Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Flight Following' started by Fearless Tower, Jan 20, 2013.
Smart move. I doubt if we will ever buy a turbine.
For an 1800 mile trip, breaking it into 2 days wouldn't be too bad. It'd still be a 6 hour day, more tolerable, but not neccesarily a whole lot of fun.
I guess in my old age I have lost my sense of adventure. No more are the 10 hour flying days in the 172. Atleast as long as it's solo, now if I had someone to go with me I would do more provided they were comfortable.
They? Don't you mean "She"?
You know me too well Greg
Well, professional video editors do tend to use a Mac Pro... That should tell you that my recommendation wouldn't be far off.
BTW, I do use Windows for work and I wouldn't recommend anything from Apple to do what I do. I do, however, run Windows on my Mac to do it, so that I don't have to worry about the headaches Windows can cause as a full-time OS.
Hey, I've got nothing against experimentals, despite the fact that I'd never build (not good enough, nor enough spare time) or buy (don't trust anyone with my life) one. I'd love to have a Ravin 500, Highlander, Seawind, etc...
But, the RV-10 simply isn't the plane for this mission, regardless of how nice they are otherwise.
No reason to explain.....
There are planes that fit certain missions, certified ships win sometimes and experimentals fit at other times.....
It is the USA... we have choices...
Gaack. You would LEAVE Jackson?
I wonder if anyone else would share what real life fuel and hourly costs of the different options are:
The great thing about a single recip is the cost per mile even with its limits.
Can't be done without usage numbers.
The only two I have any knowledge about are Aero Commanders and Aerostars.
The Aerostar is as you know the fastest recip twin made. But this also means it's the most economical if you throttle back as it has the least drag. It has a racy, thin wing and a small front cross section - this makes it economical in pure fuel burn. On the Aerostar forum many guys fly their Aerostars on 25gal/hr LOP and get 195-205kts up high. That's pretty impressive for a twin and I doubt many could beat that. Obviously this carries through down the speeds, so it will be cheaper to run at lower speeds compared to other twins as well. No matter what speed, the Aerostar will give the best MPG of any legacy twin. The Tecnam P2006T and the Diesel Twin Star probably beats it, but that's about it. As a comparison, my old 520 burns 25gal/hr but will only do 140-150kts on the same fuel burn.
As for maintenance, yeah, they're pretty complex planes (at least the pressurised ones) and will probably eat $30-50K a year in maintenance/annual. It seems like the later 700 Superstar series and Machen conversions are closer to $50K, the older 601P's more in the $30K range. Nothing out of the ordinary for this kind of pedigree, but something one has to be prepared for. I personally don't count engine times or funds as it's not really quantifiable - some go over TBO, some go under. It's just the price one pays to be in the game, like admission. But if you have to, then O/H would run in the $30-35K bracket per engine and 1800 hrs TBO.
Correction. I should say that the $30-50K is all in, including insurance etc, but excluding fuel.
I have a bare bones old twin and my annual was $21K with a prop hub O/H, so that's the kind of thing one has to be prepared for. Next years annual might be $5K, but it could also be another $21K. One never knows.
It ain't cheap and this is why they're giving away old twins these days.
The only cheap twin ever made is the Cri-Cri!
Actually, I did the spreadsheet on the little Tecnam P2006T twin and the numbers are pretty impressive. At just 100-120hrs per year, that airplane is cheaper to own than my old legacy twin that's paid for, even if you financed it a 5%. So, if you happen to sit on $500K and can buy one outright, it's one of the cheapest twins one could run. Sure, it only goes 140kts, has crappy range and a ceiling of 15000ft, but if you want the safety of a twin at single engine prices, this is the one that can do it.
I'm sure by now the OP has figured this out, but the magic number is 3NM/minute. There are lots of ways to go 180kts in a piston plane. It enters the exponential portion of the cost curve to go faster.
I plan on dying here...But.. With the condition of the country, the deficit, Obamacare kicking in full time next Jan. I am just thinking ahead and positioning myself like most pilots would do, in case I need to bail...
To put it in a nutshell... I am in good health and try hard to stay that way, Last week my insurance guy called to warn me that my health ins premium will double in the last quater of this year to cover all the demands Obamacare is forcing them to insure against... It does not matter that someone keeps him/herself healthy.. If you are 6' 190 and in great shape or 500lbs, have high blood pressure, Diabetes, Cancer and a host of other diseases, all people will have to pay the same premium.. The unhealthy get a pass, us healthy people get stuck with their bad habits in the form of a HUGE premium increase.... And I have a 10 grand deductable, 5 grand Co pay policy now, and the new premium will be higher then it takes to keep a twin flying yearly.
This was a great country...
Kenny Rogers says it best.... " Know when to hold um and know when to fold um"...
Now back to the regularly scheduled thread of 200 kts...
But.. But.. But.... Oh dang it, not the SZ.
180 knots doesn't mean squat. Subtract the time you drove away from your house in VA from the time you arrived at your your parents' house in PHX. That will tell you trip time. Then divide by any distance-measuring number you like to determine average speed.
Wayne is right..... it is the "door to door" time that needs to be determined... it's the ol' apples to apples deal ..
On the other hand you could turn it around and say it's the journey, not the destination. Isn't that what flying small airplanes is about anyway? Buy what makes sense for most of your flying and when it come down to making that long cross-country trip split it into a couple of days. Or take the airlines. Or fly one way with the family and put them on the airlines for the trip back. Obviously it all come down to what your family will tolerate.
I've been to 46 out of 50 states in experimental aircraft, none in a certified plane. Never had a mechanical issue that could not be fixed on the ramp. When I hit all 50 states, I'll start over and do it again. In the journey, the adventure.
If I wanted that much adventure I'd just drive.
That would be interesting too, although sometimes I get the weird feeling that I've seen everywhere already.
Drivers Of America?
It's interesting to hear people who used to fly SWA talk about their travel to Austin, Houston, San Antonio, Shreveport and other cities within ~200 mile radius. Door-to-door is now faster by car for many such trips due to airport hassles, parking, car rental, etc.
Heck, I opt to drive Denver to Wichita every six months rather than take the airlines. The company will provide a rental car or an airline ticket. Door to door it would save a couple hours to fly but I can get in the car and leave whenever I want and not be bound by an airline schedule.
Not just Jackson, but the best view in Jackson, seriously...
That is the point I was trying to make. There are hopes, dreams and wishesI just thought some real mile costs would bring some level of sanity to the list.
Single Turbo might cost less than $1 per mile; the Turbo Twin closer to $2; the pressurized Twin....I don't know maybe $3; Then you get into real money from there.
I sure am dammed glad I passed on the Aerostart 601P I was dreaming about. I'd have to live in it today.
Take out one of the middle seats, move the pilot seat forward and a cot will fit. Kinda sorta.
Unless icy roads I would make the driving choice every time. I go 1300 miles driving trips rather than put up with TSA, bad schedules, bad customer service, bad connections, good chance of being left in Atlanta with all the hotels full, or worse Minn.
Used to fly Little Rock to Love field once a month or so ten years ago. Wouldn't dream of doing that these days,even though the tickets were free
Sounds like an industry that is trying to create some push-back. Masterful if not obvious.
I wish I could say that.
I'm glad I don't have to.
When I lived in corporate america my personal limit was 6 hours. If I could drive in 6 hours or less I drove. That was if a non-stop flight was available. Add two hours for each layover.
I only have 10 years in Aviation, I am sure I will get there by the time I have your experience.
Or, it makes a handy excuse for jacking premiums. I don't trust any insurance company in any part of that industry, ever... But it's politically convenient for them to place blame on someone else right now and have many, many people automatically accept it as the truth.
I still enjoy flying, just don't like sitting there droning along. But a friend flew his Stearman to all 48 a few years ago and said it was fun. I can't tell you where he went to school.