You've posted that last pic a few times already.

You've posted that last pic a few times already.

What are ya the Beechtalk Editor?

Absolutely stunning!

Gorgeous Mark!

Love that paint job!

Saw one leaving KARA on Tuesday or Wednesday.
Anyone from BT?

For the Piaggio owners in this thread, would you feel comfortable basing your P180 out of a 3850FT long runway at about 800ft elevation and a climate ranging from -10C to +30C?

I would.

Not everyone will agree. Some people think that’s too tight for any twin. You would probably have many days when you would not have acc/stop or acc/go.

If you keep weight well below max for take off and be prepared to use the brakes just a bit on landing then yes depending on your experience. Strong gusting winds-no

I try not to use less than 5,000 foot runways as normal ops.

I have landed Staniel Cay Bahamas once with my wife and Palm Beach air park numerous times. Nailing my approach speed is key.

You need an Avanti with steel brakes or plan to change to steel brakes once carbon worn out. Once you have steel brakes they are almost reasonable $$ to replace.

Not for mine.

1000 ft, 30C, max weight:

Takeoff: 3810 ft
Landing: 3070 ft

Takeoff is with an engine failure at the worst time, and reaching 35 ft, less than 3000 ft ground run. Landing is 50 ft threshold height.

Mike C.

Not for mine.

1000 ft, 30C, max weight:

Takeoff: 3810 ft
Landing: 3070 ft

Takeoff is with an engine failure at the worst time, and reaching 35 ft, less than 3000 ft ground run. Landing is 50 ft threshold height.

Mike C.

And yet it doesn't seem to cost less to own overall.


Maybe, my passenger like my comfort and quietness of my cabin.


My post was not a full on point by point comparison, just pointing out that there is a twin that can use that runway very nicely.

The standard thought that turboprops can beat jets on runway usage is not universal. Piaggio is among the longer turboprops and the V is among the shorter jets, so the jet wins that one.

If your home base is short, a Piaggio is not a great choice. This is why Carlson moved from SQL to HWD when he got the Piaggio. The effective speed of the Piaggio is reduced by the drive time to/from the airport with the longer runway, and this may apply to both ends of the trip.

Mike C.

Hangar availability/cost was an additional factor. I recall you’ve spoken about moving your airplane to an airport with a cheaper hangar too… our cost saving and drive time tradeoffs are similar, actually.

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=215016&p=3199422&hilit=Kevv+hangar+citation+raised+rates#p3199422

viewtopic.php?f=49&t=223652&p=3353722&hilit=Kevv+kehr#p3353722

KSQL at 2600’ is snug for the Piaggio. I went in and out a couple times and it is doable, I could have done it with weight limitations but I also decided I didn’t want to have to go pick people up somewhere for the occasional longer trips, etc. But I would have done it no hesitation on 3850’.

It was not a single decision point, but length was one of the factors for not basing at KSQL.

...

There is no comparison between a legacy jets passenger comfort and a Piaggio. The Piaggio is a foot wider, a foot taller and 10DB less noise level.

As far as hangars go the V takes up more hangar space.

Your aircraft is 30 knots faster but uses 70% more fuel at cruise. Utilizing the same techniques you do to source parts and work with Piaggio friend shops such as Sims I can operate the Piaggio for the same or less than the V... most likely less. What I spend in greater maintenance costs I will save in fuel costs and then some. PLUS ... no SPE exemptions to worry about, no 61.58 check rides to schedule, and no type rating to fool with. Also a quieter better ride (higher wing loading). I don't even use headsets in the cockpit.. there is no need for them.

And lets don't even start comparing the lavs.

And.... its cooler looking (subjective I know)

Mark