If you can afford the acquisition and operating costs (including insurance and regular training), I'd recommend a 501SP over any piston twin. My last employer operated King Airs, Citation 500/550s, and one Baron 58 when I joined them. The Baron required the highest skill level to reliably operate single-pilot in the northeast US. Coming from large and mid-size bizjets (and having thousands of hours in Barons, Navajos, and King Airs), I was amazed to find how easy the Citations were to fly. Now add all the safety factors and all-weather capabilities and the Citation is a no-brainer... if you can afford it.

Greg

I worked this thought for a while. I'll spare you the whole enchilada, but would echo something Mike C pointed out more than once...you buy an airplane, but you are buying into an ecosystem that will determine a huge piece of your experience. Not unlike marriage, where you take the woman home, but you marry the whole fam damily.

Some random thoughts:

Gotta have pressurization.

Recently there was some activity on here about parts for old King Airs being unobtainable. Windshields, for one. That was sort of shocking to me. The KA used to be the conservative choice, and a big part of that was the availability of maintenance anywhere and everywhere. But if oyu can't get parts, maintenance availability doesn't matter.

I think support for Twin Cessnas is also more difficult than previous.

Commanders seem to be well-supported, as the Type Certificate is held by a company whose only business is supporting the airplane. Mitsubishi has supported the MU-2 famously well for a long time. Mitsubishi may be cheaper. Garrett powered airplanes are about 30% faster and more efficient than Pratt powered planes.

Old Citations get a lot of love from Tarver and others, and the cost delta between that and a 421 might not as huge as it could be. Analyzing cost must take into account how to handle improbable but really expensive events. Some turbine engines can be purchased at any point in their life, or rented, depending on which engine and how common it is. This is where the PT6 shines, and maybe the only strength of that engine.

My sweet spots moving up from a piston single or twin:

MU2-F, the budget choice.

MU2 or Commander, preferably -10's, Which to pick would depend on where I was in relation to maintenance and hangar availability. Commanders have looong wings.

Citation of some sort. If I was torn between this one or that one, I'd err on the side of moving up. And flying a jet is apparently MUCH lower workload than flying a P-Twin piston or turboprop. And you are high enough to make life easier most of the time.

It was a long time ago when I made these observations, there is more current knowledge available on BT.

Good luck!

You can have an informal conversation with your agent, but DO NOT get a quote if you are making a major step up.

Once the underwriter has started a file on you, the quote won't get much better if at all as you add qualifications.

For example, if you wanted to fly a Citation 501, go to a sim school and get your type rating before you let the underwriter quote you. Not only do you start qualified to fly the plane (notwithstanding SOE, mentor, etc), but you get to see if you are ready for the airplane. Doing a type cold, no prior experience in type, is hard, but I did it. If you can get some right seat time with another operator, that will help and gives you some time in type. Study the manuals will also help a lot.

One of my SICs came to me without any jet time. I got him right seat time and also gave him his CE-500 SIC type rating. The SIC rating won't count for much at the underwriter, but when you go to sim school, you'll be far better prepared than doing it cold.

Now, once you have the PIC type rating in hand, with some time in type, THEN go quote with the underwriter. You will get much better terms.

This is my advice, anyway. If you go to type school and wash out, then you just saved a lot of money, too. If you wash out of Citation type school for actual flying reasons, you are probably not safe in a piston twin. If you wash out for ground school reasons, you were just unprepared.

If going to type school is too expensive for you, then you aren't a turbine owner. It is typical for turbine pilots to get yearly type specific training. This is FAA required for jets, but the insurance makes it required for turboprops as well.

Mike C.

Maybe 30% faster than King airs, but MU-2, 441, 690 speeds are comparable to TBMs and M600/M700. Similar efficiency too.

All great points and I greatly appreciate all the responses and the context. I'm aware that the insurance aspect will be an initial hurdle (and I'm prepared to navigate that), and I'm more than prepared for initial and recurrent training - that's actually quite appealing to me. I'm not trying to cut corners.

I think the general consensus is it doesn't make sense to bounce around while upgrading, so narrowing down the long term solution and trying to pull that off initially get's me married to something for the long term. It seems like a common theme is people "move up" and then move up again, and again... trying to avoid that but I imagine part of that is you don't know what you don't know, and of course we always desire more as humans. I think honestly my unfamiliarity with the jet world has caused me not to even look, but perhaps I should be considering. Without this turning into a pure discussion on "what's the best airplane", I'm curious how some of you went about landing where you are... Mike R, had you flown an MU2 before you just bought one over the phone? For those that owned an MU2, but now own a Jet (seems to be a common theme), what was it that made you want to move on?

There's a lot of people I know who will say "buy a baron, it will take your whole family comfortably", but I don't see many people taking children across the country in bonanzas and barons on a frequent basis. But, the million dollar question is what "experience" would my wife say "let's do that again". We've taken trips a lot in Bonanzas, Cirrus, Barons, but I'm realistic that children add complexity and stress to the equation, and what my wife will "tolerate" vs "enjoy" are two different animals. Stepping into an Aerostar seems fun, I'm sure everyone would like the pressurization, but is it still going to be loud and fatiguing? If I finish a meeting in Clearwater and it's 5:00pm, what airplane would I feel comfortable sticking my family in and heading back to Kansas City? Is there one? I'm sure this answer varies by the person, but I welcome everyone's input. For those who have gone from one plane to another to another, was there one upgrade that you really felt was substantial enough of a difference where you just said "bingo!"

I really need to probably fly with someone in a citation, MU2, etc and just get a feel. I flew right seat in a Mustang and loved it, the thought of my family in the back without having to wear headsets. I've owned a ton of airplanes but when you're dealing with sub 300k airplanes it's easy to buy and sell without much thought. If I justify going up I'd like to be less cavalier about it... that's where your opinions and expertise come in... thanks all.

Now that you have decided on pressurization and turbine, the BT team will want to know your acquisition budget. Once we have that, we will be more than happy to help you spend your money .

Clearwater to KC at 5 pm is easy depending on the wx and how your business day went.

Brad

For what it's worth I go all over the place with my kids in my Tbone.
They are currently 2 and 3, but have been flying with me since birth.
We go from TN the coast several times per year, back and forth from Nashville to Charlotte and Charleston semi regularly and then once or twice a year go on long 12-1500nm trips out west.
It's 100% doable and not a big deal.
Being bigger and having an isle in the seating makes it MUCH easier than a Baron as my wife can always just unbuckle and walk back there and deal with the boys as needed.

That's not a difficult standard to meet. The airliner (plane) is reliable. The airline (company) is not.

As much as I love the TBone, there is NFW I would buy one if I wanted to use it for transportation on a schedule.

I've owned an Aerostar and then a 414 for the past 12 years. At Thanksgiving, the 414 was in the shop for the annual inspection (thanks to my poor planning) so we ended up taking the Travel Air from Michigan to Florida. What a nightmare. We were delayed a day due to turbulence and ice. We finally got out of the region, in the hour wide window at 5:30am. Once we arrived in Florida, I spent the whole time on vacation wondering if I was going to have to explain to my wife that we may, or may not get back on time for her and I to go to work. We made it back on time, but with 1/2" of ice on the airplane when we landed when the forecast didn't pan out.

If I had the 414, it would have been a no-brainer and we would have left and returned on time. The 414 has now been sold and my offer has been accepted on a 421C. Knowing what I know now, I would have kept the Aerostar as it would have fit my mission nicely. It will make trip nicely in March.

As much as I love the TBone, there is NFW I would buy one if I wanted to use it for transportation on a schedule.

I've owned an Aerostar and then a 414 for the past 12 years. At Thanksgiving, the 414 was in the shop for the annual inspection (thanks to my poor planning) so we ended up taking the Travel Air from Michigan to Florida. What a nightmare. We were delayed a day due to turbulence and ice. We finally got out of the region, in the hour wide window at 5:30am. Once we arrived in Florida, I spent the whole time on vacation wondering if I was going to have to explain to my wife that we may, or may not get back on time for her and I to go to work. We made it back on time, but with 1/2" of ice on the airplane when we landed when the forecast didn't pan out.

If I had the 414, it would have been a no-brainer and we would have left and returned on time. The 414 has now been sold and my offer has been accepted on a 421C. Knowing what I know now, I would have kept the Aerostar as it would have fit my mission nicely. It will make trip nicely in March.

My catalyst for “moving up” was simple. The PA32 was all I ever wanted. Lost the engine and crashed. Now fly an Aztec. Most people have more subtle catalysts I suppose.

I love that your kids were flying with you since birth. Taking my 1 year old to Oshkosh was such fun, and now every time we hear an airplane she has to drop what she's doing and find the airplane in the sky.

And yes, I can absolutely see where having a large fuselage, especially with AC, would really make family trips more comfortable for all onboard.

Care to expand? AEST, then 414, then 421?

I think that makes a lot of sense. If the costs (time and expense) involved with flying a turbine don't impact your willingness to fly it on trips and you're able to qualify for insurance a fast turboprop or "small" jet will probably provide the most enjoyment. Just make sure you understand what those costs will be so you don't end up with an airplane you're not willing to fly as often as you would like because of the costs.

As a baron owner, I've looked several times and I can't convince myself that a Turbine will end up a lot more expensive. I want a turbine but it just doesn't work for me financially .