banner
banner

29 Mar 2024, 01:59 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 181 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 11:10 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/01/17
Posts: 1052
Post Likes: +615
Location: CA
Aircraft: V35, C150
Username Protected wrote:
Consider the Tecnam P2012.

$2.7M for a piston twin? Really?

How well do they work in the mountains when trying to out climb icing?

You could buy 4 MU2 Marquise for that. And I bet they operate close to the same per mile and far more reliably.

Mike C.


I’m just talking shop here more than I am trying to defend my suggestion.

Some thoughts that made me offer the P2012:

1) They are using KA90’s currently for 100 miles trips, occasionally 200 miles. This seems to me a good fit for piston-land more than turbine-land (a la Cape Air). Is the difference between a KA and MU2 meaningful for such short trips?

2) I was unaware the purchase price is $2.7 million and is more than I expected. However, while that seems steep, I had the exact same thought 10-15 years ago watching non-profit mission organizations swap out old 185’s and 206’s for Kodiak’s. Apparently operators felt differently about the capital decision.

3) To your point about climbing in ice and terrain, they are turbocharged airframes, so I would expect reasonable performance there.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 11:27 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/14/13
Posts: 6058
Post Likes: +4636
He clearly stated the MU2 presented insurance cap limitations, why continue to reference this as a solution?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 11:36 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23615
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
Is the difference between a KA and MU2 meaningful for such short trips?

Not a lot in speed or time, but in cost per mile, yes. The MU2 will be faster, especially on 200 mile leg into a 100 knot wind. That's 1 hour for the MU2, 1.5 hours for the KA90. Not only is it less cost per hour to main the MU2, but you get more miles per hour as well, double benefit.

Quote:
2) I was unaware the purchase price is $2.7 million and is more than I expected. However, while that seems steep, I had the exact same thought 10-15 years ago watching non-profit mission organizations swap out old 185’s and 206’s for Kodiak’s.

Kodiak is turbine. That makes all the difference for fuel availability, reliability, low maintenance, high performance, payload, climb, speed.

Quote:
3) To your point about climbing in ice and terrain, they are turbocharged airframes, so I would expect reasonable performance there.

P2012: 8113 lbs lifted by 750 hp, 10.8 lbs/hp. 1150 fpm climb.

MU2 Marquise: 11570 lbs lifted by 1556 hp, 7.4 lbs/hp. 2200 fpm climb.

The turboprop will radically out climb the piston airplane and that is what you want when you are in icing in the mountains.

Would I rather fly a new P2012 or an old MU2 on this mission? The MU2 wins hands down. Buy one of each, fly for 3 years, and then compare the overall cost and experience. It will be night and day.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 11:37 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23615
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
He clearly stated the MU2 presented insurance cap limitations, why continue to reference this as a solution?

Because solving the insurance problem seems possible and that is the easiest way to get the right airplane for the mission.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 11:38 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 06/28/09
Posts: 14129
Post Likes: +9075
Location: Walnut Creek, CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1962 Twin Bonanza
You already have the best plane for this mission.

_________________
http://calipilot.com
atp/cfii


Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 12:06 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23615
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
All flights are conducted over mountainous, rural areas with essentially no airports along the way. Night ops and operations in snow and ice covered runways are the norm, but most runways are paved, and over 5000 feet in length (yet the DA is occasionally over 10K at some of them in the summer). Runways in winter are plowed at most towns, but we do occasionally land in 6 - 8” of fresh powder snow when they can’t keep up. Roads are closed for large parts of the winter so the planes make the trips and surgical care of our patients and in-person follow-up care possible.

There is a case to be made for a legacy Citation.

Won't really be faster than an MU2 for such a trip, but would be safe, would be insurable, and I think would be reasonably reliable. Good passenger comfort, too. I think that would help with you passengers, particularly if they are not "small airplane people". A jet inspires confidence.

The only downside is runway issues.

In hot weather, you have high DA which has to be factored into the operation. This would take running a few scenarios to see what the issues are. Given your very short leg lengths, you are likely NOT to have a problem since you will have very low fuel loads and thus be well under max weights.

In cold weather with ice or snow on the runway, things get a bit trickier. Landing in 6-8 inches of powder is no problem, will help slow you down. Landing on sheer ice is more of an issue but I suspect a more rare condition. This is why I suggest a legacy Citation with the original JT15D engines and, critically, thrust reversers. The landing data is NOT computed with thrust reverse, so you have margin. Very few TR equipped small cabin Citations have gone off the end of a runway, the 525 series does that more often (no TRs on the Williams).

If you have a local charter outfit who, on that rare 0.1% occasion, can take you to an ice covered runway in a King Air, then a jet might make some sense. I've seen a legacy Citation land on sheet ice before, it isn't as radical as one might imagine. TRs help *a lot*.

The legacy Citation will cost you very little to get, perhaps less than an MU2 depending on which model. The 501SP works, has enough seats, and is single pilot out of the box. The II is probably the right choice, the extra power for not much more weight helps, and pilots can be single pilot qualified. My V is pretty good short field airplane due to the much improved wing, but a V is starting to be too big. It would, however, be operating WAY under gross weight, which gives it a huge advantage. It is probably the shortest runway user of the group.

Insurance should be no problem, Citations are safe and there are many underwriters who will write high limits, particularly for a flight department with pro pilots on staff.

You can find pilots easily, probably at less cost than MU2 or King Air pilots as collecting jet time is something up and coming pilots want to do.

The fuel you use will be, say, 220 GPH block due to short legs and low altitudes. But that's a relatively small piece of the cost puzzle.

To see if this works, you need to model your missions for which airports, what weather, what leg lengths, what payloads. No plane is 100%, the question is how close to 100% do you need to get?

It will be hard to downgrade to a turboprop after your people experience the jet.

Here is my landing chart for my V, using TRs on wet and ice runways. As you can see, the adders are not particularly that high.
Attachment:
c560-tr-landing-wet-ice.png

Mike C.


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 13:00 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23615
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
To see if this works, you need to model your missions for which airports, what weather, what leg lengths, what payloads.

For a Citation V, assuming my plane weights, 9250 lbs empty, 5000 ft airport elevation, 13000 lbs takeoff, 11500 lbs landing (about 1100 lbs cabin payload, 1500 lbs fuel burn), you get numbers like this:

0 C:

Takeoff (flaps 7, dry, no TRs): 2670 ft
Takeoff (flaps 7, ice, with TRs): 4426 ft
Landing (flaps full, dry, no TRs): 2490 ft
Landing (flaps full, ice, with TRs): 3509 ft

30 C:

Takeoff (flaps 15, dry, no TRs): 3410 ft
Takeoff (flaps 15, wet, with TRs): 4149 ft
Landing (flaps full, dry, no TRs): 2650 ft
Landing (flaps full, wet, with TRs): 2730 ft

I'm actually surprised at how good those numbers are. The takeoff numbers are to 35 ft AGL AFTER an engine failure at V1. Landing numbers are from 50 ft high at runway threshold at Vref (which implies a touchdown about 1000 ft past the threshold). That means there are ample margins built into the data already.

At 13000 lbs takeoff, it will be amazing performance, even at 5000 ft field elevation.

Biggest negative for the legacy Citation strategy right now is lack of inventory and fuel prices are elevated somewhat.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 13:46 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 09/08/13
Posts: 901
Post Likes: +243
Location: Lander, WY
Aircraft: Duke B60
The Tecnam P2012 might be good option for some at lower elevations, but, note, the OPs high country neighborhood essentially requires pressurization.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 14:02 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 02/27/19
Posts: 306
Post Likes: +146
Company: OwnShip Technology
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Aircraft: C33/C90A
Username Protected wrote:
You already have the best plane for this mission.


Like Adam said: Your mission profile screams "King Air". I don't think a MU-2 or legacy Citation will fare better if "maintenance downtime" and "I can't find people to maintain them" are the pain points.

Regarding hourly costs, I don't think anything up to your mission and dispatch reliability requirements will be cheaper than $1250/hr. More speed will amount to nothing on 100-200 NM legs.

What about replacing the oldest King Airs with ca. 2007 vintage with a full Garmin panel overhaul?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 14:12 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12798
Post Likes: +5224
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
How about this… buy another c90A and just accept maintenance downtime


Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 14:46 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23615
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
How about this… buy another c90A and just accept maintenance downtime

Buy an MU2 to fly the mechanics around to wherever the King Airs are broke down.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 15:15 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 09/05/09
Posts: 4082
Post Likes: +2731
Location: Small Town, NC
Username Protected wrote:
How about this… buy another c90A and just accept maintenance downtime


Bingo.

_________________
"Find worthy causes in your life."


Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 15:34 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 06/02/15
Posts: 2691
Post Likes: +1689
Location: Fresno, CA (KFAT)
Aircraft: T210M
Username Protected wrote:
How about this… buy another c90A and just accept maintenance downtime


Bingo.


Bingo+1


Use the Southwest Air business model. Keep your fleet standardized and invest in your own extensive spares inventory. There no reason a phase inspection should be delayed that long.

If you don’t already have one, hire a captive A&P perhaps even an engineer.
_________________
Tom DeWitt
Previous: TBM850/T210M/C182P
APS 2004


Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 15:52 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 05/23/08
Posts: 6059
Post Likes: +702
Location: CMB7, Ottawa, Canada
Aircraft: TBM - C185 - T206
TBM or PC12, get over the single engine thing. Zero engine out in the TBM PT6-66D.

Start with one PC12, no need to change everything at once. I even see a combination Caravan/Kodiak for short ops with TBM/PC12. You dont want a piston anything.

Or new KA250 if you really need a twin but your cost will go up.

_________________
Former Baron 58 owner.
Pistons engines are for tractors.

Marc Bourdon


Top

 Post subject: Re: Looking for replacement for C90A King Airs
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 16:04 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 6322
Post Likes: +5522
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
Just shows how few new options there are in this field. Basically King Air's and Avanti's and that's it. The twin turboprop has gone the way of the dodo.

_________________
Problem is the intelligent people are full of doubt, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 181 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 13  Next




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 2007-2024

.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.pure-medical-85x150.png.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.midwest2.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.aeroled-85x50-2022-12-06.jpg.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.Marsh.jpg.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.lucysaviation-85x50.png.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.one-mile-up-85x100.png.
.SCA.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.AAI.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.aircraftferry-85x50.jpg.