23 Apr 2024, 23:46 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: 421 Purchase Posted: 16 Apr 2018, 21:17 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 02/24/11 Posts: 3 Location: Jackson, OH
Aircraft: Piper Arrow III
|
|
Looking for some advice from all you experts. We are contemplating a 421 for our company. First the mission; 200 mile trip, twice a week, probably 2-4 passengers plus pilot. One of our Owners is not very comfortable with flying, but is getting there. We like the idea of pressurized, plus a little room in the cabin. I think we have decided to stay piston.
All that said, looking for suggestions on people/process to get started on locating and buying.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 421 Purchase Posted: 16 Apr 2018, 22:15 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 19252 Post Likes: +23622 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: We are contemplating a 421 for our company. First the mission; 200 mile trip, twice a week, probably 2-4 passengers plus pilot. You really aren't using the 421's main feature, cruising at high altitude in a pressurized cabin, on this trip. That being said, I recommend the 1976-1979 straight leg 421C. Lots cheaper to buy than the 1980 and later trailing link gear, but lighter, better, and not worth the money difference for somewhat software landings. Quote: I think we have decided to stay piston. Your mission has "turboprop" written all over it, however. If you want dispatch reliability, that is, the plane goes every day you want it to, it isn't broke down, then you want turbine. The turboprop will get you to nicer weather far more often than the 421, too. The operating costs won't be much different. Given Ohio location, ability to operate in icing will be important. No piston airplane can do that as well as a turboprop. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 421 Purchase Posted: 16 Apr 2018, 22:56 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/24/10 Posts: 6757 Post Likes: +4423 Location: Concord , CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1967 Baron B55
|
|
In the last 13 years and 1700 hours I have flown my 421C, I have never had a AOG or cancelled trip up and down the west coast , Alaska, Canada and coast to coast. Now I may have jinxed myself by mentioning it.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 421 Purchase Posted: 17 Apr 2018, 00:04 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/31/13 Posts: 1235 Post Likes: +602 Company: Docking Drawer Location: KCCR
Aircraft: C425
|
|
Quote: Your all in hourly cost for a plane in good condition should be about 650 dollars per year which will vary with location, fuel prices etc.
FWIW, my annual spend including absolutely everything (hangar, insurance, training, charts, MX, subscriptions, prop tax, fuel) except engine and prop reserves for 125 hours in a 425 last year was $85,000 or $680 per hour. Add maybe $150-$200/hr for reserves. Admittedly that was a good year maintenance wise and others will be higher but still if the cost is in the same neighborhood might as well go turbine. On the other hand it would be hard to justify a turbine for a 200 mile trip. It won't be appreciably faster but it would have some advantage in dealing with icing and overall reliability. And the 421 (even a C model) will be cheaper to acquire. A 421B will be a lot cheaper.
_________________ ATP, CFI-I, MEI http://www.dockingdrawer.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 421 Purchase Posted: 17 Apr 2018, 00:12 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/24/10 Posts: 6757 Post Likes: +4423 Location: Concord , CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1967 Baron B55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Quote: Your all in hourly cost for a plane in good condition should be about 650 dollars per year which will vary with location, fuel prices etc.
FWIW, my annual spend including absolutely everything (hangar, insurance, training, charts, MX, subscriptions, prop tax, fuel) except engine and prop reserves for 125 hours in a 425 last year was $85,000 or $680 per hour. Add maybe $150-$200/hr for reserves. Admittedly that was a good year maintenance wise and others will be higher but still if the cost is in the same neighborhood might as well go turbine. On the other hand it would be hard to justify a turbine for a 200 mile trip. It won't be appreciably faster but it would have some advantage in dealing with icing and overall reliability. And the 421 (even a C model) will be cheaper to acquire. A 421B will be a lot cheaper. Scott my 650 an hour includes engine reserves. Your 680 an hour plus 150 to 200 would be 830 to 880 an hour. On the same 290nm regular trip my my neighbors TBM850 is only 15 minutes faster. On a 200nm trip the difference would be less than 10 minutes.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 421 Purchase Posted: 17 Apr 2018, 00:58 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/31/13 Posts: 1235 Post Likes: +602 Company: Docking Drawer Location: KCCR
Aircraft: C425
|
|
Quote: Scott my 650 an hour includes engine reserves. Your 680 an hour plus 150 to 200 would be 830 to 880 an hour. On the same 290nm regular trip my my neighbors TBM850 is only 15 minutes faster. On a 200nm trip the difference would be less than 10 minutes. Yeah that's what I'm saying. For 200nm the additional cost of a turbine is not going to buy you much. But personally if the cost were close enough (and in my opinion within 25% qualifies) I'd rather buy the more capable airplane in case longer trips ever came up.
_________________ ATP, CFI-I, MEI http://www.dockingdrawer.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 421 Purchase Posted: 17 Apr 2018, 01:38 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 19252 Post Likes: +23622 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: But personally if the cost were close enough (and in my opinion within 25% qualifies) I'd rather buy the more capable airplane in case longer trips ever came up. I agree with this. Part of that is to look at the specific two airports you will be using. In some cases, due to contract fuel, you can buy Jet-A for half that of 100LL. In other cases, some FBOs gouge turbines with high fees (oddly, airports in SW Michigan are terrible about this) and not so much piston twins. If I knew the two end points, I can tell you how it would go. Once you get a more capable airplane, I bet there are other trips besides the 200 nm milk run that it will be used for. Every use you get makes the costs lower per mile. Last year, 170 hours, $87K, $512/hour, for my MU2. This included two inspections and both prop overhauls. Long term average is ~$700-750/hour (over 10 years), no engine reserves (~$50/hour each engine, very similar to GTSIO-520). When factored per mile, very competitive with a 421. Not at all saying MU2 is the right plane here, just an example of turboprop economics. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024
|
|
|
|