05 Dec 2025, 07:43 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
| Username Protected |
Message |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna Conquest II project Posted: 12 Feb 2017, 18:33 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 01/31/09 Posts: 5193 Post Likes: +3038 Location: Northern NJ
Aircraft: SR22;CJ2+;C510
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The Conquest II is a great plane, but I only need to be able to fly 1400 nm (New York-Puerto Rico) nonstop with reserves, and want to have that capability on most days even with a slight headwind. I'll fly that route 25-30 times per year. Stopping for fuel requires a large deviation to Florida, which adds 400 nm to the trip and makes it a 7.5 hour instead of 5.0 hour trip.
Nathan
Do you need HF radio for a direct flight on L455?
_________________ Allen
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna Conquest II project Posted: 12 Feb 2017, 18:48 |
|
 |

|


|
 |
Joined: 02/09/09 Posts: 6541 Post Likes: +3243 Company: RNP Aviation Services Location: Owosso, MI (KRNP)
Aircraft: 1969 Bonanza V35A
|
|
|
I just spent the last six months looking for a 441 for a customer. There are only a few on the market that are "good" airplanes. I've talked to every one listed on controller that had less than 10k hours on them, physically looked four of them.
The good airplanes ae selling very quick. By good, I mean little damage history, owner can find the logs, descent maintenance, SIDS done, and ethical broker and/or seller. The highest priced 441 listed on Controller is a beautiful looking airplane, very well equipped, , but recently had a severely hard landing and is missing logs except for the last 15 years, despite the add. The broker says the pilot has them, the FBO that bought and imported the airplane said the logs do not exist.
One owner raised his price $100k three to four months after listing it. It's still listed on Controller. Our selection is going to prebuy this week. We fired the broker mid-sale due to some ethical issues. It was unlisted. We made offers on three before we found this one. Our last offer was for a decent airframe, but they would not accept our price. Fortunately, we think we found a much better aircraft at a similar price.
Two good 441's were sold before we could put an offer on them.
Hands down, the best 441 on the market is the purple trimmed one that Jerry Griffith just listed. I looked at it prior to listing. It's s true cream puff, and is the OCD owners baby. The logs are a work of art. I don't know what he's asking for it now, but it's as close to a new 441 as you can buy.
I don't know anything about Jerry Griffith, but he seems to have a good following in that market. He was very good to work with on the aircraft that we wanted that he accepted an offer on the day before we were going to submit ours.
Jason
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna Conquest II project Posted: 12 Feb 2017, 19:10 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/24/11 Posts: 76 Post Likes: +33
Aircraft: Mitsubishi Solitaire
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Do you need HF radio for a direct flight on L455? You'll hear a lot of answers to that question, and many people will say you just need a sat phone, regulations aside. I went directly to the FAA and asked someone in authority at New York Oceanic to find out. According to them, the regulations require that you have TWO HF radios to fly that route. They will, on a case by case basis, approve a sat phone as a replacement for the second HF radio but you must formally request it and receive written approval. I haven't done the flight yet, but I'm installing a Bendix KHF 950 and a GSR 56 to meet those requirements. Nathan
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna Conquest II project Posted: 12 Feb 2017, 19:10 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/15/10 Posts: 595 Post Likes: +301 Location: Burlington VT KBTV
Aircraft: C441 N441WD
|
|
Username Protected wrote: So isn't 1650NM at FL280 longer than any RVSM Solitaire at FL310...? Hence no RVSM needed.... Not for my 1650 nm mission. An RVSM MU2 would need a fuel stop. A non RVSM 441 would likely need a fuel stop at least west bound. An RVSM 441 would likely not need a fuel stop either direction. RVSM changes the game. It also gives you more altitudes to avoid weather and icing. Mike C. Spot on Mike! I utilize RVSM primarily for weather and turbulence avoidance. Also, we've needed FL300 or higher on AR3 (Wilmington NC-Bahamas direct) when the MOA's are hot, so It's not just range. Getting another 7000' to play with is huge
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna Conquest II project Posted: 12 Feb 2017, 20:56 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 20797 Post Likes: +26310 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Hands down, the best 441 on the market is the purple trimmed one that Jerry Griffith just listed. http://www.controller.com/listings/airc ... onquest-iiI never understand why listings don't have an asking price. Seems like it wastes time all around. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna Conquest II project Posted: 12 Feb 2017, 21:18 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 02/18/12 Posts: 1000 Post Likes: +432 Location: Atlanta
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Hands down, the best 441 on the market is the purple trimmed one that Jerry Griffith just listed. http://www.controller.com/listings/airc ... onquest-iiI never understand why listings don't have an asking price. Seems like it wastes time all around. Mike C.
Downright annoying.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna Conquest II project Posted: 12 Feb 2017, 21:24 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/26/08 Posts: 3413 Post Likes: +1055 Location: --------- Charlotte, NC (KEQY) Alva, OK (KAVK)
Aircraft: 70 A36TN, Build RV8
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Hands down, the best 441 on the market is the purple trimmed one that Jerry Griffith just listed. http://www.controller.com/listings/airc ... onquest-iiI never understand why listings don't have an asking price. Seems like it wastes time all around. Mike C. Plenty of ranting threads on this.
_________________ I had my patience tested. I'm negative.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna Conquest II project Posted: 12 Feb 2017, 21:30 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 06/09/09 Posts: 4438 Post Likes: +3306
Aircraft: C182P, Merlin IIIC
|
|
|
I'll add that C441's have come down a lot in the last five years. When I was shopping they were double what nice Merlin's were selling for.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna Conquest II project Posted: 12 Feb 2017, 22:16 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/19/11 Posts: 3308 Post Likes: +1434 Company: Bottom Line Experts Location: KTOL - Toledo, OH
Aircraft: 2004 SR22 G2
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I'll add that C441's have come down a lot in the last five years. When I was shopping they were double what nice Merlin's were selling for. It will be interesting to see if this trend continues. National Flight, who is located on my home field, tells me that the parts game is getting to be quite a challenge. There was a part they were trying to find for a II that was in their shop not long ago. Cessna told them it would be 12+ months before they could get them the part. Their suggestion was to tell them to wait for a salvage a/c to come available to get the part. I don't recall what the part was but it's clear that Cessna doesn't want these birds around anymore...
_________________ Don Coburn Corporate Expense Reduction Specialist 2004 SR22 G2
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna Conquest II project Posted: 12 Feb 2017, 22:24 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 20797 Post Likes: +26310 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: it's clear that Cessna doesn't want these birds around anymore... Yup. They make entry level jets look bad, and Cessna feels every Conquest owner is a lost jet sale. I expect the legacy Citations will be next on Cessna's hit list. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna Conquest II project Posted: 12 Feb 2017, 22:28 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 01/14/12 Posts: 2001 Post Likes: +1494 Location: Hampton, VA
Aircraft: AEST
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Do you need HF radio for a direct flight on L455? You'll hear a lot of answers to that question, and many people will say you just need a sat phone, regulations aside. I went directly to the FAA and asked someone in authority at New York Oceanic to find out. According to them, the regulations require that you have TWO HF radios to fly that route. They will, on a case by case basis, approve a sat phone as a replacement for the second HF radio but you must formally request it and receive written approval. I haven't done the flight yet, but I'm installing a Bendix KHF 950 and a GSR 56 to meet those requirements. Nathan
Did they understand that you would be operating under Part 91?
My understanding was that one working HF is enough.
And that on operations that required two HF radios, a satellite based comm could substitute for one (inop) radio.
_________________ Forrest
'---x-O-x---'
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna Conquest II project Posted: 12 Feb 2017, 22:57 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 11/24/11 Posts: 76 Post Likes: +33
Aircraft: Mitsubishi Solitaire
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Did they understand that you would be operating under Part 91? Yes. Quote: My understanding was that one working HF is enough.
And that on operations that required two HF radios, a satellite based comm could substitute for one (inop) radio. He was very clear: (1) Two HF radios are required; (2) You can obtain a waiver for substituting a sat phone for one of the HF radios, but you must apply and receive it explicitly. I know many people are only flying with one HF radio, but the regulations (and New York Oceanic) are very clear about the requirement. Nathan
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Cessna Conquest II project Posted: 12 Feb 2017, 23:18 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 11/08/12 Posts: 7729 Post Likes: +5114 Location: Live in San Carlos, CA - based Hayward, CA KHWD
Aircraft: Piaggio Avanti
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Do you really think the additional cost for getting a Solitaire RVSM approved is $600k? My suspicion would be that it is several times that...
_________________ -Jon C.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|