Started my commercial

Kent,
We may have found the other way to do the Commercial.

There's a 1955 C-310 for sale at Clow for $55K. This is an original 4-seat 310, with no letter suffix. In it, we should be able to both get our ME, ME-C, ME-I, and ME-II. OTOH, at 20gal/hour, you're looking at about $70/hour just for fuel. The paint job is non-existent, but I understand from a reputable source that the recent annual was very thorough and that the engines are in very good shape.

We haven't started seriously investigating it, but it certainly raises interesting possibilities we hadn't previously considered.

Thoughts and opinions welcome! :)
 
gprellwitz said:
Kent,
We may have found the other way to do the Commercial.

There's a 1955 C-310 for sale at Clow for $55K. This is an original 4-seat 310, with no letter suffix. In it, we should be able to both get our ME, ME-C, ME-I, and ME-II. OTOH, at 20gal/hour, you're looking at about $70/hour just for fuel. The paint job is non-existent, but I understand from a reputable source that the recent annual was very thorough and that the engines are in very good shape.

We haven't started seriously investigating it, but it certainly raises interesting possibilities we hadn't previously considered.

Thoughts and opinions welcome! :)
Click to expand...

Keep in mind you won't be paying to maintain a $55,000 airplane you will be paying to maintain a twin. You can pretty much count on maintenance and operating costs being higher than two singles put together. Plus expensive insurance and a larger commitment to recurrent training.

I've contemplated getting my multi many times. It's not really that expensive to get but there is just no way for me to stay current in them. I have no interest in using a beat up Dutchess for my normal flying. I wouldn't mind getting my twin rating in something that can barely fly on two yet alone one. But I don't want to fly one of them around every day unless it's a decent well maintained twin that has at least a small fighting chance on one. You can't rent a decent twin--and I sure the hell can't buy one. So ASEL it is for me.
 
Last edited:
Grant, C310 s/n 2 is at my airport and owned by 4 friends of mine. It was purchased dirt cheap (I think $39K) for exactly the purpose you propose. By and large the owners were able to accomplish what they wanted. OTOH they spent a LOT of money besides the fuel, which you already underestimate. One of the owners is an A&P/IA, and they still spent and are spending a LOT of money.

Your idea can get you what you want but be prepared.

If you're serious, I can put you in touch with these owners, and you can get more specifics.
 
gprellwitz said:
There's a 1955 C-310 for sale at Clow for $55K. This is an original 4-seat 310, with no letter suffix. In it, we should be able to both get our ME, ME-C, ME-I, and ME-II. OTOH, at 20gal/hour, you're looking at about $70/hour just for fuel.
Click to expand...

Grant,

Talk to Bob Gerace.

If you buy it, I'll rent it from ya to do my ratings too. ;)

However, for $55K, you could rent the TwinStar at UGN for nearly 200 hours. Add that $70/hr fuel to the $55K and you could rent that TwinStar for 256 hours. Of course, you'd have nothing to show for it at the end, but you'd also not be taking huge risks in maintenance costs.

Join a club. Become the treasurer. You'll learn a LOT about mx costs, trust me! We have a '76 Archer that costs (total, not mx) over $100 per tach hour. A bird that's 20 years older, has more engines, more systems, etc. is a HUGE risk. Buy at $55K, but do you have $50K sitting around to pay that mx bill in a week? Ya better.

Would it be cool? Hell yes. Just be sure you know what you're getting into.

If you're still thinking about it... How about a nice Twinkie? At least you'll have cheaper engines and spend less on fuel. :yes:

Dammit, now you've got me thinking again... :eek:
 
CJones said:
Sounds like the early rumblings of "Prellwitz & Cheeshead Aero, LLC." :D :yes:
Click to expand...

No, it's Prellwitz Air, a Subsidiary of Cheesehead Aero, Inc.! LOL

BTW, this reality check is exactly why I posted this here! I know there are a lot of expenses with this. Twice the fuel burn, higher insurance (luckily it's only a four-place and has a low hull value, but it's still a high performance twin retract), much higher Mx, especially given that it's more than 50 years old, hangar, some almost mandatory upgrades over the first two years (IFR GPS, new paint), etc.

OTOH, it does seem to fit the type of flying we do pretty well. With a twin (not necessarily this one), I'd feel more comfortable doing some of those trips that can be considered higher risk, like going over Lake Michigan, up to Alaska, or down to the Bahamas. All things that we've either done or wanted to do in the three years we've been flying.

Plus, as I mentioned, and to bring it back in line with this thread, a twin would provide a good challenge for us to go ahead and get a bunch of new certificates and ratings. Maybe Leslie or I become flight instructors! :):dunno:

BTW, some more specs on this particular plane.:
2323 total time
540 SMOH Left & Right
110 since new props (not unusual, because of an AD)

New in past 2 years:
C&D Heater upgrade
ignition harness
batteries
main tires

rebuilt:
fuel cells (last year)
exhaust systems
nose strut
shimmy dampener


Yes, in all honesty, I don't think that we're in a situation now to purchase even a 182, much less a twin. But I still need to test the waters every once in a while!


Heck, if anyone else is interested in the plane, give me a holler, and maybe I'll put you in touch with the seller in exchange for some flight time! :yes::goofy:
 
tonycondon said:
grant just buy apachebobs apache.
Click to expand...
Sell me on it Tony. Leslie and I have some 310 time, but no Apache time. In what way(s) would an Apache be better for us that a 310 (or a 182)? Someone at the airport today was touting a Baron 55. It's all dreaming anyway, right? :goofy:
 
i dunno. how bout this:
its for sale and
from what i hear, its pretty cheap

isnt that enough? :D ive never flown an apache either
 
I enjoyed training for the Commercial rating. I got all the paperwork, written test and studying for the oral, done up front. Then a glorious 4 days of constant flying. I loved chandelles, but lazy-8s were my bane. The power-off 180 was a blast. One cool thing I learned from my DE, was if you're coming up short and the P-180 just pull the prop (less resistance) from full forward to full back. It can really make a difference.

I will always dislike steep turns & steep spirals. The way chandelles were explained to me, was a move to get out of a box canyon, of sorts. I found them a lot of fun. We'd chandelle up and up, then reluctantly steep spiral down. Clear the engine some... go back to lazy-8s, P-180s, short, soft-field landings. Rinse, Lather and repeat for 4 days. I was in heaven.

I'm sure you will do great.
 
jdwatson said:
I enjoyed training for the Commercial rating. I got all the paperwork, written test and studying for the oral, done up front. Then a glorious 4 days of constant flying. I loved chandelles, but lazy-8s were my bane. The power-off 180 was a blast. One cool thing I learned from my DE, was if you're coming up short and the P-180 just pull the prop (less resistance) from full forward to full back. It can really make a difference.

I will always dislike steep turns & steep spirals. The way chandelles were explained to me, was a move to get out of a box canyon, of sorts. I found them a lot of fun. We'd chandelle up and up, then reluctantly steep spiral down. Clear the engine some... go back to lazy-8s, P-180s, short, soft-field landings. Rinse, Lather and repeat for 4 days. I was in heaven.

I'm sure you will do great.
Click to expand...

Steep spirals were the worst for me. I did the SE commercial in a slow taildragger and in a steep bank my turn radius is only a few hundred feet and that makes it tough to keep the turn point in view as well as highlighting any positional errors.

And BTW, a Chandelle isn't the best way out of a canyon.
 
lancefisher said:
Steep spirals were the worst for me. I did the SE commercial in a slow taildragger and in a steep bank my turn radius is only a few hundred feet and that makes it tough to keep the turn point in view as well as highlighting any positional errors.

And BTW, a Chandelle isn't the best way out of a canyon.
Click to expand...

Can I presume your multi-commercial was in something faster ? :)

I think the CFI was going for the imagery. I have no idea the best way out of a canyon, other than don't go in to begin with.
 
EdFred said:
you should almost be at stall speed at the 90 point in the turn.
Click to expand...

Just a little nit-picky here, but the objective is to be at the highest pitch-attitude at the 90 point, but not so close to stall speed, yet. The nose is supposed to stay at this maximum pitch attitude throughout the rest of the 90 turn while rolling out, so you cannot be almost stalling at the first 90. This second half of the maneuver, slowly rolling out at a constant rate of roll-out while maintaing a pitch attitude thar will result in reaching minimum controllable airspeed as you reach 180 is the hard part.
 
CJones said:
Actually, there is a very slim chance that I might end up going somewhere to do Multi-Comm so I can kill two birds with one stone, then get the single add-on. Not sure how that's gonna pan out right now, though.
Click to expand...


I just passed my Commercial and Multi checkrides. I did both the same day. I used a C152 for the commercial maneuvers and a Beech Duchess for my complex and multi. I'm now Commercial ASEL/AMEL rated.

I took this route because I couldn't find a complex single anywhere nearby. The Duchess is more expensive ($190/hr wet) than say an Arrow or 172 RG but when you consider I got both ratings out of the way I'm sure I saved some money. BTW, the Duchess is a great multi trainer. I had a blast!

I see you are from BNW. The Duchess I used is at PEA. Shane Vande Voort is a great instructor and runs a first calss opperation. I also used Shane for my instrument rating. Check out his website at:

http://www.flyclassicaviation.com/
 
now he just needs that commercial glider (wink wink)
 
nosehair said:
Just a little nit-picky here, but the objective is to be at the highest pitch-attitude at the 90 point, but not so close to stall speed, yet. The nose is supposed to stay at this maximum pitch attitude throughout the rest of the 90 turn while rolling out, so you cannot be almost stalling at the first 90. This second half of the maneuver, slowly rolling out at a constant rate of roll-out while maintaing a pitch attitude thar will result in reaching minimum controllable airspeed as you reach 180 is the hard part.
Click to expand...

And since you are in a 30 degree bank your load factor is increased and...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top