Ten years into my ownership of a Cessna 421C (2016), the upgrade itch began. After installing two factory-new engines in my 421 (a scheduled event with the prior engines about 200 hours over TBO with a nary a cylinder ever having been swapped), the cost of a hot section inspection no longer seemed as daunting. Plus, I wanted turbine reliability, increased engine-out performance, and the ability to fly higher and farther.
The capabilities of a Cessna 441 had always impressed me. Although the SIDs inspections are manageable, the SIDs took the bloom off the rose for me. I started looking around for other Garret-powered turboprops. I went to MU-2 PROP and took the Garrett course. I went to Twin Commander University in 2015. I did some research on Commander 1000s – and was especially intrigued by the useful load of 695B models. However, the Commander market seems shrouded in mystery and I couldn’t get comfortable with the pricing on Commander 1000s. As best I recall, I never even made an offer on one.
Our BT Brother, Erwin K., turned me onto the possibilities of a Merlin IIIC: 7.0 psi cabin pressure differential, roomy cabin, and 600+ gallons of fuel for exceptional range. I was so enthused about Merlins that I went to Nevada to fly a few hours with a Merlin guru whom Erwin recommended. The Merlin IIIC’s range and pressurization can’t be beat, so off I went to FlightSafety to get my type rating. The IIIC is an SFAR41 aircraft that is allowed to have a MGTOW of 13,230 – hence the need for a type rating.
The type rating course was a tough two weeks. The IIIC has quirky systems and heavy controls. It was a much more difficult type rating than my Citation Ultra experience many years earlier. There aren’t many IIICs or Merlin 300s on the market, and I never found one with complete logs and NDH. I made offers on a 300 with damage history (off the runway to due to a steering failure) and missing logs; on a IIIC with missing logs; and on a IIIC in Australia. Both had been on the market for well over a year. Another IIIC that I looked at in early 2016 with an asking price of $840k, is still on the market with an asking price of $625k. Fortunately, none of my Merlin offers were accepted. I eventually realized that the hot/high runway length requirements, high ref speeds, and low SE ceiling at gross weight, overwhelmed the appeal of the pressurization and range. Further, Merlin IIICs are not a common owner-flown machine. I worried that if I sunk vast sums into avionics upgrades, I was unlikely to find an owner-pilot willing to pay for my improvements.
During the depths of my Merlin funk, I had a fortuitous encounter with a corporate pilot who had flown both Merlins IIICs and another SFAR 41 aircraft, King Air 300s. Based upon a brief stint flying a B200 in the mid-1990s, I had always considered King Air 200s to be a lousy fit for me: abysmal useful load with full fuel and range far shorter than Garrett turboprops. However, the King Air 300 got my attention: great useful load, a relatively liquid market, eligible for a Garmin 1000 upgrade, and shops everywhere know how to work on them. Compared to a Merlin IIIC, the KA 300 has better runway numbers, better SE performance, better speed, but less range, more fuel burn, and a cabin diff of only 6.6 psi. Every airplane is a compromise. I decided that the KA 300 offered a reasonable set of compromises.
One month later, I found myself without an airplane. Through TAS Aviation, the premier Twin Cessna shop that maintained my 421, I was connected with a buyer looking for a 421 with top maintenance and top avionics. I was reluctant to sell before I had my replacement bird, but the deal was compelling. Fortunately, I wasn’t grounded when the 421 was sold. A friend of 30+ years is chief pilot for a company with a PC-12 NG that is based at my home airport. He arranged a dry lease with me and it worked out great.
My family and I enjoyed our PC-12 travels. We made it nonstop westbound from Allentown, PA to Watertown, SD, something the 421 could do only eastbound. The PC-12 has phenomenal range, has a modern, spacious cabin, is well-engineered and well-built, and is super reliable. The downsides: the cabin max diff is only 5.75 psi, the automatic pressurization controller is not smooth, it does not ride well in turbulence, and the Honeywell Apex avionics suite is a better match for a Falcon than a single-pilot turboprop. Penman and JC disagree:
viewtopic.php?f=49&t=134047The PC-12 dry lease removed the time pressure to jump into a King Air 300 purchase, but I still didn’t want the process to drag out. I am a hands-on guy who is good at educating myself. I had plunged into the Merlins and learned an extraordinary amount, but I did not feel comfortable wading into the King Air market without assistance. I interviewed several consultants and hired John Murphy of Murphy Acquisitions. John had been recommended to me by one of his former clients. I heartily add my endorsement of John. John is an expert in the King Air market, is honest, is a gentleman, and he always put my needs ahead of his monetary incentive to get a quick deal rather than a good deal for me. John had some off-market planes, knew the tribal history on some planes that should be avoided, and had connections with maintenance shops and other requisite parties.
In October of last year, I went to Potomac Flight Training to get my type rating. Potomac has a King Air 300 FTD as well as a real King Air 300 equipped with a Garmin G1000. The sim doesn’t fly particularly well, but it is great for learning procedures. The airplane is maintained superbly and is a delight to fly. I had a super instructor, Ray DeHaan. Ray is a gifted educator. The first week of training was mostly ground school and sim; the second week was in the airplane. I chose Potomac specifically because I wanted some real airplane time during training, but the vagaries of weather, traffic, and ATC add complications that do not exist in the sim world. Likewise, the type rating checkride in the real airplane involved more variables than would be encountered during a sim ride. After my training, I occasionally flew with a local company that operates a 300. It was a good way to keep from forgetting everything.
Over the course of nine months since joining forces with John Murphy, I made offers on six KA 300s. Two offers were rejected, one seller changed his mind as he flew to the inspection facility, two deals died in contract negotiation, and I rejected one plane during the inspection phase. The process was harder than I had expected. I guess I was naive, but I expected KA 300 owners to be more rational and more organized than the 421 sellers I had dealt with a dozen years prior. Neal Schwartz provides logbook PDFs for Bonanzas, but I encountered only a single 300 where the owner or broker had made the effort to copy the logbooks.
At this stage, John Murphy suggested I take a look at the 350 market. When I had hired John, I told him explicitly that I didn’t want a 350: the 300 cabin is bigger than I need, the 300 has better runway numbers, and the 300 isn’t hauling around an extra 700# in empty weight that does me no good. Despite my anti-350 bias, I did some research. I discovered that 350s FL-111 and later, had improved runway numbers thanks to a lower Vmc and an FAA waiver to use transport rules rather than commuter rules. These later 350s (or earlier ones that have been retrofitted) can have better runway numbers than a 300: the 350 can have balanced field length where the 300 doesn’t even have accelerate-stop. But the 300 does have the flexibility to depart TEX or LXV at 12,500# (no accelerate-stop required), where the 350 needs cool temps and to be reasonably light. Other plusses for the 350 are improved annunciator panel logic, a slightly-improved electrical system, and a little more useful load.
John found an early 350, FL-136, that seemed to fit my needs: only two owners (both U.S.), complete logs, and maintained by a reputable shop. The downsides: mediocre to poor P&I and engines just over 400 hrs away from a big expense. But the plane was priced accordingly. John was correct that there was value in the early 350 market. This 1996 King Air 350 cost me no more to buy than a comparable 1988 KA 300 with its price bumped for 8 model years. In other words, I paid more because it was newer, but didn’t pay anything extra for it being a 350 rather than a 300. That was my rationalization.
The inspection process on FL-136 dragged out because it was in maintenance when we finalized the deal. The upside was that it was completely opened up – making it easy for my mechanic’s inspection. The downside was that the functional checks and flight test were delayed. We closed on July 31.
My insurance company kindly turned me loose as PIC based upon my 28 hours in a King Air 300, but zero in a 350. After we closed, I flew the seller’s pilot back to his home base at YNG. I then proceeded to Chicago ARR to retrieve my sister and her son (both pilots) for a much-needed visit with my ill father. A couple days later, I flew them from Allentown, PA ABE back to ARR.
The following week, I did two days of training in my airplane with my type rating instructor. It felt good to get put through the paces and to review some intricacies of the systems. I am proud of my decision to seek training that wasn’t required. I knew I needed it and I felt much better about my capabilities afterward.
In mid-August, my wife and kids and I took a vacation trip to the west coast. Landing at Mammoth Lakes, CA MMH was a fun challenge (weather was great). We went on to Arcata, CA for the Redwood Forest, Cody, WY COD for rodeo, and Watertown, SD ATY to visit cousins. Subsequently, I have been to Las Vegas HND for NBAA and Wichita ICT for FSI recurrent. FSI was another phenomenal training experience. My sim instructor, Brian MacInnis, worked me HARD – but never to the point that it was counterproductive. FSI was the most expensive training option, but I felt I received far more than I paid.
My thoughts on flying the 350: I like it. It is big and solid, handles well (I am especially happy that there is no rudder-aileron interconnect), gives a decent ride in turbulence, and climbs and cruises faster than a PC-12. I have a 7,000’ cabin altitude at FL280. I do miss the range of the PC-12, and the fuel bills of the PC-12.
I have grown reasonably fond of my EFIS 85 system and UNS-1EW (approved for LPV approaches). The avionics aren’t as capable as the Apex, and they are certainly not intuitive, but I get along with them better than I do with the Apex. Fortunately, it is a short-term fling with EFIS and UNS. I go to Moline in January to have Elliott install the G1000 NXi package. I am looking forward to enroute VNAV capability as well as the extra toys: synthetic vision, ESP, and coupled missed approaches.
To compare it to my 421, my 60+ hours of King Air ownership have not included any oil changes, any exhaust inspection, any adjustments to mag timing, fuel flow, or manifold pressure, nor any baffling tweaks. I have not played with any mixture knobs. I have not had a takeoff without balanced field length. The turbine world is awfully nice.
Was the King Air 350 the right choice for me? The operating costs of a Pilatus are certainly much lower, but as a low-utilization operator, I think I am happy with lower capital cost and higher operating cost. The 300s and 350s are certainly tremendous values relative to Blackhawk B200s. For the minor cost and hassle of a type rating, I got way more King Air for the money than I would have in the B200 market.
See this thread:
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=133400A 350 seems like the right choice for me at this juncture, but we’ll see how I feel after a few years of phase inspections – and after I’ve overhauled or swapped both engines.
In closing, a big thanks to the BT crew who helped me along the way:
Max and Martti in the 441
Bruce B in the Commander
Erwin K in the Merlin – and to Bradley V. for convincing me not to overpay for a Merlin
John L, Tom Clements, Paul S., and Bill C. in the King Air
Mike C. for convincing me that the turbine world doesn’t have to be a huge expense leap from a 421 (though I’ve made it an expensive leap).
