fpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 755 posts, RR: 0 Posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6911 times:
I was thinking about commuters. What aircraft would come to mind in the 9-15 pax range that could operate at very low cost on up to 300 miles segment. Speed is not necessarily an issue, piston acceptable as well.
I am trying to figure out what would be the absolute lowest operating cost.
nkops From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2544 posts, RR: 6 Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6884 times:
My guess would be a C402... not too many aircraft made in the 9-15 market
YVRLTN From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2091 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6591 times:
Piper PA31 Navajo, particularly a 350 Chieftan or a BN2 Islander (the pax may not like those so much as they are loud...) Along with the C402 they are at the bottom end of your capacity requirement though.
Others are Cessna 208, Beech 99 & King Air family and Pilatus PC12 - these are getting away from your 'cheap' requirment though
DiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1294 posts, RR: 3 Reply 3, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6571 times:
As had been said, the 402 is probably a good airplane. Hard to find these days though. Perhaps the new Evektor EV-55 and the new Tecnam P2012 could work, depending on how they turn out.
fpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 755 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6508 times:
That looks promising. Any ideas on price and cetifications? I couldn't find anything on their site. Looks like a twin turboprop, pretty sure will be well north of a million which would make it too expensive.
DiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1294 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6486 times:
Quoting fpetrutiu (Reply 4): That looks promising. Any ideas on price and cetifications? I couldn't find anything on their site. Looks like a twin turboprop, pretty sure will be well north of a million which would make it too expensive.
If I had to guess, I'd say the EV-55 will probably be between the Cessna 208 and PC-12 in price. So between 2 and 4 million. I'd imagine that the Tecnam 2012 will probably be at least 1.4 million or better, depending on how it ends up being configured.
fpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 755 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6448 times:
Ok, to come clean, I was thinking about what airplane could be used for in and out of MCO as a commuter to airports around Florida, Florida Keys, smaller islands in the Bahamas, etc. It would have to be cheap enough so people would not think twice about it, and be able to carry their luggage as well.
Cessna 402 would be a good optionin my opinion, but still looking.
jonathanxxxx From United States of America, joined Feb 2011, 638 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6439 times:
How abou the Piaggio P-180 Avanti? Ok but seriously can this plane be used for commercial service?
fpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 755 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6425 times:
Quoting jonathanxxxx (Reply 7): How abou the Piaggio P-180 Avanti? Ok but seriously can this plane be used for commercial service?
Cool plane, not much for commercial service though.
atcsundevil From United States of America, joined Mar 2010, 667 posts, RR: 1 Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 6178 times:
Beech 1900D! They're like tanks and IIRC have fairly low operating costs. ZK can turn those things in less than 10mins and since they're twin turbo, they're pretty quick and have excellent short field take-off performance. That would be my vote. Good luck finding one though...this things get snapped up quickly by Lakes or Gulfstream and now African carriers.
fpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 755 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6072 times:
I think you need a Part 121 for a Beech 1900 right? I believe if you stay at 9 pax you could stat part 135, am I correct? Although part 121 would be better, it also increases the costs quite a bit.
hatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1451 posts, RR: 15 Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5838 times:
Quoting fpetrutiu (Reply 4): That looks promising. Any ideas on price and cetifications? I couldn't find anything on their site. Looks like a twin turboprop, pretty sure will be well north of a million which would make it too expensive.
Price of the EV-55 has been indicated to be about $1.7-1.9 million.
The price for the P2012 has been indicated around $2.2 million.
DiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1294 posts, RR: 3 Reply 13, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5808 times:
Quoting fpetrutiu (Reply 6): Ok, to come clean, I was thinking about what airplane could be used for in and out of MCO as a commuter to airports around Florida, Florida Keys, smaller islands in the Bahamas, etc. It would have to be cheap enough so people would not think twice about it, and be able to carry their luggage as well
Drastically over served market. There are tons of people who do runs 135 in Florida and to he Bahamas. Honestly, that's the last place I'd try to make a buck in the 135 world.
Quoting atcsundevil (Reply 9): ZK can turn those things in less than 10mins and since they're twin turbo, they're pretty quick and have excellent short field take-off performance.
You mean twin turbine, correct?
Quoting fpetrutiu (Reply 11): I think you need a Part 121 for a Beech 1900 right? I believe if you stay at 9 pax you could stat part 135, am I correct? Although part 121 would be better, it also increases the costs quite a bit.
AFAIK, yes, 19 seats is a 121 deal now. However, if one was to go down this route, I'm not sure a DO-228 wouldn't be a better buy, especially considering they are producing them again.
jonathanxxxx From United States of America, joined Feb 2011, 638 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 5807 times:
Is it just me or is thisnairline really starting to sound like Gulfstream
fpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 755 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 5678 times:
Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 13): Drastically over served market. There are tons of people who do runs 135 in Florida and to he Bahamas. Honestly, that's the last place I'd try to make a buck in the 135 world.
Not really, there are a lot of airports that are not served. I am not saying MCO-NAS or MCO-EYW, I am saying like MCO-CTY, MCO-GNV, MCO-OCF, MCO-BIM, MCO-GGT, MCO-MTH, MCO-OCA (in cooperation with the resort)
nws2002 From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 781 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5539 times:
Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 13): Drastically over served market. There are tons of people who do runs 135 in Florida and to he Bahamas. Honestly, that's the last place I'd try to make a buck in the 135 world.
Not to mention all the illegal ops that don't have a 135 cert but still carry passengers or cargo for cash.
DiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1294 posts, RR: 3 Reply 17, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5486 times:
Quoting fpetrutiu (Reply 15):
Not really, there are a lot of airports that are not served. I am not saying MCO-NAS or MCO-EYW, I am saying like MCO-CTY, MCO-GNV, MCO-OCF, MCO-BIM, MCO-GGT, MCO-MTH, MCO-OCA (in cooperation with the resort)
I'm saying, there is very little to no demand for those routes. If there was, someone would be flying them. If you could price them right, I'd bet GNV & OCF might work, but it would have to be less than $50 bucks or so one way. I just don't see the price getting that low.
jonathanxxxx From United States of America, joined Feb 2011, 638 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5451 times:
I mean why the above cities are small and unserved from MCO, why not just try point to point Florida routes that have no carriers? For example: PBI-MCO, RSW-TPA, TLH-PBI, MCO-SRQ and ECP-TPA? what about those?
DiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1294 posts, RR: 3 Reply 19, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 5413 times:
Quoting jonathanxxxx (Reply 18): I mean why the above cities are small and unserved from MCO, why not just try point to point Florida routes that have no carriers? For example: PBI-MCO, RSW-TPA, TLH-PBI, MCO-SRQ and ECP-TPA? what about those?
Because quite frankly, nobody wants to fly between those cities. Either they are so close together that driving makes sense or they don't have the traffic between cities. ECP & TLH might have enough support for a flight to south FL, and that's about it, as far as I can tell.
fpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 755 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 5202 times:
Exactly. You could find people if you can offer connecting flights from MCO. Problem with driving is that you have to leave your car here. If the ticket price is low enough, it could work.
fpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 755 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 5203 times:
Again this whole excercise is academical, there is not serious consideration of an airline. I am trying to figure out if there would be a plane that could make something like this feasable.
DiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1294 posts, RR: 3 Reply 22, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 5170 times:
Quoting fpetrutiu (Reply 21): Again this whole excercise is academical, there is not serious consideration of an airline. I am trying to figure out if there would be a plane that could make something like this feasable.
Realistically, a 9-seat plane wouldn't work. To make it work, financially, you'd have to sell all 9 seats. Most 9 seat planes out there, with the seats full, won't be able to take the bags the people want to take with them. I think you'd have to jump up to a 19 seater. Dornier 228 or Twin Otter sized. Not a fast 19 seater, something that's cheap to buy and economical to run. Who cares if it's slow, the routes aren't more than 150 miles.
fpetrutiu From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 755 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 5069 times:
Ok, so if we need to move to a 19 seater, for about the same price you could get a 30 seater (particularly Saab 340's or EMB-120's). World there be a good argument for them? Maybe not on the routes provided, but serving PBI and other airports like them.
25 xavier2511: I would say the Cessna 208 Grand Caravan, Airlines in Suriname say that the parts are cheap when compared to something like the Islander or Twin Otter
26 atcsundevil: No. Twin turbo. They have Pratt & Whitney PW Canada PT6A-67D Turboprops. I'm not aware of what changes you're referring to. The costs are lower b
27 bjorn14: Wow. CapeAir is paying that much for them?
28 Goldenshield: Turboprops are still turbines, and are logged as such. :P
29 BrouAviation: The new Tecnam P2012 will be your plane, two 6-cyl Lycomings certified for running on MoGas. Which is nice, considering 100LL is currently hitting 17
30 fpetrutiu: turboprops are indeed turbine engines. They work the same way except that they have a propeller attached to the shaft and are not ducted. These turbi
31 hatbutton: Not if they order 60 of them. Either way though, the P2012 runs on MoGas and burns less than 30gph according to Tecnam. That is seriously significant
32 ridgid727: If you're looking for connecting traffic with interline agreements with other carriers or even code share, there is a cost involved with that, then o
33 fpetrutiu: Interesting point. But if you are not the one selling tickets for the connecting flights, it is say DL for flights to airports they do not serve, you
34 nws2002: +1, check out FAR Part 119. It pretty much eliminates scheduled 135 ops for more than 9 seats.
35 ridgid727: If you just sell a ticket from point A to point B without baggage and ticket interlining, then yes you can. The customer would have to claim their ba
36 nkops: Nope, has to be under 121 regs for a 19-seater... that was changed I believe in the late 90's or early 2000's. Didn't they just come out with the nex
37 fpetrutiu: Ok so I did the math for the P2012 on a 1 hour flight with what we know so far: 30 gals/hr used auto gas at 4.0 $/gal Crew cost, maint, insurance, loa
38 DiamondFlyer: As has been pointed out, when one says twin turbo about an airplane, it is generally in regards to a piston engine. You'd confuse a lot of people by
39 fpetrutiu: That's what it came out at, again using auto gas, and high cycles. The only guestimation is the insurance and airport fees.
40 2175301: That does seem low. Could you break out and list your assumptions for each item. That way we can see if each item makes sense or not. Personally, I s
41 hatbutton: I'll take a stab at it. Here is an attempt to break down the costs: Assume you are single pilot ops and you fly the plane 2500 hours a year which is j
42 atcsundevil: Well then that's why I'm not a pilot...the 7710.65 tells me that a B190 is a 2/T for two turboprops. I do know that a turbine and turboprop is the sa
43 BrouAviation: Not bad at all! And it immediately proves the point of Tecnam's newest product --> it really shows why that plane is going to work better and more
44 2175301: OK, good breakdown. Now lets add that you need 4 pilots a year to cover training, sick time, and vacation. Then add that if you are paying your pilot
45 fpetrutiu: You can pay hourly for the pilots. There are plenty out there with low hours willing to fly anything with wings and get minimum wage for the flown ho
46 DiamondFlyer: Not under the regulations you're going to have to operate under. Even if you could pull off a single pilot waiver for this Tecnam, you're still going
47 fpetrutiu: The PIC must have 1200+ hours, for the copilot, there is no minimum. If you you pay say 3 pilots $40,000/yr for the 1200hrs exp and the copilots at $
48 DiamondFlyer: Waste of money to have a copilot ride along. Get the single pilot 135 waiver and be done with it. 15 hour days are fine for basic maintenance, but wh
49 fpetrutiu: Could you specify the source? It seems a bit high for a piston pounder. A reworked engine costs is $30k directly from Lycoming. I can't imagine an ov
50 FlyASAGuy2005: Same can be said about rentals I suppose. True that! The line will be out the door, HOWEVER, operations like these have proven to not work. TAB Expre
51 hatbutton: Here's just a random shop I found online: http://dongeorgeaircraft.com/lycoming.htm The Tecnam P2012 will have a TEO-540-A1A and according to this we
52 Wingscrubber: Given the original requirements, it's a no-brainer. Cessna 208. http://www.what2fly.com/operating_cost/cessna/208_caravan.php Easy maintenance, easy t
53 yeelep: The problem is turbo refers to a turbo charged piston aircraft, hence the confusion.
54 DiamondFlyer: In this case, anything more than 9 is a waste, since you can't operate a single engine aircraft under Part 121 rules. I've done the numbers on a 402
55 FighterPilot: The C402 would be on the lower end of the passenger scale. We normally configure ours for 6-7 pax, we can configure it for 9 but it's extremely crampe
56 KELPkid: Not in the US of A. In our country, a single-engined aircraft (no matter what part it is operating under) is restricted to a maximum 9 passenger seat
57 Wingscrubber: According to the a.net datasheet, the 208B (super caravan) can fly with 1 pilot and 14 passengers with a part 23 waiver. http://www.airliners.net/airc
58 DiamondFlyer: Yes, it can, to be operated under Part 91. You can't sell tickets and operate under Part 91. If you want to run an airline type operation, you're goi
59 KELPkid: I think whoever wrote that was severely confused...Part 23 is the Standard Category certification rules. There are no provisions in Part 23 for a wai
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 755 posts, 
From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 2091 posts, 
Ok but seriously can this plane be used for commercial service?
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
