Best Aircraft for the Job ???

[AV8N4Fun]

Looking to those of you w/ many years of experience, good judgment, sound reasoning, and the willingness to give free advise. I am trying to determine the right aircraft for a particular job.

A company that I occasionally do some flying for is considering buying another aircraft strictly for freight hauling rather than outsourcing it as they've been doing. They currently transport between 8,000 & 9,000 lbs per day on either four or five days out of the week to a location roughly 630NM away. What type of aircraft would be best for this? The cargo would normally be on pallets, but ... (??) ... may not have to be . The ability to haul it all in one flight would be nice, ... but if cost savings were enough, I'm fairly certain that it would be acceptable to do multiple trips in a day.

Also, this is all one-way-freight. They do not have anything for the return legs. They certainly are not apposed to making money. lol And therefore the likelihood of picking up some return frieght is very possible. But, it needs to be considered only as the "gravy". They want to know that their daily(almost daily) transports can justify the aircraft. What aircraft would do this leg the most efficiently???

Hoping to hear from those who may have owned, operated, managed, or whom have had to pay the bills of an operation similiar to this and/or beyond.

Thanks, AV8N4Fun

 

[Birddog]

If you can get your hands on one, and ATR72 would do this. A F27 might, too. Depending on the size of the pallets, there is a freighter conversion for the Saab. If it is not too bulky and you will do multiple trips, a Beech 1900, Metro, or even a Beech 99 might do.

 

[EatSleepFly]

I don't think a Be-99 or a Metro would be very cost effective. I don't know specific #'s for the Be-1900, but I'm guessing it wouldn't be either.

631 nm in a Be-99 means you'd have to take a lot of gas, maybe even top off if the weather was bad enough and then you'd be pushing it to make it with IFR reserves. Topping it off would only give you ~2600 lbs of payload, which means 3 trips even for 8k lbs of cargo. 3 trips x 631nm per leg = 3786 miles or roughly 18 hours of flying per day in a Be-99 (obviously would take more than one pilot). Um, no thanks. uke:

A 'heavy' Metro (16k lbs) may or may not even be able do it in 2 trips, depending on weather and you'd still be looking at over 9 hours of flying per day for 2 round trips. A 4500 lb. load (assuming the volume would fit) would leave you with about 2400-2500 lbs of fuel capacity given one 200 lb. pilot, and a full tank of AWI which you may or may not need depending on the elevation and climate you're flying to/from. No wind, you're looking at about a 2+25 leg and you'd land with about 500 lbs of fuel remaining- just barely IFR reserves if you don't need an alternate. That's being conservative, but you can see that if you need an alternate and the associated extra fuel, it's going to take 3 trips for a 9k load. That's all based on flight planning for 260 kts, and conservatively for a fuel burn of 800 lbs the first hour and 600 lbs per hour thereafter. It's a pretty efficient airplane, although perhaps a little pricey to maintain.

Relative to a Metro, a Be-1900 is much more expensive to acquire and not nearly as fuel efficient. About the same speed, and can take more weight and fuel (but needs more fuel). Maybe someone else can give you the numbers for that... tinman?

[ I don't think any "little" airplanes would fit the bill unless they want to buy a couple. Of course, if they decide on Metros and need pilots, I might know of one who is typed and current and always on the prowl to improve his income... imp: ]

How about a Shorts? Or a DC-9?

Also, I'm assuming this is going to be 91? There is a limit you can carry in one a/c under 135, and I can't remember what it is, but I know it's less than 8k lbs.

 

[NewmanF16]

Basler DC-3 would do the job. http://www.baslerturbo.com/performance.html

 

[PreContact]

How about a Dash-8? It's got growth potential for larger loads.

 

[Captain Morgan]

I would go for the Beech 1900D model or even go for a Saab or Brasilia. This way you've got the speed. I think the Dash and the Fokker/ATR would be on the slow side. Where is this company and are they hiring?

 

[AV8N4Fun]

Thanks for the various inputs guys. EatSleepFly, I like some of those ideas. Does anyone know the operating cost of these aircraft. What's the cost per pound of cargo capacity per mile, etc??

Before I realized how much volume they were talking about, I was looking at the Grand Caravan doing two trips. That plane is a little expensive to purchase, not very fast, or terribly sexy, but ... it's really practicle and economical. For the pure business aspect, it looks great. Just don't see how to make one of them do that kind of volume. Sooo...

Next, I had looked at the Shorts SD3-30. But, don't know much bout them. How available are they? What kind of purchase price? Cost per hour to operate(or cost per cargo pound mile)???

I really like the ATR suggestion as well. My first thoughts, without knowing the real world numbers, is that the ATR may be overkill. Cost too much on the startup cost ... may or may not be as efficient on the ops cost. Anyone have operating cost for these or others? Any suggestions of where to research? Any source you know of that may already do a comparison?

Thanks, AV8N4Fun

 

[AV8N4Fun]

Morgan, Hey there. They're not hiring yet. They only have the "thought" right now. If I can do the numbers, I'll get em to have the "bug" to start this operation. I gotta prove it's more cost effective than paying someone else. I think it has huge potential above their own stuff, but I have to start with just there needs to convience them. The B1900D has some benafits. Mainly, I have a connection to get a leased one, from a former business associate, that is just coming off of a 135 ops. Do you know what the numbers for the B1900D are? What kind of hidden cost? Etc etc etc ??? If I ask the guy I know w/ the B1900D, he'll be bias & just try to sell me on it. I wouldn't want to say anything to him till I was fairly certain that we were interested in such. Ya know

 

[Captain Morgan]

Not sure about the B1900D as I have never flown one. I know they do mid 200's in the speed range and the engines are grossly overpowered. They are basically a big King Air. Even though the pilot would need a type, the plane can be operated single pilot, although not sure about the D model (look at Ameriflight, theirs are C's.) The engines are PT-6's and are proven. I know Ameriflight also flies the Brasilia so that might be viable as well. Good luck!

CM

 

[Captain Morgan]

I was just thinking, the Brasilia might be more accepting of pallets and I was looking at the weight issues. The Brasilia would have a better useful load for what you're looking for I think. The plane will cruise 50kts faster as well I think from what stats I'm looking at. Here you go:
http://www.aviatorsale.com/aix4700/

CM

 

[Birddog]

Next, I had looked at the Shorts SD3-30. But, don't know much bout them. How available are they? What kind of purchase price? Cost per hour to operate(or cost per cargo pound mile)???

Decent 330's are hard to come by. They are also slow. You are looking at a no wind round trip of about 7 hours, and that would only get about 5000 lbs at a time. A 360 would be a little faster, but not carry much more. The 1900 will be faster, but only take about 4000 lbs per trip.

I think the Dash 8 or the Saab would be a better choice. Depending on the size and density of the freight, a baby 9 might work well, as suggested above. You can also get a converted CRJ, but that would probably cost upwards of 10 million.

 

[EatSleepFly]

I was just thinking, the Brasilia might be more accepting of pallets and I was looking at the weight issues. The Brasilia would have a better useful load for what you're looking for I think. The plane will cruise 50kts faster as well I think from what stats I'm looking at. Here you go:
http://www.aviatorsale.com/aix4700/

CM

I don't think even a Brasilia would be able to take 8-9k lbs, but I could be wrong.

The more I think about it, 2 heavy Metros would be my vote. Run one back and forth twice and the other once if need be. Both can be had for the price of 1 Be-1900D, and they are more fuel efficient and at least the same speed. A Brasilia would cost significantly more and would still need to make 2 trips I think. Probably the same with a Saab. Castle out of CAK operated a cargo Saab for awhile, but not a very long while. I heard it wasn't very successful, but I have no first-hand knowledge. There's a reason you don't see CRJ's, Dash-8's and Saabs flying cargo around. What about a Convair? I don't know much about them, or if there's any even around to buy, but they seem to be good freight haulers.

 

[Captain Morgan]

You might be right, I was going off of rough numbers. I've never flown those aircraft. I know a guy who flew Metro's and he loved them. Plus, two of those, means more jobs for pilots.

CM

 

[propsarebest]

Convair 580...

 

[Captain Morgan]

Ohhh... that's a badda$$ bird!

 

[AV8N4Fun]

Man, I am so impressed to get so many serious responses so quickly. It is truly appreciated. Thanks!!

I need hard numbers as well as opinions. I just don't know anymore as to where to look for such. I've been out out of the business side of things for a few years. I'm sure somewhere on the internet there has got to be something that compares various aircrafts cost of operations. Do y'all think an AOPA or NBAA could/would help with this??

The Convair... WOW !! ... EatSleepFly, I guess I need to expand my considerations. I have not tried to look up the info on the Convair yet(BUt I will) , but, ... no doubt, it is such a proven cargo hauler. Not that long ago, I knew Kitty Hawk was selling off their Convairs. They had the turbine ones, not bad aircraft, I even jumpseated w/ em at one point a while back. Know if they still have them for sale &/or what something like that sells for???

Cpt Morgan, I like ur thinking. More aircraft = more pilot jobs. LOL That's good. I agree. I am wanting to create a situation that pretty much uses the maximum efficiency of a particular aircraft at the start. A little room for growth, but minimum. Growth will develop with additional aircraft AFTER we've had time to see what the market situation may really be and have time to get our feet wet. This is an opportunity to start w/ a known volume. IF I can put together a plan that at least satisfies their needs w/ that volume, then I am confident their is opportunity for much more.

Once again, THANKS. I appreciate the input. It has got me thinking already bout things I had not.

Sincerely, AV8N4Fun

 

[Junkflyer]

Something you may want to keep in mind is the 7500 # limit for 135, otherwise you will have to start a 121 operation.

 

[citabriapilot]

The Brasilia can only take just over 8,000 pounds due to max zero fuel weights. Even at that, you will only be able to fuel for a 300nm trip with light winds and no alternate.

 

[countbat]

Because you mentioned Kitty Hawk, why don't you just call them and maybe they will have a B737/727 taking your freight? It's cheaper, faster, less headaches.

 

[ksu_aviator]

Atr 72

ATR 72

http://www.bluegrassairport.com/documents/LEX-Chapter4-DemandAnalysis.pdf

TABLE 4-5
AIRCRAFT BLOCK HOUR OPERATING COSTS
Aircraft Type Block Hour Cost
Commercial Passenger Service​

ATR 72 $1,401

http://www.airliners.net/info/stats.main?id=42

ATR-72-200 - Max cruising speed at 15,000ft 526km/h (284kt), economical cruising speed 460km/h (248kt). Range with reserves at max optional weight 1195km (645nm), range with 66 pax 2665km (1200nm).

ATR-72-200 - Operating empty 12,400kg (27,337lb), max takeoff 21,500kg (47,400lb), optional 22,000kg (48,501lb).
ATR-72-210 - Operating empty 12,450kg (27,447lb), max takeoff same as ATR-72-200.
ATR-72-500 - Operating empty 12,950kg (28,550lb), max takeoff 22,000kg (48,501lb), optional 22,500kg (49,604lb).​

 

[ksu_aviator]

Atr 42

I couldn't find differrent operating costs, so you'll have to see what you can find, I'm assuming it is significantly less than the 72, but I don't know.


ATR-42-300 - Max cruising speed 490km/h (265kt) economical cruising speed 450km/h (243kt). Range with max fuel and reserves at max cruising speed 4480km (2420nm), or 5040km (2720nm) at economical cruising speed.
ATR-42-320 - Same as ATR-42-300 except max cruising speed 498km/h (269kt).
ATR-42-500 - Cruising speed 563km/h (304kt). Max range 1850km (1000nm).

[FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]Weights[/FONT]

[FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]ATR-42-300 - Operating empty 10,285kg (22,674lb), max takeoff 16,700kg (36,817lb).
ATR-42-320 - Operating empty 10,290kg (22,685lb), max takeoff as per 42-300.
ATR-42-500 - Operating empty 11,250kg (24,802lb), max takeoff 18,600kg (41,005lb).
[FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]Dimensions[/FONT]

[FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]Wing span 24.57m (80ft 8in), length 22.67m (74ft 5in), height 7.59m (24ft 11in). Wing area 54.5m2 (586.6sq ft). [FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]Capacity[/FONT]

[FONT=ARIAL, Helvetica, Geneva]Flightcrew of two. Maximum passenger accommodation for 50, 48 or 46 at 76cm (30in) pitch and four abreast. Typical seating arrangement for 42 at 81cm (32in) pitch.
ATR-42 Cargo - Nine containers with a 4000kg payload.
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

 

[Caboclo]

Sounds like you're looking at a large T-prop. Either multiple trips in a 19-30 seater, or one trip in something bigger. The good news is there aren't that many choices in either case, so it will be a fairly easy decision. The bad news is the t-prop market is pretty tight right now, at least for the more modern models. Of the more modern models, the choices are ATR, Saab, 1900 and -8. Of those, Beech, ATR and Saab offer factory cargo mods. All of those are currently popular in the pax market, you'll have to pay through the nose for them. Someone refresh my memory, who's the 135 outfit in FL running Saabs? You could ask them for a charter quote and get an idea of operating costs. In the slightly older category, you have the Jetstreams and Brasilias, both of which are currently leaving the pax market, so availabilty might be better. Ameriflight runs some cargo Brasilias and 1900s, if you want to ask them for a quote. I found this info for the Jetstream: www.jetstreamcargo.com. Basically identical in size to the Metro, but probably easier to find. Metro's are very popular freighters, and therefore scarcer then hen's teeth. Going farther back, there are probably a lot of F27's around, since Fedex just replaced all theirs with ATRs. Cheap, and very high time. Ask around, there are surely some FX feeder pilots online who can give you some good info on those. Another interesting option is the Convair 5800. That's a 580 which has been completely overhauled, stretched, and given an Efis make-over by a Canadian company of some renown. Here's their link: www.flightcraft.ca The Shorts have already been discussed, this outfit runs a bunch of them: www.aircar.com And here's another interesting link I just stumbled across; the t-props are listed under "utility". www.freightersonline.com Of course, there's always the L-382; that's a civilian C-130. There's also a cargo conversion for the old Bae-146/Avro RJ.

 

[tinman]

I don't think a Be-99 or a Metro would be very cost effective. I don't know specific #'s for the Be-1900, but I'm guessing it wouldn't be either.

631 nm in a Be-99 means you'd have to take a lot of gas, maybe even top off if the weather was bad enough and then you'd be pushing it to make it with IFR reserves. Topping it off would only give you ~2600 lbs of payload, which means 3 trips even for 8k lbs of cargo. 3 trips x 631nm per leg = 3786 miles or roughly 18 hours of flying per day in a Be-99 (obviously would take more than one pilot). Um, no thanks. uke:

A 'heavy' Metro (16k lbs) may or may not even be able do it in 2 trips, depending on weather and you'd still be looking at over 9 hours of flying per day for 2 round trips. A 4500 lb. load (assuming the volume would fit) would leave you with about 2400-2500 lbs of fuel capacity given one 200 lb. pilot, and a full tank of AWI which you may or may not need depending on the elevation and climate you're flying to/from. No wind, you're looking at about a 2+25 leg and you'd land with about 500 lbs of fuel remaining- just barely IFR reserves if you don't need an alternate. That's being conservative, but you can see that if you need an alternate and the associated extra fuel, it's going to take 3 trips for a 9k load. That's all based on flight planning for 260 kts, and conservatively for a fuel burn of 800 lbs the first hour and 600 lbs per hour thereafter. It's a pretty efficient airplane, although perhaps a little pricey to maintain.

Relative to a Metro, a Be-1900 is much more expensive to acquire and not nearly as fuel efficient. About the same speed, and can take more weight and fuel (but needs more fuel). Maybe someone else can give you the numbers for that... tinman?

[ I don't think any "little" airplanes would fit the bill unless they want to buy a couple. Of course, if they decide on Metros and need pilots, I might know of one who is typed and current and always on the prowl to improve his income... imp: ]

How about a Shorts? Or a DC-9?

Also, I'm assuming this is going to be 91? There is a limit you can carry in one a/c under 135, and I can't remember what it is, but I know it's less than 8k lbs.

1900=Big money compared to the metro. If volume is a important, that's about the only diff. between the 1900D and the earlier models. All the other #'s are about the same, but you've got that beautiful hump on the top!

 

[TheBaron]

The truth nobody wants to tell you...

Pay overtime for 1 day (one time only) of extra production to get ahead of your customers needs. Ship out each days production on a truck for delivery the next day. Air freight is for hiccups in the supply chain and there is no way to justify the expense for such a relatively short haul. Now if you're sending high dollar value goods across an ocean...that's a different story.

 

[OzBushWhacker]

Yeah call Air Cargo and charter us!

 

[RefugePilot]

Pay overtime for 1 day (one time only) of extra production to get ahead of your customers needs. Ship out each days production on a truck for delivery the next day. Air freight is for hiccups in the supply chain and there is no way to justify the expense for such a relatively short haul. Now if you're sending high dollar value goods across an ocean...that's a different story.

If this is an option I'd agree, but that would not create any jobs for pilots, which is what we are after. I think this operation could be a true nightmare to keep up, especially if you try doing it in a metro. The only freight operation I am familiar with is Ameriflight and since at least half or your responses are from AMF pilots they can chime in.

Our Metros run on average 4+ days a week and we need a spare for every couple of planes. We also have a number of different bases that specialize in fixing the complicated things when they break, which in a Metro is often.
Each base has a maintenance department that is there all night getting the planes ready to fly each day. Our average days are under 400 miles. Even with all this going in our favor we are unable to field a full fleet sometimes in winter.

Granted the Metro is complicated plane to maintain, but trying to get any one plane to fly 10 trips a week on a regular basis could be tough and what would happen if your backup is not available on short notice.

 

[citabriapilot]

We also have a number of different bases that specialize in fixing the complicated things when they break, which in a Metro is often.

Ha! Metros might be in the hangar every night or so for little "gremlins", but you won't see one down for weeks at a time like those 1900's... They don't call the hangar the "Beech Showroom" for nothing. Metros break a lot with small things, 1900's go down hard.

I think the Tinman would even admit it... :smash:

 

[tinman]

Ha! Metros might be in the hangar every night or so for little "gremlins", but you won't see one down for weeks at a time like those 1900's... They don't call the hangar the "Beech Showroom" for nothing. Metros break a lot with small things, 1900's go down hard.

I think the Tinman would even admit it... :smash:

Ooohhh, you better step off sucka!

That's how they get people to come AMF. Bring prospects into the "Beech showroom" to see what they could be flying, then once they sign on the dotted line, wham, "here's a metro, have fun".

 

[EatSleepFly]

I think this operation could be a true nightmare to keep up, especially if you try doing it in a metro.

I think you don't know what you're talking about.

The Metro is a very reliable airplane when flown and maintained properly.

Only once have I ever had a Metro go down on me away from base, and that was for an igniter box that could and does happen to any turbine airplane. We carry spares with us, except this time happened to be during a snowstorm the weekend before x-mas in the middle of nowhere and everyone at the FBO was at their Christmas party so nobody was around to make the switch. Otherwise it would've been a quick fix.

They are also "quirky", causing new or mentally challenged pilots to write things up that needn't be, which downs the airplane for days or more while the mechanics chase ghosts. I rarely have anything serious to write up, and more than once I've gone over 3 weeks in the same plane without a single write up. That's pretty impressive for old freighters that fly daily with ~30k hours and who knows how many cycles on them.

I'll give you that occasionally there is an airplane that is a hangar queen (152AF), but in my experience that is by far the exception not the rule for Metros at this company.

 

[OzBushWhacker]

We have quirks too (Shorts) but yet get them up in the air 5 nights/wk. May have to swap out occasionally but pretty reliable.