What plane to buy for 300m twice weekly commute?

Hangar costs - I'm not sure where to start with this one. I guess I'll take a stab at available hangar space to begin with. None. Of the airports I've quickly looked at there are no hangars available. Tie-downs yes. Even a tie-down, only one available at SBA a few months ago. Hangar space is an entirely new discussion I'll have to tackle to decide if it takes 1+hr to get to my plane from SF then I may as well cancel any time savings gained.
 
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...

It is a fantastic choice for that mission in my opinion, but he said $40k/yr budget. Lemme see.... 1200miles/week x 50 weeks = 60,000 miles / 170 block speeds = 353 hrs. The fuel bill alone will chew up +100% of his budget.
 
200kts and 4 people, you break 200kts and it's REALLY expensive in a 4 seater.

Only economical way to do that is try to find a white lighting for sale, and that's like finding hens teeth.
 
Never had a cirrus but did have a Columbia, which is Simular. Was the most expensive airplane to own I have owned so far. I fly a Malibu now which has cost me half what the Columbia cost even including recurrent training. A 210 or a36 or maybe retract Saratoga would be my choices for your use. All have room and enough speed so that you wouldn't have to upgrade in near future. Of course my choice would be Malibu but a downside to that is the 43ft wing which takes you in to a different price bracket on hangers usually.
 
I'm still wagering bang for the buck, for his mission, larger engined PA24 will dominate all.
 
James331 said:
I'm still wagering bang for the buck, for his mission, larger engined PA24 will dominate all.
Click to expand...

It would be a good option for sure, but I haven't seen many that look or feel "modern." This would require a significant amount invested.

James_Dean said:
It is a fantastic choice for that mission in my opinion, but he said $40k/yr budget. Lemme see.... 1200miles/week x 50 weeks = 60,000 miles / 170 block speeds = 353 hrs. The fuel bill alone will chew up +100% of his budget.
Click to expand...

Yep. Why I didn't suggest it the first time around.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
It would be a good option for sure, but I haven't seen many that look or feel "modern." This would require a significant amount invested.



Yep. Why I didn't suggest it the first time around.
Click to expand...


Get one with nice paint.

Dump a aspen into it, spend 4-5k at the local hot rod upholstery shop and you're set.

There was a thing a while back where they handed 20ish year olds the "new iPhone" to get their opinion, it was the iPhone 3 or older as I recall, they were amazed at the new icon graphics and the smooth back lol

My old plane, I'd ask some girls I took up in it how old it was, uhh like a 03'? Yeah it was made in 1946....


People who don't know aviation are like ferrets, if it shines and has a nice upholstery job, could be a 2016 for all they know.
 
James331 said:
Get one with nice paint.

Dump a aspen into it, spend 4-5k at the local hot rod upholstery shop and you're set.

There was a thing a while back where they handed 20ish year olds the "new iPhone" to get their opinion, it was the iPhone 3 or older as I recall, they were amazed at the new icon graphics and the smooth back lol

My old plane, I'd ask some girls I took up in it how old it was, uhh like a 03'? Yeah it was made in 1946....


People who don't know aviation are like ferrets, if it shines and has a nice upholstery job, could be a 2016 for all they know.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying it needs to actually be new at all. You pretty much described what's needed, although I'd say you need more in the panel to make it look new than an Aspen. I'd figure at least a double Aspen, but a G500 would be preferred. Dual 650s or a 750/650 combo. Interior attention to detail is important for looking new, too. Of course, most legacy planes are going to require that sort of money put in for the new look/feel.

I typically got people who didn't know better thinking the 310 (which turns 50 next year) was a ~10 year old airplane.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I'm not saying it needs to actually be new at all. You pretty much described what's needed, although I'd say you need more in the panel to make it look new than an Aspen. I'd figure at least a double Aspen, but a G500 would be preferred. Dual 650s or a 750/650 combo. Interior attention to detail is important for looking new, too. Of course, most legacy planes are going to require that sort of money put in for the new look/feel.

I typically got people who didn't know better thinking the 310 (which turns 50 next year) was a ~10 year old airplane.
Click to expand...

Just panel dock iPad with foreflight. That should be enough screens to appease the masses
 
I had a commanche and while they are great planes I think a plane with big door in back would be better for loading kids, dog and baggage. Plus a six seat plane has more storage space. Plus if he gets stuck they make a cot type thing that lays on seats to lay down. Lol.
 
Well a PC12/47 would work great.

But there is the whole money thing again.

Hence the PA24 ;)
 
James_Dean said:
It is a fantastic choice for that mission in my opinion, but he said $40k/yr budget. Lemme see.... 1200miles/week x 50 weeks = 60,000 miles / 170 block speeds = 353 hrs. The fuel bill alone will chew up +100% of his budget.
Click to expand...

A Mooney M20J will do the 353 hrs at 8gph, 2824gal, even at $5/gal would leave plenty for hangar fees, insurance, maintenance plus an upgrade or two.
 
James_Dean said:
It is a fantastic choice for that mission in my opinion, but he said $40k/yr budget. Lemme see.... 1200miles/week x 50 weeks = 60,000 miles / 170 block speeds = 353 hrs. The fuel bill alone will chew up +100% of his budget.
Click to expand...

Cessna 182 can do 140 KIAS at 11 GPH (from experience).
So 60,000 miles/yr @ 140 kt (assuming head and tail winds average out, which they don't quite) becomes 60000/160 = 375 hrs, increased to 400 hrs for that pesky wind. That's 4400 gallons, $22k per year fuel cost, well under his budget, leaving room for other expenses.
BTW, I used to commute an 820 mile (each way) route years ago in a C-182, about once a week over many months, and it worked out well. You get to know your plane, the route and the weather fairly well after a few trips. :)
 
I maintain that a 182 would be too slow. M20/PA24 would still be slow, but more doable.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I maintain that a 182 would be too slow. M20/PA24 would still be slow, but more doable.
Click to expand...
I'm with Ted on this. And the M20 might not have the useful for the family trips. If your going to go 182 speed, might as well go Toga and get some extra room.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I maintain that a 182 would be too slow. M20/PA24 would still be slow, but more doable.
Click to expand...

C182 for a 300 mile trip is two hours avg. I guess too slow if you are used to a jet.
 
RotorDude said:
C182 for a 300 mile trip is two hours avg. I guess too slow if you are used to a jet.
Click to expand...

I've yet to see a C182 that will do 150. Maybe a 182RG. You'd be looking at more like 2.5 hours each way engine start to engine stop realistically with the slower speed in the climb, approach, etc.

He's looking at a round trip commute in the 1-2x/week range. Obviously everyone's different, but I've found most people quickly decide that 140 is too slow for something like that and want to go faster. 150 nm I'd agree that a 182 would be fine.
 
teejayevans said:
A Mooney M20J will do the 353 hrs at 8gph, 2824gal, even at $5/gal would leave plenty for hangar fees, insurance, maintenance plus an upgrade or two.
Click to expand...

I wasn't the one who suggested the 310 for the mission, however I don't think the mooney will do the same speed as a 310 that I used to do the calculation. I used 170 block and I'd guess an M20J is probably closer to 150? That is an extra 50 hours of flight time per year. I average over 180 on the 310, but have an R model.
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I've yet to see a C182 that will do 150. Maybe a 182RG. You'd be looking at more like 2.5 hours each way engine start to engine stop realistically with the slower speed in the climb, approach, etc.

He's looking at a round trip commute in the 1-2x/week range. Obviously everyone's different, but I've found most people quickly decide that 140 is too slow for something like that and want to go faster. 150 nm I'd agree that a 182 would be fine.
Click to expand...

If you include engine start to stop time, yes, it could be much longer, but that would be true in any aircraft. This can become esp. prohibitive flying IFR in busy airspace where it's not uncommon to wait 20 minutes for release, plus some enroute deviations. My own experience is that a 2 hour flight time is considered "easy" by most non-pilots. For pilots of course the longer the merrier. :)
 
Ted DuPuis said:
I've yet to see a C182 that will do 150. Maybe a 182RG. You'd be looking at more like 2.5 hours each way engine start to engine stop realistically with the slower speed in the climb, approach, etc.

He's looking at a round trip commute in the 1-2x/week range. Obviously everyone's different, but I've found most people quickly decide that 140 is too slow for something like that and want to go faster. 150 nm I'd agree that a 182 would be fine.
Click to expand...

Aviation Law #18 - "It takes, on average, one week of owning an airplane to want a faster one."
 
It's amazing how much slower 10-15 kns feels.
I went RYY to OLV a few time in my Dakota. About 130-132 KTAS. I had to rent a 172 as the plane was doWN for a trip. OMG, it.felt like it took 2x as long.

If I was doing 300nm every once in a while, 182 is fine. Up and back 2x a week, eff that. I want 170+knots

2 seat EAB and rent for family. Or pay for 4-6 seats of speed you don't need most time.
 
The op states that he has a ppl "but doesn't use it much." This leads me to ask, how many hours does he have total, ?in what types? Inst. rated? All this should figure into the choice. Would I fly my whole family plus dog with low time? Of course not! Would I buy a twin and not be IFR rated? Probably not unless I just flew it for fun on nice days. I would want to get maximum utilization with a twin. 40 grand is not going to get it on a 310! It would barely fund an older mooney in decent shape which I would start with. Or maybe an older bonanza in decent shape. Either would be more expensive if properly maintained and hangared.
 
Speed and cost, why is no one saying Mooney Mooney Mooney. Tell me what's faster and more efficient?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I have a buddy in a similar situation, weekly trips from NM to Socal. Two years ago we went over all the options...he ended up buying a Columbia 400. It suites his mission perfectly. His wife loves it, she didn't want anything to do with the legacy airframes. One leg, very fast door to door, ~3 hrs (especially going back east). Poor full fuel payload but he doesn't carry much and the option of 100+ gallons usable really makes it great for long range flights. Of course, with the volume of flying you anticipate, with a C400 $40k ain't gonna cut it.

I vote Comanche, or M20J.
 
James_Dean said:
Aviation Law #18 - "It takes, on average, one week of owning an airplane to want a faster one."
Click to expand...

Funny thing, that. I've actually been pretty happy with the speed in the 414, despite it being slower than the 310. The extra comfort helps.
 
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...

:yeahthat:, My wife says you need one...:goofy: Your wife / family will thank you. She love ours. It's her traveling machine...:yes::yes::yes:
 
BTW - it should be trivial for you to set up a spreadsheet which analyzes the costs.

Example, with sample numbers
Get your annual cost of insurance = 3000
Figure your monthly costs - payment + hangar/tie down = 1,000 + 200
Figure your hourly costs - gph * fuel cost + engine reserve + maint reserve = ?*5 + 11 + 11 = 82
Figure the hours you'll fly for each - roughly 3 hours/round trip * twice a week * 50 weeks a year = 300 hours/year

Depending on gph, this is either right around 40k or way over. You could also cut back on the number of trips per week on some weeks.
 
gsengle said:
Speed and cost, why is no one saying Mooney Mooney Mooney. Tell me what's faster and more efficient?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Great machines, no doubt. Family of 4 plus the dog in a Mooney would be kind of tight, wouldn't it?

I would say Bonanza or C210. Decent speed and relatively roomy.


I drive an old 182. Of course, I don't fly nearly as much as the OP is planning, but $40K seems like more than enough dough. Gas should cost around $20K. Another $20K should cover the rest with ease. Sounds like he needs something faster though.
 
Last edited:
4 skinny lightweights he said. He needs a six seater and a considerable step up in expense if he thinks he can take bikes etc...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Ok, can't help but pitch my favorite. I used to do a 290nm trip a couple times a month ... but only in the summer because it was to go to the lake house, in Indiana, and I'm not IFR. I'd pack the wife, 2 kids, smallish dog and a weekend worth of luggage. The wife loved the plane since it was stall / spin proof and looked brand new compared to the '79 172 I had before and the rentals we used on occasion.
http://www.velocityaircraft.com/airplane-models-turbo.html
$100k gets you 165kts, 4 seats, 1,000lb useful load, dual EFIS with a backup EFIS, Garmin 430W with constant speed prop and retractable gear. The kids will LOVE the gull wing doors and the wife will love the new carpet and leather interior. You will love the factory support and the fact that if you want a new state of the art autopilot, you can have one for $4k not $20k.

Only downside is that your need a 4,000 ft paved runway at both ends ... at least with wife, kids and dog. For your commute, 3,000 ft paved is fine.
 
gsengle said:
Speed and cost, why is no one saying Mooney Mooney Mooney. Tell me what's faster and more efficient?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

I did in #52.
As far as load he mentioned they are lightweights, so Mooney would be perfect. Using only $12k worth of fuel would leave him 28k/yr for expenses and upgrades.
 
gsengle said:
4 skinny lightweights he said. He needs a six seater and a considerable step up in expense if he thinks he can take bikes etc...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

OP never mentioned bikes....M20J will have an autopilot, install an Aspen with its GPSS and you have a fairly modern panel.
 
iflyforfun said:
Ok, can't help but pitch my favorite. I used to do a 290nm trip a couple times a month ... but only in the summer because it was to go to the lake house, in Indiana, and I'm not IFR. I'd pack the wife, 2 kids, smallish dog and a weekend worth of luggage. The wife loved the plane since it was stall / spin proof and looked brand new compared to the '79 172 I had before and the rentals we used on occasion.
http://www.velocityaircraft.com/airplane-models-turbo.html
$100k gets you 165kts, 4 seats, 1,000lb useful load, dual EFIS with a backup EFIS, Garmin 430W with constant speed prop and retractable gear. The kids will LOVE the gull wing doors and the wife will love the new carpet and leather interior. You will love the factory support and the fact that if you want a new state of the art autopilot, you can have one for $4k not $20k.

Only downside is that your need a 4,000 ft paved runway at both ends ... at least with wife, kids and dog. For your commute, 3,000 ft paved is fine.
Click to expand...

OP may not want an experimental either
 
Twin_Flyer said:
:yeahthat:, My wife says you need one...:goofy: Your wife / family will thank you. She love ours. It's her traveling machine...:yes::yes::yes:
Click to expand...
I'd love to buy one, if only my wallet was a little fatter. It would be my twin of choice! :biggrin:
 
When I first saw this post I read it as "What plane to buy for 300 million" - LOL any plane you want man!
 
Get a plane for fun. Use Surf Air for business.
 
As for the total number of hours/miles. Expect to make the trip fewer times than commercial.
 
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...
Safety is one thing but maintenance can be another. Model years can make a difference. The 210 you mentioned had multiple changes through the years such as bladders, landing gear systems and engines. Just something to keep in mind when selecting your plane.
 
If you only flew your family 3 times a month at 2 hours a leg you are still looking at 150 hours a year not counting vacations. That is a lot of flying. Do that with you family and have a surf air subscribtion for the other 8 times a month and be done. How much flying can you do before you burn yourself out
 
If the Cardinal is on the list (on the frugal end) then so would be a Grumman Tiger.. but both would be on the low end of capacity for 4 adults with bags.. tabs fuel, however, instead of full tanks, might make it workable

The biggest thing I'm not seeing here is you still need to be prepared to fly commercial when things aren't quite right timing or weather wise, or the bird is down for maintenance.. And 4 same day tickets can get $$$. Dont plan on saving much money flying this way. Do plan on getting control of most of your travel schedule...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top