Today’s’ Date:

Sunday, 7 March 2010

This Page was last updated

3rd February 2010

US$ 1.00 = AU$ 0.88

AIRCRAFT THAT WE HAVE INSPECTED

The views expressed are our own, and are a result of our own observations and investigations of aircraft with a focus on suitability for our purpose. They are not meant to be taken as generic, nor are they intended to denigrate nor alleviate any aircraft. We acknowledge that the experiences and requirements of others are different to our own.

x These aircraft are not suitable for our purpose

Model

Description

No. Inspected

PA 32 260

Piper Cherokee six - Excellent aircraft. A delight to fly. Handles like an ocean liner when compared to the Victa. It is smooth and easy to the touch. Heavy load carrying capacity (larger loads than the 300). Forty-eight inch cabin width, means that side by side seating is “not so squeezy”. This is the “single” most suited single to our family needs.

14

PA 32 300  x

Piper Cherokee six - All Like the 260 model faster cruise speed, but sacrifices load carrying capacity. The 260 allows the whole family to fit in comfort along with full fuel and baggage. The 300 is the same but with a reduced fuel and/or baggage load.

8

C310  x

Cessna - Fun to fly, as a pilot, but cramped passenger interior, 340 is much better

25

PA23 250  x

Piper Aztec - Cumbersome “close quarters” interior - not ergonomic for pilot or passenger. They are however in the lower price bracket and from this point of view, could be a consideration for some buyers. Not of interest to us.

3

C337 

Cessna - Good power - asymmetric engines and props make flying of this twin an easy experience for the pilot - Noisy inside - six passengers is a real stretch, or squashy (no-stretch) as the case may be.

5

C340

Cessna - We love these planes - very suitable but high maintenance cost (see AD’s’). Easy passenger access. They all seem to be tied-up by commercial operators. Not many good ones in the hands of private owners. We have had to rethink this one since Wendy’s’ heart attack. The three stairs into and out of the cabin are difficult for her. This one now drops down our list of preferences.

3

C T303

Crusader

Cessna Crusader- A “by chance” flight while I was working in Queensland. Very impressed. Almost as good as the C340, but less cabin space. Excellent flying characteristics. Did have a negative in that they were restricted from flying into known icing conditions due to a serious vibration set up in the tail.fin area when ice formed between the root of the fin and the tailplane. A Cessna strengthening modification has rectified this problem (see AD’s’ relating to this aircraft). Only eight on the register in Australia.

1

C421C

Golden Eagle

Cessna - Similar set up to the C340. This aircraft is larger than we need, however still suitable. The SIDs effect,  is causing a number of these to be made available to private operators, however, they seem to have high TTs. Did not seek out this one, just happened to be in the neighborhood, so took a test fly. Would have to see more before coming to a final decision on this model. See also AD’s relating to his aircraft

3

PA 68

Partenavia - Excellent economy and running costs for a twin. Seem to become available when spar AD/inspection is due. Easy passenger access. Easy to fly, and comfortable for passengers. Not great in the load carrying department.

4

C206  x

Cessna - Much prefer PA32 over these aircraft - The PA32 has a lower noise level and much more passenger and pilot comfort.

3

PA 34-200

Piper Seneca 3, and 2 - Same fuselage as the 32-260 and 32-300, so comfort is OK. Heavy, cumbersome to handle, just doesn’t feel right. (seems to be a lot up for sale high TTs’ - not for us). Six POB with luggage is a stretch five is just OK.

4

PA31-350  x

Piper Navajo - Good ergonomics, comfort and flying conditions. Excellent pilot position for taxying and good overall (safe) view when flying. On the negatives, those available for sale have high Total airframe times, and would require an extensive overhaul to be safe and pleasant to fly with our family. Generally from what we have seen, these are too expensive for us to bring up to our standard, run and maintain privately.

5

601P

Aerostar - Fast (no nonsense) between two points. Pilot layout is fantastic, someone has put a lot of thought into this. Passenger comfort is minimalistic, but acceptable, but not as good as the C340 or PA31-350. Passengers do not have much of a view. We have placed these second to the C340 in our order of preference. We would like to see more of these prior to making a final decision. Link to AD’s’

3

500 (6A1)

Twin Commander - Has the 0-540 engine (same as the PA32-260) Excellent to fly, with forgiving handling characteristics. Easy access for Wendy and all passengers. We were impressed, however, were advised that maintenance cost is high, particularly prone to corrosion on wing and engine mounts and high cost to maintain the retractable gear. See article

6

685

Twin commander - Excellent flight characteristics a pleasure to fly. Handling was superb, cabin quiet, and a high level of comfort. We would recommend to anyone wanting a fast comfortable twin. Easy access for all. The one that we flew had 16,760 hours on the airframe, so had done a lot of work, and had a very “tired” interior. This had a lot to spend to bring to the level that we require, and so not suitable. We will look favourably at this model if one comes up.

1

Beech 60B  x

Beechcraft Duke - We did not seek out the Duke, but were fortunate enough to have a test flight during a fly-in visit. Still prefer the C340 as a twin, however, the Duke does have a lower purchase price, and generally lower TTIS. Could have been an option for us in “private” category. Our investigations to date however, show that maintenance costs are 40% to 50% higher than the C340, running costs are also slightly higher, which is probably why they are not preferred as commercial carriers (other aircraft such as the C340 and the Baron offer higher returns). Comment from the maintenance organisation was that these were closer to a King Air as far as maintenance complexity and cost of parts are concerned. Link to AD’s’

2

BN2

Britten Norman - Powerful, load carrying aircraft. Strongly built, and very easy to fly. Again easy access for Wendy and all passengers. Relatively high running costs when compared with the C340, and very much slower. Used for high loads, and short hop commuting. Much more room than we need, with eight seats in commuter format. Would be great with club type seating if they were available in this form. Most that we have seen are in commercial, or semi commercial (freight) applications. Not many in private hands. Some are well expired due to rough treatment, poor maintenance and operators “running them into the ground” to maximise profits. We will have to be very lucky to find one that is suitable within Australia Link to AD’s’.

2

1. Twin Commander 500 A-S or 685

2. Aerostar 601, 601A, 602

3. Cessna 421 Golden Eagle

4. Cessna T 303 or C340

5. Britten Norman BN2

6. Piper Seneca 3+

7. Cessna 337

8. Beechcraft Baron 58P