Considering heresy - talk me out of a BE58

[chrixxer]

Mooney is offline getting a new engine. It will never be worth more than it will be in a few weeks. I was already seriously contemplating getting a newer Ovation with FIKI, but at the price point, I could be in a BE58 with FIKI (there are a few in the $200K range on controller.com with mid-time engines, ADS-B compliant, etc). Having survived two engine outs in ASELs, I've been casually considering a twin for a while. I'm ME training in a Duchess with a Baron on the field for rent, and we have a C340 I'll occasionally fly for work, but almost all of my time has been in older Mooneys and newer composite thingies with a parachute. I'm aware two engines equals roughly 2.5x the maintenance spend and operating cost, and I'm conceptually okay with that - I think. Unless there are huge "gotchas" I'm missing? Mission is mostly longer distance cross-countries (800-1300 nm), 1-2 people + 2 big dogs, ski trips carrying gear, etc. Lots of higher altitude airport operations and some IFR departures that have been a challenge in a NA single. (But generally not high enough to really benefit from a turbo, i.e., 12-14K stuff.) I don't think I spend enough time at altitudes that require oxygen, to really want a pressurized plane (well, want, sure, but, can't justify the ongoing expense), I'm fine with cannulas...

 

[Vno]

Good luck. Flying twins are a blast. I think you hit the biggest negatives of the change which is a huge increase in cost. Also the much smaller increase in speed versus the larger increase in cost is something to consider. If that doesn't bother you then have at it. I reference sentence two in this post. "Flying a twin is a blast."

Brian

[FoxMike]

Bigger airplanes require bigger hangars and more ground handling equipment.  Get an insurance estimate.  First year can be rough.  I owned a C Baron for a short period of time.  I found not much bang for a whole lot of bucks.  Maintenance on twins is often deferred because so much is required.  If 100LL gets more costly you will lose a lot of value.  The last time fuel got real pricey , people could not give twins away.  

[BKlott]

I would think an early generation SR22 would be newer, have a modern avionics suite, be far less expensive to maintain, may come with a built-in O2 system and A/C and provide comparable cruise performance without the risks and costs associated with folding the gear. You are also going to have less exposure to airframe corrosion issues.
 

I also think the SR22 would be easier to market when it comes time to sell. Historically, asymmetrical thrust has not proven to be a reliable safety feature whereas the CAPS system, when deployed within the specified parameters, has been highly successful. Don’t overlook the 26G cabin and seats or the airbags in the harness either.

Edited October 6, 2019 by BKlott

[ArtVandelay]

You used the pronoun “I” a lot, if you have a SO, what does she think? Including wearing cannulas?


Tom

[Niko182]

I'd personally say Ovation. an older ovation will get the same speed as a baron on about 60% of the fuel. it won't have that massive useful load but it will most likely have a better range. Barons are however very nice and its a really nice plane to own. Flying isn't rational. go fly a baron and go fly an ovation. I'd also take a look at a 310R. I got to fly in one of those, and they have the same handling characteristics as the Mooney, but the cabin is insanely comfy, not that the Mooney isn't comfy. the 310 is just big. whatever you end up liking the most you should buy. any of those options will be setting money on fire anyway.

[Jerry 5TJ]

7 hours ago, chrixxer said:

Having survived two engine outs in ASELs, I've been casually considering a twin for a while.

If this is a key factor for your comfort then no single piston airplane is likely to suit you.  

[MIm20c]

You seem like the perfect candidate for a twin. You fly a lot and have shown a good amount of discipline/awareness during your emergency events. A BE55 would be on my short list as well. I’d rather buy a top of the line 55 vs a mid to lower end 58. 

[Boilermonkey]

Having the same debate...following.   Wish you were in Indy to partner.

[jetdriven]

If you’ve got $40-50,000 a year, plus unexpected repairs, for an airplane budget, go right ahead. The  fatal accident rate of amateur flown piston twins and singles is about the same.  And it’s a more complex airplane, and you’ll have lower hours in the category as well.

[N201MKTurbo]

Talk to #KRLDMD, he switched from Mooney to Baron reciently.

[BKlott]

6 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

You used the pronoun “I” a lot, if you have a SO, what does she think? Including wearing cannulas?


Tom

She leaves the airplane decisions to me. We have a SkyOx portable oxygen system with pendant cannulas which she has no issues with. In fact, she likes using the oxygen while at altitude. Like those pronouns better?

[Mooney in Oz]

12 hours ago, Vno said:

Flying a twin is a blast.

Agree.  But after a while you'll come to realise it is just another airplane with much added expense.

2 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

Talk to #KRLDMD, he switched from Mooney to Baron reciently.

@KLRDMD did make the switch and he also switched from the Baron back to a single - a V tail Bonanza.

[chrixxer]

11 hours ago, FoxMike said:

Bigger airplanes require bigger hangars and more ground handling equipment.  Get an insurance estimate.  First year can be rough.  I owned a C Baron for a short period of time.  I found not much bang for a whole lot of bucks.  Maintenance on twins is often deferred because so much is required.  If 100LL gets more costly you will lose a lot of value.  The last time fuel got real pricey , people could not give twins away.  

My current hangar will fit the Baron. Ground equipment is a drop in the proverbial bucket. Insurance may be the factor, I've got a request out to my agent. Hopefully a good pre-buy will catch any deferred maintenance. I'm not really concerned about loss of value, with any luck the next plane will be my forever plane... 

[KLRDMD]

I've had 16 airplanes in my flying career thus far. Five were twins. Two were Barons, both B55s. One was a Colemill. If I had two engine failures I doubt I would be flying a single today. If I had one engine failure I doubt I would be flying a single today. My current airplane is an S35 Bonanza and it is the best of all of the airplanes I have owned. But there is one flight that I make regularly that has zero good options in the event of an engine failure at certain points in the flight so that concerns me. A parachute or a second engine would make me feel better on those flights and I have previously owned both types of airplane. For now I just reduce risk as much as possible in a number of different ways.

With two people and two large dogs you're looking at four bodies flying regularly with a lot of "stuff" so to me that means a six place airplane to do it comfortably. That eliminates all the Mooneys. If you fly a lot at night, over water or over inhospitable terrain, that too pushes me to recommend a twin. One of the problems with 310s is they often don't fit in the same hangar as your single. The R model absolutely will not, you need a much larger hangar for that airplane. Other than that, 310s are very comfortable. 

Most people that have not owned twins greatly overestimate their expense and greatly underestimate their safety and utility. In my real world, multi-year experience owning a twin costs right at 50% more per year than owning a capable single. Search this forum for many posts I have made providing specific numbers. My twins have always fit in the same hangar as my singles so there's no extra expense there. Insurance on my twins was always less than a similar single due to the lower hull value, many times 50% the hull value on the twin versus the single. Maintenance and fuel are higher on the twin, thus the net 50% increase in expense per year.

[chrixxer]

9 hours ago, BKlott said:

I would think an early generation SR22 would be newer, have a modern avionics suite, be far less expensive to maintain, may come with a built-in O2 system and A/C and provide comparable cruise performance without the risks and costs associated with folding the gear. You are also going to have less exposure to airframe corrosion issues.
 

I also think the SR22 would be easier to market when it comes time to sell. Historically, asymmetrical thrust has not proven to be a reliable safety feature whereas the CAPS system, when deployed within the specified parameters, has been highly successful. Don’t overlook the 26G cabin and seats or the airbags in the harness either.

I have a lot of time in an SR22 (I'm on the insurance for a G2 locally). It's ... Fine, I guess. It's not a plane I would own. And it's still a SEL. With a 'chute, yes, but most of my flying is over mountainous terrain and/or open water. (FWIW, the owner of the SR22 also owns a C340 and uses that for the type of flying I do a lot of...)

[chrixxer]

7 hours ago, ArtVandelay said:

You used the pronoun “I” a lot, if you have a SO, what does she think? Including wearing cannulas?

Just me and the dogs, and the occasional girlfriend. None have been long term enough to have an input into plane purchasing.

 

[chrixxer]

6 hours ago, Niko182 said:

I'd personally say Ovation. an older ovation will get the same speed as a baron on about 60% of the fuel. it won't have that massive useful load but it will most likely have a better range. Barons are however very nice and its a really nice plane to own. Flying isn't rational. go fly a baron and go fly an ovation. I'd also take a look at a 310R. I got to fly in one of those, and they have the same handling characteristics as the Mooney, but the cabin is insanely comfy, not that the Mooney isn't comfy. the 310 is just big. whatever you end up liking the most you should buy. any of those options will be setting money on fire anyway.

Speed isn't the primary factor, redundancy is. If I just wanted speed I could go with a Lancair IV-P.

I considered the 310, but what I've heard from owners is they're not very robust airplanes. Not sure I can quantify that, though. My understanding also is that only the R models are really safe when it comes to single engine operation (the O-470s just don't have enough power)?

Edited October 6, 2019 by chrixxer

[KLRDMD]

If I were ever to go back to a twin, it would probably be an R/STOL Twin Comanche, for what it is worth. I've only seen two for sale that I would want in the last 25 years, though.

Edited October 6, 2019 by KLRDMD

[chrixxer]

6 hours ago, MIm20c said:

You seem like the perfect candidate for a twin. You fly a lot and have shown a good amount of discipline/awareness during your emergency events. A BE55 would be on my short list as well. I’d rather buy a top of the line 55 vs a mid to lower end 58. 

I haven't seen any '55s that are FIKI, and my understanding is it's more rare than on the '58 (only certain 55 models are covered by the STCs), but, I'm not necessarily opposed. I don't honestly know enough about Barons (yet!) to really have an opinion...

[KLRDMD]

Just now, chrixxer said:

I haven't seen any '55s that are FIKI, and my understanding is it's more rare than on the '58 (only certain 55 models are covered by the STCs), but, I'm not necessarily opposed. I don't honestly know enough about Barons (yet!) to really have an opinion...

Some 55s are FIKI. A friend put TKS on his 55 Baron a few years ago. But there are FAR more KI 58s. They'll almost all be booted. Then you get to make the TKS versus boot decision.

[chrixxer]

4 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

If I were ever to go back to a twin, it would probably be an R/STOL Twin Comanche, for what it is worth. I've only seen two for sale that I would want in the last 25 years, though.

There's a lot to like about the TwinC, but it doesn't really fit my mission. 

[KLRDMD]

I would be looking at a known ice P210 if I had your mission requirements. Take out the middle row of seats.

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/150318475/1981-cessna-p210n

The tip tanks on this one remove FIKI but it is still well de-iced. And the tip tanks may make the wingspan too long to fit in your hangar.

Edited October 6, 2019 by KLRDMD

[chrixxer]

1 minute ago, KLRDMD said:

Some 55s are FIKI. A friend put TKS on his 55 Baron a few years ago. But there are FAR more KI 58s. They'll almost all be booted. Then you get to make the TKS versus boot decision.

Yeah, I know they're out there, I just haven't seen any come up for sale. (I'm not in the market yet, but I'm starting to look at it ...)

TKS vs. boots: Anti-ice vs. ice removal?

The reality is, ice scares me, even properly equipped. There are low risk situations where I'd use it to be legal, but that's about it. Case in point, I was three days delayed leaving St. Louis after New Year's this year because there was a thin layer (<1,000') of clouds sitting about 700' off the ground, and freezing levels were to the surface. I would have been out of it in less than a minute, and could have used FIKI equipment to punch through that layer. But that's about the extent of what I'd do with it.

(Other than get out of unexpected icing. Same trip, east bound, weather reports were clear when I departed ABQ, but several hours later a small pocket of precipitation had popped up. ATC advised I was heading right towards it. It was night, and dark (no moon), but I could see city lights below and ahead crystal clear, wasn't thinking about weather really much at all. Popped on my landing lights and - oh, hey, I'm already in rain. Plotted a course to divert around the pocket and cleared it with ATC (I was IFR). Checked my wing with a flashlight and it was clear. Pulled up icing levels in ForeFlight and saw 5,000' would put me out of risk. Asked ATC for that and got approved, started my descent. Checked my wing again - light rime forming. Only picked up a few crystals, but it freaked me out a bit.)

[chrixxer]

6 minutes ago, KLRDMD said:

I would be looking at a known ice P210 if I had your mission requirements. Take out the middle row of seats.

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/150318475/1981-cessna-p210n

The tip tanks on this one remove FIKI but it is still well de-iced. And the tip tanks may make the wingspan too long to fit in your hangar.

Counting engines ... One ... One.