aerostar 601P or 700 will do the trick depending on the weight you want to haul.

I plan for 220 knots at 65% on my 700 at mid teens.

pressurized flys better than almost anything out there. a big BMW sedan with wings. very strong and won't lose its wings no matter what turbulence you hit.

very well supported by a manufacturer but not cheap

From a TN Bonanza? What are you looking to do? I went from a T206 to a P210. Pressurization is a game changer comfort wise. You fly higher because it is so easy to do, no oxygen to mess with. If you want to stay piston single, the next step is a P210 or a Malibu, whichever works best for you. Your fuel burn won't be a lot higher, your maintenance will be a little more and your comfort will be far better. Pressurized piston twins have a lot of stuff to maintain and will burn more fuel, could be more than twice as much, but you will go a little faster, more so in something like an Aerostar. The P Baron cabin is essentially what you have now, the Aerostar is a little bigger and the twin Cessnas are a lot bigger. Whatever you get, be sure there is someone in your area who can maintain it. If you have 100+ hours of multi time, I would skip pressurized piston twins entirely and get an MU2. Cost per mile is close, and it is a much more reliable and capable plane than any pressurized piston twin. It is also faster, even an old F model like mine is a 250-260KTAS plane at FL240-250 on under 60gph of fuel that is less expensive, sometimes much less expensive than 100LL. Speed is life changing and being able to do coast to coast eastbound in under 8 hours flying time with just one fuel stop is just magic. Your passengers will like this choice better, at least mine do.

Jeff Axel
N228WP

viewtopic.php?f=43&t=229872

lotta plane for the money, and this isn't a F model. It is a -10 Solitaire, 300KTAS airplane. If I didn't already have an MU2, or had the cash to upgrade.....

Jeff Axel
N228WP

For me the next step up would be a Malibu.

Pressurization, FIKI, A/C and very long range capability are enticing.

But it won’t fit in my hangar.

Having said that I see 190 KTAS all the time at 11,500 - 12,500’ MSL with my TAT TN A36 with IO-550. Basically Baron speeds on 15.x GPH fuel flow at cruise.

I looked into the Malibu quite extensively when deciding to move out of the Cirrus.
From what I saw, the Malibu seemed to not have much more to offer besides pressurization
It seems the TAS is really 190-200 at the flight levels (my personal experience was only around 160 TAS at 16,000 feet when I flew one. Speed is key and while I have not seen 200 kts yet on my bonanza (just because I havent had the time to set up my O2 tank and go) I am definitely seeking more

Im curious, do you know what your numbers look like when you get 190 TAS. I have a western skyways, and everyone Ive spoken to with tornado alley seems to be getting better numbers than mine

At 11,000 to 12,000 I am seeing 170-175 TAS, 14-15 GPH, 80 degrees LOP (Peak TIT is 1500 for me, tried it multiple times), 29.96 manifold, 2500 RPM.


I might just wait it out a few years and keep the Bonanza running until I can get closer to the light jet category in my budget.

I looked into the Malibu quite extensively when deciding to move out of the Cirrus.
From what I saw, the Malibu seemed to not have much more to offer besides pressurization
It seems the TAS is really 190-200 at the flight levels (my personal experience was only around 160 TAS at 16,000 feet when I flew one. Speed is key and while I have not seen 200 kts yet on my bonanza (just because I havent had the time to set up my O2 tank and go) I am definitely seeking more

Im curious, do you know what your numbers look like when you get 190 TAS. I have a western skyways, and everyone Ive spoken to with tornado alley seems to be getting better numbers than mine

At 11,000 to 12,000 I am seeing 170-175 TAS, 14-15 GPH, 80 degrees LOP (Peak TIT is 1500 for me, tried it multiple times), 29.96 manifold, 2500 RPM.


I might just wait it out a few years and keep the Bonanza running until I can get closer to the light jet category in my budget.

An option is an MU2, say an F or K model, which can be had under $400K.

Put the other $600K in investments. An 8% return is $48K per year, this is less than the SP500 average return the last 20 years.

You can fly it for under $100K per year, I did for my M model and a doctor friend of mine has an F model and operates under that budget easily per year. I was about $700-750/hour and flew 100-125 hours/year.

F model is 260+ knots. One for sale on Controller for $289K right now. Later models get progressively faster. You will have twin turbine reliability, pressurized comfort, and go a lot faster. It will make those long trips a lot shorter.

A 501 Citation is an option given the low capital cost (maybe $500K?) but the operating costs will be hard to keep under $100K/year. If you put the saved capital cost in investments, then it might work out as I think you can do it well under $150K/year. Nothing is safer than the jet if you put a high value on that, much safer than a piston single. Passenger comfort tops anything else.

There are 3 501s under $500K on Controller right now, including one with fairly low engine times.

For smaller planes, your capital costs go way up (Meridian, TBM, etc), so you are losing a lot of money in tied up capital that you don't see. A $1M JetProp, for example, is $80K in capital cost per year before you spend any money on actually flying it. Higher capital cost is higher risk or market value loss, and higher insurance, too. 10 years from now, I doubt 501s will be half their market value now, while JetProps might be.

Basic point: make sure to look at the total cost of ownership, including the cost of capital.

Mike C.

It's funny in these threads, where the budget is stated at $700K, the recommend is always "PC-12, TBM or Jetprop". None of those can be had for anywhere close to the budget.

My suggestion would be to get the best Aerostar 700P you can get. It'll do 220-240kts all day and has the range you need. Or if you want a turbine, you can have a look at the one I'm selling or an MU-2.

CapEx Budget is $700k-$1m

Opex Budget is $50-$100k

Is willing to spend $150k OpEx if CapEx is $200k less

This makes no sense to me, it sounds like you have a classic case of money burning a hole in your pocket, and haven't thought out your next move completely.

If you can afford 50-100k/year in opex, then save longer and get a better bird

TBM and Pilatus are definitely out of the question, but I have seen several jetprops with midtime motors for $700-900K,

[Link]https://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=Turboprop&make=PIPER&model=JETPROP+DLX&listing_id=2430246&s-type=aircraft[/Link]

[Link]https://www.controller.com/listing/for-sale/230950231/1999-piper-jetprop-turboprop-aircraft[/Link]

Casey aviation (focus on piper Malibus, Jetprops, and Meridians) has a lot of great things to say about the jetprop. My main issue is my faith in piper's airframe (I don't fly into any sort of weather system to begin with, but it isnt reassuring to hear about the wings falling off on Malibus and Mirages). The other is- single engine reliability. While turbines are far more reliable than pistons, I don't know if I would be comfortable flying to the Carribbean in one.

I appreciate the suggestion for MU2, other option is to wait it out and buy a nicer jet in the coming years.

I don't think you are reading the ranges correctly , Budget is $700k-1 million
The current citation 500s are less than $400 K. The difference between the lower end of my budget and that price is $300 K, and the difference to the higher end is almost $600 K.

Give's over a decade of extra room to move funds from my capital to operating costs.

Since 2008 I have had an Eclipse and in my opinion it’s perfect for this mission and I still love it

Fly above almost all the weather available for less than 1M and if your annual budget is 150K you will run out of places to go before you bust your budget

I don't think you're being very kind to your capital in that case- opex vanishes, you're literally setting money on fire

To say that for reduced Capex spend, you can tolerate increased opex, is a bit illogical to me- you're willing to toss more money into the furnace repeatedly, if you can shell out less up front?

Why not wait, and accrue more Capex, so that you can buy something nicer with a more tolerable opex.....

BWTHDIK

Without a doubt, I definitely would avoid this route, I am just considering options at the moment.

I learn of different combinations of planes all the time (didnt know about the mu2 at all, learned about the jetprop last year, didnt know citation 500’s could be had for the low cost)

I still have another few hundred hours to go (hopefully a year or two) before I make a purchase decision.

I’d just get a good late-model 58 Baron with A/C and call it good.