I didn’t realize you were in Alaska. I’d consider Mike’s suggestion, I can’t speak for the maintenance of an MU-2 but there is no comparison in reliability and trips to the shop between a turbocharged piston and a turboprop. I’m not sure how easy it would be to service in Alaska when you do need something done though. I love the 425 but it can’t compete if MU-2s at that price are not project planes.

Man, now that’s one cool Navajo! I actually quite like that old school panel, looks straight out of a C-130… especially that ADI/HSI combo plus dual inverters to drive them. But then there’s your new panel, so clean, tidy, functional… yeah, new is better!

Yea they are slick planes, I may have to do some more research on them for operating costs. I don't know any operators up here from Anchorage.

An older King Air might fit the bill better.

King Airs are more common so finding shops that can work on them is easier.

Starting PT6 in the cold is easier than a TPE331. With a TPE331 block heater and battery heater, this issue can be mitigated, though.

The King Airs are slower and use more fuel, so everything is a tradeoff.

Mike C.

Perhaps I am experiencing the exception vs the rule on C421 ownership, but I've not found it to be a maintenance nightmare. Kind of the opposite. Over two years and 250 hours, we have not had and AOG problem yet, close but none yet. I had a starter go out, but I was carrying a spare (advice from other owners) and was back in the air within 1 hour. It has proven to be a very reliable plane. i did shop for over a year looking for a turnkey plane with a good maintenance pedigree, and I do use a large, well known twin cessna shop in Waco for all my maintenance, so maybe that is the difference.

It is not cheap to however, to maintain or operate. Every oil change is costly, fuel burn is costly due to the price of Avgas, and the annuals have run 25-30K a year.

My biggest complaint is a problem common to all aircraft, and that is finding a good avionics shop. Seems like they just do not exist any more. The good shops are slammed with too much work, and the other shops do more damage than good.

I would love to upgrade to a turbine, so maybe I'll have to consider the MU-2, but for now the C421C is basically a great airplane for my frequent 800nm tips. Low teens westbound in the winter, above FL200 eastbound yield some good performance

Chris C

After 500hrs during 4 years of ownership this has been my experience as well.

20 years and 2,500 hours of 421C ownership. I have never had an AOG and flown all over North America.

A well maintained 421C is a great pressurized twin for family or business trips.

I have to agree, a C421 is the best most comfortable piston plane around. I love my MU2 more than anything I've ever owned. Living in Alaska makes owning an MU2 troublesome. It's very important to have a mechanic that can work on your plane. You can almost always find someone that can work on a twin Cessna.

Most multi engine aircraft have negligible payloads at full fuel. That’s why it’s commonly called ferry range. The interesting number is range while carrying the payload it will most commonly need to haul.

Most multi engine aircraft have negligible payloads at full fuel. That’s why it’s commonly called ferry range. The interesting number is range while carrying the payload it will most commonly need to haul.[/quote]

this is true for a lot of PISTON twins, not for a lot turboprop twins. I can put 900lbs in the cabin with full fuel in my MU-2 F model for example. 366 gallons goes a long way, 4:45 is the longest leg I plan for and land with 65-70 gallons, no wind this is ~1100 miles. This time of year I see 260KTAS on 58gph, not bad! The newer MU2s are faster on a little more fuel.

Jeff Axel
N228WP

As much as I'm a twin Cessna fan (own a 414, managed a 421C, currently manage a 441 and flown most of the fleet), I'd be hard pressed not to buy a PA31 if operating in Alaska. There are Navajo pilots, parts and support in every corner of the state. The cargo door is also a huge benefit, especially if equipped with the crew door. The only Cessna's that cancompete with the PA31 in that environment is a 402B, C or a 404...

There are Navajos flying commuter legs all over AK, and very very few 340s.

The Navajo is an AK plane and the 340 is not - unless your only use of the 340 is to go from pavement to pavement, and to travel to the lower 48.

We current.y operate eight C421s and managed to get our hands on a C340A. Our people really like it. We are able to fly it regularly at FL250 and get close to C421 performance. Compared to a C421, we get that capability for $100K lower purchase price and $100 per hour lower operating cost. The C340 is for a specific market. It is for an operator with a limited budget, no need for a large cabin, and no need for much useful load. The one we have has the 200 Gal fuel system, is loaded with equipment, and has an 1800 Lb useful load. For a passenger load of two or four people, it is great.

We also have operated 325 and 350 Navajos. They were not popular. The 325 had a very limited useful load. The cabin was not as comfortable as a C421. There were some systems issues. The biggest problem is no pressurization. That is a big deal. Once you have flown pressurized, you never go back. I found the Navajos to be heavy on the controls and flew like a truck. After a long flight, my arms hurt (even with autopilot). The market for Navajos is carrying a large load over a short distance and no need to go to altitude.

We have also operated C414s (short nose). It is a good alternative to a C340. It has the same engines as the C340, but has less performance, larger cabin, and greater useful Load. The C414A is not a good choice. It is essentially a C421C but without the geared engines. The difference in price compared to a C421 is not significant. There are a number of other issues.

David Dewhirst
sabriscorporation.com

An upper body regimen at the gym might be in order. Back in the cancelled check hauling nights, we had multiple women weighing <120 pounds flying Chieftains six legs a night, who never complained about sore arms. Maybe they were bulked up from helping load 1000# of freight before they started the engines.