Hints on purchasing aircraft
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hints on purchasing aircraft
I was wonderin if anyone would be able to help me out.
I am looking at purchasing a C340 or a PA31-310.
I have looked in depth in the trader, however it seems that I cannot find a good fairly low time C340 or Navajo.
I was wondering if anyone knows of a 340 or Navajo for sale - if so, please email me
Any hints on what to look for with regards to both aircraft - grey areas in particular to look for before purchasing ... and what year models are better than others, features to look for in each aircraft (a/c - crew door... ?).
Any help would be greatly appreciated in finding a good 340 or Navajo.
Thanks for your time
PS: Just interested in what everyone would prefer - 340 or Navajo ??
I am looking at purchasing a C340 or a PA31-310.
I have looked in depth in the trader, however it seems that I cannot find a good fairly low time C340 or Navajo.
I was wondering if anyone knows of a 340 or Navajo for sale - if so, please email me
Any hints on what to look for with regards to both aircraft - grey areas in particular to look for before purchasing ... and what year models are better than others, features to look for in each aircraft (a/c - crew door... ?).
Any help would be greatly appreciated in finding a good 340 or Navajo.
Thanks for your time
PS: Just interested in what everyone would prefer - 340 or Navajo ??
Props are for boats!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: An Asian Hub
Age: 56
Posts: 994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends alot on what you want to use it for?
A crewdoor will come in handy if you intend on using for charter etc.
340 is pressurised means more maintenece checks and costs. If you want pressurisation, you may aswell go a turbine ie. B90,C425 depends on your budget ofcourse.I know where there are some B90s for sale.
Beware there maybe some cheap Chieftans on the market as there is an ad out on their engines. I know this doesnt pertain to a Navajo, but just some kind advice.
There are definitley more PA-31-310s on the register than C340s, this comes in handy when you need to get special parts quickly, someone else may help you. A grounded aircraft is an expensive vacumm. As it sits their awaiting watever, it depreciates in value rapidly.Not to mention, parking fees,insurance,registration and repayments......
Finding a good low time C340 or PA-31 will be tough as these machines arent getting any younger.
A crewdoor will come in handy if you intend on using for charter etc.
340 is pressurised means more maintenece checks and costs. If you want pressurisation, you may aswell go a turbine ie. B90,C425 depends on your budget ofcourse.I know where there are some B90s for sale.
Beware there maybe some cheap Chieftans on the market as there is an ad out on their engines. I know this doesnt pertain to a Navajo, but just some kind advice.
There are definitley more PA-31-310s on the register than C340s, this comes in handy when you need to get special parts quickly, someone else may help you. A grounded aircraft is an expensive vacumm. As it sits their awaiting watever, it depreciates in value rapidly.Not to mention, parking fees,insurance,registration and repayments......
Finding a good low time C340 or PA-31 will be tough as these machines arent getting any younger.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kav
Seeing as nasa asked sooooo politely
here it is in about three lines.
1. Don't buy either type, if you are buying to set up a charter op.
2. C340 maintenance schedule is/was only about 3 hours more than std, BUT nobody in recorded history has ever made any money with one. A C421C is better bet and don't believe a word you hear about the engines. I have run many many pairs to TBO without a single problem.
3. PA31 when you buy one of these, you will be solving somebody elses problem. Apart from the fact that the engines are under a bit of a cloud at the moment, BUT few people if any, certainly in the last 15 or more years has made any money out of them. A C402C or C404 are cheaper to run and the only way to go, but the same applies.
4. Sorry there is a fourth, don't under ANY circumstances buy a C90 or B100, a PA31P, an AC500/680/690, a Cheyenne of any description, dont even stand under the wing of an MU2 and here's the kicker in fact ANYTHING less than say 10 years old.
That's right, there's is nothing much left now that you can buy under several $million dollars.
Then if you can't afford to enter the industry at that level then you can't afford it.
I gaurantee that if you do not heed my advice, that in less than several years, you will be substantially poorer than when you started.
There is a HUGE sea change in progress in the market and the regulatory process, that may give the incumbents a chance to run out whatever they are currently operating and refleet but there will be many casualties.
In the class of aircraft you mention everybody is a seller.
Sits back and waits to be stoned as a heretic.
Oh and Uncle Torres has a much simpler course of action, except he forgot to say,
"after the cup of tea, wait for the feeling to go away". 
Seeing as nasa asked sooooo politely
here it is in about three lines.1. Don't buy either type, if you are buying to set up a charter op.
2. C340 maintenance schedule is/was only about 3 hours more than std, BUT nobody in recorded history has ever made any money with one. A C421C is better bet and don't believe a word you hear about the engines. I have run many many pairs to TBO without a single problem.
3. PA31 when you buy one of these, you will be solving somebody elses problem. Apart from the fact that the engines are under a bit of a cloud at the moment, BUT few people if any, certainly in the last 15 or more years has made any money out of them. A C402C or C404 are cheaper to run and the only way to go, but the same applies.
4. Sorry there is a fourth, don't under ANY circumstances buy a C90 or B100, a PA31P, an AC500/680/690, a Cheyenne of any description, dont even stand under the wing of an MU2 and here's the kicker in fact ANYTHING less than say 10 years old.
That's right, there's is nothing much left now that you can buy under several $million dollars.
Then if you can't afford to enter the industry at that level then you can't afford it.
I gaurantee that if you do not heed my advice, that in less than several years, you will be substantially poorer than when you started.
There is a HUGE sea change in progress in the market and the regulatory process, that may give the incumbents a chance to run out whatever they are currently operating and refleet but there will be many casualties.
In the class of aircraft you mention everybody is a seller.
Sits back and waits to be stoned as a heretic.
Oh and Uncle Torres has a much simpler course of action, except he forgot to say,
"after the cup of tea, wait for the feeling to go away".
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for your advice.
What would you recommend for majority of the flying to be conducted in PVT. We have been thinking of a BE58, however it is cramped and the baggage is to be carried inside or in the nose locker.
A 303 is built to light - engine and airframe
310 - to small for what our intended uses are for - we could be carry 5-6 people on about 3 hour sectors
Any other twin aircraft that we could look for that could suit our needs. I am sure the aircraft will not be sitting for any length of time, he needs it for work and has work building up and requires his own aircraft - he is sick of chartering aircraft and driving miles from the domestic terminals.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers
What would you recommend for majority of the flying to be conducted in PVT. We have been thinking of a BE58, however it is cramped and the baggage is to be carried inside or in the nose locker.
A 303 is built to light - engine and airframe
310 - to small for what our intended uses are for - we could be carry 5-6 people on about 3 hour sectors
Any other twin aircraft that we could look for that could suit our needs. I am sure the aircraft will not be sitting for any length of time, he needs it for work and has work building up and requires his own aircraft - he is sick of chartering aircraft and driving miles from the domestic terminals.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
Cheers
Last edited by Kav; 21st Aug 2002 at 02:22.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kav
Yu don't say what your budget is but I suspect it may be around $3-400,000?? and it really depends on the role.
In any event the perfect aircraft would be a nice clean and tidy C414 Chancellor which is a C402C fuse with pressurisation and 315HP Contys as standard.
There is, I believe an STC for an ugrade to the HP which is what was to happen to replace the C421C Golden Eagle. The original engine is the same TSIO520 that they used in the C402 C but only 315HP instead of 325HP in the interests of economy.
The bit of extra grunt would make all the difference.
Having said that the aircraft on its own is the perfect 5- 6 seat C340 which was a transition machine until they developed the Chancellor.
Quiet, a delight to fly, very roomy and very economical.
I operated one against a C421C in our fleet and it was hard to pick em unless you were looking for sheer grunt payload/range, but the engine HP ugrade should sort that.
Having said all of that you should really rattle the bosses tin and buy a C425 Conquest 1, which is the P & W version of the Chancellor/Golden Eagle.
250 KTAS at FL250 and it'll get you their in under 10 minutes, if I recall correctly. Its the quietest aircraft I have flown in ever.
For near Citation performance go for the legendary C441 Conquest 11, 5-6 pax over 1000nm @ FL330 and 290 KTAS. It will go a solid 1800nm with IFR reserves.
It'll costs about the same to buy and run as the C425 on a seat mile basis and over shorter distances will give the RPT jets a run for their money door to door.
Problem will be finding a nice one.
Overall winner the Chancellor for distances out to say 2-300nm the Conquests outside this distance.
re the C303, I wont bore you with the why and wherefore but the C303 would have been another legend but was stillborn when they abondoned piston manufacture in the mid eighties.
If you really understand the aircraft then you see that for a 6 place it is a pretty sharp ship.
The reason it is so light is because it was designed completely from scratch rather than the C310 which was being continually "stretched" from the original 4 seat/260HP or B58 which started life as a Bonanza.
Yu don't say what your budget is but I suspect it may be around $3-400,000?? and it really depends on the role.
In any event the perfect aircraft would be a nice clean and tidy C414 Chancellor which is a C402C fuse with pressurisation and 315HP Contys as standard.
There is, I believe an STC for an ugrade to the HP which is what was to happen to replace the C421C Golden Eagle. The original engine is the same TSIO520 that they used in the C402 C but only 315HP instead of 325HP in the interests of economy.
The bit of extra grunt would make all the difference.
Having said that the aircraft on its own is the perfect 5- 6 seat C340 which was a transition machine until they developed the Chancellor.
Quiet, a delight to fly, very roomy and very economical.
I operated one against a C421C in our fleet and it was hard to pick em unless you were looking for sheer grunt payload/range, but the engine HP ugrade should sort that.
Having said all of that you should really rattle the bosses tin and buy a C425 Conquest 1, which is the P & W version of the Chancellor/Golden Eagle.
250 KTAS at FL250 and it'll get you their in under 10 minutes, if I recall correctly. Its the quietest aircraft I have flown in ever.
For near Citation performance go for the legendary C441 Conquest 11, 5-6 pax over 1000nm @ FL330 and 290 KTAS. It will go a solid 1800nm with IFR reserves.
It'll costs about the same to buy and run as the C425 on a seat mile basis and over shorter distances will give the RPT jets a run for their money door to door.
Problem will be finding a nice one.
Overall winner the Chancellor for distances out to say 2-300nm the Conquests outside this distance.
re the C303, I wont bore you with the why and wherefore but the C303 would have been another legend but was stillborn when they abondoned piston manufacture in the mid eighties.
If you really understand the aircraft then you see that for a 6 place it is a pretty sharp ship.
The reason it is so light is because it was designed completely from scratch rather than the C310 which was being continually "stretched" from the original 4 seat/260HP or B58 which started life as a Bonanza.
Last edited by gaunty; 21st Aug 2002 at 02:33.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Gautny
Very helpful with your reply.
I think that you would be hard pressed to find a 414 for around 350k, if you did - please let me know !
What aircraft would you recommed for around the $350k ??
There are so many aircraft out there ... just want to find a fairly good twin for around that price ...
Any help ....
I heard that it is a buyers market .... if this is true ... how come we cant find a good houred twin ... for the right price .... for PVT flying ??
Very helpful with your reply.
I think that you would be hard pressed to find a 414 for around 350k, if you did - please let me know !
What aircraft would you recommed for around the $350k ??
There are so many aircraft out there ... just want to find a fairly good twin for around that price ...
Any help ....
I heard that it is a buyers market .... if this is true ... how come we cant find a good houred twin ... for the right price .... for PVT flying ??
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kav
Buyers market?, sorry mate I meant here, not in the real world outside Oz.
Mind you the Oz exchange rate has reversed the direction a little lately.
In any event, with respect you've got it back to front with the purchasing bit. In effect you are trying to make the "punishment fit the crime".
You must first identify the type or class of aircraft that will do at least 85% of the job (which you have defined by rigouorus research) that you want to do.
Then you go off and find the best example that you can for whatever it costs.
Setting a price limit at the front is back to front.
If you have done the research job properly and it clearly shows that there is advantage to owning v RPT, then it shouldn't matter what the capital cost is.
What is absolutely certain is that if you don't get it right then it will be an expensive failure and the boss will never go near another corporate aircraft ever again.
email me if you want to talk about it, I wont try to sell you an aircraft or offer a consultancy coz I dont do that any more but I can give you some clues on where to start.
Buyers market?, sorry mate I meant here, not in the real world outside Oz.
Mind you the Oz exchange rate has reversed the direction a little lately.
In any event, with respect you've got it back to front with the purchasing bit. In effect you are trying to make the "punishment fit the crime".
You must first identify the type or class of aircraft that will do at least 85% of the job (which you have defined by rigouorus research) that you want to do.
Then you go off and find the best example that you can for whatever it costs.
Setting a price limit at the front is back to front.
If you have done the research job properly and it clearly shows that there is advantage to owning v RPT, then it shouldn't matter what the capital cost is.
What is absolutely certain is that if you don't get it right then it will be an expensive failure and the boss will never go near another corporate aircraft ever again.
email me if you want to talk about it, I wont try to sell you an aircraft or offer a consultancy coz I dont do that any more but I can give you some clues on where to start.
I support Gaunty. Forget the C90. The -20/-21 engines love expensive hot sections, parts are getting hard to get and a C90 can hardly be called a "fast" aircraft. If you must go a baby King Air look at an F90.
The Cessna 425 Citation I - magnificant aircraft with lovely de-rated Pratt's!
I'm not as keen on geared engines as Gaunty is, however good pilot training in engine techniques is an excellent investment.
The Beech 55 and Beech 58 are good honest work horses, but you may find it difficult to get a good, low time machine.
And because I'm extremely biased, don't overlook a Cessna 208/208B. They have the lowest seat/mile cost of any GA aircraft and will do the job for you. And used C208's are reasonably priced.
Regarding the PA31 etc etc, you would certainly be fixing someone else's problem if you bought one........!!!
The Cessna 425 Citation I - magnificant aircraft with lovely de-rated Pratt's!
I'm not as keen on geared engines as Gaunty is, however good pilot training in engine techniques is an excellent investment.
The Beech 55 and Beech 58 are good honest work horses, but you may find it difficult to get a good, low time machine.
And because I'm extremely biased, don't overlook a Cessna 208/208B. They have the lowest seat/mile cost of any GA aircraft and will do the job for you. And used C208's are reasonably priced.
Regarding the PA31 etc etc, you would certainly be fixing someone else's problem if you bought one........!!!
Props are for boats!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: An Asian Hub
Age: 56
Posts: 994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would stay away from anything with GTIO520s ie C404 OR C421 unless you can be sure of its history, or its got new donks. They have a TBO of around 1100HRS I think , but then again it depends on how many hours a month you intend on flying. When I mentioned C90 it was only COST as some are going cheap at the moment , but you would need maybe a spare-20/21 in cupboard. I have a question for Torres what PRATTS are in the C425? I couldnt find it anywhere.
Ofcourse as Gaunty has said the slickest is the QUEST goes like a stabbed cat , but you need a big back pockets for it. I thought the C310R was reasonably roomy, nose locker and wing lockers, will follow a Baron all day . 
Ofcourse as Gaunty has said the slickest is the QUEST goes like a stabbed cat
, but you need a big back pockets for it. I thought the C310R was reasonably roomy, nose locker and wing lockers, will follow a Baron all day .
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Under the Equator
Posts: 605
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The T303 is an orphan (only 300 built) but a really, really nice machine.
There are only 9 in Oz and 1 for sale but it's been for sale for 18 months so it may just be a 'phantom' listing.
Talk to some engineers as well. e.g. BE58 is a great twin but Beech spares prices are a killer.
There are only 9 in Oz and 1 for sale but it's been for sale for 18 months so it may just be a 'phantom' listing.
Talk to some engineers as well. e.g. BE58 is a great twin but Beech spares prices are a killer.
Last edited by Rich-Fine-Green; 21st Aug 2002 at 05:45.
Sheep Guts. I think it's the PT6A-135 derated to around 450 SHP. Basically a -34 family engine but it's so far derated it'll never wear out and is very forgiving in high ambient temps.
The -114/-114A (600/675 SHP) in the C208/C208B is also in the same class of engine and it's operating costs are excellent.
There is a remarkable reduction in hourly operating costs in these later engines, compared to the much earlier -9, -15, and -20/-21.
The Twin Otter had -27's and Beech E90 had -28's. I seem to recall the -34 gas generator can be installed on a -27.
The Bandeirante had -34's.
But all that's from long distant memory so if incorrect I stand corrected.
The -114/-114A (600/675 SHP) in the C208/C208B is also in the same class of engine and it's operating costs are excellent.
There is a remarkable reduction in hourly operating costs in these later engines, compared to the much earlier -9, -15, and -20/-21.
The Twin Otter had -27's and Beech E90 had -28's. I seem to recall the -34 gas generator can be installed on a -27.
The Bandeirante had -34's.
But all that's from long distant memory so if incorrect I stand corrected.
Guest
Posts: n/a
I have to agree with Torres...
Go the Caravan.
It will cost a bit more than your typical older piston twin to start, however the difference will close quickly once maintenance comes into the picture.
Not the fastest machine around, but it will get into and out of anywhere without a problem, unlike most twins. You'll still get around 170kts out of one ( afew more without the pod). A much more comfortable cabin than any piston twin also. You can also pull the seats out quickly and run it as a very high volume freighter.
Great aircraft all round. Don't bother with piston twins anymore, their time is up.
Go the Caravan.
It will cost a bit more than your typical older piston twin to start, however the difference will close quickly once maintenance comes into the picture.
Not the fastest machine around, but it will get into and out of anywhere without a problem, unlike most twins. You'll still get around 170kts out of one ( afew more without the pod). A much more comfortable cabin than any piston twin also. You can also pull the seats out quickly and run it as a very high volume freighter.
Great aircraft all round. Don't bother with piston twins anymore, their time is up.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gaunty
Quick question if I may. Why do you discount the Aero Commander series of aircraft?
I thought they all had good load capacity with fair to middling speed but great handling qualities.
Perhaps a slightly higher maintenance requirement with the hydraulics but they are not on their own regarding that. 
Cheers.
Quick question if I may. Why do you discount the Aero Commander series of aircraft?
I thought they all had good load capacity with fair to middling speed but great handling qualities.
Perhaps a slightly higher maintenance requirement with the hydraulics but they are not on their own regarding that. Cheers.