banner
banner

06 Dec 2019, 03:38 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Greenwich AeroGroup



Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2019, 22:44 
Online



User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: 06/28/09
Posts: 10602
Post Likes: +4620
Location: Walnut Creek, CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1962 Twin Bonanza
Username Protected wrote:
I'm 6'4" 220 lbs. Meridian is muy no-bueno.


Yeah, I don't fit it either. knees jammed into the lower panel with the seat all the way back.

That's what I liked about the SF50 Vision Jet. Very comfortable, does more or less the same job. And it has a parachute.


Weird thing is, I fit just fine in an Archer.. :scratch:
_________________
http://calipilot.com
cfii


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2019, 23:37 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 11/19/15
Posts: 853
Post Likes: +733
Company: Centurion LV
Location: Draper UT KPVU-KSMO
Aircraft: N100L 421C
I am 6’5” 250lbs and fit in a PA46. It’s hard to get in and out especially with a person in the right seat but once in its pretty comfy.

If you only plan to fly 3 people the Meridian is hard to beat. The King air is a lot of plane and lots to maintain. Plus for me I am scared of high power twin props. Lots of King Airs crashing on take off. For a lower time pilot I think the Meridian is a better fit than a KA.

Mike

_________________
InstaGram @Mtpyle and my company @CenturionLV


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 16 Nov 2019, 23:55 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 10/23/19
Posts: 11
Post Likes: +2
Aircraft: Cirrus S22T G3
Username Protected wrote:
Plus for me I am scared of high power twin props. Lots of King Airs crashing on take off. For a lower time pilot I think the Meridian is a better fit than a KA.

Mike


I love life and this has been a concern as well. Long time KA pilots will say its not big deal but it just takes once. Something about centerline thrust is very appealing in the Meridian and Light Jets.

Thanks for your insights. Safety is always the 1st priority.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2019, 02:39 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 11/09/13
Posts: 148
Post Likes: +48
Location: Camarillo, Ca.
Aircraft: 2005 Meridian
Username Protected wrote:
Hi Patrick, the meridian likes higher for sure due to the economy. The Meridian enjoys a highly derated engine which allows torque to be the limiting power all the way to FL280 where as the C90 could become temp limited at a lower altitude making that the altitude where it would achieve max speed.


What avionics do you have in your 05? JetAviva had a 2005 last year that I feel in love with but just wasn't ready yet.


I have 2 G500 and 2 GTN 750
It would take a huge leap in technology for me to want to upgrade from this simple to operate combo. I am 6’2 200# and in the beginning I did not like the egress from the cockpit but it became a non issue After a few days of flying the plane. Once in the seat is is very comfortable.
I was skeptical of the meridian due to being a long time Cessna 425 pilot but I have to say that with my mostly light loads and 400nm trips there is nothing more I need. I also like an occasional trip to 2500 ft. Strips and the Meridian is a great short field airplane.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2019, 03:33 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: 08/03/10
Posts: 1347
Post Likes: +1450
Company: D&M Leasing
Location: Katy, TX (KTME)
Aircraft: Citation 501sp
Patrick,

You’ll want more speed soon after getting either of these planes. You’ll want more room almost immediately in the Meridian. You’ll want the King Air to cost less to maintain and to burn less fuel.

Why not skip all that and get the TBM? 20-25% more to acquire? You’ll spend close to that buying and selling in two years when you upgrade.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2019, 04:36 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 05/31/13
Posts: 717
Post Likes: +307
Aircraft: C425
Quote:
You’ll want more room almost immediately in the Meridian. You’ll want the King Air to cost less to maintain and to burn less fuel

You just described a Conquest I

_________________
http://www.dockingdrawer.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2019, 04:49 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 08/23/10
Posts: 273
Post Likes: +158
Username Protected wrote:
Patrick,

You’ll want more speed soon after getting either of these planes. You’ll want more room almost immediately in the Meridian. You’ll want the King Air to cost less to maintain and to burn less fuel.

Why not skip all that and get the TBM? 20-25% more to acquire? You’ll spend close to that buying and selling in two years when you upgrade.


An equivalent TBM is more like 75% more to acquire and operate.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2019, 08:27 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 06/09/09
Posts: 3492
Post Likes: +2057
Aircraft: C182P, Merlin IIIC
The “cabin class” aspect between the two is worlds apart. If you can get a 135 powered 90 KA in your price range you’d have a nice mover. Who cares if your only taking one passenger or even alone sometimes, that’s is a non issue really once it is sitting there ready to go.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2019, 09:04 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 4211
Post Likes: +2785
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
Username Protected wrote:
Quote:
You’ll want more room almost immediately in the Meridian. You’ll want the King Air to cost less to maintain and to burn less fuel

You just described a Conquest I


Or a Turbo Commander.

_________________
Slumming it in the antique turboprop world - so you don't have to!


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2019, 09:08 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 09/04/10
Posts: 3188
Post Likes: +2426
Aircraft: C525A
I'm pretty sure that a TBM is cheaper overall than the King Air. KA is expensive to maintain!

Will they insure you in a KA? If so, yes the multi time is nice.

But you want a Mustang. How many hours do you need to get into it? What if you just bought the Mustang now and had a mentor pilot for the first year? Would they insure you after that?

I know we are all sitting here spending your money but it is expensive to get into and out of airplane ownership. In this class of airplane, I'm sure it's over $100K if you add in the cost of training. So my point is; why not just spend that $100K on a mentor pilot and get 300 hours of training time in the 'stang!

There are aspects of flying a jet that are easier than a turbo prop. Weather avoidance is one of the things that is harder in a TP. When you operate in the 200-280 environment you are dodging embedded cells and picking up ice much more often than a jet at 350-410. I did this in the KA for many years and I enjoyed the challenge but it can make for a long day too. A TP will also wear you out faster than a jet (jet is quieter and has less vibration) - I never noticed this kind of stuff when I was younger...

Conversely, there are aspects of flying a jet that are harder. In a jet, you almost always get SIDS & STARS (the DSNEE FOUR into KSNA or KLGB will keep you hopping), a jet has more systems to learn, getting down (from altitude) requires more planning and you don't have the big prop (or props) that act like a brake when you pull back your power so "dumping it in" isn't practical.

These two comparisons are just examples but the point I want to make is that the best way to get ready to fly a jet is to fly a jet. The other airplanes get you closer than flying a Cirrus but there is still a gap between a TP & a jet.

The problem with flying is that we have to beat around for a long time between "educational opportunities". I'm not talking about training, I'm talking about the (mostly boring) hours we spend flying ourselves around. With 300 hours you haven't had as many of these educational opportunities as somebody with more hours and there isn't anything you can do besides flying more hours to get these. This learning comes from screwing up and learning from it. So the challenge with hopping in a high performance airplane isn't getting through the training (anybody can do it, it may be long or short but it is doable), the challenge comes from the steepness of the learning curve in a high performance airplane in situations that you'll encounter outside of your training. You basically have to just go through the many cycles of screwing something up, living through it, reflecting on it, fixing it and repeat until you get it right. I'm "just ok" as far as piloting skills go, the thing that enables me to feel good about taking others along in a high performance airplane is the huge number of things I've screwed up and learned from in my past. These screw-ups have to come at the right amplitude and frequency - if either is too high, the results can be awful. The combination of speed and complexity of a high performance airplane increases the risk of encountering problems that are too hard or happen too fast.

_________________
John Lockhart
Phoenix, AZ


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2019, 09:31 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 05/05/09
Posts: 3412
Post Likes: +2903
Aircraft: MU-2, G44
If you can deal with the difficulties of parts and maintenance, you can bilaterally enucleate someone in this market and pick up an IFMS Eclipse 500 for probably $600K. 360kts, 60 GPH.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2019, 09:31 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 03/03/11
Posts: 934
Post Likes: +719
Aircraft: Solitaire
One thing to consider is the maint schedule. I think the Meredians are easier to manage. No calendar items, basic annual, etc. Not to be ignored if you are a busy business owner and managing things yourself.

There is a big difference between being in the low 20s and being at fl280. For where you live, that would tip me towards Meridian. I fly around out west all summer long and every 1000ft is helpful in staying above weather.

I think the Meredian is a better sub 500hr plane than a king air. Less to manage and think about. Pa46 cabin is great for missions you describe. Pilot ingress and egress will be a non issue at your size after a month jd owning. If you think the pa46 is hard, try getting into any jet with a center console and fms. Makes pa46 seem like a breeze.

The pa46 owners forum is really good and worth joining if you want more Meredian opinions. TBM seems like a great plane but I think the ownership cost is a good bit higher than pa46. That was the general consensus when I was shopping.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2019, 11:26 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 07/11/11
Posts: 1900
Post Likes: +1623
Location: Queretaro / Houston
Aircraft: CJ, L17, Davis D1K
Username Protected wrote:
I'm pretty sure that a TBM is cheaper overall than the King Air. KA is expensive to maintain!

Will they insure you in a KA? If so, yes the multi time is nice.

But you want a Mustang. How many hours do you need to get into it? What if you just bought the Mustang now and had a mentor pilot for the first year? Would they insure you after that?

I know we are all sitting here spending your money but it is expensive to get into and out of airplane ownership. In this class of airplane, I'm sure it's over $100K if you add in the cost of training. So my point is; why not just spend that $100K on a mentor pilot and get 300 hours of training time in the 'stang!

There are aspects of flying a jet that are easier than a turbo prop. Weather avoidance is one of the things that is harder in a TP. When you operate in the 200-280 environment you are dodging embedded cells and picking up ice much more often than a jet at 350-410. I did this in the KA for many years and I enjoyed the challenge but it can make for a long day too. A TP will also wear you out faster than a jet (jet is quieter and has less vibration) - I never noticed this kind of stuff when I was younger...

Conversely, there are aspects of flying a jet that are harder. In a jet, you almost always get SIDS & STARS (the DSNEE FOUR into KSNA or KLGB will keep you hopping), a jet has more systems to learn, getting down (from altitude) requires more planning and you don't have the big prop (or props) that act like a brake when you pull back your power so "dumping it in" isn't practical.

These two comparisons are just examples but the point I want to make is that the best way to get ready to fly a jet is to fly a jet. The other airplanes get you closer than flying a Cirrus but there is still a gap between a TP & a jet.

The problem with flying is that we have to beat around for a long time between "educational opportunities". I'm not talking about training, I'm talking about the (mostly boring) hours we spend flying ourselves around. With 300 hours you haven't had as many of these educational opportunities as somebody with more hours and there isn't anything you can do besides flying more hours to get these. This learning comes from screwing up and learning from it. So the challenge with hopping in a high performance airplane isn't getting through the training (anybody can do it, it may be long or short but it is doable), the challenge comes from the steepness of the learning curve in a high performance airplane in situations that you'll encounter outside of your training. You basically have to just go through the many cycles of screwing something up, living through it, reflecting on it, fixing it and repeat until you get it right. I'm "just ok" as far as piloting skills go, the thing that enables me to feel good about taking others along in a high performance airplane is the huge number of things I've screwed up and learned from in my past. These screw-ups have to come at the right amplitude and frequency - if either is too high, the results can be awful. The combination of speed and complexity of a high performance airplane increases the risk of encountering problems that are too hard or happen too fast.

This is without a doubt, the best advice given so far. At 300+ hours mostly in a fixed gear piston single, having a mentor pilot fly with you in the plane you really need will develop the skills and experience you require to be safe and professional.

I say this with the greatest amount of respect - your wallet may be ready for more speed and complexity, but at 300+ hours, you are not there yet. Use this opportunity wisely.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2019, 11:49 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 01/21/14
Posts: 2354
Post Likes: +1369
Company: FAA Flight Check
Location: Oklahoma City, OK (KOKC)
Aircraft: King Air 300F
Username Protected wrote:
I'm pretty sure that a TBM is cheaper overall than the King Air. KA is expensive to maintain!

Will they insure you in a KA? If so, yes the multi time is nice.

But you want a Mustang. How many hours do you need to get into it? What if you just bought the Mustang now and had a mentor pilot for the first year? Would they insure you after that?

I know we are all sitting here spending your money but it is expensive to get into and out of airplane ownership. In this class of airplane, I'm sure it's over $100K if you add in the cost of training. So my point is; why not just spend that $100K on a mentor pilot and get 300 hours of training time in the 'stang!

There are aspects of flying a jet that are easier than a turbo prop. Weather avoidance is one of the things that is harder in a TP. When you operate in the 200-280 environment you are dodging embedded cells and picking up ice much more often than a jet at 350-410. I did this in the KA for many years and I enjoyed the challenge but it can make for a long day too. A TP will also wear you out faster than a jet (jet is quieter and has less vibration) - I never noticed this kind of stuff when I was younger...

Conversely, there are aspects of flying a jet that are harder. In a jet, you almost always get SIDS & STARS (the DSNEE FOUR into KSNA or KLGB will keep you hopping), a jet has more systems to learn, getting down (from altitude) requires more planning and you don't have the big prop (or props) that act like a brake when you pull back your power so "dumping it in" isn't practical.

These two comparisons are just examples but the point I want to make is that the best way to get ready to fly a jet is to fly a jet. The other airplanes get you closer than flying a Cirrus but there is still a gap between a TP & a jet.

The problem with flying is that we have to beat around for a long time between "educational opportunities". I'm not talking about training, I'm talking about the (mostly boring) hours we spend flying ourselves around. With 300 hours you haven't had as many of these educational opportunities as somebody with more hours and there isn't anything you can do besides flying more hours to get these. This learning comes from screwing up and learning from it. So the challenge with hopping in a high performance airplane isn't getting through the training (anybody can do it, it may be long or short but it is doable), the challenge comes from the steepness of the learning curve in a high performance airplane in situations that you'll encounter outside of your training. You basically have to just go through the many cycles of screwing something up, living through it, reflecting on it, fixing it and repeat until you get it right. I'm "just ok" as far as piloting skills go, the thing that enables me to feel good about taking others along in a high performance airplane is the huge number of things I've screwed up and learned from in my past. These screw-ups have to come at the right amplitude and frequency - if either is too high, the results can be awful. The combination of speed and complexity of a high performance airplane increases the risk of encountering problems that are too hard or happen too fast.

This is without a doubt, the best advice given so far. At 300+ hours mostly in a fixed gear piston single, having a mentor pilot fly with you in the plane you really need will develop the skills and experience you require to be safe and professional.

I say this with the greatest amount of respect - your wallet may be ready for more speed and complexity, but at 300+ hours, you are not there yet. Use this opportunity wisely.

And a grasp of expectations.
No one with 300 hrs TT has ‘plenty of IFR’ experience.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90
PostPosted: 17 Nov 2019, 11:50 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 10/31/14
Posts: 355
Post Likes: +121
Aircraft: eclipse
I find it bizarre that you can get insurance on a King Air but not a Mustang or Eclipse

I find an Eclipse is as easy to operate as my old Mooney maybe easier.

There are a lot of ex Cirrus guys flying Eclipse’s and it fits your mission perfectly


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 58 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next



uAvionix (banner)

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

Jump to:  

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 2007-2019

.Davis_Aviation_85x50.jpg.
.methodseven-85x50.jpg.
.kingairdom.jpg.
.airpower-85x50.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.tulsair-85x50.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.jpg.
.dshannon.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.airplanesusa-85x50.png.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.AAI.jpg.
.tas-85x50.jpg.
.jetacquisitions-85x50.png.
.weatherspork_85x50.jpg.
.selectairparts-85x100.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.STLAir_85x50.jpg.
.ForeFlight.jpeg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.jetaviva-85x50.jpg.
.fortner-85x50.jpg.
.Anrim_85x200.png.
.Latitude.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.Electroair.jpg.
.Trace.jpg.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.hpair-85x50.jpg.
.Marsh.jpg.
.wildblue-85x50.jpg.
.cubcrafters.jpg.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.truecourse.jpg.
.McPeck_85x50.jpg.
.Steel_85x50.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.byerlyaviation-85x50.png.
.avidyne-85x50-2017-11-22.jpg.
.rtc-85x200.jpg.
.westsky.jpg.
.Outright_85_50.png.
.Showalter.jpg.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.tempest.jpg.
.sureflight-85x50.jpg.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.ps_engineering.gif.
.avionicssource-85x50.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.L3_85x100.jpg.
.heartlandsm.jpg.
.uavionix-85x50.png.
.FreeFlight_85x50.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2019-11-01.jpg.
.instar.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.lopresti_85x50.jpg.
.bkool-85x50-2014-08-04.jpg.
.Bendix_85x50(1).png.
.camguard.jpg.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.Expert_Aircraft_Solution_85x50.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.