BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 11:22

Username Protected wrote:

Disappointing there are not more options on the low end. A factory certified BE36 with a decent pressurization system and a turbine engine would be an awesome thing to buy new from Beech.

I heard Piper is working on a new design called a Meridian.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 11:24

Username Protected wrote:

Disappointing there are not more options on the low end. A factory certified BE36 with a decent pressurization system and a turbine engine would be an awesome thing to buy new from Beech.

Cirrus came out with it. It's called SF50.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 11:32

Username Protected wrote:

Disappointing there are not more options on the low end. A factory certified BE36 with a decent pressurization system and a turbine engine would be an awesome thing to buy new from Beech.

I heard Piper is working on a new design called a Meridian.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 11:33

Username Protected wrote:

Better as a turboprop... no type rating/cirrus school, more fuel efficient, longer legs, less onerous regs, no engine program/Williams tax. that's a stupid jet

Yeah but it's a jet. Nobody really wants to own a "clown plane".

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 11:55

Here are my costs for the past 2 years for the MU2.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 12:06

Username Protected wrote:

The right answer, though maybe a bit above the budget:

1981 Beech Duke Turboprop. Fast, low time, great engines, perfect for 4 people, compact, good for short fields. If I had the money, that's how I'd spend it. Wonder if they'll finance.....

https://www.controller.com/listings/air ... -turboprop

It's funny how everyone balks at acquisition cost but pays no mind to depreciation or if they'll ever be able to get rid of the airplane they're buying.

You will never, ever, ever sell a 40 year old, $825K Beech Duke frankeplane. Of course it's awesome.... It's also a boat anchor.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 12:07

Username Protected wrote:

Here are my costs for the past 2 years for the MU2.

Thanks for posting this. What are the hourly engine and prop reserves based on?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 12:08

Username Protected wrote:

Here are my costs for the past 2 years for the MU2.

Thanks for posting this. What are the hourly engine and prop reserves based on?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 12:49

Username Protected wrote:

Disappointing there are not more options on the low end. A factory certified BE36 with a decent pressurization system and a turbine engine would be an awesome thing to buy new from Beech.

I heard Piper is working on a new design called a Meridian.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 12:54

Meridian sure... but what is it, 18 years no competition? And meanwhile Beech selling 8 or 9 planes a year...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 13:09

Username Protected wrote:

Meridian sure... but what is it, 18 years no competition? And meanwhile Beech selling 8 or 9 planes a year...

Beech should be selling more aircraft, but they don't, didn't seem to be interested in significantly upgrading the fleet, and it is probably too late now, the market has spoken on single pistons. I guess they were more interested in their upper end turbines. They could have had factory FIKI, Envelope protection, mods for increased range and payload, lightened the airframe, Amsafe seatbelts, a more reliable Lycoming option (OK :duck:

). I loved the 36, and definitely would have bought one over the TN22, as it met my mission better, except for the FIKI. I needed FIKI and desired a factory certified plane with that built in, so went with the Cirrus. Love the way the 36 flies though.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 13:44

Username Protected wrote:

Meridian sure... but what is it, 18 years no competition? And meanwhile Beech selling 8 or 9 planes a year...

Beech should be selling more aircraft, but they don't, didn't seem to be interested in significantly upgrading the fleet, and it is probably too late now, the market has spoken on single pistons. I guess they were more interested in their upper end turbines. They could have had factory FIKI, Envelope protection, mods for increased range and payload, lightened the airframe, Amsafe seatbelts, a more reliable Lycoming option (OK :duck:

). I loved the 36, and definitely would have bought one over the TN22, as it met my mission better, except for the FIKI. I needed FIKI and desired a factory certified plane with that built in, so went with the Cirrus. Love the way the 36 flies though.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 13:45

I've been watching this thread with interest, because I believe eventually I will be in the SETP market. I'm not looking at what I consider to be the bush planes: Cessna 208, Kodiak, and the like. Those are too slow for the distances I want to cover. I know the OP is not specific about twins versus singles, and I won't go into all my reasoning. But a SETP seems to be my upper limit of what I could eventually afford.

There are several SETP options available: TBM, Pilatus, even a new Piper, but they're all north of $2m.

Then there are the next gen designs that have yet to hit the market - Cessna Denali ($4.5m), Epic E1000 ($3.25m), Kestrel 350 ($3.2m), etc.

Marvelous... SETP drivetrains at light jet prices.

Then there's the used P-46, with either the Piper TP or the JetProp conversion. Proven airframe. Solid performance. Good support network of parts and shops that know how to work on them.

Best payload? No. Fastest? No. Best TBO? No. Economical (for its class)? Absolutely.

Honestly, I don't see a lot of other TP options out there when you eliminate the twins.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 13:54

Username Protected wrote:

I'm extremely late to this party, but because I had one I feel compelled to respond. The Royal Duke is good product. I wouldn't have sold mine if someone wasn't really motivated to purchase it from me. The one still listed on Controller has been on the market for years. The reason it's still for sale..........search the N # in the NTSB database. Makes for some interesting reading. You will understand why it's still for sale. That particular aircraft should have been parted after the pilot walked away with his soiled underwear in hand. That particular airplane will probably never sell until it's in an estate sale.

I sold mine for over 7 figures. Guy loves it.

Did you miss the part of my post where I said the Royal Duke was awesome?

When did you sell your Royal Duke? If you like it so much, why did you sell it? How many Royal Dukes have been built in the last few years? Is the manufacturer of the Royal Duke covered up with orders?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Nov 2017, 13:58

Twin pistons and TP's are losing ground to SETP's because twin TP's really don't offer much over the singles. They mainly carry more when both engines are working, and offer some false sense of security for passengers. Twin engine safety has not panned out for pistons or TP's, and never will. Pilots prove over and over that asymmetric thrust in a real emergency kills aircraft. Engine related LOC fatals with twin engine cross country TP's will always exceed engine loss fatals with SETP's. There are enough data out there to be convincing. 7 million hours in the PC12 and P46T fleet alone. Maybe one engine related TBM fatal that should not have happened. There are lots of reason for that. In a twin with the increased complexity, you are more than twice as likely to lose an engine. The airframe is less survivable in a crash (higher stall speed, no engine up front to take the impact, stronger airframe in the single since the fuselage in front of the pax has to support the engine weight and torque etc.). If you want a twin to carry more, maybe go a little faster, that is a good reason. If it is for safety, you are simply being dishonest with yourself and your passengers :duck:

Lowest cost reliable Turboprop?