Best all around plane?

AdamZ

AdamZ

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
14,866
Location
Montgomery County PA
Display Name
Display name:
Adam Zucker
What do each of you think is the best or one of the
best all around airplanes. Some of us look for planes to fly fast some to carry a load ,some to fly low n slow etc. But my question is what plane fits the most items on a theoretical wish list.

Here are the basic attribute that the plane should have to be the best all around plane for the purposes of this question. The plane should have all or as many as possible. In other words what is the best plane to compromise all requirments

REQUIREMENTS:

1) Single Engine Piston
2) Speed
3) Can carry a reasonable load preferably 4 avg size folks and some "light bags" with Fuel for 3hrs + reserves
4) Respectable Short field capabilites say 2300'
5) Grass strip capable
6) Decent IR platform
7) Not a total fuel hog or Mx Hog

BTW its also OK to say that such a plane does not exist.

Be interested to hear what everyone says.

My initial thoughts were the Six 300hp or something like Spieks late great Deb but I don't know much about it. And not sure the Six could do the short or short grass Not saying it can't just dunno.

Perhaps the Maule but can't recall if thats a two seater which would disqulaify it.
 
I'm voting for the Bo / Debbie. :) But everyone here knew that already.
 
not much certified is going to fit the bill. 300 HP 6 is about it really. First thing that came to my mind was a Murphy Moose. I dont know a lot about em, not sure how fast they are, but they can carry a lot.
 
Any that you can fly. In my case I love my C182 for flights less than 500 NM and my Columbia 400 for flights of a greater distance.

Scott
 
I'm going to say Cessna T-210 although I would want that to be smooth grass and not all the time.
 
Adam: The Beech A-36 will pretty much do what you said. It's a six seater with a payload around 600 pounds with full fuel (four seats and stuff or six seats with little folks and no stuff). One can add tip tanks for longer trips or just to have fuel flexibility and get a gross weight increase. 170 knot basic machine. Can be improved with a turbo and lots of other after market stuff.

The Deb will have trouble with four adults and any stuff as will the V-tail. Those are really sports cars, the A-36 is more like a family sedan. A later 70s to early 80s should run in the high 100s to low 200s depending on engine and AF time and how it's equipped.

I flew a turbo normalized A-36 for five years before I purchased the Baron.

Best,

Dave
 
The T-210. 1550# useful load. 89 gal. useable fuel. 13.5 gph or less in cruise. 162 kt. TAS @4,000, 182 kt. TAS @20,000 [65% power]. Built-in O2. In and out of 1400 ft. grass, 1,000 msl. over 50 ft. obstacle @2500ft. from takeoff end.
 
Several planes fit that criteria:

A-36
Cessna 210
Piper Lance/Saratoga
Cherokee 6 (may be a little slow tho)
Cessna 182 and 182RG (smooth strip for the RG, OK?)(the straight leg may be slow though)
Cessna 206
Cessna 180/185 (taildraggers are OK, right?)

All I can think of for now.
 
The 6-300 or a Cessna 210 are the only ones that really come to mind.
 
Depends on what you mean by "speed". 130 to 140 KTAS, then a 182 or 6-300. If you want faster, then probably a Bonanza or a T206 or 210.

However, if you REALLY want it all.... a PC12 will fit the bill nicely (will handle the 2300 of grass at middle weights, too). Caravan would also work but not as fast.
 
Hey, you've already ridden in it! :)

www.iar823.com

Grass operations is assumed in the POH chart for t/o performance already.

Will do everything a Cirrus SR22 will do...only 35kts slower... ;)
 
Steve said:
Hey, you've already ridden in it! :)

www.iar823.com

Grass operations is assumed in the POH chart for t/o performance already.

Will do everything a Cirrus SR22 will do...only 35kts slower... ;)
Click to expand...

That thing isn't safe. WTF would you do if the radio failed and you didn't have a parachute!?!?
 
TMetzinger said:
Depends on what you mean by "speed". 130 to 140 KTAS, then a 182 or 6-300. If you want faster, then probably a Bonanza or a T206 or 210.

However, if you REALLY want it all.... a PC12 will fit the bill nicely (will handle the 2300 of grass at middle weights, too). Caravan would also work but not as fast.
Click to expand...

Tim I also thought of the PC-12 as having it all, however its not a piston. Otherwise I'd say thats the one.
 
Well, it depends on what you mean by Speed. IMHO, The Cherokee fits everything you're asking for, and speed is 120Knots....so it depends on whether that is fast enough for ya. It's certainly faster than a lot of piston singles.
 
you're right, they sold them for training, and good flying characteristics, and two people cross country flying. not 4 people, fast, with light bags.
 
On my budget I would go with the Cherokee 235, on someone elses budget the Cherokee 6 300HP. I have flown in both the A36 Bo and the 300 HP 6, the 6 has more room and in my opinion is more comfy. I will always give up speed for comfort.
 
Yeah, you guessed it......Tiger.

It will do 2,300 ft strips and grass, but I would not do a 2,300 ft grass strip at gross wight. If that's a requirement, forget the Tiger. It meets all the other specs though and has the fuel burn and maintenance of a simple 4 banger, not Continental 6 cyl. to worry about.
 
NC19143 said:
Cessna did not sell 27 thousand 172 for nothing.
Click to expand...
I think Tom's got it. Adam posted the question "Best all-around plane" and then redefined the question with his own criteria of what best would be.

As Tom points out, the market has its own definition of "best". The best combination of utility (as the market has defined it), and price is clearly the Skyhawk. Now if only they put the wings in the right place.... :rolleyes:

-Skip
 
Skip Miller said:
Now if only they put the wings in the right place.... :rolleyes:

-Skip
Click to expand...
OK, this has always been an issue that the wings belong on the bottom. Do birds set on top of their wings or hang from them?:rolleyes: They hang from them, so the proper location is on top. :yes:
 
AdamZ said:
Tim I also thought of the PC-12 as having it all, however its not a piston. Otherwise I'd say thats the one.
Click to expand...

Yanno, if you let a 135 operator use the airplane when you didn't need it, or use it for business, you MIGHT get costs down to where it might be a decent proposition. I know several 135 folks who use PC12s and they say they are good money-makers for legs of 750 NM or less.
 
2) Speed
What do you mean here? If you could specify >140kts or something we could drop a bunch of those suggested. >120kts would make 'speed' a factor which you could probably drop from your list.

3) Can carry a reasonable load preferably 4 avg size folks and some "light bags" with Fuel for 3hrs + reserves
4) Respectable Short field capabilites say 2300'
These (#3 and #4) will limit you I think, to >200hp so you can go through the offerings and drop those. In fact I think you might 'up' that hp requirement quite a bit if you want to do both!

5) Grass strip capable
I have never seen this as a limitation for most light singles if you are talking about a smooth, dry, trimmed strip. Lots of mooneys and bonanza do such airfields, so you can almost delete this from your list. Unless you are talking about Idaho state park mountain-sides, or Alaska, or uninmproved & constantly wet strips - in which case you need a 185 or something.

6) Decent IR platform
Are there any airplanes out there that are not? I hear people say this plane is a Great IFR P. but what plane is 'not'? We arent including Pitts', 150's in your search I'd bet!

7) Not a total fuel hog
Hmm. A dilemma. You want power to get up with 4, or from a short strip, but you don't want to feed it a lot of gas. Can't defeat those laws of physics...in order to have the first, you need HP. But HP uses more gas.
You need to select a compromise engine size somewhere between the O-200 and the IO-720! (if you just say you will get a climb prop, there goes #2, "speed" so I don't consider that an ideal option)
I would look at airplanes having an engine with a power/fuel flow combination you can live with... maybe somewhere between the O470 and the IO520?

or Mx Hog
For this I would just avoid multiple complicated systems, and aged or non-regularily flown and maintained airplanes.
 
Skip Miller said:
I think Tom's got it. Adam posted the question "Best all-around plane" and then redefined the question with his own criteria of what best would be.

As Tom points out, the market has its own definition of "best". The best combination of utility (as the market has defined it), and price is clearly the Skyhawk. Now if only they put the wings in the right place.... :rolleyes:

-Skip
Click to expand...

Well Skip, I had to "redefine" the requirments The 172 or the Archer for that matter are great planes, They are the Chevys of the sky. Yes thousands have been sold but they still don't have the load capacity at the speed that many including myself think would be ideal. ( Note to Sportys disregard that statment if I win the 172) I like to travel with my wife and another couple on a weekend trip. thats tough in a 172 or an Archer.
And yes Anthony I LOVE the Tiger but your not getting you, Bonnie, and another adult couple in the plane with a few light bags and 3 hrs + reserves.
The speed of a Tiger is surely nice and I guess thats what one of my errors was in this post I didn't define speed. So lets say Cruise TAS at 75% BHP is oh 135kts or 140 kts or faster.

Frankley the plane Terry posted looks awesome but it dosent' appear to be in production yet. It looks like the list is getting narrowed to

A-36
182
206 or 210
PA32-300
 
Cessna 205 fits your criteria, too, Adam, and it's the low price leader.
 

Attachments

  • 8411Z.JPG
    8411Z.JPG
    104.8 KB · Views: 22
Last edited:
Let'sgoflying! said:
7) Not a total fuel hog
Hmm. A dilemma. You want power to get up with 4, or from a short strip, but you don't want to feed it a lot of gas. Can't defeat those laws of physics...in order to have the first, you need HP. But HP uses more gas.
You need to select a compromise engine size somewhere between the O-200 and the IO-720! (if you just say you will get a climb prop, there goes #2, "speed" so I don't consider that an ideal option)
I would look at airplanes having an engine with a power/fuel flow combination you can live with... maybe somewhere between the O470 and the IO520?
Click to expand...

How bout something with an IO 360, like a mooney, but with RATO for the grass takeoffs?
 
Adam:
If you want more detailed info on the A-36, let me know. The large rear cargo doors are a real plus. In '78, they moved the rear bulkhead back to allow about three feet of cargo room behind the rear seats.

I usually flew with the rearmost seats out; it made a great four place with some stuff plane. Sometimes left a fifth seat in for that short hop with kids in back when I went to visit my nieces.

Best,

Dave
 
AdamZ said:
Frankley the plane Terry posted looks awesome but it dosent' appear to be in production yet. It looks like the list is getting narrowed to
Click to expand...
Actually the Helio Courier was produced up until the mid eighties (I think) and there are still several flying around.
You may be able to find an old one on TAP or controller. My old airport had one which had been converted to tricycle gear.
 
AdamZ said:
Well Skip, I had to "redefine" the requirments
Click to expand...
I would agree that the ideal plane for me, as well, would not be a 172. Regardless, it is hard to argue against the best-ever seller as being the most desired plane for us pilots taken as a whole.
Frankley the plane Terry posted looks awesome but it dosent' appear to be in production yet. It looks like the list is getting narrowed to

A-36
182
206 or 210
PA32-300
Click to expand...
Don't rule out a certain PA-32-260......

-Skip
 
There's a Helio Courier at MBO that came from the factory as a tri-gear. The owner has turned down several offers. :(

More Helio trivia at

http://www.heliocourier.net/



infotango said:
Actually the Helio Courier was produced up until the mid eighties (I think) and there are still several flying around.
You may be able to find an old one on TAP or controller. My old airport had one which had been converted to tricycle gear.
Click to expand...
 
Ron Levy said:
Is price a consideration?
Click to expand...


Good question Ron! Yes I suppose price is always a condideration.

BTW I think I should have put the Dakota in my list above as well.

the 205 looks intriguing I have never seen one before.

Also FWIW this is kind of fantasy for me a one day kind of thing if you will, lest you think I am actually looking now. I was just thinking what are the things I'd like to do with a plane and what I'd like a plane to do.
 
Last edited:
Dean said:
On my budget I would go with the Cherokee 235, on someone elses budget the Cherokee 6 300HP. I have flown in both the A36 Bo and the 300 HP 6, the 6 has more room and in my opinion is more comfy. I will always give up speed for comfort.
Click to expand...

Cherokee 235 was my vote; will carry 4 just fine, full fuel, off grass.
 
People with Helios are not going to be inclined to sell them (although I saw a few for sale somewhere, one of them 1950-something, at really exorbitant prices). There was some doctor at GFK who had one and would regularly fly it to Bermuda or some private island somewhere.
 
terzap said:
People with Helios are not going to be inclined to sell them (although I saw a few for sale somewhere, one of them 1950-something, at really exorbitant prices). There was some doctor at GFK who had one and would regularly fly it to Bermuda or some private island somewhere.
Click to expand...
For your consideration:
http://www.stolaircraft.com/1958_h391B.html
I'm not sure why it is so cheap, nor why the ad's text lists 125, when the title lists 85, any thoughts?
Apparently JAARS is slowly getting rid of its fleet of Couriers.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top