Rob wrote:Some more food for thought... If you can actually afford to own a beaver that is not a 25K hr rat trap, you can afford to own, run and maintain a turbine 206/7. And it will do everything you want to do, faster, and with a few bonus perks that won't come on any beaver short of a turbine. (the turbine you already know is unaffordable).

I love a nice beaver as much as the next Motörhead, but in my older age, I find it harder to ignore logical.

Take care, Rob

Thanks Rob, good advice. My heart is telling me Beaver but my logical side is saying 206. It would be good to hear from some folks who have flown both and can give some info on them.

175 magnum wrote:Bearhawk5 or Bull Moose with the LS3 power. Run circles around one of those cool old Beavers.

I'll take a look at those, thank you

Just an idea.

Why not two planes?

A 180/182 would do the 90% part and a partnership in a Beaver/Helio Courier/185/206/207/Kodiak/etc would cover the 10%. Granted, finding partners for something like that in Texas might be challenging.

You could consider charter flights for the 10%, and fly something more practical for 90%. I've got a 205, and it's perfect for a family of 4. It has 182 like operating costs, can carry a legitimate 6 people, and can haul a load.

Swindler wrote:Just an idea.

Why not two planes?

A 180/182 would do the 90% part and a partnership in a Beaver/Helio Courier/185/206/207/Kodiak/etc would cover the 10%. Granted, finding partners for something like that in Texas might be challenging.

Not a bad idea, but I'm more inclined to owning 100% . It would be hard for me to trust someone else to take care of the ol' bird the way I would want.

jcadwell wrote:You could consider charter flights for the 10%, and fly something more practical for 90%. I've got a 205, and it's perfect for a family of 4. It has 182 like operating costs, can carry a legitimate 6 people, and can haul a load.

Probably the best advice here so far.

Dude, get the beaver. If you can swing it and have even the faintest justification, I think your choice is clear.

Oregon180 wrote:Dude, get the beaver. If you can swing it and have even the faintest justification, I think your choice is clear.

Hard to argue with that

jcadwell wrote:You could consider charter flights for the 10%, and fly something more practical for 90%. I've got a 205, and it's perfect for a family of 4. It has 182 like operating costs, can carry a legitimate 6 people, and can haul a load.

Nice advice, makes sense

TxKiger wrote:Thanks Rob, good advice. My heart is telling me Beaver but my logical side is saying 206. It would be good to hear from some folks who have flown both and can give some info on them.

Call Middle Fork Aviation in Challis, ID and ask for Pete. He’s a cool dude and would be a good source for info. He’s got a ton of experience in a bunch of different planes. He’s got the 206s, which he usually upgrades to IO550s I think, and the Beaver. Used to own a PA18 and who knows what else. He’s a typical career pilot/aviation junkie. Call him.

I had a hard look at the Beaver on my last airplane purchase and in the end bought a 185. There were a few reasons for this. Cruise speed, fuel capacity, range, for what I do I think the Beaver is short on all 3. For me to jump in my Wagon and fly 500+ miles for a fishing or hunting trip is pretty routine. I do it several times a year, BC is a big place after all. It would be a lot slower and involve a fuel stop each way in a Beaver. The next thing is maintenance costs. The ADs are really stacking up on the old Beaver, in Canadian dollars we've come to the point where it's pretty rare to annual a Beaver for less than $10,000, is what I found talking to a few operators and shops. It's very easy for the annual to go considerably higher than that though. This may not matter to you though, some guys don't care because, hey, it's a Beaver.

Because of how well aircraft preserve their value, if I was going to upsize beyond the 185, I'd look first at the 206, I'd probably skip the Beaver and I'd look for the best deal I could find on a used Kodiak.

The Beaver and the Cessna 206 are orders of magnitude different airplanes.

At one pint in my career, I operated an amphib Beaver for work. This was on Kodiak Island, with a few excursions to the AK Peninsula. That airplane was a workhorse.
And, this was before all the GW mods came out for the Beaver.

So, our aircraft management (idiots) decided they wanted to be rid of all the “old, high maintenance” equipment. Mind you, that Beaver almost never needed much in the way of maintenance……but “old” airplanes……so gauche!

My boss was totally on board with them….he was also an idiot, BTW.

So, one day I flew that beautiful old Beaver to Anchorage, said goodbye and flew a brand new amphib 206 back home.

I had cautioned my boss that a 206 would require two trips to do the same work the Beaver dis with one. I was wrong…..it was more like three trips to do the same loads.

And, that 206 was NOT built to operate in salt water. Nuff said on that.

Finally, for the OP: What exactly do you mean by “off airport” Ops in your first post? Are you actually saying you want to land either of these big planes off airport in lower 48? Or is Johnson Creek “off airport” in your perspective? I’m not being smart ass here, just trying to better understand your ACTUAL mission.

The loads you described are BIG loads, and you MAY be able to find a 206 that’ll carry that, but you’re going to have to leave a lot of fuel at home, thus lots of stops, and no fuel to play once you’re in the back country.

IF you’re actually thinking of “backcountry airstrips” when you posted “off airport”, I’d seriously consider an early short Caravan, with the engine upgrade. Or maybe a Grand Caravan if you can find the right deal.

Buy one of those in good shape, and you’ll have a load hauling, ass kicking machine that can carry the loads you describe AND get there fast. AND, your pax will thank you….if you’ve ever had to sit in third row of a 206…..it sucks, big time.

Always fun to spend other people’s money.

MTV

How about a Max Holste Broussard ? Same R985 as a Beaver and hauls quite a load.

Well under half the cost of a Beaver because it doesn't have a standard air worthiness certificate (so you can't use them to make money).

Also means you can turn your own wrenches, not need permission from the king to install mods and the annual condition inspections can be done by an A&P.

Get one of these:
https://www.northwestbackcountryaircraf ... mid=624961

And give us a review.

Brad

Oregon180 wrote:Dude, get the beaver. If you can swing it and have even the faintest justification, I think your choice is clear.

This. Stop being so logical and trying to justify one of life's greatest pleasures: owning your dream airplane.

Durango Skywagon wrote:Get one of these:
https://www.northwestbackcountryaircraf ... mid=624961

And give us a review.

Brad

Absolute POS, and company is out of business. Look for parts support? Good luck.
OH, yeah, and less useful load than a good U-206G

MTV

mtv wrote:

Durango Skywagon wrote:Get one of these:
https://www.northwestbackcountryaircraf ... mid=624961

And give us a review.

Brad

Absolute POS, and company is out of business. Look for parts support? Good luck.
OH, yeah, and less useful load than a good U-206G

MTV

FWIW, pacific aerospace took the production over and is building them new again. So there is some support.

Get a DH2 you know that's what you really want anyway, hell it's what we ALL want

mtv wrote:The Beaver and the Cessna 206 are orders of magnitude different airplanes.

At one pint in my career, I operated an amphib Beaver for work. This was on Kodiak Island, with a few excursions to the AK Peninsula. That airplane was a workhorse.
And, this was before all the GW mods came out for the Beaver.

So, our aircraft management (idiots) decided they wanted to be rid of all the “old, high maintenance” equipment. Mind you, that Beaver almost never needed much in the way of maintenance……but “old” airplanes……so gauche!

My boss was totally on board with them….he was also an idiot, BTW.

So, one day I flew that beautiful old Beaver to Anchorage, said goodbye and flew a brand new amphib 206 back home.

I had cautioned my boss that a 206 would require two trips to do the same work the Beaver dis with one. I was wrong…..it was more like three trips to do the same loads.

And, that 206 was NOT built to operate in salt water. Nuff said on that.

Finally, for the OP: What exactly do you mean by “off airport” Ops in your first post? Are you actually saying you want to land either of these big planes off airport in lower 48? Or is Johnson Creek “off airport” in your perspective? I’m not being smart ass here, just trying to better understand your ACTUAL mission.

The loads you described are BIG loads, and you MAY be able to find a 206 that’ll carry that, but you’re going to have to leave a lot of fuel at home, thus lots of stops, and no fuel to play once you’re in the back country.

IF you’re actually thinking of “backcountry airstrips” when you posted “off airport”, I’d seriously consider an early short Caravan, with the engine upgrade. Or maybe a Grand Caravan if you can find the right deal.

Buy one of those in good shape, and you’ll have a load hauling, ass kicking machine that can carry the loads you describe AND get there fast. AND, your pax will thank you….if you’ve ever had to sit in third row of a 206…..it sucks, big time.

Always fun to spend other people’s money.

MTV

Thanks MTV, I always enjoy reading your thoughts throughout the forum! When I say off airport I'm referring to gravel bars, non maintained areas, etc. Don't get me wrong, Johnson Creek and other backcountry strips are awesome and fun to visit as well. I appreciate your insight

Zzz wrote:

Oregon180 wrote:Dude, get the beaver. If you can swing it and have even the faintest justification, I think your choice is clear.

This. Stop being so logical and trying to justify one of life's greatest pleasures: owning your dream airplane.