How dare you! Please explain yourself!

In this F-104 video you can see the similarities between the gear of the Starfighter and the Avanti. Biggest difference is that Avanti folds them backwards.

As I recall it and was told, the Avanti had identical gear to the Starfighter. But when I look at it now, it looks like there are some minute differences especially in the cross section of the main legs. Maybe Carlo can clarify?

To the person that contacted me with a private message: I am sorry, but I don't have privileges on the forum to reply to you. Please send email to tom at dud dot co

I have been reading this thread for a long while now..... I am only half through. I am considering the Avanti seriously as my upgrade path from my current C90. Seems if I go jet instead I need to go to a much smaller cabin, and I am already used to flying a TETP, so the Piaggio might just be a wonderful solution.

Is there an owners forum somewhere to find out more or is this thread basically it? I have some questions about training, maintenance schedules for low annual part 91 operators etc.

I am based KMFR.

Thank you
Florian

I'd suggest this thread is the most comprehensive "database" of Piaggio knowledge outside the "brain-retained" knowledge of a few select Piaggio gurus.

Post your questions here, you'll get some great answers...and grow the database..

Thank you - ok:

-training - I am a big fan of simulator training and have learned a lot on the King Air sim training - I do that in San Diego. Is Florida the only location you can get Piaggio sim training? Also, the prices of $22k and $11k or so recurrent - is that true? Just surprised since its just so much more than my KA training.

-maintenance - do you have a maintenance schedule you can post? Are there different options depending on the hours you fly - all calendar based or all time based etc? Special inspections? I hear the gear is a 12 year overhaul which for part 91 would be optional. if the word is really only overhaul. On the king air it is 6 year inspection and overhaul, so while you can leave out the overhaul items it is still a $25k inspection (that's cheap of course compared to the $250k piaggio overhaul)

-What is it that makes it so runway hungry? the power to weight ratio is much better than a KA90, iso even if rotation speed is 110 vs 95 it shouldn't make much difference? And on landing, I suppose the book figures are without reverse but with reverse you should be able to land short unless you just float a lot when descending from 50ft (which is probably what is in the book landing distance)

-can a local shop get training to work on them? I love getting work locally done as I can oversee it better and check in every day rather than being pushed to the back of the hangar. OK, since I am in medford, OR Mather in Sacramento would not be far.

-what altitudes do you typically cruise at? I watched some videos on YouTube and the guy really recommended fl340 or so, but I didn't quite get the point since efficiency is so much better towards FL400, unless you need the last few knots of speed.

-whats the hardest part about flying them (especially compared to KA if you have experience)? Slightly higher approach speeds doesn't seem too difficult to adjust to I think. maybe the landing flare or lack thereof is harder? KA doesn't really flare, but it settles down very easily of course at full flaps compared to just about any other aircraft I have flown.

I think a copy of the maintenance overview is the biggest question I here for me. I am trying to figure out how much more this costs me to maintain vs KA90. I burn 500 pounds for 215knots currently, but of course the real cost is not in the fuel for a 120hours per year part 91 family hauler operator.

My family (and me honestly) are kind of done for the day after four hours in the KA. that gives me about 800nm range with happy family. It seems to me a piaggio would extend that a lot.

Florian

Hi Florian,

I flew a Columbia 350 for 11 years and around 1700 hours.
I joined BT because I wanted to buy a pressurized Baron then discovered an Aerostar thread here and bought an Aerostar.
After 400 hours in Aerostar I thought I would buy a King Air 200 or a Cheyenne IIXL but after seeing this here Avanti tread and a little research I was smitten and found my Avanti.
A bit nervous on maintenance at first but after 4 years and close to 600 hours no surprises.

Training: Yes, the only Avanti Sim in the world is Flight Safety in Palm Springs, Fl.
Not cheap but worth it to me, especially since I had zero turbine time transitioning to Avanti.

Runway hungry: All airplanes have compromises. Avanti has a larger cabin than any single pilot airplane (headroom and width, not length) and a smallish wing which lets us shrug at what others report as moderate turbulence and contributes to Avanti’s incredible efficiency. Higher stall speed requires higher landing and take off speed which means this airplane needs more runway than a King Air.
I have landed 3,000 foot runway light. Pretty sure I could land lees than 2500 feet if I wanted to. Wheels come off the ground around 2700 feet when heavy and less when lighter.
Risk times exposure when contemplating shorter runways.
I can land kinda short but if a part 135 operation would not land/take off on a runway this short do I need to be….on a regular basis.

Local shop maintenance: Lot to learn on this plane but I suppose.

Altitude: FL380 or Fl390 on a long trip cruising at 350+ knots on 80gph or less is sweet.
You run out of gogo juice (Jet A) in this airplane way before you want to get off.
Full stand up LAV and relief tube for me.

To me nothing hard about flying Avanti or landing one.
I had my worst landing in 2 years last weekend and my first time passenger said it was his smoothest landing ever being used to commercial only.
I have had many (still just occasional) landings where I just notice wheels are now rolling on runway.

N O T H I N G C O M E S C L O S E for me

and there is no move up/next airplane

Yes, and yes.


I attached the manufacturer's maintenance manual inspection section (i.e. Ch 5). It is a good overview. Not quite full detail because there are lots of SBs. But... should give you an overview to ask detailed questions if you want.

edit: Shoot - PDFs don't upload. Send me a PM and I will email you that file.


It's really not, its reputation is overblown. I thought about basing at KSQL, and bailed at the last second. But I sometimes regret having bailed. It lands quite short if you give it a little effort (and reverse). Its takeoff is greatly dependent on rotate speed of course, and some of the reputation comes from using speeds significantly higher than book speeds. Use the book speeds and it's not bad.


I use a local guy for basic stuff. But... the inspections, as with many turbines, benefit significantly from experience and some specialized tools and knowledge. Not that there's anything mysterious, it's just being familiar with the ins and outs of SBs, how they interact, best times to do them.... etc.

Haven't had a chance to use the guy in Mather yet myself honestly.


I find it very happy in the FL350-FL390 range. Above 390 gets a little wheezy when temps are above ISA+10, which it seems like is much of the time these days. Obviously it does better up there if not heavy, too.


It's super easy to fly. Nothing hard at all.

Trickiest thing is the first hour of trying to taxi on the ground - the ground handling is, uh, different. But you get it figured out.


I suspect it'll be more than a KA. Piaggio parts can be eye watering, though they can also be found used etc for not unreasonable. It's a "jet-level" of maintenance cost. Compare to the CJ line it doesn't look too bad. Compare to my older MU-2 and... it's more.


It's hugely more comfortable in the cabin. Quiet, 9.0PSID pressurization means 5-6000 cabin altitude, super spacious, has a potty... mine doesn't have headset jacks, and my wife keeps saying she doesn't want to wear them even if I put them in. My only complaint is she doesn't really seem to want to talk to me. :(

For a given plane, it takes 35% more runway to accelerate to 110 knots than it does to accelerate to 95 knots.

For a given plane, it takes 35% more runway to accelerate to 110 knots than it does to accelerate to 95 knots.

Panel is almost finished... interior being put in next and I finally will have my new bird!

Looks great!

Does your wallet need a little ballast now so as to fly on its own?

Looks great!

Does your wallet need a little ballast now so as to fly on its own?

It would be great if we could add a front luggage compartment.

There's an amazingly well equipped, low time Avanti II with fresh hot sections coming on the market soon. If you know anyone looking it should be out next week.