Best Twin for ME instruction?

weekendwarrior

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2002
Posts
271
Total Time
Some
Anyone care to chime on on the best twin for MEL instruction? My criteria is price, operating cost, mx, insurance, etc. Mostly a financial discussion, with a mix of good training value as well.

My thoughts are:
Seminole
Aztec
Twin Comanche
 

7574EVER

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 5, 2004
Posts
288
Total Time
2100+
I don't have any experience with the Aztec; but, given it's age I would assume it's a maint. hog. The Twin Comanche is a GREAT airplane; but, insurance is through the roof.

That said, out of the three aircraft you listed I'd probably say the Seminole.
 

brokeflyer

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2005
Posts
2,374
Total Time
1501
Aztec is a good plane, it performs really good.

Did my initial in a 310R....good complex plane that was rather hard to handle.
 

eagle06

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 14, 2006
Posts
92
Total Time
5000+
of those - probably the PA44. You may also want to consider the BE76.
 

JAFI

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2003
Posts
964
Total Time
8000+
Order of preference IMHO:

BE76 - Great trainer, good performance, good systems and cockpit layout. (not on your list but look for this one)

Seminole - OK if it is not too hot for performance, cockpit tight, harder to see all of the panel than the BE76. I flew one that one prop sometimes would come out of feather, then sometimes it would not.

Aztec - great aircraft performance (for a light twin) If you can find one that has been maintained well enough for training and the owner will allow training in one.

Twin Comanche - not a good trainer IMHO. Requires more speed to operate safer. Smaller wing than I like for a trainer. As I recall many had problems with the gear. Or at least those who landed gear up said it was mechanical problems....
 

weekendwarrior

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2002
Posts
271
Total Time
Some
Thanks guys...I didn't want to go the Beech route, as I worked as a mechanic and HATED working on them. But, guess it depends on the airplane. I did my training in seminole, which I didn't care for, but bang for the buck you couldn't beat it. A 310 is a great airplane...have some time in them. But a conventional twin I'm not sure if insurance would be higher than a counter rotating twin.
 

Hung Start

Just the cleanup guy
Joined
Sep 12, 2004
Posts
701
Total Time
enough
Aztec is a good plane, it performs really good.

Did my initial in a 310R....good complex plane that was rather hard to handle.
I know it's not on the list, but a 310 will make a man out of ya. And, a better multi pilot.

Broke, you went up a notch in my book.:beer:

Hung
 

sqwkvfr

Baseball junkie
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Posts
1,673
Total Time
a lot
I'm probably gonna get a lot of crap for this and I know it's not on the list, but I would suggest exploring the use of a Seneca II.

I've been instructing in them for over a thousand hours now, and I find them a very stable, forgiving platform that is still plenty capable.

Don't get me wrong, the MAP adjustment will make your hair gray in short order and MX can be a problem, but the low acquisition costs of a II might help make up for some of that.

I think that it flies a lot like a Seminole (note that I said "flies," not to including takeoff and landing) with more interior room and overall capability.

Some people don't like the Seneca for a primary trainer mainly because of the simple turbocharging system and the forward CG that'll require you and/or your student to jockey ballast around, but I've come around to liking them.

Like I said, I realize that it's not on your list, I just wanted to make sure that you weren't discounting what can be a pretty good trainer.
 

Mach

Active member
Joined
May 2, 2004
Posts
31
Total Time
3000
I know it's not on the list, but a 310 will make a man out of ya. And, a better multi pilot.

Broke, you went up a notch in my book.:beer:

Hung

Agree, did my multi in a 310. And signed off many students in a 310.
 

Mach

Active member
Joined
May 2, 2004
Posts
31
Total Time
3000
Very capable airplane with great single engine performance.
 

Mach

Active member
Joined
May 2, 2004
Posts
31
Total Time
3000
Why?

If $hit were to hit the fan. I want to be able to climb on one engine, not make a smoking hole in the ground.
 

AC560

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 9, 2005
Posts
1,184
Total Time
750
If $hit were to hit the fan. I want to be able to climb on one engine, not make a smoking hole in the ground.
It is a relatively complex and difficult to fly airplane with high maintenance costs. I have a lot of 320 hours. Great airplane, nothing against it. It wouldn't be my first choice for multi instruction which is what the question was.
 

Princedietrich

Retired Starchecker
Joined
Oct 27, 2004
Posts
1,437
Total Time
Enough
Having flown the PA44 and the BE76, I'd have to give my preference to the Dutchess. Granted you'll be able to find very new and relatively well-equipped and maintained Seminoles out there since they are still in production.

Never flown a Seneca, but will be taking one up in the next couple o weeks.

Never flown a 310, but have heard good things about them.

Never flown a Twin Commanche so I know nothing about them.

Never flown a Duke, but always wanted to.

If it were up to me, I'd go for a Baron. Did my comm-multi and MEI in a BE55 and signed off a few students in one. Did my ATP and few many hundreds of hours in a BE58. They're expensive, no denying it, but Barons are excellent airplanes. They definitely keep you on your toes, both as a trainee and as an instructor, because they can be very unforgiving (especially in terms of VMC).
 

VW Pilot

MMM...PIGEON CASSEROLE
Joined
Jun 3, 2006
Posts
257
Total Time
Rising
BE-76 or Travelair....I rode right seat in a BE-76...The set up is very nice.
 

ackattacker

Client 9
Joined
Nov 14, 2004
Posts
2,125
Total Time
hah!
I did a lot of instruction in a Twin Comanche and thought it was excellent for training. Of course not as docile as a Seminole. It has an honest-to-god Vmca and if you go below it single engine you'll know it quick. In my opinion this is a plus - makes for a better and safer twin pilot than one who learned on a training-wheels plane and then has to go on and fly a "real" twin.

All the other planes being discussed besides the Twin Comanche and Seminole will cost more to operate. The PA30 is only 160HP per side and is relatively simple systems-wise. Good speed for cross-country also. The gear is not as finicky as people say, but it is stiff and not easy to grease on. Most of the people who land a Twin Comanche gear up had no idea how to properly perform an emergency gear extension.
 
Last edited:
Top