What plane to buy for 300m twice weekly commute?

P

pele

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
5
Display Name
Display name:
pele
Sorry for what is probably one of the most often asked questions, but I'm at the brainstorming stage to start the plane purchase discussion with the wife.

Budget of $40,000 yearly and plane will be used for business.

The mission:
1) 300 mile commute one way (Average 2 round trips weekly = 1,200 miles a week)
2) Commute is along California Coast from San Francisco to Santa Barbara (IFR Fog, but no ice, severe weather is rare, etc..)
3) Weekend commute would include a family of 4 - all skinny light-weights
4) Other flight trips would be to Tahoe, Bishop, and the Sierras maybe 5-10 times per year.

What I Value Most:
1) Speed - It's a commute, the less time I'm traveling and with the family the better
2) Cost - I don't want to feel like I'm working just to pay for my plane
3) Avionics - G1000 for the Sierras and auto-pilot for the commute would help manage the frequent flights and make the family feel like they are flying in a safe and modern plane

Planes on my list:
Cessna 182T
Cirrus SR-22 (Operational costs look too pricey)

Why purchase vs. commercial?
I currently do this flight commercial (1hr:15min one way) and spend around $40,000 yearly. I'm trying to see if I could actually decrease or break even my flight costs while increasing the frequency of my flights. The benefits of being able to bring passengers, my dog, my bicycle, and ability to not worry about missing my flight, or where to park my car. At the moment my dog has to stay home with a dog sitter and that costs money/stress as well. One last bonus is the adventure of sharing flying with my kids vs. simply arriving at an airport with my luggage seems like a positive teaching influence for my kids (I could be wrong). I also have my pilot license and don't use it much. It seems I should be leveraging it to the benefit of my current traveling need and enhancing my families life.

Thanks for your help in picking a plane!

If you think there's a better strategy such as a plane share, lease back to a school, etc.. I'm all ears. Based on my frequent and un-predictable flying schedule I don't think those options work out very well. But I only know what I know, the community here has probably experienced my situation many times over and could educate me.
 
What is your purchase budget?

I have a 182 and make the Nor Cal to So Cal trip every few weeks usually via SBA. Twice a week trip you are gonna want speed which would favor the SR-22 over 182.

For your mission, you will want 100% ownership.
 
Is $40,000 what you intend to spend on an aircraft? If so, both of the planes on your list are out of the equation. Your best bet is to look at some older Saratoga's or a 182/206. There are a lot of factors that come into play when looking for an a/c that's capable to do a multitude of things. Your mission is definitely possible, but with GA you always have to give up something to gain something else, (ex. giving up speed for payload or vice versa etc.)
 
Would you be financing? Also, have you looked into hangar costs in your area?
 
More mission creep than plane advice:

You have the perfect mission to justify a GA plane but having flown that route all seasons, you will still wind up being commercial 10-15% of the time due to weather. There is actually icing to deal with during winter months.

Assuming also you have your Instrument Ticket...that would be critical in making it a viable mission to fly on a regular basis.
 
Ryanb said:
Is $40,000 what you intend to spend on an aircraft?
Click to expand...

That's his yearly. I assume that means he can finance for 20k a year for a plane that has a 20k operating cost. Or 10k/30k etc.
 
Yes I would be financing the plane and trying to hit the $40,000 per year. The plane is used for business and I would expect to depreciate it. I didn't realize a 182 was more than 40k per year! OUCH!!

In terms of mission creep - I'm buying for the commute first and foremost. I'm willing to solve mission creep with renting for the special occasion to the mountains and a commercial ticket for the rough weather days or pushing the trip back for a few days. I didn't realize icing was an issue. Thank you for that information. I don't foresee payload being an issue. My bicycle weights less than 20lbs and the entire family (including dog) sits under 500lbs for the next 5 years. We currently fly happily with carry-on baggage limits at 30lbs per person. (500lbs + luggage 120lbs = 620lbs total weight).

Yes IFR is a must and I have. I agree waiting until 11am every day for the fog to burn off and fly VFR would be impossible.
 
And your $40k will be break even at best. Fuel is your highest part of the operating costs.

1200 miles a week...say at 130 knots apporx 9 hours per week flying x 48 weeks=432 hours a year/$40k=$92/flight hour budget when you take into account fuel/hangar/maintenance/insurance...THEN add on top any financing payments/costs.

Not too far for 400ish hours a year but will not be much of a financial advantage. You are buying time and convenience.

Unless YOUR company owns the plane it most likely would not be a depreciable asset...just like a car that you individually own used for transporation. If you are solo however, you can be reimbursed by the company or deduct the direct flight costs even without a CPL similar to a milage deduction you would take for your car so it would be a bit of pre tax money spent on the costs.
 
Last edited:
pele said:
Yes I would be financing the plane and trying to hit the $40,000 per year. The plane is used for business and I would expect to depreciate it. I didn't realize a 182 was more than 40k per year! OUCH!!
Click to expand...

Depends on the model and the going rates in your area. Ownership can suck the life out of your wallet.
 
If you need glass to feel safe, or you think your mfg year = saftey, you're missing the boat, read up on the NTSB, it's YOU who will fail far before even the oldest and most basic IFR airframes, the illusion of saftey is a bad trap to get into.

You want REAL saftey, mimic the pros, go up for a mock 293,297,299 ride with a ATP/CFI every 6 months, if you don't pass train till you do and don't fly solo or with pax till you can pass.

That out of the way.

PA24 all day long, if you need glass find one with a aspen, or put one in, shouldn't be too hard to find a /G with a good autopilot.

If you could get away with a 2 seater this has lancair/glasair written all over it.
 
James331 said:
If you need glass to feel safe, or you think your mfg year = saftey, you're missing the boat, read up on the NTSB, it's YOU who will fail far before even the oldest and most basic IFR airframes, the illusion of saftey is a bad trap to get into.
Click to expand...

He was saying the perception of safety for the family. Same argument for BRS system for the wives...but I agree with you. All he really needs for the mission at minimum is a 430W and autopilot but the level of luxury avionics would be determined by budget.
 
The options you listed aren't bad ones. If you're willing to spend the effort on training and proficiency, a Lancair IV (or IV-P) will provide you great speed and economy, but they do absolutely require a high dedication to training and proficiency, as they don't offer much in the way of . I would also look at a Columbia 400 which I like better than either of the options that you listed. With a 300 nm one way commute, I'd tend to argue that you want a plane that'll do 200 kts to try to keep it to under 2 hours each way. I agree that you want to own the plane outright given your schedule.

It wold be worth seeing what your family thinks about the options. Really, you have two separate missions - family and commuting. A Lancair 360 would be perfect for commuting. 200 KTAS @ 10 GPH, experimental, will burn MoGas. It would be my choice for a commuting airplane. I don't know how your family is, but we see a lot of people moving to cabin class Twin Cessnas (a 340 would come to mind for you) for family reasons. You won't operate one for $40k/year given your intended flying, which looks to be 300-400 hours per year.

I think you might consider what you really want to do. It might make more sense to have a commuting plane that you could then use with your wife or one kid from time to time.
 
" If you need glass to feel safe, or you think your mfg year = saftey, you're missing the boat,"

As Shawn said, I'm reasonably okay flying a 1960's 210, but it's the wife's perception that is the difference between her being coerced into flying with me once a month and her asking to join me every week. Your advice of going up with a CFI every 6 months and testing is also a great plan. I go up with a CFI fairly often for my own comfort level since I don't fly very often at the moment.

4 seats are a must min.

Plane would be owned by the business for depreciation.

Thanks for the great rapid feedback thus far.
 
How much travel time are you spending going commercial? Parking and getting inside the airport, TSA, onboarding, getting a rental car, ...

I have a 182 and make the Nor Cal to So Cal trip every few weeks usually via SBA. Twice a week trip you are gonna want speed which would favor the SR-22 over 182.

For your mission, you will want 100% ownership.
Click to expand...

Speed and climb rate are great things to have for lots of traveling. Many 2002 SR22's have 1100 lbs of useful load, plus good speed and avionics.

Shawn said:
1200 miles a week...say at 130 knots apporx 9 hours per week flying x 48 weeks=432 hours a year/$40k=$92/flight hour budget when you take into account fuel/hangar/maintenance/insurance...THEN add on top any financing payments/costs.

Not too far for 400ish hours a year but will not be much of a financial advantage. You are buying time and convenience.
Click to expand...

Plus time on the ground, plus IFR re-routing from ATC. You could easily get up to 500 hrs/year with a 182 on those flights alone.

Flying private allows you to more easily change your schedule. Done early? Head home. Need to do more, stay later; at some point a hotel instead of a night flight home will be safer though.
 
Shawn said:
No MoGas readily available in California.
Click to expand...

Lancair burns a small enough amount that if you have a local station that sells it without ethanol, you can use 5 gallon cans. Either way, I wouldn't mess around with it. I mostly mentioned it because it's another option to help keep costs down.
 
cgrab said:
Take a look at the Cardinal RG. Fast and comfortable.
Click to expand...
I'd have to agree on the Cardinal, even a fixed gear version (Cheaper to operate).
Meets the missions specs, easily upgradable, meets the "family Truckster" requirement, and reasonable to operate. Even at a slower-than-Cirrus speed, the time savings over today's Commercial commute nightmare would more than even it out, even if you still have to do Commercial 20% of the time...

Initial costs to buy a good used 80's-era model aren't that much, even if you have to throw some money in it, to get it up to the needed expense. You'll be depreciating and expensing it anyway. (THIS is what accountants are for!) Parking won't be anymore than "Preferred" parking for your car in most places. As a really regular customer, you can cut some pretty sweet deals with mechanics, hangar owners, FBO's, fuelers, etc. If you know you'll be doing 400+ hours, you can even cut deals on fuel and flow-throughs.

IMHO, this is EXACTLY the kind of mission that GA is best at, especially in decent weather California.
 
"Needed Expense" = Needed specs.
I hate Auto-correct
 
"Plane would be owned by the business for depreciation."

Just saw this. Well, that ends the expensing debate.
Everything penny becomes a deductible expense.

Sure, the Cirrus is fancy, and looks good to the boys in the Ramp Club, but the Cardinal sounds like a perfect fit for your mission. Both acquisition and operating costs will be much less than the Cirrus.
 
pele said:
" If you need glass to feel safe, or you think your mfg year = saftey, you're missing the boat,"

As Shawn said, I'm reasonably okay flying a 1960's 210, but it's the wife's perception that is the difference between her being coerced into flying with me once a month and her asking to join me every week. Your advice of going up with a CFI every 6 months and testing is also a great plan. I go up with a CFI fairly often for my own comfort level since I don't fly very often at the moment.

4 seats are a must min.

Plane would be owned by the business for depreciation.

Thanks for the great rapid feedback thus far.
Click to expand...

Just toss in a Aspen, or buy one with one, it'll have all the knobs and cool graphics like terrain that changes color as you climb, it will be impressive and whiz bang looking enough for her but without the huge expense of a G1000 ship, also a PA24 will be way less to operate and more comfortable.

One thing on what I said about a mock .29X ride, this is not anything most CFIs are going to have a clue about, and you're really going to want someone who has part 135 experience for these, even if they arnt a CFI, huge plus if you could find a training Capt who would do it with you, huge diffrent between what most CFIs think of as a instrument cross country compared to what a training Capt would have you do on a ride.

Have your wife come along with you on one, have her listen in on the oral, talk to the guy, and come along for the ride, probably could educate her as to what saftey is and isn't, might save you some money and help her understand things a bit better, get her to trust a little more on you vs trusting a screen.
 
Speed, cost, avionics. What you're really saying is that you want to balance speed and cost via some undefinable internal judgement.

http://www.avweb.com/news/features/Speed-Buying-180-Knots-for-180000-223694-1.html

Summary of suggestions:
Mooney M20k
Beech B35, aka, the plane that doctors kill
Cessna 210
An older turbo SR22
Piper Lance or Saratoga
Bellanca Super Viking

Other than the SR22, I wouldn't expect glass in any of these. But you don't really need it.

All are in the 170-190 kts range meaning you're only slightly above the comparable 1:15 flight time. All the aircraft are under 180k meaning your payments are around $1200/month max assuming a 30 year loan, a second mortgage. You do know that you'll have to pony up a down payment on the plane, right, maybe 20%? Can you drop 40k on a down payment?

No clue on your insurance or hanger costs.

Any of them should be operable on less than 40k.
 
With that much distance every week, Cessna 310, or similar twin. Acquisition cost would be similar to Bo or SR22. Speed would be >170kn and second engine for safety (family). You would be flying it enough to remain proficient. Operating costs would be a tad higher than what your budget is.

See if Eggman is ready to sell his....

Good luck with your search.
 
ChemGuy said:
With that much distance every week, Cessna 310, or similar twin. Acquisition cost would be similar to Bo or SR22. Speed would be >170kn and second engine for safety (family). You would be flying it enough to remain proficient. Operating costs would be a tad higher than what your budget is.

See if Eggman is ready to sell his....

Good luck with your search.
Click to expand...

I am ashamed that you suggested this before me. :D

The 310 is a great option. I didn't mention it because turbos were on the list. Once you get into a T310 or a 320, the potential MX headaches do go up. However, it is worth considering either one. And Eggman's is very, very nice.
 
4 people plus occasional dog. Bay to LA with occasional non-stop vacations. I would be looking in the 6 seater category. You also mentioned that you want glass. You also want to keep your costs at 40k a year.

In a 200 knot airplane you'll be running your engine startup to shutdown about 2 hours each way, 2 times a week for probably 42 weeks in the year (10 weeks vacay).
That's 336 hours of flying plus vacation flying. That's $120 a hour in expenses, just not going to happen.

If I had to do that commute I would get a surfair subscription or fly jetsuite from concord. + you'll burn your family out flying that much. If you really want to fly it, I would go twin. You are carrying your entire family that extra engine adds a little Saftey. Also you can pick up a well equipped G500 b55 for cheap. I know a guy in Concord with one and he hauls 4+dog all around with it. Cost will likely be double what you are paying for commercial now, but what is that time not at the airport worth to you
 
Ted DuPuis said:
The 310 is a great option. I didn't mention it because turbos were on the list. Once you get into a T310 or a 320, the potential MX headaches do go up. However, it is worth considering either one.
Click to expand...

I agree with this whole-heartedly. The T310R is one of the smoothest flying twins I've ever flown. A great airplane all the way around; however, as you mentioned, when you add that second engine with a turbo, the expenses start climbing.
 
Ryanb said:
I agree with this whole-heartedly. The T310R is one of the smoothest flying twins I've ever flown. A great airplane all the way around; however, as you mentioned, when you add that second engine with a turbo, the expenses start climbing.
Click to expand...

$10k/side exhaust, $3k/each turbos...
 
You can do it in a 182 or a Piper Dakota. Get that and start doing it. You can move up later and you will get most of your money back from the 182. You will need an IFR/GPS, a VOR with glideslope and two radios and an autopilot. Dont expect to be able to always get in, might be fogged in. Also, you wont be able to fly in ice, not sure about how often that happens. Be willing to land somewhere else and drive on in or fly commercial. Good luck!
 
Talk to a tax advisor that deals with business aircraft. It could be that operating expenses become a small part of the equation.
 
Diamond Star DA40? You can tell your wife it's statistically the least fatal in the certified ASEL fleet. And most of them have G1000. Plus, a rear door for the rear PAX. 135kts on 9-10gph, too.
 
I saw the Lancair but not the RV-10 in the suggestion list.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I am ashamed that you suggested this before me. :D

The 310 is a great option.
Click to expand...
I was like WTF? Ted saw this and didn't say 310? I figured you either completely forgot about the 'lowly' 310 now that your in a 414, or you lost cabin pressure in said 414 at altitude and still haven't come out of it yet.

The OP's mission screams 310, B55, etc... to me. it can be done in a fast single sure, but that much mileage, I want a second engine.
 
rolivi said:
I saw the Lancair but not the RV-10 in the suggestion list.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling all those "EXPERIMENTAL" placards pasted all over the doors won't help with the OP's nervous wife :)
 
ChemGuy said:
I was like WTF? Ted saw this and didn't say 310? I figured you either completely forgot about the 'lowly' 310 now that your in a 414, or you lost cabin pressure in said 414 at altitude and still haven't come out of it yet.

The OP's mission screams 310, B55, etc... to me. it can be done in a fast single sure, but that much mileage, I want a second engine.
Click to expand...

Now that I'm used to <5k cabin altitudes, my brain gets foggy easily. ;)

I think that a 310 would be a great compromise, but like I said he really has two separate missions. Doing what he wants in a 310 would be hard to do for $40k/year. Maybe $40k in fuel, but you're looking at a plane that's ~$300-400/hr to operate flying ~300 hours per year.

I would be looking for a fast and efficient experimental for the commute, and then considering a family plane separately. I do agree that the second engine would be ideal. A Twin Comanche might even be a good option to consider, but it would be slower and would require a significant amount of money put in to make it "feel" new.
 
I second the Saratoga recommendation above. Family of 4 plus bags and dogs, as stated in the op, will probably appreciate the room in the Saratoga cabin and the speed gain from retract vs Cherokee 6 would help with the commute as well. My $0.02.
 
The 310 looks far too expensive on paper and a twin is beyond my goals/experience this year.

The vacation part of the equation I don't sit hard and fast on in my $40k budget, since that's an entertainment/vacation expense, maybe tack on $10k per year for vacation. I don't want vacations to define the the reason for the plane purchase though. To clarify, the family doesn't need to come on both round trips, but once a week or once every other week. Not sure if that changes any of the recommendations, but clarifying a little that I'm not trying to tote everyone on four flights per week.

Of all the options, I'm leaning towards a 182 for the first year to test if it's a good decision. I fly the trip slow and determine if it's a do-able trip safely and mentally, at which time I upgrade the plane to what I think would scale for my budget and mission for the next 5 years. That leads to a second question. How much money is lost buying a 182 and then selling it a year later? The 182 could accomplish all of the flight requirements, just a bit slow correct?

The second option I'm curious about is a 210. Would a 1960's Cessna 210 with a G500 avionics upgrade fit this mission? Take for an example a $65k 1960's 210 as seen on controller.

Surf-Air - Yes. Yes. and Yes. The issue becomes bringing the family and that darn dog! .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top