Here’s a 310 K. Looks a bit too good to be true. Maybe they just don’t use it and want the money back they bought it for in 1997.
http://www.planesandboats.com/1966-cessna-310k/
Anyone looking for a 310?
-
- Posts: 854
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2020 3:24 am
-
- Posts: 216
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:15 am
You can buy Twins surprisingly cheap. Perhaps even cheaper in Canada than in the US. I would say the one from the first post is correctly priced. It's certainly not excessively cheap.
I passed 2 annuals now, and certainly didn't spend anything near 50% of the purchase value. I'm sure it's possible, but it's not a necessity.
To add, if you compare it to a classic 172 or pa28 type of airplane, you'll end up burning just over twice the amount of fuel (22 GPH vs 9 GPH), and you'll be going just under twice as fast (170 KTS vs 95 KTS). Your range and comfortable altitude increases as well. So you might be able to skip a fuel stop, saving you time and possibly some money. That might be an advantage or a disadvantage, depending on what your goal is.
If you want to get somewhere (cost per mile), they can be great. If you just want to fly around (cost per hour), you're likely wasting some money with a twin.
I passed 2 annuals now, and certainly didn't spend anything near 50% of the purchase value. I'm sure it's possible, but it's not a necessity.
To add, if you compare it to a classic 172 or pa28 type of airplane, you'll end up burning just over twice the amount of fuel (22 GPH vs 9 GPH), and you'll be going just under twice as fast (170 KTS vs 95 KTS). Your range and comfortable altitude increases as well. So you might be able to skip a fuel stop, saving you time and possibly some money. That might be an advantage or a disadvantage, depending on what your goal is.
If you want to get somewhere (cost per mile), they can be great. If you just want to fly around (cost per hour), you're likely wasting some money with a twin.
-
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2021 7:21 pm
- Location: Group W Bench
- Colonel
- Posts: 2440
- Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:02 pm
- Location: Over The Runway
I hear ya, but Cessna could easily issue MSB’s “erring on the side of caution” and ask the FAA to make them AD’s in the name of “safety” if they wanted. The cost of the AD parts and labor would exceed the value of the aircraft by 10x and that would ground them all permanently.
But, they don’t.
But, they don’t.
-
- Posts: 216
- Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2020 4:15 am
I don't really have that feeling. Cessna seems to put an effort into keeping their old planes flying. They have their aging aircraft program. There's still support for repairs. On the twin cessna forum their regularly are stories about people dealing with Cessna to get exotic repairs approved etc. It seems to cost a couple thousand dollars to get anything approved, but for a repair that costs at least 10 times as much, that's not completely excessive.
I believe you pay the same fee for the singles, but chances are somebody already attempted any possible repair on those by now.
Rumors have it that Piper is much harder to deal with if you own ancient aircraft.
I believe you pay the same fee for the singles, but chances are somebody already attempted any possible repair on those by now.
Rumors have it that Piper is much harder to deal with if you own ancient aircraft.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 9 Replies
- 3102 Views
-
Last post by Liquid_Charlie
-
- 8 Replies
- 1197 Views
-
Last post by anofly
-
- 0 Replies
- 3263 Views
-
Last post by Scudrunner