Any one have any sales advice on piston twins v.s turbo prop twins. I'm
currently in the process of aquiring a charter buisness that operates 2
navajo aircraft. I've heard some people say that the days of the piston twin
in commercial charter work may be coming to an end. Now I don't know if it's
just because of the problem with some of the cessna piston twins or just
that large corps want to and spend the extra $ on the reliablity and comfort
of turbines. I can basically offer services out of my local airport at less
than half the cost of the guys with the turbines. Does anyone feel that the
issue with the cessna twins could actually increase the value of piper
twins, or is the problem spread across both companies.

In article >, Vigo
> wrote:

> Any one have any sales advice on piston twins v.s turbo prop twins. I'm
> currently in the process of aquiring a charter buisness that operates 2
> navajo aircraft. I've heard some people say that the days of the piston twin
> in commercial charter work may be coming to an end. Now I don't know if it's
> just because of the problem with some of the cessna piston twins or just
> that large corps want to and spend the extra $ on the reliablity and comfort
> of turbines. I can basically offer services out of my local airport at less
> than half the cost of the guys with the turbines. Does anyone feel that the
> issue with the cessna twins could actually increase the value of piper
> twins, or is the problem spread across both companies.

Isn't it more of an economics issue?
payload vs. fuel vs. speed vs. maintenance vs. operating costs?

The market varies considerably from one place to another. To be blunt, yours
is much too complex a question to be answered on a news group. I would want
to see a proper business plan with market surveys and at least a ten year
budget with supportable income and expense figures.

I will say that Cessna twins are said to be pretty good aircraft, reliable
and relatively easy to maintain, and that you may have some misunderstanding
about their 'problems.'

I think he may be referring to the potential of an AD on the wing spars
of some of the cessna twins in which the repair might cost more than the
airframe or be otherwise economically not worthwhile.

Do you know the outcome of that proposed AD.. I havent kept up to speed
on it lately.

Dave

C J Campbell wrote:
> The market varies considerably from one place to another. To be blunt, yours
> is much too complex a question to be answered on a news group. I would want
> to see a proper business plan with market surveys and at least a ten year
> budget with supportable income and expense figures.
>
> I will say that Cessna twins are said to be pretty good aircraft, reliable
> and relatively easy to maintain, and that you may have some misunderstanding
> about their 'problems.'
>
>

Dave S wrote:
>
> Do you know the outcome of that proposed AD.. I havent kept up to speed
> on it lately.

From the AOPA web site - "May 26 — The FAA withdrew on Tuesday expensive proposed
airworthiness directives against 400-series twin Cessna aircraft." See
http://www.aopa.org/whatsnew/newsitems/2004/04-2-102x.html for the whole article.

I posted that at the time it appeared on the AOPA site. Jerry Kurata replied....

"This is a temporary measure. The FAA still plans on issuing another
proposed AD with changes based on the two day meeting."

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> The market varies considerably from one place to another. To be blunt,
yours
> is much too complex a question to be answered on a news group. I would
want
> to see a proper business plan with market surveys and at least a ten year
> budget with supportable income and expense figures.
>
> I will say that Cessna twins are said to be pretty good aircraft, reliable
> and relatively easy to maintain, and that you may have some
misunderstanding
> about their 'problems.'

I'm not looking for a complex answer to my question. more a general outlook
on the piston twin market. I'm mainly curious to know if any current piston
twin owners have begun to have problems selling their services. I have been
told that some companies are demanding turbines.

I have heard of charter passengers, especially ones with corporate aviation
departments, be unwilling to fly in non turbine aircraft.

I do not know what percentage of the market this would represent though.

IMO, the big difference in safety records reflects the amount of money spent
on training more than the reliability of the engines, but when did the
insurance guys really try to figure anything out for real?



"Vigo" > wrote in message
...
>
> "C J Campbell" > wrote in message
> ...
> > The market varies considerably from one place to another. To be blunt,
> yours
> > is much too complex a question to be answered on a news group. I would
> want
> > to see a proper business plan with market surveys and at least a ten
year
> > budget with supportable income and expense figures.
> >
> > I will say that Cessna twins are said to be pretty good aircraft,
reliable
> > and relatively easy to maintain, and that you may have some
> misunderstanding
> > about their 'problems.'
>
> I'm not looking for a complex answer to my question. more a general
outlook
> on the piston twin market. I'm mainly curious to know if any current
piston
> twin owners have begun to have problems selling their services. I have
been
> told that some companies are demanding turbines.
>
>

"Vigo" > wrote in message >...
> Any one have any sales advice on piston twins v.s turbo prop twins. I'm
> currently in the process of aquiring a charter buisness that operates 2
> navajo aircraft. I've heard some people say that the days of the piston twin
> in commercial charter work may be coming to an end.

When the microjets hit the markets in large numbers over the next 5-10
years, the piston twins - especially new ones - will suddenly become
less desireable due to the price differences.

Several entrepreneurs have already placed large orders (100+) for some
of these small jets (Eclipse, Saffire, etc.) in full anticipation of
offering air taxi services from small airports that are not served by
airlines.

Marketed right, this could completely change public perception of
private flying. It may be in reach for more of the masses if priced
right. Forget the big airports. Just call your airtaxi and share a
flight with a few others to Florida, Vegas, New York, etc. The cost
per person and time flexibility just might make it worth it.

Dave,

I agree with some of your post, and disagree with a little.

The larger piston twins will definitely be hit hard. But the smaller ones
may do okay. They are already cheap when used, and the new ones are only
being built to supply a small market - training planes and step up planes.

If the Centurion engine lives up to its claims, and has product support,
then the Diamond Twin Star could reshape the equation being useful for
training, personal transport, and short range Air Taxi.

They could easily sell 5000 of these planes over the next ten years if it
works well. Unfortunately, I hear Diamond may be hedging their bets due to
the lack of support from Thielert/Centurion. They don't want to see a
replay of the Rotax problems they had on the katanas.



"Dave" > wrote in message
om...
> "Vigo" > wrote in message
>...
> > Any one have any sales advice on piston twins v.s turbo prop twins. I'm
> > currently in the process of aquiring a charter buisness that operates 2
> > navajo aircraft. I've heard some people say that the days of the piston
twin
> > in commercial charter work may be coming to an end.
>
> When the microjets hit the markets in large numbers over the next 5-10
> years, the piston twins - especially new ones - will suddenly become
> less desireable due to the price differences.
>
> Several entrepreneurs have already placed large orders (100+) for some
> of these small jets (Eclipse, Saffire, etc.) in full anticipation of
> offering air taxi services from small airports that are not served by
> airlines.
>
> Marketed right, this could completely change public perception of
> private flying. It may be in reach for more of the masses if priced
> right. Forget the big airports. Just call your airtaxi and share a
> flight with a few others to Florida, Vegas, New York, etc. The cost
> per person and time flexibility just might make it worth it.

"Dude" > wrote in message >...
> The larger piston twins will definitely be hit hard. But the smaller ones
> may do okay. They are already cheap when used, and the new ones are only
> being built to supply a small market - training planes and step up planes.
>
> If the Centurion engine lives up to its claims, and has product support,
> then the Diamond Twin Star could reshape the equation being useful for
> training, personal transport, and short range Air Taxi.

My bigger point is that, regardless of the reliability and quality of
the Centurion and other pistons, public perception(i.e. non-aviators)
will lean towards a minijet for the "cool" factor, as long as they
don't have problems that get overblown by the media in the early
years. If the first 5 years are successful and <relatively> accident
free with good PR, then the prop generation of planes could see a
decline in value and use by the deeper pocket organizations.

If you are looking at the corporate market, you may find that over the medium
term both the piston and turbine products are on their way out. The silk suits
only want to fly jets. Even the general public has developed a deep seated
suspicion of anything with a propellor on it, and most regional operators are
in the process of replacing their turboprops with jets.

The flying public does not understand that a propellor is an inherently
efficient propulsion device, particularly at low density altitudes, and as
such well suited to short haul operations. Thisd misunderstanding may do much
harm to general aviation, because the advent of jets at airports currently
served by turboprops will increase noise complaints from neighbors.

I know one company operating KingAirs and Falcons, and they say the KingAirs
are logging very little time these days, despite the higher price for the
jets.

Unless you have some sort of captive market - an existing freight operation or
something with some sort of protection from competition built in, I don't
think you'd do well tio invest in a fleet of Navajos or twin Cessnas (unless
they're Citations!).

G Faris