Comfortable 4 seaters?

[Paul Tomblin]

Our flying club's insurance company is reluctantly allowing us to insure
our Lance, but they have said that they don't like 6 seaters in clubs. A
year ago they told us that anybody who flew the Lance had to put at least
3 hours in the previous 90 days or do a "proficiency check" with a club
instructor every time they flew it, then they told us that's not enough,
and you have to do 15 hours a year in it and ground training and they need
a list of all the pilots and you could only have 8 pilots on the list.
We're wondering what they're going to do next year. So we're thinking
about what happens when we can't keep it any more.

More than the 6 seats, what I like best about the Lance is that it's
roomier side-to-side than an Archer or Dakota. Are there any four seaters
out there that are as wide as a Lance that don't cost too much?

--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
The only problem is that if we found the Holy Grail, we'd have to support it
and explain to the lusers which way to tip it so that they don't get the
elixer of life down the front of their tasteless shirts. -- Wayne Pascoe

[Mike Rapoport]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
> Our flying club's insurance company is reluctantly allowing us to insure
> our Lance, but they have said that they don't like 6 seaters in clubs. A
> year ago they told us that anybody who flew the Lance had to put at least
> 3 hours in the previous 90 days or do a "proficiency check" with a club
> instructor every time they flew it, then they told us that's not enough,
> and you have to do 15 hours a year in it and ground training and they need
> a list of all the pilots and you could only have 8 pilots on the list.
> We're wondering what they're going to do next year. So we're thinking
> about what happens when we can't keep it any more.
>
> More than the 6 seats, what I like best about the Lance is that it's
> roomier side-to-side than an Archer or Dakota. Are there any four seaters
> out there that are as wide as a Lance that don't cost too much?
>
> --
> Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
> The only problem is that if we found the Holy Grail, we'd have to support
> it
> and explain to the lusers which way to tip it so that they don't get the
> elixer of life down the front of their tasteless shirts. -- Wayne Pascoe

I wonder what their logic is. Why don't you offer to put crash dummies in
two of the seats? I could understand if they wanted a certain number of
hours to fly retractable, multi, pressurized airplanes or others with
funcional differences but I don't understand why they have an issue with the
number of seats. It seems that they could just add 50% to the liability
premium (above a four seater) and be done with it.

Mike
MU-2

[xyzzy]

Mike Rapoport wrote:

> "Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Our flying club's insurance company is reluctantly allowing us to insure
>>our Lance, but they have said that they don't like 6 seaters in clubs. A
>>year ago they told us that anybody who flew the Lance had to put at least
>>3 hours in the previous 90 days or do a "proficiency check" with a club
>>instructor every time they flew it, then they told us that's not enough,
>>and you have to do 15 hours a year in it and ground training and they need
>>a list of all the pilots and you could only have 8 pilots on the list.
>>We're wondering what they're going to do next year. So we're thinking
>>about what happens when we can't keep it any more.
>>
>>More than the 6 seats, what I like best about the Lance is that it's
>>roomier side-to-side than an Archer or Dakota. Are there any four seaters
>>out there that are as wide as a Lance that don't cost too much?
>>
>>--
>>Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
>>The only problem is that if we found the Holy Grail, we'd have to support
>>it
>>and explain to the lusers which way to tip it so that they don't get the
>>elixer of life down the front of their tasteless shirts. -- Wayne Pascoe
>
>
> I wonder what their logic is. Why don't you offer to put crash dummies in
> two of the seats? I could understand if they wanted a certain number of
> hours to fly retractable, multi, pressurized airplanes or others with
> funcional differences but I don't understand why they have an issue with the
> number of seats. It seems that they could just add 50% to the liability
> premium (above a four seater) and be done with it.
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>
>

Can they remove two seats?

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Mike Rapoport" > said:
>I wonder what their logic is. Why don't you offer to put crash dummies in

They claim it's liability exposure - and that complex 6s have been a
disproportionate part of the claims they've had from flying clubs. If
there was an STC to remove two of the seats, I think we'd take it - more
people want the big plane to fly 2-3 people and a load of gear than to fly
5-6 people.

--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Considering the number of wheels Microsoft has found reason to invent,
one never ceases to be baffled by the minuscule number whose shape even
vaguely resembles a circle. -- [unknown]

[Bob Noel]

In article >,
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:

> They claim it's liability exposure - and that complex 6s have been a
> disproportionate part of the claims they've had from flying clubs. If
> there was an STC to remove two of the seats, I think we'd take it - more
> people want the big plane to fly 2-3 people and a load of gear than to fly
> 5-6 people.

Is the removal of seats something that requires an STC in Canada?

I have a slightly lower insurance rate on my cherokee 140 because
I removed two seats. All Avemco wanted was a log entry (I think
I sent them a copy of the log entry).

--
Bob Noel
looking for a sig the lawyers will like

[Matt Barrow]

"Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
...
> In a previous article, "Mike Rapoport" > said:
> >I wonder what their logic is. Why don't you offer to put crash dummies
in
>
> They claim it's liability exposure - and that complex 6s have been a
> disproportionate part of the claims they've had from flying clubs. If
> there was an STC to remove two of the seats, I think we'd take it - more
> people want the big plane to fly 2-3 people and a load of gear than to fly
> 5-6 people.

Or they want to take 3-4 people and 'some' gear, and not treat them like
sardines.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[[email protected]]

Paul Tomblin wrote:

> what I like best about the Lance is that it's
> roomier side-to-side than an Archer or Dakota. Are there any four
seaters
> out there that are as wide as a Lance that don't cost too much?
>
>

The Cardinal FG or RG are what you're looking for, depending on whether
you want a simple or complex type. They are absolutely huge inside.
Check it out for yourself. Don't let anyone tell you they're not good
planes that don't fly well. They are they best handling Cessnas made,
and they don't land badly, just different than Shyhawks. I have owned a
FG for over 7 years, and I wouldn't trade it for anything out there.
The Cessna RG can be just as reliable as any retract if you have it
worked on by someone who knows what they are doing. Sundowners are a
close second, as they are very roomy. Almost bought one of them. They
are available at bargain prices too, as are some Cardinals. There may
be others that are what you want, maybe a Maule or something. I'm not
that familiar with all that is available.
Bruce Cunningham
N30464 C177A

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, said:
>Paul Tomblin wrote:
>> what I like best about the Lance is that it's
>> roomier side-to-side than an Archer or Dakota. Are there any four
>seaters
>> out there that are as wide as a Lance that don't cost too much?
>The Cardinal FG or RG are what you're looking for, depending on whether
>you want a simple or complex type. They are absolutely huge inside.

48 inches wide, compared to 49 for the Lance and 42 for the Archer. Might
be worth a try. I see Trinidads and Togabos are 50 inches wide, but I've
heard they're over priced and under powered.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
"Leave the beaten track occasionally, and dive into the woods. You will be
certain to find something that you have never seen before."
-- Alexander Graham Bell

[Heywood J. Blaume]

Nah, the Trinidad isn't under-powered, it's under-winged. Tiny wing.
Flies accordingly, but with 250HP, it climbs well and goes fast. My
old flying club has one that barely spends one night a week at home.
However, the insurance companies don't seem to like insuring the
Trinidad for clubs either.

Steven Newton

[markjenn]

What about the obvious choice: C182? No, it's not as wide, but they sit up
higher and are reasonbly comfortable. They have enough useful to handle
your 3-4 people with gear needs. Your insurance guy would love you too.

- Mark

[Ben Jackson]

On 2005-01-13, Paul Tomblin > wrote:
> More than the 6 seats, what I like best about the Lance is that it's
> roomier side-to-side than an Archer or Dakota. Are there any four seaters

The Comanche is between the Archer and the Lance/Six.

Do you really have to remove seats to insure it as a 4-seater? Wouldn't
it be more a matter of not flying it with more than 4 people? There are
plenty of other requirements on my insurance that don't have any physical
barrier to prevent me from violating. For example, if I'm not covered
if I rent my plane, but I could still have a Hobbs meter...

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[Matt Whiting]

Mike Rapoport wrote:
> "Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Our flying club's insurance company is reluctantly allowing us to insure
>>our Lance, but they have said that they don't like 6 seaters in clubs. A
>>year ago they told us that anybody who flew the Lance had to put at least
>>3 hours in the previous 90 days or do a "proficiency check" with a club
>>instructor every time they flew it, then they told us that's not enough,
>>and you have to do 15 hours a year in it and ground training and they need
>>a list of all the pilots and you could only have 8 pilots on the list.
>>We're wondering what they're going to do next year. So we're thinking
>>about what happens when we can't keep it any more.
>>
>>More than the 6 seats, what I like best about the Lance is that it's
>>roomier side-to-side than an Archer or Dakota. Are there any four seaters
>>out there that are as wide as a Lance that don't cost too much?
>>
>>--
>>Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
>>The only problem is that if we found the Holy Grail, we'd have to support
>>it
>>and explain to the lusers which way to tip it so that they don't get the
>>elixer of life down the front of their tasteless shirts. -- Wayne Pascoe
>
>
> I wonder what their logic is. Why don't you offer to put crash dummies in
> two of the seats? I could understand if they wanted a certain number of
> hours to fly retractable, multi, pressurized airplanes or others with
> funcional differences but I don't understand why they have an issue with the
> number of seats. It seems that they could just add 50% to the liability
> premium (above a four seater) and be done with it.

Yes, it does seem odd. I did read once that people in the back row or
two tend to sue much more frequently than the pilot or the pax in the
right front seat. But even then, an increase of 100% should cover going
from two folks in back to four.


Matt

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, Ben Jackson > said:
>Do you really have to remove seats to insure it as a 4-seater? Wouldn't
>it be more a matter of not flying it with more than 4 people? There are
>plenty of other requirements on my insurance that don't have any physical
>barrier to prevent me from violating. For example, if I'm not covered
>if I rent my plane, but I could still have a Hobbs meter...

It's a lot easier to tell a single owner "if you do this, your insurance
will be invalid" than to tell 50 people "if you do this, the CLUB will be
out the cost of the airplane". A lot of people don't understand that if
the club suffers, they all suffer.

--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
I just woke up, I'm 40 miles from my car and I can't remember where
I left my trousers. I think I'm going to be a little late.
-- Someone's employee, rec.humor.funny

[BTIZ]

we had a Bonanza here at one time on the rental line.. I'm not sure of the
paper work involved.. but the FBO did remove two seats and certified same to
the insurance company to keep the insurance down.

BT

"Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> "Paul Tomblin" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Our flying club's insurance company is reluctantly allowing us to insure
>> our Lance, but they have said that they don't like 6 seaters in clubs. A
>> year ago they told us that anybody who flew the Lance had to put at least
>> 3 hours in the previous 90 days or do a "proficiency check" with a club
>> instructor every time they flew it, then they told us that's not enough,
>> and you have to do 15 hours a year in it and ground training and they
>> need
>> a list of all the pilots and you could only have 8 pilots on the list.
>> We're wondering what they're going to do next year. So we're thinking
>> about what happens when we can't keep it any more.
>>
>> More than the 6 seats, what I like best about the Lance is that it's
>> roomier side-to-side than an Archer or Dakota. Are there any four
>> seaters
>> out there that are as wide as a Lance that don't cost too much?
>>
>> --
>> Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
>> The only problem is that if we found the Holy Grail, we'd have to support
>> it
>> and explain to the lusers which way to tip it so that they don't get the
>> elixer of life down the front of their tasteless shirts. -- Wayne Pascoe
>
> I wonder what their logic is. Why don't you offer to put crash dummies in
> two of the seats? I could understand if they wanted a certain number of
> hours to fly retractable, multi, pressurized airplanes or others with
> funcional differences but I don't understand why they have an issue with
> the number of seats. It seems that they could just add 50% to the
> liability premium (above a four seater) and be done with it.
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>
>

[Aaron Coolidge]

Paul Tomblin > wrote:
: More than the 6 seats, what I like best about the Lance is that it's
: roomier side-to-side than an Archer or Dakota. Are there any four seaters
: out there that are as wide as a Lance that don't cost too much?

Commander 114/115? It's huge and cushy inside.
--
Aaron C.

[C J Campbell]

"xyzzy" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Rapoport wrote:
> >
> >
> > I wonder what their logic is.

There is no logic. Rationality departed the insurance industry years ago.

[Jay Honeck]

> Commander 114/115? It's huge and cushy inside.

Boy, that's for sure. I met a guy at OSH a couple of years ago with a 114
who gave me a "tour", and the cabin was just gigantic. Very cool plane.

How about a Navion? They're certainly voluminous...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, "Jay Honeck" > said:
>> Commander 114/115? It's huge and cushy inside.
>
>Boy, that's for sure. I met a guy at OSH a couple of years ago with a 114
>who gave me a "tour", and the cabin was just gigantic. Very cool plane.
>
>How about a Navion? They're certainly voluminous...

According to Plane and Pilot
(http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/content/specs/index.html) both of these
planes have a 47" wide cabin. The Lance is 49" and the Cardinal is 48"
and the Trinidad is 50".


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
My group's mission statement - 'You want *what* ? By *WHEN* ?'
-- Simon Burr

[Dude]

"Aaron Coolidge" > wrote in message
...
> Paul Tomblin > wrote:
> : More than the 6 seats, what I like best about the Lance is that it's
> : roomier side-to-side than an Archer or Dakota. Are there any four
> seaters
> : out there that are as wide as a Lance that don't cost too much?
>
> Commander 114/115? It's huge and cushy inside.
> --
> Aaron C.

Aaron gets the prize. The Commander is the closest thing to what you are
asking for.

The Socata's aren't bad, but the low end models are not all that great, and
the more powerful planes are definitely a risky buy.

[Aaron Coolidge]

Paul Tomblin > wrote:
: According to Plane and Pilot
: (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/content/specs/index.html) both of these
: planes have a 47" wide cabin. The Lance is 49" and the Cardinal is 48"
: and the Trinidad is 50".

Don't let this decide you. The 114/115 feel HUGE inside. If you are serious,
you should certainly sit in one.
Some of those specs are not quite right: It's got 260HP, not 200HP (the 112
has 200 HP). It really goes about 150K tas. The trailing link main gears
make bad landings impossible.
--
Aaron C.

[Matt Barrow]

"Aaron Coolidge" > wrote in message
...
> Paul Tomblin > wrote:
> : According to Plane and Pilot
> : (http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/content/specs/index.html) both of these
> : planes have a 47" wide cabin. The Lance is 49" and the Cardinal is 48"
> : and the Trinidad is 50".
>
> Don't let this decide you. The 114/115 feel HUGE inside. If you are
serious,
> you should certainly sit in one.
> Some of those specs are not quite right: It's got 260HP, not 200HP (the
112
> has 200 HP). It really goes about 150K tas. The trailing link main gears
> make bad landings impossible.

And the 114/115 not only feel big inside, they ride like a Cadillac.
--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[[email protected]]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 19:59:20 GMT, "Dude" > wrote:


>Aaron gets the prize. The Commander is the closest thing to what you are
>asking for.
>
>The Socata's aren't bad, but the low end models are not all that great, and
>the more powerful planes are definitely a risky buy.
>
>


I thought I heard that single Commanders are dogs, as in very slow
cruise.

[Matt Barrow]

> wrote in message
news:1105757261.8d8a91a22fbed692025f4154aea01f0f@t eranews...
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 19:59:20 GMT, "Dude" > wrote:
>
>
> >Aaron gets the prize. The Commander is the closest thing to what you are
> >asking for.
> >
> >The Socata's aren't bad, but the low end models are not all that great,
and
> >the more powerful planes are definitely a risky buy.
> >
> >
>
>
> I thought I heard that single Commanders are dogs, as in very slow
> cruise.

160kts @ 75% or 155 at 65% for the NA, 170 @12,500 for the TC.

Not screaming, but not canine either.
--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[john szpara]

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 20:20:09 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
> wrote:


>> I thought I heard that single Commanders are dogs, as in very slow
>> cruise.
>
>160kts @ 75% or 155 at 65% for the NA, 170 @12,500 for the TC.
>
>Not screaming, but not canine either.

Not bad at all. I assume that would be for the 114 models? If so,
maybe I was thinking of an older or different model.

John Szpara
Affordable Satellite
Fiero Owner 2-84 Indy Pace cars, 86 Coupe, 88 Formula 3.4, 88 Coupe, 88GT

[Matt Barrow]

"john szpara" > wrote in message
news:1105771659.6a8239d67433a9bdcd115783008c24b0@t eranews...
> On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 20:20:09 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
> > wrote:
>
>
> >> I thought I heard that single Commanders are dogs, as in very slow
> >> cruise.
> >
> >160kts @ 75% or 155 at 65% for the NA, 170 @12,500 for the TC.
> >
> >Not screaming, but not canine either.
>
> Not bad at all. I assume that would be for the 114 models? If so,
> maybe I was thinking of an older or different model.

That's the 114/115; the 112 was less, but that, IIRC, was only a 200-235HP,
while the 114/115 is/was a 260HP.

I almost bought a 114TC back a few years ago, but got a "really good deal"
on a T210, which turned out to be a maintenance nightmare. Traded it for a
B56 which turned out to be even worse and kept neither one more than 9
months each (okay, third time was the charm when I got my B36).
--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[Scott Skylane]

Matt Barrow wrote:
/snip/
>
> I almost bought a 114TC back a few years ago, but got a "really good deal"
> on a T210, which turned out to be a maintenance nightmare. Traded it for a
> B56 which turned out to be even worse and kept neither one more than 9
> months each (okay, third time was the charm when I got my B36).

Geez,

No wonder you're down on Barons! You do realize that those TIO-541's
are not typical of the fleet's maintenance level???

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane
N92054

[Matt Barrow]

"Scott Skylane" > wrote in message
...
> Matt Barrow wrote:
> /snip/
> >
> > I almost bought a 114TC back a few years ago, but got a "really good
deal"
> > on a T210, which turned out to be a maintenance nightmare. Traded it for
a
> > B56 which turned out to be even worse and kept neither one more than 9
> > months each (okay, third time was the charm when I got my B36).
>
> Geez,
>
> No wonder you're down on Barons! You do realize that those TIO-541's
> are not typical of the fleet's maintenance level???

Pardon me? The Baron and the T210 both had Continental 520's. AAMOF, my B36
had one when I got it and that's why I opted for the IO-550 when they did
the conversion/overhaul.

In truth, the Baron was LESS maintenance than the 210 (it was, though, 12
years newer), but the gas and insurance was so much more and for hauling two
or three people was overkill. The 210 was a mess from the standpoint of
hydraulics and avionics/electrical problems.


Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[kage]

Your memory must be fading. The Baron 56TC has the big Lyc's, LYC
TIO-541-E1B4.

Karl


"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Scott Skylane" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Matt Barrow wrote:
>> /snip/
>> >
>> > I almost bought a 114TC back a few years ago, but got a "really good
> deal"
>> > on a T210, which turned out to be a maintenance nightmare. Traded it
>> > for
> a
>> > B56 which turned out to be even worse and kept neither one more than 9
>> > months each (okay, third time was the charm when I got my B36).
>>
>> Geez,
>>
>> No wonder you're down on Barons! You do realize that those TIO-541's
>> are not typical of the fleet's maintenance level???
>
> Pardon me? The Baron and the T210 both had Continental 520's. AAMOF, my
> B36
> had one when I got it and that's why I opted for the IO-550 when they did
> the conversion/overhaul.
>
> In truth, the Baron was LESS maintenance than the 210 (it was, though, 12
> years newer), but the gas and insurance was so much more and for hauling
> two
> or three people was overkill. The 210 was a mess from the standpoint of
> hydraulics and avionics/electrical problems.
>
>
> Matt
> ---------------------
> Matthew W. Barrow
> Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
> Montrose, CO
>
>
>
>

[Heywood J. Blaume]

Either that or he had a conversion, or he fat-fingered it and meant
that he had a 55 or a 58.

kage wrote:
> Your memory must be fading. The Baron 56TC has the big Lyc's, LYC
> TIO-541-E1B4.
>
> Karl
>
>
> "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Scott Skylane" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> Matt Barrow wrote:
> >> /snip/
> >> >
> >> > I almost bought a 114TC back a few years ago, but got a "really
good
> > deal"
> >> > on a T210, which turned out to be a maintenance nightmare.
Traded it
> >> > for
> > a
> >> > B56 which turned out to be even worse and kept neither one more
than 9
> >> > months each (okay, third time was the charm when I got my B36).
> >>
> >> Geez,
> >>
> >> No wonder you're down on Barons! You do realize that those
TIO-541's
> >> are not typical of the fleet's maintenance level???
> >
> > Pardon me? The Baron and the T210 both had Continental 520's.
AAMOF, my
> > B36
> > had one when I got it and that's why I opted for the IO-550 when
they did
> > the conversion/overhaul.
> >
> > In truth, the Baron was LESS maintenance than the 210 (it was,
though, 12
> > years newer), but the gas and insurance was so much more and for
hauling
> > two
> > or three people was overkill. The 210 was a mess from the
standpoint of
> > hydraulics and avionics/electrical problems.
> >
> >
> > Matt
> > ---------------------
> > Matthew W. Barrow
> > Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
> > Montrose, CO
> >
> >
> >
> >

[john szpara]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:03:23 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
> wrote:


>In truth, the Baron was LESS maintenance than the 210 (it was, though, 12
>years newer), but the gas and insurance was so much more and for hauling two
>or three people was overkill. The 210 was a mess from the standpoint of
>hydraulics and avionics/electrical problems.

The T210 is on my short list of possible planes for purchase. Do you
think it was that particular airplane, or 210s in general?

I'd opt for a T210 that is no older than a 1970, and I'd go with the
newest, lowest time model I could afford.

John Szpara
Affordable Satellite
Fiero Owner 2-84 Indy Pace cars, 86 Coupe, 88 Formula 3.4, 88 Coupe, 88GT

[john szpara]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:03:23 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
> wrote:


>In truth, the Baron was LESS maintenance than the 210 (it was, though, 12
>years newer), but the gas and insurance was so much more and for hauling two
>or three people was overkill. The 210 was a mess from the standpoint of
>hydraulics and avionics/electrical problems.

The T210 is on my short list of possible planes for purchase. Do you
think it was that particular airplane, or 210s in general?

I'd opt for a T210 that is no older than a 1970, and I'd go with the
newest, lowest time model I could afford.

John Szpara
Affordable Satellite
Fiero Owner 2-84 Indy Pace cars, 86 Coupe, 88 Formula 3.4, 88 Coupe, 88GT

[john szpara]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:03:23 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
> wrote:


>In truth, the Baron was LESS maintenance than the 210 (it was, though, 12
>years newer), but the gas and insurance was so much more and for hauling two
>or three people was overkill. The 210 was a mess from the standpoint of
>hydraulics and avionics/electrical problems.

The T210 is on my short list of possible planes for purchase. Do you
think it was that particular airplane, or 210s in general?

I'd opt for a T210 that is no older than a 1970, and I'd go with the
newest, lowest time model I could afford.

John Szpara
Affordable Satellite
Fiero Owner 2-84 Indy Pace cars, 86 Coupe, 88 Formula 3.4, 88 Coupe, 88GT

[Matt Barrow]

Correct, a 58; I now have a B36.

"Heywood J. Blaume" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Either that or he had a conversion, or he fat-fingered it and meant
> that he had a 55 or a 58.
>
> kage wrote:
> > Your memory must be fading. The Baron 56TC has the big Lyc's, LYC
> > TIO-541-E1B4.
> >
> > Karl
> >
> >
> > "Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > "Scott Skylane" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > >> Matt Barrow wrote:
> > >> /snip/
> > >> >
> > >> > I almost bought a 114TC back a few years ago, but got a "really
> good
> > > deal"
> > >> > on a T210, which turned out to be a maintenance nightmare.
> Traded it
> > >> > for
> > > a
> > >> > B56 which turned out to be even worse and kept neither one more
> than 9
> > >> > months each (okay, third time was the charm when I got my B36).
> > >>
> > >> Geez,
> > >>
> > >> No wonder you're down on Barons! You do realize that those
> TIO-541's
> > >> are not typical of the fleet's maintenance level???
> > >
> > > Pardon me? The Baron and the T210 both had Continental 520's.
> AAMOF, my
> > > B36
> > > had one when I got it and that's why I opted for the IO-550 when
> they did
> > > the conversion/overhaul.
> > >
> > > In truth, the Baron was LESS maintenance than the 210 (it was,
> though, 12
> > > years newer), but the gas and insurance was so much more and for
> hauling
> > > two
> > > or three people was overkill. The 210 was a mess from the
> standpoint of
> > > hydraulics and avionics/electrical problems.
> > >
> > >
> > > Matt
> > > ---------------------
> > > Matthew W. Barrow
> > > Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
> > > Montrose, CO
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
>

[john szpara]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:03:23 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
> wrote:


>In truth, the Baron was LESS maintenance than the 210 (it was, though, 12
>years newer), but the gas and insurance was so much more and for hauling two
>or three people was overkill. The 210 was a mess from the standpoint of
>hydraulics and avionics/electrical problems.

The T210 is on my short list of possible planes for purchase. Do you
think it was that particular airplane, or 210s in general?

I'd opt for a T210 that is no older than a 1970, and I'd go with the
newest, lowest time model I could afford.

John Szpara
Affordable Satellite
Fiero Owner 2-84 Indy Pace cars, 86 Coupe, 88 Formula 3.4, 88 Coupe, 88GT

[Matt Barrow]

"john szpara" > wrote in message
news:1106041105.d46f78bf6331d8958214d0f4e37b2074@t eranews...
> On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:03:23 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
> > wrote:
>
>
> >In truth, the Baron was LESS maintenance than the 210 (it was, though, 12
> >years newer), but the gas and insurance was so much more and for hauling
two
> >or three people was overkill. The 210 was a mess from the standpoint of
> >hydraulics and avionics/electrical problems.
>
> The T210 is on my short list of possible planes for purchase. Do you
> think it was that particular airplane, or 210s in general?

Mine may have been a "lemon" to an extent, but then I frequently hear it was
certainly not a unique situation.
>
> I'd opt for a T210 that is no older than a 1970, and I'd go with the
> newest, lowest time model I could afford.

Mine was a 1978 and I bought it in August, 1998 and traded for the Baron it
in May, '99. So how a 35 year old model would fare is a interesting
question.

--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO

[john szpara]

On Sat, 15 Jan 2005 21:03:23 -0700, "Matt Barrow"
> wrote:


>In truth, the Baron was LESS maintenance than the 210 (it was, though, 12
>years newer), but the gas and insurance was so much more and for hauling two
>or three people was overkill. The 210 was a mess from the standpoint of
>hydraulics and avionics/electrical problems.

The T210 is on my short list of possible planes for purchase. Do you
think it was that particular airplane, or 210s in general?

I'd opt for a T210 that is no older than a 1970, and I'd go with the
newest, lowest time model I could afford.

John Szpara
Affordable Satellite
Fiero Owner 2-84 Indy Pace cars, 86 Coupe, 88 Formula 3.4, 88 Coupe, 88GT

[Paul Tomblin]

In a previous article, john szpara > said:
>The T210 is on my short list of possible planes for purchase. Do you
>think it was that particular airplane, or 210s in general?

John, you've posted this exact same message 5 times between Sunday and
Wednesday. I think we get the message.


--
Paul Tomblin > http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Education is what remains after one has forgotten everything he learned
in school. -- A. Einstein

[Jay Honeck]

>>The T210 is on my short list of possible planes for purchase. Do you
>>think it was that particular airplane, or 210s in general?
>
> John, you've posted this exact same message 5 times between Sunday and
> Wednesday. I think we get the message.

Maybe it's that Howard Hughes syndrome?

"It's the wave of the future...It's the wave of the future...It's the wave
of the future..."

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[xyzzy]

Paul Tomblin wrote:

> In a previous article, john szpara > said:
>
>>The T210 is on my short list of possible planes for purchase. Do you
>>think it was that particular airplane, or 210s in general?
>
>
> John, you've posted this exact same message 5 times between Sunday and
> Wednesday. I think we get the message.
>
>

If he's posting thru google groups beta, this is a known problem. Don't
always assume something like this is the poster's fault.

[john szpara]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:06:58 +0000 (UTC),
(Paul Tomblin) wrote:

>In a previous article, john szpara > said:
>>The T210 is on my short list of possible planes for purchase. Do you
>>think it was that particular airplane, or 210s in general?
>
>John, you've posted this exact same message 5 times between Sunday and
>Wednesday. I think we get the message.

I've been having trouble sending messages. Agent (newsreader) keeps
saying that it's not going through, then 5 copies show up.

John Szpara
Affordable Satellite
Fiero Owner 2-84 Indy Pace cars, 86 Coupe, 88 Formula 3.4, 88 Coupe, 88GT

[john szpara]

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:01:01 -0500, xyzzy > wrote:

>Paul Tomblin wrote:

>If he's posting thru google groups beta, this is a known problem. Don't
>always assume something like this is the poster's fault.

This is the internet. People almost always assume you're an idiot, and
ask questions later. ;)
John Szpara
Affordable Satellite
Fiero Owner 2-84 Indy Pace cars, 86 Coupe, 88 Formula 3.4, 88 Coupe, 88GT

[Matt Barrow]

"john szpara" > wrote in message
news:1106293967.06ca122b5cfff829a3f20c992452e2db@t eranews...
> On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:01:01 -0500, xyzzy > wrote:
>
> >Paul Tomblin wrote:
>
> >If he's posting thru google groups beta, this is a known problem. Don't
> >always assume something like this is the poster's fault.
>
> This is the internet. People almost always assume you're an idiot, and
> ask questions later. ;)

This is UseNet -- that assumption is often valid. :>~