I've requested one charter quote in my life. It was SUS-AIZ (95nm) on a friday afternoon and return on a sunday afternoon in a Navajo that was listed at $725/hr.

Total price - almost $4K after taxes, fees, deadhead legs, etc. The flight from startup to shutdown was generously 0.7. That would put my effective hourly charter rate above $2k in a navajo. I can imagine that HPN-ACK for a weekend could push $2600/hr easily for a PC12 that is officially $1200/hr

My advice is to stretch on the budget and focus on the mission. You can do what your talking about 75-80% of the time with either a C-90 or C-421. I had the same mission for my construction company and used a 421 for 12 years very successfully.

I agree.
But with a non-pilot owner I’d lean with Chip and choose the 90.
The 421 really needs an owner/pilot involved in the maintenance.

I agree.
But with a non-pilot owner I’d lean with Chip and choose the 90.
The 421 really needs an owner/pilot involved in the maintenance.

That's the statement that I think is false.

Your example, ACM, exists in both the turboprops and the jets.

In fact, the ACM is actually the same exact model (Hamilton Sundstrand R70) that is in the Citation and MU2 and the Commander and a bunch of other airplanes. The King Air will have environmental systems that cost money to fix.

Obviously brakes are more complicated on the jet, and props are more complex on the turboprop, but after that, what is so different?

The big expense items you hear about are when people take legacy Citations to service centers and they try to make everything "new" again. Take a King Air 90 to the service center with a blank checkbook, you will see similar numbers.


And you can sell a jet.

Have them day charter a King Air and a Citation on similar trips. I think that will settle the issue very quickly.

Mike C.

Show us the chart.

Mike C.

I flew my TC840 in and out of my 2500 foot strip in Kansas. Paved 30 feet wide. Never had a problem. Had to pay the power company to bury a line off the departure end. $20k. I am sure it saved my life.

Looks like Mike wants to talk himself into a jet, but I suspect that even trying to talk himself into it, he is starting to understand why you can't give these old jets away

$2600 an hour is the rate I hear quoted from charter operators. Hell mine costs me $1K an hour flying it myself.

What's funny is hearing him trying to talk me into it!!

Show us the chart.

Mike C.

Here is the Marquise SE climb chart.

As has been stated many times, the MU2 strong suit is not OEI climb rates.

There is no corresponding chart for the legacy jets that I can find. Instead, they have segmented takeoff engine failure charts but it isn't clear how you translate the charts into climb rates.

The turboprops lack such charts, so they only give you OEI climb rates when everything is all cleaned up and good, not how you get from engine failure on or near the runway to that point.

The key point is that for a jet to achieve the numbers requires very simple pilot actions, basically just fly the airplane on speed. For a turboprop, that is not so, pilots have to correctly manage the airplane configuration and also fly on speed.

If you look through the accident record, you will find dozens of mishandled engine outs in turboprops, and close to none in jets (in fact, I don't know of any myself). So the jet safety is not just the performance you get single engine, but the ease with which you achieve it.

Mike C.

Yep - nobody muffs a citation engine out and goes through the roof of Flight Safety. Nobody cobbs an eclipse throttle at 1.01 VSo and loses control from torque roll.

No 121 jet crew feathers the wrong engine then crashes.

Propellers are troublesome no matter what turns them.

I completely agree with the safety component of jets, it's a bit of a delicate subject because it's hard to explain that extra safety margin without implying turboprops are unsafe... because they're not.

The fact is, the bigger it is... the easier it is to fly.

Do everything right in a turboprop and all is well... but it is easier to do everything right in a jet.

A great example is the Cheyenne I that crashed on takeoff from Tyler, Texas. The pilot was a retired Southwest Captain. The firefighters on scene reported that all of the levers were full forward. Good loss of engine plan in a 737... fatal in a Cheyenne I.

By focusing on the engine out scenarios we are ignoring high altitude depressurization and other issues not common to turboprops.

BUT... turboprops are safer than pistons and jets are safer than turboprops... overall.

I've got an unlisted 1981 Citation II I'd sell for well within that budget. Branson 14.5 MTOW. I've flown it in and out of KVAY single pilot (3,880 X 50) at about 10.5K Lbs. Tight and a little scary due to the runway slope and condition, but doable down to probably 3000' on a nice runway. I've had 8 adults on board with 3 hours of fuel... Full fuel, it's really only a 6 place airplane (1200NM), but it can seat 10 including the pilot. DM me for more info...