Which Airplane!!! Or a plane at all??

J

jmp470

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
598
Location
San Antonio
Display Name
Display name:
John
So I have a two part question:

1st) would you rather own an airplane or retire early? Retirement would be at 42.

2nd) Since everyone says, if you have $200K to buy a plane.. don't.. buy a $50K plane and put money towards maintenance.

My question is: What plane costs between $20 -$35K per year to own and operate that can haul 5 people. 2 x adults and 3 children? Twins are fine if they can be in the $$ range. Oh, and the purchase price could be between $50k - $250K. Of course, lower is better! The plane has to go from D.C to San Antonio 6x per year for vacations, would prefer a plane that can do it with 1 stop and several little runs up and down the east coast and out west per year.

What say you????
 
The plane below easily fits that. What good is retiring early if you don't have a plane to fly?
 
Henning's right, a 310 would fit that nicely. Your yearly expenditures are probably reasonable for 100 hours or so of flight. I figure the 310 is about a $300/hr plane, conservatively, including engine/prop reserves and appropriate upgrades.

An Aztec would be cheaper (mine's for sale), and a Baron would be good as well, similar in cost to the 310 (but highest purchase cost).

In the category of singles given the distances you want to fly, you're looking at nothing short of a Malibu. The 310 will actually be cheaper to operate.
 
jmp470 said:
So I have a two part question:

1st) would you rather own an airplane or retire early? Retirement would be at 42.

2nd) Since everyone says, if you have $200K to buy a plane.. don't.. buy a $50K plane and put money towards maintenance.

My question is: What plane costs between $20 -$35K per year to own and operate that can haul 5 people. 2 x adults and 3 children? Twins are fine if they can be in the $$ range. Oh, and the purchase price could be between $50k - $250K. Of course, lower is better! The plane has to go from D.C to San Antonio 6x per year for vacations, would prefer a plane that can do it with 1 stop and several little runs up and down the east coast and out west per year.

What say you????
Click to expand...

Any of the Cessna 200 series would do that easy, but the problems are three little kids don't stay that way.

I'd be looking for a Cherokee 6 - 300.

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/detail/Single+Engine+Piston/1966/Piper/Cherokee+6_260/1378366.html
 
Last edited:
In my view, "retirement" means you finally reached the financial point in your life where you get to go to work because you want to, not because you have to.

I have met many folks who claim "semi-retirement" who are still drawing a paycheck because it is something they love to do and are passionate about it.
 
1. IMHO If you can't afford a plane you can't afford to retire.


2. A P337 will do it.:idea:
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
Any of the Cessna 200 series would do that easy, but the problems are three little kids don't stay that way.

I'd be looking for a Cherokee 6 - 300.
Click to expand...
PA32 - you would be hard pressed to do a DC to San Antonio trip in one day of flying.

A 210 could do it in a day with one fuel stop, but it would be a rough trip for kids to sit through (at least 9-10 hrs in the air with a fuel stop in between).
 
With five comfortable seats and reasonable room, I think you would be looking at a B-58 Baron, or an A-36 Bonanza. The big rear doors make it easy to get in and out of either, let alone space for luggage.

Probably talking $300-350/hr for a Baron, and less for the A-36. The usual arguments hold for twin versus single, but I fly a twin and like the redundancy of the engine, electrics, and vacuum. Mine also has known ice, on board and down linked radar, stormscope, etc.

A B-58 Baron is going to get there a lot faster and would be better equipped than a C-210 or a Lance, and certainly more than any fixed gear Piper or Cessna.

The Beech products will cost more to buy and operate, but then again, they are much more solid- take a look at the doors up close and gear legs on a Bonanza compared to an equivalent Piper or Cessna.

An A-36 Bonanza or a B-58 Baron would probably meet your mission requirements.
 
Fearless Tower said:
PA32 - you would be hard pressed to do a DC to San Antonio trip in one day of flying.

A 210 could do it in a day with one fuel stop, but it would be a rough trip for kids to sit through (at least 9-10 hrs in the air with a fuel stop in between).
Click to expand...
KIAD-> KADS = 1000 miles, published cruise speed for the PA 32 is 160 MPH = 6.25 hours -- should be done in two legs at just over 3 hours each.. + or -
 
I would buy henning's 310. If i had a mission that required a twin this would be the one i would look at very seriously.

But alas i dont need a twin yet, or a third airplane.
 
You need a 1984- 1985 Malibu, the prices are really low now. The maintenance might add to the yearly costs.
 
Dulles to San Antonio is around 1200nm. The computer shows 7.5 h flying time at my TAS of 175k with a slight head wind. So at least for me a gas and go adds an hour, but .5 getting vectored or doing an approach adds up to around 9.5 or more for weather.

I think you can figure on a ten hour trip block to block time in a plane with a TAS of 175 or so. A pressurized and turbocharged single will give comfort and speed up high, but asks the single engine to do a lot. Probable cost would be $4000(complex piston single)- $7,000(light twin) per trip.
 
kmead said:
You need a 1984- 1985 Malibu, the prices are really low now. The maintenance might add to the yearly costs.
Click to expand...

A customer of mine used to have an early Malibu, I forget what year exactly. Mid/late-80s.

His per hour operating costs were higher than the 310 I fly (by about 15-20%) when we compared notes. For that, he got lower reliability and one engine.

I have no doubt that you can maintain Malibus better than the average A&P and thus save your customers money as a result. However, in this case the Malibu was a real problem child. 310s are far more maintainable overall, being simpler aircraft with fewer problems. Plus, the W&B is better on the 310. I can easily put 2 adults, 3 kids, luggage, and full fuel in the 310.
 
Tom-D said:
KIAD-> KADS = 1000 miles, published cruise speed for the PA 32 is 160 MPH = 6.25 hours -- should be done in two legs at just over 3 hours each.. + or -
Click to expand...

Tom, ADS is on the east side of Dallas. OP said he needs to get to San Antonio which is considerably farther south. Probably at least another hour of flying time in a HP airplane.

Like I said, you could do it in a 210, and you could possibly do it if you really pushed it in a retract Lance, but no way in a fixed gear PA32.
 
Malibu useful loads aren't very compatible with the payload/range profile. And while Tom's math is technically correct, add the typical winds into the picture and it's a very long day in the airplane southwestbound in a Cherokee Six or othewr fixed gear 6-seater. If you go with a single, it will pretty much have to be a retractable like a 36 Bonanza or Piper Lance/ Saratoga RG or 210 for the speed, but watch out for payload/range issues with some of those, especially later production.

I'd agree with those suggesting the 6-seat light twins such as the 58 Baron and 310. Operating budget on the lower end cabin class twins like the Piper Navajo and Cessna 401 might be pushing that limit, but the extra space might be nice.
 
I'd recommend some sort of "try before you buy" program for whatever airplane you're considering. 1,200 nm trips in any GA airplane are less than wonderful experiences, especially those without room to move around and without on-board whizzers. The planned six times/yr would be a no-go at my place, we had a hard time making half than many trips half that far, and we had a King Air B200. The guys who come to Palm Springs each year (same distance as your proposed trip) to play golf with me still have their B200, and they make a stop in El Paso on the way out. Can't imagine making that trip in a light twin or single, especially with a plane-load of kids.

I'd buy a little plane to fly around at home and take the smoker on the TX trips.
 
Ron Levy said:
Malibu useful loads aren't very compatible with the payload/range profile. And while Tom's math is technically correct
Click to expand...
But he's not correct.....Tom's got the OP going to Dallas.....Texas is a mighty big state!
 
Ron Levy said:
Malibu useful loads aren't very compatible with the payload/range profile.
Click to expand...
This is very true, plus, while the Malibu has the nice club seating, the baggage space behind that is smaller than the baggage compartment in my 170.

If cost drives the OP to consider singles over twins, he might also look into a 285 HP V-tail Bo. Good speed, comfortable seating and lots of baggage room.
 
wabower said:
I'd recommend some sort of "try before you buy" program for whatever airplane you're considering. 1,200 nm trips in any GA airplane are less than wonderful experiences, especially those without room to move around and without on-board whizzers. The planned six times/yr would be a no-go at my place, we had a hard time making half than many trips half that far, and we had a King Air B200. The guys who come to Palm Springs each year (same distance as your proposed trip) to play golf with me still have their B200, and they make a stop in El Paso on the way out. Can't imagine making that trip in a light twin or single, especially with a plane-load of kids.

I'd buy a little plane to fly around at home and take the smoker on the TX trips.
Click to expand...
I think he needs an AC 500....oh wait...he said it needed to be under 35K/year.....yeah, I think Wayne is on to something here......
 
Tom-D said:
My concern with most light twins that Ron suggests would be finding one in budget that wouldn't be a maintenance pig.
Click to expand...
Having owned and flown a light twin for five years, I think a non-turbo 310 or 58 Baron could do the job and be flown well over 100 hours a year on an operating budget of $35K, and I don't think either could be described as a "maintenance pig." Now, if you start talking about a Duke...

...oink, oink. And you'll note that I did express my reservations on that score regarding the turbocharged cabin class twins I mentioned.
 
Ron Levy said:
Having owned and flown a light twin for five years, I think a non-turbo 310 or 58 Baron could do the job and be flown well over 100 hours a year on an operating budget of $35K, and I don't think either could be described as a "maintenance pig." Now, if you start talking about a Duke...

...oink, oink. And you'll note that I did express my reservations on that score regarding the turbocharged cabin class twins I mentioned.
Click to expand...

Well noted, but the maintenance trap gets wider as you increase the number of items to be maintained.

The wing inspections on many of the Beech products and the weak landing gear on the 310 are well documented, and could be a huge money drain.

Looking at T-A-P this morning I don't see a baron under 100k that I would start the buying process.
 
Here's a big thing you have to ask yourself along the lines of what Wayne was getting at - "how well does your family handle long distances in a GA plane?"

I have a family of 4 and may very well be moving to Virginia within the year. I'll also be acquiring a PA32RT in the near future. My wife has family in the Dallas area and would love to visit them periodically. Norfolk to GVT is a bit shorter than the OP's mission, and while my family does enjoy travelling in small planes with me, there ain't no way my wife is going to go for flying that trip in a Lance. Even when I try to offer the advantage of avoiding the TSA (my wife HATES the TSA), she still is going to opt for the aluminum tube. YMMV.
 
Fearless Tower said:
I think he needs an AC 500....oh wait...he said it needed to be under 35K/year.....yeah, I think Wayne is on to something here......
Click to expand...


He definitely is. Unless the guy is doing this to get the hell away from TSA, the long trips with family on that budget don't make a lot of sense. I think a 310 or Baron is about the best you can do with that budget and mission. Figure car to car it's gonna average as an 8.5hr trip with one one hour break for fuel and food. The flight legs will be about 3-3.5 hrs depending on winds (possibly have to add another fuel stop as well). That's doable only if everyone is amicable. There is also altitude consideration, though on his route it's only a weather issue. Do you (and the family) really want to suck O2 (not particularly comfortable) or are you going to stay low? The advantage the 310 has over the Baron is cabin size, several inches of width goes a long way, but still only goes so far. With good aircraft selection, a gentle hand at flying, good maintenance and a lack of bad fortune; a 421 comes within view of that budget if not within. That adds half a mile a minute, pressurization and a lav.
 
Ron Levy said:
His budget is up to $250K -- I'll bet there are plenty of nice 58 Barons under that figure.
Click to expand...

How often do we suggest the buyer spend all the budget on the buy in?

I just looked up the AD list on a beech 58, there are 45 active ADs listed. (on the A/F alone) Which is pretty typical of the line of beech twins.

I really don't believe that you can own any aircraft on your list and beat the Aluminum tube for the DC -> SSF portion of mission.
 
Any plane around as long as the B-58 is going to have AD's, but this means little to a buyer who does a good per buy inspection. The key is to look at the ones that are recurring.

My guideline is that a trip of 1,000 sm or less is probably more convenient in my small Baron, while farther the airlines win. The private plane will always be more expensive.
 
Where would an Aerostar 601 fall in comparison to the 310/Baron argument for a mission like this?
 
AcroBoy said:
Any plane around as long as the B-58 is going to have AD's, but this means little to a buyer who does a good per buy inspection. The key is to look at the ones that are recurring.
Click to expand...
Ain't no way OP could afford to operate a B-58

b-58_1.jpg
 
Morne said:
Where would an Aerostar 601 fall in comparison to the 310/Baron argument for a mission like this?
Click to expand...

The 310 & Baron will be significantly cheaper to operate, about $150hr on average I'd say. It's there with a 421 with less chance of making the maintenance end of the budget but better on the fuel, again, no Lav. Also a bit load/range limited with 5, call it 2-3 fuel stops. For a personal long range plane, it's hard to beat without hanging a pair of turbojets on the wings (which are in the process of becoming an option). For a family plane, since I can get a good copy of a 421 for less than I can get a good copy of an Aerostar, similar operating costs and the Lav (potty seat really) on the 421, I'd take the extra room and load of the 421 over the increased speed and efficiency of the Aerostar. Also the heated windshield instead of the hot plate is a nice (although costly to replace) perk.
 
Last edited:
I always thought TBF/TBM Avengers would make good family haulin' airplanes too - seats 4 and they're nice and roomy - kids can fight over who rides in the turret too. Plenty fast enough and lots of baggage space in the torpedo bay. Only problem is the whole 80 gph fuel burn thing.....

I think I've had too much coffee this morning....
 
Fearless Tower said:
I always thought TBF/TBM Avengers would make good family haulin' airplanes too - seats 4 and they're nice and roomy - kids can fight over who rides in the turret too. Plenty fast enough and lots of baggage space in the torpedo bay. Only problem is the whole 80 gph fuel burn thing.....

I think I've had too much coffee this morning....
Click to expand...

A Skyraider is a much more practical family aircraft with the cabin below...:rolleyes:
 
Henning said:
The 310 & Baron will be significantly cheaper to operate, about $150hr on average I'd say.
Click to expand...
That's barely more than my 2x160HP Cougar cost over five years and 1000 hours, and that was ten years ago with a lot cheaper fuel. At 25-30 gph total for normal cruise, you'll pay almost that much in fuel alone today. Heck, my nice, simple, single-engine 180HP Tiger costs $100/hr to operate.
 
jsstevens said:
That's exactly what I was thinking. It would cut the trip time way down though...

:rofl:
Click to expand...
Not when you figure in the two round trips for each trip since it only seats three. But they can put a real boat-load of baggage in the weapons pod on the belly.
 
Ron Levy said:
That's barely more than my 2x160HP Cougar cost over five years and 1000 hours, and that was ten years ago with a lot cheaper fuel. At 25-30 gph total for normal cruise, you'll pay almost that much in fuel alone today. Heck, my nice, simple, single-engine 180HP Tiger costs $100/hr to operate.
Click to expand...

What does your Tiger have to do with the difference in operating cost between an Aerostar and a 310? A 310 will cost between $250 & $325 hr to operate on average and an Aerostar $400-$475. Where does a Tiger fit into the equation?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top