Inexpensive twin

jssmith.lh

jssmith.lh

Pre-Flight
Joined
May 29, 2015
Messages
55
Location
Central Texas
Display Name
Display name:
Goldthwaite flyer
OK, I know the two don’t really go together. But everything is relative:) I’m looking down the road to a part 135 job and need to get multi and build time. This would be a replacement for my current single bug smasher. Basically needs a low acquisition and low maintenance cost. Four place is fine. Not really worried about operating costs. Popcorn ready!
 
Travel Air or Apache?
 
If you’re not concerned about operating costs, you can always get a King Air and check the turbine box while you’re at it. ;)
 
There's a few ancient 310's for sale right now. I'd think that if I only needed a bunch of hours for getting a 135 job, I'd just get my multi, then get on with a 121 airline for a year and bam! 1000 hrs multi and ya got paid for it. Then a 135 job is yours.
 
Everyone has caught onto the cheap twin strategy and are buying them all up for hours. Depending on that cheap is to you an older 310 or Baron is going for less than a travel air or Apache. You can also find some good Twin Bonanza for decent prices.
 
jssmith.lh said:
OK, I know the two don’t really go together. But everything is relative:) I’m looking down the road to a part 135 job and need to get multi and build time. This would be a replacement for my current single bug smasher. Basically needs a low acquisition and low maintenance cost. Four place is fine. Not really worried about operating costs. Popcorn ready!
Click to expand...

Low CAPEX and low MXEX inclusive of each other? Doesn't exist. Sorry bud.
 
I don’t think in today’s hiring environment you need a ton of multi engine time. I think if you went in with a great IFR scan and 25-50 hours of hard, no BS multi engine time you’d be competitive for most positions including a regional carrier.
 
jonnyjetprop said:
I don’t think in today’s hiring environment you need a ton of multi engine time. I think if you went in with a great IFR scan and 25-50 hours of hard, no BS multi engine time you’d be competitive for most positions including a regional carrier.
Click to expand...

I was going to say the same thing. Right now there are jobs for just about anyone with a multi. I certainly would not be buying a twin just to get a few hours.

OP, the best twin to fly is someone else’s. I’ve got three of them I could fly with a simple phone call and paying for gas. I carried my own insurance for the first year and 100ish hours that I flew. Since then I’m covered on the open pilot warranty for the Twins I have access to.
 
jonnyjetprop said:
I don’t think in today’s hiring environment you need a ton of multi engine time. I think if you went in with a great IFR scan and 25-50 hours of hard, no BS multi engine time you’d be competitive for most positions including a regional carrier.
Click to expand...

This is kind of scary. With 25-50 hours time you're barely competent flying a twin, let alone safe! Now you’re going to be part of a crew flying paying passengers? Doesn’t seem fair to the innocent “souls” on board.
 
Brad Smith said:
This is kind of scary. With 25-50 hours time you're barely competent flying a twin, let alone safe! Now you’re going to be part of a crew flying paying passengers? Doesn’t seem fair to the innocent “souls” on board.
Click to expand...

It has been this way for a while now. BTW, any operarion that requires an ATP will have guys that have at least 50 hours category and class but maybe not much more.

I don’t worry so much about the low time multi guys in a crew environment. What’s more surprising and concerning to me are the cargo outfits putting guys with 25-50 hours by themselves in something like a King Air or Beech 99.
 
Rest of the story. I'm a 61 year old instrument rated private pilot. I'm a teacher and have committed to my class that I will stay through next year. I should have my commercial done by the end of the summer. I wouldn't think a regional would be interested but who knows in this day and age. I'm a current airplane owner so stepping up to a twin wouldn't be a huge deal if I could keep the costs reasonable. I figured get the twin rating in maybe 15 hours and tack on an extra 40-50 to be competitive for a 135 job. I'd keep the twin long term for personal travel. I'm okay with the extra fuel burn and oil usage. I want to avoid a twin that has historical engine, gear, prop, spar, etc problems.
 
jssmith.lh said:
Rest of the story. I'm a 61 year old instrument rated private pilot. I'm a teacher and have committed to my class that I will stay through next year. I should have my commercial done by the end of the summer. I wouldn't think a regional would be interested but who knows in this day and age. I'm a current airplane owner so stepping up to a twin wouldn't be a huge deal if I could keep the costs reasonable. I figured get the twin rating in maybe 15 hours and tack on an extra 40-50 to be competitive for a 135 job. I'd keep the twin long term for personal travel. I'm okay with the extra fuel burn and oil usage. I want to avoid a twin that has historical engine, gear, prop, spar, etc problems.
Click to expand...

If you are thinking about a plane you'll actually keep and use for real travel after the multi rating, you might want to look into the 'C' model Aztecs.

I own a later 'F' model, but from the 'C' onward the changes were refinements, and the older ones are just as capable in terms of speed and load capability (in fact the 'C' is reputed to be the fastest of the bunch).

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/29988881/1966-piper-aztec-c
 
Last edited:
jssmith.lh said:
Rest of the story. I'm a 61 year old instrument rated private pilot. I'm a teacher and have committed to my class that I will stay through next year. I should have my commercial done by the end of the summer. I wouldn't think a regional would be interested but who knows in this day and age. I'm a current airplane owner so stepping up to a twin wouldn't be a huge deal if I could keep the costs reasonable. I figured get the twin rating in maybe 15 hours and tack on an extra 40-50 to be competitive for a 135 job. I'd keep the twin long term for personal travel. I'm okay with the extra fuel burn and oil usage. I want to avoid a twin that has historical engine, gear, prop, spar, etc problems.
Click to expand...

In pilot interview sites I've seen them hire as old as 63 in the regionals even though they have only two years to fly. They just look for a minimum of 25 hours multi for the most part. If you're close to 1500 get 'er done and go to a regional if that's what you want to do.
 
GRG55 said:
If you are thinking about a plane you'll actually keep and use for real travel after the multi rating, you might want to look into the 'C' model Aztecs.

I own a later 'F' model, but from the 'C' onward the changes were refinements, and the older ones are just as capable in terms of speed and load capability (in fact the 'C' is reputed to be the fastest of the bunch).

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/29988881/1966-piper-aztec-c
Click to expand...

Whoa 45 k with deice a 430 and 70 hour 23 year old engines? Would be a bit of a gamble but darn


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
MIFlyer said:
Whoa 45 k with deice a 430 and 70 hour 23 year old engines? Would be a bit of a gamble but darn
Click to expand...

Just one as an example. Condition varies, but none of the older ones go for much money any more.
 
GRG55 said:
Just one as an example. Condition varies, but none of the older ones go for much money any more.
Click to expand...

Besides the snark about the time smog, I was actually surprised at how low the price is. And to be factually correct, they’re 13 years, not 23, unless I misread the ad.

That’s less than 172 money by 25k


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
MIFlyer said:
Whoa 45 k with deice a 430 and 70 hour 23 year old engines? Would be a bit of a gamble but darn


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
I've learned through the years that if it "needs annual" there is most likely something that they know needs to be fixed to pass annual that they don't want to pay for.
 
jssmith.lh said:
Rest of the story. I'm a 61 year old instrument rated private pilot. I'm a teacher and have committed to my class that I will stay through next year. I should have my commercial done by the end of the summer. I wouldn't think a regional would be interested but who knows in this day and age. I'm a current airplane owner so stepping up to a twin wouldn't be a huge deal if I could keep the costs reasonable. I figured get the twin rating in maybe 15 hours and tack on an extra 40-50 to be competitive for a 135 job. I'd keep the twin long term for personal travel. I'm okay with the extra fuel burn and oil usage. I want to avoid a twin that has historical engine, gear, prop, spar, etc problems.
Click to expand...

Paging @LDJones

Search for posts here by Jonesy (LD Jones above)
 
arlington-flyin-2000.jpg


Meets all of your criteria
 
If I were buying this plane I'd find out why it's not annualed (my guess is lack of activity, plus the bird nest in the nose) and see if it was fixable for a reasonable price. Since I don't think it's been flying, I'd try to get some kind of intelligence on the cams. that's the biggest concern.
Avionics wise, I think you'd throw a skybeacon on it and fly it for a year to make sure that it's a good ship. Or, I suppose you could do the IFD 440 slide in if you just couldn't wait, but I'd personally tell myself to wait on avionics until I got some oil changes and rust analysis out of the motors. After that year, you could decide on panel upgrades/etc.

I guess it depends what you want, but ~40k for a 160kt, near new engines and a moving MAP Nav and de-ice seems pretty great.
 
Probably the most important thing in shopping for a cheap twin is to consider the parts value of the airplane. If you have an engine die on you in an old twin with bare bones radios, rough paint, and old interior; you are probably better off parting it out than putting an engine on it.
 
Challenged said:
Grumman Cougar?
Click to expand...

I second the Cougar. Fantastically affordable aircraft. I owned one for 5 years and found it to be a reliable, comfortable and easy to fly twin. It truly has no bad habits. It’s Lycoming 0-320’s are easy on maintenance and sip fuel. A speed demon it’s not, it holds a lot of fuel and carry’s a decent payload. It’s built like a tank, from the ground up, not from a single engine design with a second engine slapped on.
 
jssmith.lh said:
Rest of the story. I'm a 61 year old instrument rated private pilot. I'm a teacher and have committed to my class that I will stay through next year. I should have my commercial done by the end of the summer. I wouldn't think a regional would be interested but who knows in this day and age. I'm a current airplane owner so stepping up to a twin wouldn't be a huge deal if I could keep the costs reasonable. I figured get the twin rating in maybe 15 hours and tack on an extra 40-50 to be competitive for a 135 job. I'd keep the twin long term for personal travel. I'm okay with the extra fuel burn and oil usage. I want to avoid a twin that has historical engine, gear, prop, spar, etc problems.
Click to expand...
There was a guy in my new hire class that was 63 and hadn’t flown in 14 years other than IPC/BFR in a cirrus just prior to interview.

The real question is not “can I get hired” it is “can I make it through training?”

Edit:

No he didn’t make it. Not even close.
 
C-1 PILOT said:
I second the Cougar. Fantastically affordable aircraft. I owned one for 5 years and found it to be a reliable, comfortable and easy to fly twin. It truly has no bad habits. It’s Lycoming 0-320’s are easy on maintenance and sip fuel. A speed demon it’s not, it holds a lot of fuel and carry’s a decent payload. It’s built like a tank, from the ground up, not from a single engine design with a second engine slapped on.
Click to expand...
I recommend the F9 model.
 
jssmith.lh said:
I figured get the twin rating in maybe 15 hours and tack on an extra 40-50 to be competitive for a 135 job.
Click to expand...
Ok I'll qualify this by saying I only ever interviewed for one 135 job so I'm no expert on the subject. But in that interview, the chief pilot was way more concerned about my lack of recent instrument currency than how much twin time I had. You've got a pilot certificate and a pulse. That alone makes you reasonably competitive in this market. If you want to be more competitive for most 135 gigs, you're going to need actual 135 experience and/or twin turbine time. Keep the plane you have and get a multi rating and start sending out resumes.

Unless your real motivation is just that you really want to have a twin and you're looking for a way to justify it. Then by all means go buy twin and get those hours in your logbook. o_O

Its a 135 gig. You need a multi rating so they can put you in the seat. But lets be realistic, the gear and the flaps and radio work exactly the same way in a twin as they work in a single and those are the only things you're going to be touching for a while so how much twin time do you really need? :D
 
"Cheap twin"


ox·y·mo·ron
/ˌäksəˈmôrˌän/
noun
a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction (e.g. faith unfaithful kept him falsely true ).

Says a guy who owns a "cheap twin"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ted
For cheap twin I’m biased and agree the cougar is awesome.

I was going to buy a twin a year ago to build time. Ended up with a 91/135 sic jet job with about 15 hours of multi. So didn’t need the twin. But then of course I bought a cougar a few months ago anyway.
 
Kenny Phillips said:
If you like vintage non-ADS-B instrument panels.
Click to expand...

There's going to be all manner of non-ADS-B Out instrument panel old airplanes for sale in the next few years. So what?
As for vintage, glass panels don't make any airplane fly any faster, any higher or carry any more than they do with round instruments.
 
muddy00 said:
For cheap twin I’m biased and agree the cougar is awesome.

I was going to buy a twin a year ago to build time. Ended up with a 91/135 sic jet job with about 15 hours of multi. So didn’t need the twin. But then of course I bought a cougar a few months ago anyway.
Click to expand...

:needpics:

And update your avatar :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top