Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Climbing the Aluminum Ladder

  1. #1
    Member Toddler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    556

    Default Climbing the Aluminum Ladder

    Ok I am looking for a few suggestions here because I am considering moving up the aluminum ladder. Here are my needs, 6 seats, 500 nm range, 950# useful load with full fuel under $150K. I would like IFR w/WAAS GPS and coupled AP, the ability to work runways less than 2000', and under $100K

    The intended use is airport to airport with the occasional gravel runway (Seldovia, Hope, etc) and to be a SUV for some cross-country family adventure. I am open to twins or single. Probably the most influential factor in the decision will be the ease and cost of maintenance and fuel consumption (MPG not GPH).

    What are your suggestions and why? Thanks

    Drew
    Normal people believe that if something ain't broke, don't fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet.

    Scott Adams

  2. #2

    Default

    sounds like a Cessna 206/207 to me. Get the 206, hundreds of aircraft charter companies cant be wrong.

  3. #3
    Member ocnfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    542

    Default

    http://www.controller.com/listingsde...60/1195033.htm?

    this is less expensive than the Cessna 206 and a real load hauler

  4. #4
    Member Toddler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    556

    Default

    I have been looking at U206's and Cherokee 6/300's but I want to make sure I have not overlooked. Would you give any consideration to a 210 or a Saratoga? What about airplanes that are not Pipers or Cessna's? Just trying to make sure I look at all possibilities. Thanks

    Drew
    Normal people believe that if something ain't broke, don't fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet.

    Scott Adams

  5. #5

    Default

    Cherokee 6s are nice. Problem with a c-206 or cherokee 6 is with 6 people you have no room for luggage. remember a c-210 or retractable saratoga will be A LOT more maintenance. Is this plane just for personal use or are you planning on working it later down the road? If you are never planning on working the plane i would seriously consider an experimental class aircraft to ease the maintenance $$.

  6. #6

    Default

    Sherpa!!! It's an 8 place Super Cub. And VERY $$$$$...

    http://www.sherpaaircraft.com/

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Semi-retired in Florida
    Posts
    483

    Default

    I guess I've pretty much flown 'em all. The most versatile, dependable, and useful single can't be anything other than a Cessna 206, whether U 206 or TU 206. The huge loading door is a benefit you would always appreciate. It can carry almost twice the load you wish to carry (though admittedly not legally!), and do it with ease and dignity. They're comfortable, relatively quiet (unlike the C-185), well cowled, and stable as rocks.

    Yeah, I know they're a bit on the expensive side. Still, you can find one within your price range that will serve you almost forever. One recommendation: change oil every 40-hours or less. Differential pressures will remain where they were when you bought the thing.

    Stick with it . . . . .

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    chugiak, ak
    Posts
    630

    Default

    i agree 206... you won't be disappointed. Can you put a cargo pod on a 206?

  9. #9
    Member Toddler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    556

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperCub View Post
    Sherpa!!! It's an 8 place Super Cub. And VERY $$$$$...

    http://www.sherpaaircraft.com/
    OK - I WANT one!!!!! Can I borrow 750K? If they get the part 23 cert I can see the oil companies buy up quite a few of those.
    Normal people believe that if something ain't broke, don't fix it. Engineers believe that if it ain't broke, it doesn't have enough features yet.

    Scott Adams

  10. #10

    Default

    [/QUOTE]i agree 206... you won't be disappointed. Can you put a cargo pod on a 206?[/QUOTE]

    Absolutely. And you'll be surprised how much you can pack into it, makes carrying 5 guys and gear viable, and keeps the cargo weight forward especially for those 'a little on the heavy side' loads - handles fine like that.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    3,293

    Default

    Probably high time but the price is pretty tempting.

    http://alaskaslist.com/1/posts/10_Tr...loatplane.html

  12. #12
    Member BeaverDriver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grizzly 1 View Post
    I guess I've pretty much flown 'em all. The most versatile, dependable, and useful single can't be anything other than a Cessna 206, whether U 206 or TU 206. The huge loading door is a benefit you would always appreciate. It can carry almost twice the load you wish to carry (though admittedly not legally!), and do it with ease and dignity. They're comfortable, relatively quiet (unlike the C-185), well cowled, and stable as rocks.

    Yeah, I know they're a bit on the expensive side. Still, you can find one within your price range that will serve you almost forever. One recommendation: change oil every 40-hours or less. Differential pressures will remain where they were when you bought the thing.

    Stick with it . . . . .
    Oh I dunno - the 206 is awesome! Lands slower, high wing, crosswind seems better. But having flown thousands of hours in both, for runway to runway, it is hard to beat the Saratoga - 1981 fixed gear big tires (landis fork on the front 8.50s on the mains. I have had one on the beachs of Kodiak several times. It WILL haul a bigger load than a 206 and do it faster. However, you need to cross the fence 20+ knots faster at max gross landing. So it takes a bit more runway. But for shear hauling, throw it in the airplane and go capability, it is hard to beat the Toga. You need to first define your NEEDS. If you NEED the high wing, low T/O and landing speed, with Float capability etc then the 206 is the way to go. If you are bush runway to bush runway with 1200+ feet available and are looking for a load carrying machine then a Toga might be a consideration.

  13. #13

  14. #14

    Default

    I would have to 100% agree with Beaverdriver on the Saratoga. I have 2000+ hrs in them flying in southwest AK. Before at my previous job I had flown both the 206/207's and was skeptical of the piper low wings at my new job. It was easier to load a coffin in the piper (less sideways turning) than it was in the 207! It would be a great family airplane. As far as short strips we used to take them into Togiak Fish Cannery (900-1000') and Queen Fisheries (very short). Plus all the other Fishing operations, hauling personel and fish/roe. During all the varied operation the Saratoga did just fine. Good in turbulence, wind, ice and heavy loads.
    If you want floats though a cessna is hard to beat unless you can afford a Beaver.

  15. #15
    Member RocketRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    ANC
    Posts
    410

    Default

    Toddler,

    I looked on the site which lists bush-planes. The Piper it includes is the Aztec. Don't know about the Saratoga.

    I've flown in a BearHawk and wld have one now but the builder/owner reneged on the deal then he called back and wanted me to buy it. You bet....HA!. He did sell it for his price. It was new.

    Check out the Bearhawk

    Here's the site: http://www.bush-planes.com/PiperAztec.html

    Good ruck

    rick

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    96

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NERKA71 View Post
    I would have to 100% agree with Beaverdriver on the Saratoga. I have 2000+ hrs in them flying in southwest AK. Before at my previous job I had flown both the 206/207's and was skeptical of the piper low wings at my new job. It was easier to load a coffin in the piper (less sideways turning) than it was in the 207! It would be a great family airplane. As far as short strips we used to take them into Togiak Fish Cannery (900-1000') and Queen Fisheries (very short). Plus all the other Fishing operations, hauling personel and fish/roe. During all the varied operation the Saratoga did just fine. Good in turbulence, wind, ice and heavy loads.
    If you want floats though a cessna is hard to beat unless you can afford a Beaver.
    Who did you fly for?
    -Out-of-State for school, remembering why I love Alaska so much

  17. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NERKA71 View Post
    .........unless you can afford a Beaver.
    Finest aircraft built by man!

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •