​PRIME ONE

By Andy Yacoub 10/13

 

 

Easy....Buy the biggest, shiniest one you can afford, right? Well..... that might not be the best idea actually.

 

 

 

Here are some thoughts of mine to ponder and some actual type suggestions. Let's start with the lower end owner flown aircraft and some broad A vs B factors.

 

 

SINGLE VS PISTON TWIN 

 

The age old discussion, and one that quite often gets heated on some forums. Pilots are an enthusiastic bunch ya know!

 

With current fuel prices, there is no doubt twin engine aircraft have had a huge increase in operating costs with two engines guzzling the gas.

 

For some people it's a price worth paying as they glance either side of the cockpit, and see 2 motors humming in unison, with either one just waiting to take the slack of the other one deciding to take a well earned rest. That relaxed feeling and piece of mind, can be priceless, say in cruise flight for example over water, or mountains at night. However not so, on a critical take off out of a short strip... If one engine lets go in spectacular fashion, I'd rather that engine be the only one. 

 

Statistics continue to show that twins are ultimately not safer than singles, and generally achieve around about 10% more speed (or less) for double the power or more, and some say double the operating costs...twice the fuel and engine maintenance/ overhaul. I think sometimes it comes in at a little less than double, with the airframe maintenance being similar in both classes. Also you are generally travelling  a little faster so should have less flight time for the same yearly travels. 

 

Another factor is training and proficiency. In Airline and corporate flying, absolutely every take off bar none, is assumed to be an engine out take off, departure and immediate return (or divert in the case of very poor weather) It is planned as such, with weights and required safe performance to achieve it. It is briefed as such, by the flying pilot to the rest of the crew and agreed upon.

 

Obviously a Piper Seminole flown by 1 guy with his girlfriend is a different operation to a powerful airliner flown by trained crew, but ironically a max weight take off in such a light twin is far more critical, due to lack of engine out performance, and should be operated with the same airline mentality, even if it is a mental brief to one's self before departure. The point being training, proficiency, and operating attitude must be stepped up if a multi engine aircraft is be considered. If it is not, then the owner pilot could be courting disaster.

 

Current operating costs of light to medium twins, such as Piper Aztec or Beech Baron can easily exceed $500 per hour depending on yearly use, pilot experience and other factors. Make no mistake if that number scares you, you might want to look back at singles, or perhaps rent. Cabin class twins such as the Cessna 340 are now in the realm of where the Kingair used to tread, at $750 an hour or even more. 

 

The type of mission as mentioned earlier, is an important issue for many. Perhaps if a large proportion of your flying is over inhospitable areas then a Multi engine can make the missions enjoyable rather nail biting stressful flights. Inhospitable doesn't just mean water, it could be jungle, mountains, cities and night IMC.

 

Another major issue is the used prices of the aforementioned twins and others in their class, have been dramatically hit and are now affordable to some that could never have done so before. For example a decent Baron B55 of 1980's vintage, a well respected and loved machine can be picked up for under $100,000 these days (depending heavily on equipment and hours of course)

 

As with any purchase, you have to weigh up what's most important to you, what you are willing to pay for it, and of course the benefits it will bring to your life. 

 

 

 

 

 

CIRRUS SR22 TURBO VS BARON B58

 

Let's look at $350,000 budget example of the types above. Both popular choices in the piston single and it's nemesis the piston twin markets respectively.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$350,000 will currently allow the buyer to be looking at a roughly 2008 vintage SR22T and around a ten year older Baron at the 1998 mark. You would expect around only 800 hrs Total time for the Cirrus, and perhaps triple that 2400 for the older Beech.

 

PERFORMANCE

Both do around 200 Kts True airspeed, with the difference being the Cirrus has to go high (into Oxygen breathing   altititudes) to achieve that full speed, and can see a touch more, I regularly saw 208 kts at FL230-250. At 12,500 it still trues out at a respectable 188kts give or take. The Baron achieves it's speed through brute normally aspirated power at sees around 200kts at most altitudes.

 

The powerful twin will climb better at low level, with both motors running, but the differential will even out or even have  the sleek single outclimb it eventually if you were headed into the thin flight levels in both. The Cirrus does top out higher at FL250 and the Baron FL200 max levels.

 

EQUIPMENT

For this artificial comparison, we are looking at a $350,000 budget ,and for that you will be just in the range of the       Garmin equipped Cirri, which is arguably a far better paltform than the previous Avidyne avionics suite. Synthetic vision, 12 inch screens and such, are just mind blowing in capability. 

 

For that budget in a Baron you will not be looking at anything near as fancy, or as capable and integrated, but if it was my money I would be looking for one with a G500 avionics upgrade, and could be possible in that price range. That could be considered half a Cirrus Garmin Perspective perhaps.   

 

The Baron can have a FIKI option (flight into known icing approved) boots system, with the Cirrus of that year an emergency only system of TKS fluid panels. In my opinion the Baron is better equipped for ice (and fully legal!) It has retractable gear which would help in a ditching situation, but the rest of the time is just a maintenance headache and potential worry if it doesnt come down. What is remarkable about the Cirrus is it's performance with the gear welded down. The secret of course is the ultra aerodynamic composite material and it's incredibly sleek profile, whilst retaining a large cabin. Speaking of that....

 

 

CABIN INTERIOR

The big Beech has six seats vs the Cirrus only 4 however the young upstart from Duluth has a dedidely roomier cabin both for the pilot and passengers with six inches wider throughout and more headroom. It makes a huge difference, but if you do need to carry six people the Baron will do it (with reduced fuel) the Cirrus will not.

 

 

OPERATING COSTS

The moment of truth for some! For airplanes of very similar performance, capability (other than engine number!) and hull value, here are the rough percentage increases for the second engine luxury.

 

Insurance 50%

Maintenance 75%

Fuel burn 95% (both lean of peak operation)

Training 20%

Hangarage, landing fees etc 25%

 

 

The following figures are only estimates and can vary considerably but if you're looking for a guideline (Do NOT hold me to it) I would ballpark the 22T at around $375 an hour not counting financing or deprecaition, and the Baron $620 an hour for a 100 hrs a year flying. 

 

 

One factor that is to be determined is how much the Cirrus will depreciate vs the Baron, which could go either way with the factory constantly improving new products, and the cost of Avgas headed in it's ever northward march.

 

 

 

I hope you enjoyed the comparison 

 

 

STAY TUNED FOR JET VS TURBOPROP