23 Apr 2024, 17:25 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90 Posted: 16 Nov 2019, 22:44 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/28/09 Posts: 14152 Post Likes: +9097 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..
_________________ http://calipilot.com atp/cfii
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90 Posted: 16 Nov 2019, 23:55 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/23/19 Posts: 18 Post Likes: +10 Location: 18AZ
Aircraft: 2001 Piper Meridian
|
|
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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90 Posted: 17 Nov 2019, 02:39 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/09/13 Posts: 174 Post Likes: +79 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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90 Posted: 17 Nov 2019, 04:36 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/31/13 Posts: 1235 Post Likes: +602 Company: Docking Drawer Location: KCCR
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
_________________ ATP, CFI-I, MEI http://www.dockingdrawer.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90 Posted: 17 Nov 2019, 04:49 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/23/10 Posts: 849 Post Likes: +661
|
|
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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90 Posted: 17 Nov 2019, 08:27 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/09/09 Posts: 4573 Post Likes: +3298
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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90 Posted: 17 Nov 2019, 09:04 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/17/13 Posts: 6359 Post Likes: +5543 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.
_________________ Problem is the intelligent people are full of doubt, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90 Posted: 17 Nov 2019, 09:08 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/04/10 Posts: 3539 Post Likes: +3198
Aircraft: C55, PC-12
|
|
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 Ridgway, CO
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90 Posted: 17 Nov 2019, 11:26 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/11/11 Posts: 2252 Post Likes: +2215 Location: Queretaro / Woodlands
Aircraft: C525 BE40 D1K Waco
|
|
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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90 Posted: 17 Nov 2019, 11:49 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/21/14 Posts: 5160 Post Likes: +3698 Company: FAA Flight Check Location: Oklahoma City, OK (KOKC)
Aircraft: King Air 300F/C90GTx
|
|
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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Upgrade: Meridian or King Air C90 Posted: 17 Nov 2019, 11:50 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/31/14 Posts: 534 Post Likes: +255
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 |
|
|
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
|
|
|
|