Best affordable STOL light piston twin?

[cluttonfred]

Thanks for the suggestion. If there were a four- or six-seat verson, the Islander would be great, but it's a bit much for this mission.

Pilatus Britten Norman BN2 Islander - good vis, plenty of cubic space inside and awesome short strip performance. very rugged and easy to maintain machine. Not the prettiest machine around, but we've got plenty of them working hard off short, high strips here in New Zealand.... May be a bit noisy if operating over towns however...

[Jim Hann]

Partenavia Victor or Observer, now manufactured by Vulcanair.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partenavia_P.68
http://www.vulcanair.com/

[cluttonfred]

Yes, the Partenavia would be perfect, though cost is an issue. I have reached out to Vulcanair on the possibility of refurbishing and equipping a used one.

While far from an ideal solution, I keep coming back to a refurbished old Piper twin with STOL mods as by far the most economical option.

Partenavia Victor or Observer, now manufactured by Vulcanair.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partenavia_P.68
http://www.vulcanair.com/

[WLIU]

Single engine night - I would not hesitate to do that in a turboprop such as a Caravan. Turbines are hugely reliable.

I would NEVER do that in any variant of Apache. Two engines does NOT buy more safety.

A cheap airplane that can not get the mission done is a waste of $$.

An Islander is actually a good suggestion. Who cares about carrying around empty seats if you have the performance you need, reliability, and good parts support. I can tell you that the Italian options only work if you do not mind waiting months for parts. At least that is the experience of one of my neighbors.

Best of luck,

Wes
N78PS

[Bob Dingley]

Air Cam would probably do the job.

Aircam.com claims a single engine capability. Bad news is that its experimental. Good news is that you can cobble up a cabin enclosure with heater for those chilly mornings. Bad news is limited load carrying ability for FLIR/NV gear. Good news is that 912's have a good rep.
Local Sheriff has a history of using ultralights for pot patrol.

[Bob Dingley]

Good news is that a zero time airframe means low maintenance. Bad news is that a slow "dash speed" means a small patrol area. Good news is that "exp" means that anybody can maintain it. (some S.O.s use convict labor to maintain patrol cars)

[martymayes]

Maule makes an MXT-180 set up specifically for this role, surveillance gear, etc. I flew one a few times for a Sheriff dept. in La. As far as being comfortable flying a S.E. airplane and/or flying at night, that's just part of the job description. Fits your budget and mission.

Same dept. also used a GT-500 for surveillance. One day I got home and heard if flying overhead. I knew there were strong winds aloft so I was laughing at how slow it was going. Went inside, took a shower, came back out to go to my second job and it was still visible - probably moved forward less than 2 miles. On the wrong day, it would be worthless for trailing someone. They could out run it on a bicycle.

[martymayes]

A Caravan jump pilot told me it's just a big 172 but easier to fly, no mixture or prop control

That's a lot of the reason so many Caravans have been destroyed. I owned a 172 and flew a lot of hrs in a Caravan. There is no comparison.

[WLIU]

I don't see any abnormal number of Caravans in the NTSB reports and my skydiving experiences have not seen a lot of Caravan issues. Not sure where you fly. Fedex ran Caravans for a very long time with great success. The only issues that I am aware of involve icing and that does not sound like a hazard for the original poster's mission.

That said, a Caravan is more like a 206 than a 172.

If I win the lottery I will order up a Caravan on floats like Jimmy Buffet's.

Best of luck,

Wes
N78PS

[martymayes]

I don't see any abnormal number of Caravans in the NTSB reports and my skydiving experiences have not seen a lot of Caravan issues. Not sure where you fly. Fedex ran Caravans for a very long time with great success. The only issues that I am aware of involve icing and that does not sound like a hazard for the original poster's mission.

That said, a Caravan is more like a 206 than a 172.

Interestingly, the very first Caravan fatal accident was a skydiving operator. 17 fatalities.

>12% of the Caravan fleet as been involved in crashes.

>10% of the FedEx Caravan fleet has been involved in crashes. Those are not good numbers for a < 300 ship fleet and usually won't earn anyone a "great success" award. While the planes are flown in challenging conditions, they are also flown by 'professional' flight crew. Had the company not had such a huge stake in the airplane, they would have been shed from inventory a long time ago. There were some pretty intense meetings on that. I've flown ~7000 hrs in Caravans. Purple package carrier livery.

Based on the accident rate, one of the database companies (like ASN) at one time rated the Caravan in the top 5 most dangerous airplanes. That put it right next to another plane I used to fly, the Embraer Bandeirante. Perhaps I need to work in another field.

There's been a number of changes in how Caravans are operated based on lessons we learned a long time ago. I'd fly one in a heartbeat but if someone is planning on operating a Caravan as a go anywhere, anytime airplane, they need proper training. Pretending it's a big 172 will get you killed, or worse.