Best King Air

[Byei]

We currently operate a Beechjet 400A and typically have 4-5 people on board. When we first purchased it we we doing single leg longer trips, but have changed to frequent and multiple shorter legs. That along with the cost of fuel is bringing us to reevaluate what we fly. We are looking at all three of the King Airs, but the C90 is probably out because of seating. So we are looking at B200, 300 and 350s. I know there are a ton of you with experience in all of these, what have you found to be best in:

Speed
Payload
Range
Value
Reliability

Thanks for your help!

byei

 

[400A]

What is your purchase budget? Hard to beat a 350 if you can afford it. More or less seats full tanks full. Also holds resale extremely well. Do your home work though. Cost per mile may not be much different unless you are doing really short legs.
Crew cost will go down of course if you change to single Pilot. 200 is an awful hard working bird too!

 

[GVFlyer]

Carefully evaluate your average trip length while deciding your aircraft needs.

The distance at which it becomes more cost effective to fly the King Air (in still air) is at 400 nautical miles from point of origin. This distance becomes closer to the take-off point with a headwind because the headwind constitutes a larger percentage of the turbo-props total speed when compared to a jet. The wind would matter, for instance, if most of your trips were morning departures West with evening returns East where diurnal effects would diminish the expected tail wind on the return trip. The higher the fuel price from today's average cost, the more distant from your point of origin the break even distance becomes.

The real issue you are considering is fuel versus maintenance accrual. The jet achieves its cost savings beyond 400 nm by taking less time to get to the destination thereby reducing maintenance costs (it will always burn more fuel).

When it came time for the US Army to replace it's aging U-21s (an unpressurized A90), they found the preponderance of their trip lengths for small cabin aircraft to be between 800 nm and 1,000 nm. They were able to convince the Pentagon to buy them 65 Citation UC-35Bs as a wise business decision because at those ranges the jets cost less to operate than the King Airs.

If the preponderance of your trips are beyond 400 nm, keep the jet. If they are not, buy the least King Air that will fill your mission requirements. This would be consistent with your stated goal of saving money.

If your average passenger load is 8 or less don't spend the extra 20% for the 350, the B200 is a great airplane that cruises 7 knots slower than the 350 with a similar average fuel flow at long range cruise.

If you feel compelled to spend over $6 million for a turbo-prop, run the numbers for the Piaggio 180 as well as for the KA350. The Italian manufacturer is beginning to have a large enough footprint in the US to make the P180 at least worth a look.

When I was in the military I did a closed-loop handling qualities evaluation on the P180. While I would characterize the Piaggio as delicate, it has a large cabin, good field performance and is quite quick.

GV

 

[solpilot]

The best King Air by far is the 350. But you can get similar performance in the B200. The B200 is really a 275 kts airplane and the 350 is 300 kts. The 350 has a lower cruise RPM thus allowing for a much quieter cabin...which is nice on the longer legs. The newer King Air's offer an active noise cancellation system throught the cabin - not as quiet as a jet, but very comfortable. You can't go wrong with either airplane (350/200).

 

[johnsonrod]

Try the B200 or B350 with Pro Line 21 up front.

 

[avbug]

The King Air 300 or 350 don't offer much more than the 200, but do it at a much higher price tag. For value the 200 is probably the ideal. As stated before, look closely at your mission profile, including destination (length and runway type), pilot experience, etc, before making the decision. A turboprop may or may not be what you want.

As stated, the Piaggio is good, but expensive. It does jet performance at turboprop operating costs. It will do a hundred knots more than the King Air 200 for the same fuel burns, will go to FL410, and has a lot more range in less time. It's requires more runway, but not excessively so.

 

[bobs98tlr]

If your looking for budget forget about the proline 21, hes looking to save money. Depending on your trip lenth/passenger load/ and cargo is going to be the factor. As much as i love the 350 the 200 may do the job just fine. If your flying the 400A into the same airports your gonna be flying the king air then TO performance in the king air wont be a problem. Do pay MUCH attention to the king air's your looking at. I worked at a beechcraft maintnance center for alittle over 2 years and saw some airplanes that look great on the outside with MANY new parts (avionics, engines, landing gear ect...) but always had all kinds of different problems and racket up some big bills. Mostly the 200's and the A90's. The 350 IMHO is the best turbo prop out there....if you can afford it. Good luck with your couse, you wont go wrong.

 

[mavrck]

I would seriously consider a 200. The C90 would be out due to weight and passenger load. Keep in mind, the 350 you would need a type rating for. So, thats a higher cost for training.

If you can fit it in the 200 and you dont need to top off fuel, you are pretty much inside the Cg/gross weight.

Top off w fuel and you easily have a 5hr range. Best altitude works out between 240 - 280.

Hope that helps. There is alot of 200's on the market right now so prices are comparable. We have one on the market ourselves.

PM me if you need more.

 

[Tgaug6300]

I would recommend the CJ2+ or 3.

 

[satpak77]

real world performance

I never would see more than 270, 280 TAS in our B-350's.

Some of you get 300, but I just have never seen that.