are at least 25% shorter than a P180. Informal notes from a few P180 pilots suggest that the book runway numbers are harder to achieve in a P180 than they are in a B200. FWIW, my published 50ft obstacle takeoff distance on a standard say at sea level is less than 2200 ft at full gross.

It takes everyone a while to get used to landing new airframes anywhere near book numbers. I still remember my first night landing in my C340 - I turned off on a taxiway about 6,000' from the threshold.

Be careful about betting on the purchase price. I used Chip McClure *and* bought one of the oldest B200s still flying. I'll take that bet for pink slips.

I'll save my photos for another thread. This thread is about the magnificent P180 (and comparing it to planes that don't go as fast.)

Impressive. Which engines?

Impressive. Which engines?

The P180II actually can land quite short with its reverse and its carbon brakes...but I don't want to honk down hard on those expensive brakes until I get some steel ones and avoid the 80,000 dollar over haul cost(!!!!).

4500' long runways are my minimum.... that way I dont have to touch the brakes until 50 knots and below.

Nice day coming home from The Saint today in NOLA.... FL 300, +8 degrees and 379 knots.

670 lbs/hr. (Did I tell you how quiet it is? )

I will say that it DEFINTELY uses too much runway for me.

Certainly not telling you how to fly your plane, even more so as I'm not rated on the Piaggio (only the Vespa ones, and I crashed it), but could I recommend you still tap the brakes on touchdown, just to be sure? Touch, positive braking, reverse, let go of the brakes if you choose to do so. At least you know what you're dealing with, and if you need to quickly get your hands on that parking brake.

what happened to that one guy who veered off the runway at Eagle, CO about ten years ago?

The P180 POH I have indicates 3,700' ground run and 7,000' accelerate go distance at Santa Fe at that temp, and 3,900' ground roll and 7,400' accelerate go at Telluride at that temp. Not bad. I'm not sure the long runway criticism is warranted. Maybe it's more difficult to achieve book numbers in the P180?

Book numbers are not hard to achieve, but, speeds are high enough that if you delay on your actions you chew up runway.

Before I bought mine I spoke at length with a pilot who had about 5k hours flying Avantis for avantair and other charter operators. He verified that if the book says it could do it, the plane did it. It was his favorite plane he had flown in 15k hours. He flies a 7X now I think. I took that as a good sign !

Congrats to all the BT guys now flying the really cool Avanti. While I’m not in that club I definitely think Adam F deserves a round of applause for always bringing up the qualities of this unique aircraft back when no one else did. I have been thinking about this aircraft and the altitudes/speed regime in flys in and realized I have never heard of an inflight breakup of an Avanti. Is this the case? A tough bird. Hope y’all enjoy it.

(we need a wine glass clinking emoji for Adam!)

Your challenge, Erwin, is the P180 doesn't have long enough legs, correct?

No has perished in one. Not bad for an airplane made since '92. It's pretty sturdy.