![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Aviation Consumer had an article on this choice within the past few months.
Mike MU-2 wrote in message oups.com... Hi all, I hesitate to ask this question, since on rec.aviation this kind of thing always turns into a religious war, but here goes: a bunch of us are getting ready to go in on a new plane together. I travel with my family, and have already lost one engine over the woods, so the candidates are the Twinstar and SR-22. Here's what I'd like to find out: IF YOU ARE BUYING ONE OR THE OTHER (or have recently, or decided to buy something else instead), why did you make the choice you made? I apologize for sounding exclusive, but everyone's got opinions, and I'd like to concentrate on opinions of folks who have invested their $$$ and lives into the it. Many thanks in advance, -dpc |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'm a bit slow, I admit it... But when you say you have lost one engine
already and then ask our opinion as to whether you should by a twin or a single!... It's a no brainer, buy the twin... But then, what do I know, I fly junk... cheers ... denny and Fat Albert the Apache... |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Excellent - thanks, all! Consensus (mostly sent offlist) is to buy into
an older twin. I ran the spreadsheet numbers and, while I can't plug in the "damn, it's sexy factor", the data all support an older, non-sexy twin for speed, cost and safety: I'd need to fly 2k hours to make up the difference in buy-in. Thanks again, -pablo On Oct 6, 4:57 am, "Denny" wrote: I'm a bit slow, I admit it... But when you say you have lost one engine already and then ask our opinion as to whether you should by a twin or a single!... It's a no brainer, buy the twin... But then, what do I know, I fly junk... cheers ... denny and Fat Albert the Apache... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
wrote)
Excellent - thanks, all! Consensus (mostly sent offlist) is to buy into an older twin. I ran the spreadsheet numbers and, while I can't plug in the "damn, it's sexy factor", the data all support an older, non-sexy twin for speed, cost and safety: I'd need to fly 2k hours to make up the difference in buy-in. Is a new 2006 Diamond DA-42 (Diesel) Twin Star (with two partners) an option? I was hoping to call them $450,000/3 = $150K each http://makeashorterlink.com/?M36324FED (Same link as below ...wait for it) http://www.controller.com/listings/forsale/list.asp?Man=DIAMOND&catID=9%20&mdltxt=DA42%20TWIN STAR&MdlX=Contains¬found=1&GUID=52282B84D989476 78F7D9AFC924A9CEE Montblack |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Montblack wrote: wrote) Excellent - thanks, all! Consensus (mostly sent offlist) is to buy into an older twin. I ran the spreadsheet numbers and, while I can't plug in the "damn, it's sexy factor", the data all support an older, non-sexy twin for speed, cost and safety: I'd need to fly 2k hours to make up the difference in buy-in. Is a new 2006 Diamond DA-42 (Diesel) Twin Star (with two partners) an option? I was hoping to call them $450,000/3 = $150K each http://makeashorterlink.com/?M36324FED (Same link as below ...wait for it) http://www.controller.com/listings/forsale/list.asp?Man=DIAMOND&catID=9%20&mdltxt=DA42%20TWIN STAR&MdlX=Contains¬found=1&GUID=52282B84D989476 78F7D9AFC924A9CEE Montblack The fuel burn of 11 gallons for 175 kts also very good. What about the overall operations cost ? Say the 3-way partnership does a total of 200-300 hours/year ? P S |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Y'know, it's embarrassing to admit that I didn't look at the
marketplace on this. But of course there are people selling their earlier slots. Yes, I feel stupid, but that's nnot a new sensation for me. Hmmm, that opens up another option. At the moment, I'm focusing on a mid-late model Seneca or Baron - higher fuel burn, but much faster, and a few hundred $K less. Montblack wrote: wrote) Excellent - thanks, all! Consensus (mostly sent offlist) is to buy into an older twin. I ran the spreadsheet numbers and, while I can't plug in the "damn, it's sexy factor", the data all support an older, non-sexy twin for speed, cost and safety: I'd need to fly 2k hours to make up the difference in buy-in. Is a new 2006 Diamond DA-42 (Diesel) Twin Star (with two partners) an option? I was hoping to call them $450,000/3 = $150K each http://makeashorterlink.com/?M36324FED (Same link as below ...wait for it) http://www.controller.com/listings/forsale/list.asp?Man=DIAMOND&catID=9%20&mdltxt=DA42%20TWIN STAR&MdlX=Contains¬found=1&GUID=52282B84D989476 78F7D9AFC924A9CEE Montblack |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Consensus (mostly sent offlist)
That sucks. Big time. THanks all - not! -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Thomas Borchert wrote: Consensus (mostly sent offlist) That sucks. Big time. THanks all - not! -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) I agree, this is just the type of information and discussion I would have wanted to see here!! -- Cheers, John Clonts Temple, Texas N7NZ |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 6 Oct 2006 04:57:14 -0700, "Denny" wrote:
I'm a bit slow, I admit it... But when you say you have lost one engine already and then ask our opinion as to whether you should by a twin or a single!... It's a no brainer, buy the twin... How can you lose an engine? Those things are pretty large to just misplace. My keys I may have left in my other pants, but the other engine? OTOH I have seen a few photos of jet liners with one missing, but they had a pretty good idea of where it was. Still if you misplace one for a single on the ground it's not a real safety concern. Losing one in the air really screws with your W&B. Me? I like the Twinstar, particularly with the diesel engines. The SR-22 is a very nice airplane but I don't like the side yoke. Now if they'd have put in a side joystick... Back when I was looking at a TBM-700 I *might* have actually considered a Twinstar, but they weren't available back then and it would have been a tad small. Although the 700 is a single, the reliability of that engine greatly reduces the concern. Then again, one of those engines new is probably more than either of the two planes we are discussing. But then, what do I know, I fly junk... But it works doesn't it? Besides I think Fat Albert is newer than the Deb ... or maybe close to the same age. cheers ... denny and Fat Albert the Apache... Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Cirrus chute deployment -- an incredible story | Michael182/G | Instrument Flight Rules | 48 | July 14th 05 03:52 PM |
New G-1000 182 & Cirrus SR-22 GTS | Dan Luke | Owning | 22 | June 27th 05 07:18 PM |
Call signs | buttman | Piloting | 55 | June 14th 05 04:42 AM |
Cirrus attracting pilots with 'The Wrong Stuff'? | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 73 | May 1st 04 04:35 AM |
IdaFlieg or manufacturer data for Open Cirrus | dj | Soaring | 2 | October 19th 03 07:56 PM |