The end result to me is the airplane rolling over and everybody on board dying.

Chip,

I assume you provide counsel on not just the purchase but also the prospects of a future resale. If the marketplace is replacing the King Air with the Denali, how do you expect that to influence resale values?

Nishant

Total fatal accidents in King Airs since 1990.... 112

Total fatal accidents in Piaggios since 1990 ... 1

Tell me again who wins?

100% not the same because the throttle moving back disables the auto-feather - the auto feather mechanism is in part tied to the position of the throttle handle. Engine failure without the throttle moving activates auto-feather.

Most turboprops are not controllable on one engine without the autofeather.

HUGE DIFFERENCE.

Well I can assure you it's far more than one.

The one Mike sent happened less than 100 yards from my hangar.

King Airs literally and figuratively have BIG ramp presence. A KA350 is a large airplane with a large cabin. It's surprisingly important to the non-flying public, most of whom still assume that all private jets are Gulfstream sized inside with a stand up cabin and a private washroom.

I would love the cabin of a King Air with the performance of a Citation but that requires more money than I currently have.

100% not the same because the throttle moving back disables the auto-feather - the auto feather mechanism is in part tied to the position of the throttle handle. Engine failure without the throttle moving activates auto-feather.

Most turboprops are not controllable on one engine without the autofeather.

HUGE DIFFERENCE.

Earlier Chip mentioned the Citation V is marginally more expensive to operate than the KA350. I am still interested in seeing those numbers and a definition of “marginally.”

In my eyes, the Citation is a simpler airframe and simpler engine. Simple to me is less money to maintain.

This is some strange usage of the word "failure" I wasn't previously aware of.

Every single case was lack of thrust in one engine in such a critical regime of flight that the pilot(s) couldn't handle it. Some of the pilots were highly experienced, too.

Compare what happens in a V when an engine fails:



I doubt the passengers even notice. For the record, that was my first time doing a V1 cut in the actual airplane after several times in the sim. It was easy.

I hope no turboprop owner tries to make a similar video. Far too risky.

Mike C.

Then a simple jet engine should cost much less to overhaul than a complex geared piston.

Higher horsepower is more money to maintain.

Then a simple jet engine should cost much less to overhaul than a complex geared piston.

Higher horsepower is more money to maintain.

We are already seeing extremely strong resale values in the later model King Airs because they just don't build that many.

When you look at the military and training aircraft contracts they have to fulfill it is clear that in the future fewer new King Airs will be delivered for civilian use.

I expect the production numbers for the Denali to be much higher, it is a new design that had producibility as one of it's goals. If I were to guess, I would say Textron can build 1 1/2 - 2 units on the Denali line with the effort required to build just one King Air.

When a new King Air 260 sells for more than $7M and a 360 for more than $8M... there's plenty of room for the Denali to slide nicely below the acquisition cost of either.

I publish my numbers on BT. So far, 2022, 2023, 2024, exactly what I spent. I'll add 2025 when known. It is strictly cash basis, what I spend.

Now you need to find a KA 350 private operator who isn't embarrassed to publish their numbers.

There will always be random variable involved. This year will be a high water mark for my maintenance, phase 1-5, but I only suffer that every 6 years. I don't know what the King Air program looks like, but suspect it is much worse.

KA 350 has almost 6 ft more wing span, has 5 tires, has 6 year gear overhaul, has props, and lastly, has a Beech defined maintenance program. Those drive up costs.

It also has a type rating, so basically the same training overhead as a Citation.


It seems so to me.

This thread came about because I saw four Blackhawk 350s each worth $5M or so and I wondered what the appeal was of that over my plane. My plane is worth maybe $1.5M as it sits, so the extra $3.5M to get a KA 350 has to be for something, right? The extra cost of money for the King Air exceeds my total operating budget.

Yes, they burn less fuel. But they burn more cash.

Mike C.

We are already seeing extremely strong resale values in the later model King Airs because they just don't build that many.

When you look at the military and training aircraft contracts they have to fulfill it is clear that in the future fewer new King Airs will be delivered for civilian use.

I expect the production numbers for the Denali to be much higher, it is a new design that had producibility as one of it's goals. If I were to guess, I would say Textron can build 1 1/2 - 2 units on the Denali line with the effort required to build just one King Air.

When a new King Air 260 sells for more than $7M and a 360 for more than $8M... there's plenty of room for the Denali to slide nicely below the acquisition cost of either.

I believe that is a very reasonable comparable to include, IMO.

In no way shape or form, would I buy a King Air 350 over a Piaggio, all other things being equal.

Mike C.