BeechTalk - BT - Considering a Turbo Commander for my next plane

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Mar 2017, 00:45

Username Protected wrote:

My assessment is the -10 Commanders also top out around 300 knots, similar to the long body MU2s. It would be neck and neck.

Meanwhile, the short body MU2 pulls away from both of them.

The Conquest II with -10 is about short body MU2 speeds, thus faster than Commanders and long body MU2s.

If you want the most cabin for the speed, the Conquest II is the top of the heap in the TPE331-10 class.

It gets this by being lightly built, lightweight, and having an extremely clean design. The engine installation on the 441 is a thing of beauty compared to the others.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Mar 2017, 02:10

Username Protected wrote:

You probably know more mechanics than me... but I can promise you most mechanics do not want to work on Mits. That's why everyone takes them to a handful of shops.

IMO, You're mistaken. Mechanics don't want to work on the Mits because they don't know the Mits. Pull up to a Beechcraft mechanic with a Malibu, and he'll tell you the same thing .. don't want to work on it, no manuals, etc.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Mar 2017, 06:21

Username Protected wrote:

You do have a point there in the sense that I deal with mainstream maintenance facilities and service centers, so yes most are King Air and Citation knowledgeable... but then again most turbine airplanes are either King Airs or Citations.

For a King Air shop the Mits or anything else is a pain, no manuals etc. but I'm talking about literally "I don't like turning wrenches on it" this is a specific issue that every MU2 owner is aware of, you all either have a local mechanic who works on it... or you take it to one of the few shops... probably Tulsa.

Simple question, are there more maintenance facilities that work on (not specialize in) MU2's or Commanders?

And in defense of my original statement I have been told by several mechanics that they did not like working on MU2s and many more who won't work on them at all.

I get attacked when I say things like this but I would bet that I have more mechanics in my phone than the average Joe. Most owners or pilots know a few mechanics in the area they live in. I deal with airplanes and maintenance facilities all over the US on a daily basis and all over the world on a regular basis.

It's time to embrace the strengths and weaknesses of your airplane.

In my opinion the Gulfstream Commander 980 is twice the airplane the Marquise is... proof? Sure. It sells for twice as much.

Is the Mits a better value? Yes.

Chip, it's time we embrace the strengths and weaknesses of your posts.

Your mention of type ratings only shows your ignorance of piloting.

You are not a pilot at all (unless maybe a student pilot).

Your opinion from a salesman's perspective is not without value but it should be prefaced as such so people know.

Which language to you speak besides english if you are dealing with mechanics worldwide on a regular basis?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Mar 2017, 07:36

Username Protected wrote:

As Patrick (an owner) said above, Commanders have a poor use of space problem. I would advise anyone looking to buy to sit up front for 4-5 hours and see if you can stomach it. I can't. The pax seats are smallish too unless you have one with the couch in the rear but most of us sit up front.

Commanders are performers though and have decent margins.

I've been comfortable up front. I don't find the cabin from a pilot perspective to be bad. That said, my range of experience is limited. I have sat for one flight up front in a KA C90, and I didn't find it to be meaningfully qualitatively different to my aircraft (although it was an old one, so I now think it was quite slow). Up front, I find any plane I've ever flown as pilot to start being a bit uncomfortable around the 4 hour mark...

With 4 pax in the back, 5 if kids are involved (two adults plus a munchkin on the back row), my unstretched (690A) is fine in the cabin. The cabin layout bit which seems less than optimally designed on the stretched Commander, IMO, is that back bit.

I'd ask whether you can find any passengers _happy_ to be in a non-stand up tube for 4+ hours? Relatively less unhappy, maybe, because they are skipping dealing with airports, the TSA and the crowded school bus experience of commercial travel...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Mar 2017, 08:08

Oh Chip! I thought you knew better. :rofl:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Mar 2017, 08:18

Username Protected wrote:

I do drive a Lexus... it's a heck of a lot better than a US built vehicle.

Where was your Lexus built? It may have been built in Japan, Canada, or Kentucky. And it was assembled from parts sourced from all over the world. The MU-2 probably had significantly more US labor content than foreign. Buying domestic isn't as simple as it seems!

The Commander seems like a great plane, I've never flown or ridden in one. But I'm very happy with our choice of a MU-2, and if it could carry 300 lbs more of fuel it would be darn near perfect.

Nathan

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Mar 2017, 08:35

Been a long time since high school, but I'm all of a sudden itching to stuff someone in a locker.

The Mits is an absolute dream to work on. Everything is laid out right in front of you. Anyone who's ever done an honest days wrenching could tell you that.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Mar 2017, 08:58

Username Protected wrote:

Been a long time since high school, but I'm all of a sudden itching to stuff someone in a locker.

The Mits is an absolute dream to work on. Everything is laid out right in front of you. Anyone who's ever done an honest days wrenching could tell you that.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Mar 2017, 09:02

My mechanical expertise is limited to Ikea assembly, with only a few "ëxtra" pieces at the end... so take this for whatever you find it to be worth:
While I was having my Baron in for some avionics upgrades, they were also working on a MU-2 panel upgrade. The same very experienced (old) mechanic was doing my plane. He told me he hated working on the MU-2, that everything was too tightly packed in and cramped. I don't know if that sort of complaint would be limited to mechanics working on non-anticipated work - Mits would not have anticipated avionics upgrades as part of their regular maintenance in constructing the aircraft, I suppose.
:duck:

Going to go back to allen wrench and attempting to build my Hemnes bookshelves.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Mar 2017, 09:02

Chip,

Did you mix up the calendar? Is it really April 1st? Slow day and you decided to poke the hornets nest? :lol:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Mar 2017, 09:29

Username Protected wrote:

Oh Chip! I thought you knew better. :rofl:

I do, but a good spirited debate keeps one sharp. I do apologize to all of the MU2 guys for my propensity to state opinions as fact.

I don't have a Ford or a Chevy... so that debate isn't an option! TC's and MU2's are classic Ford and Chevy.

The fact is I like anything with Garrett engines on it, but if I came here and spouted off about Commanders my words would be met with silence.

It's interesting... I guess a bit novel to me because of my environment... one were there are no fans of the Mits... I've literally only met one person prior to joining Beechtalk that was a fan.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Mar 2017, 09:32

Username Protected wrote:

Been a long time since high school, but I'm all of a sudden itching to stuff someone in a locker.

The Mits is an absolute dream to work on. Everything is laid out right in front of you. Anyone who's ever done an honest days wrenching could tell you that.

Please don't stuff me in a locker, I fit when I was in high school... it would be painful now.

I do appreciate your point of view, I have owned several old Mercedes 300D's and love to work on them... most mechanics won't touch them.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 07 Mar 2017, 09:35

Username Protected wrote:

My mechanical expertise is limited to Ikea assembly, with only a few "ëxtra" pieces at the end... so take this for whatever you find it to be worth:
While I was having my Baron in for some avionics upgrades, they were also working on a MU-2 panel upgrade. The same very experienced (old) mechanic was doing my plane. He told me he hated working on the MU-2, that everything was too tightly packed in and cramped. I don't know if that sort of complaint would be limited to mechanics working on non-anticipated work - Mits would not have anticipated avionics upgrades as part of their regular maintenance in constructing the aircraft, I suppose.
:duck:

Going to go back to allen wrench and attempting to build my Hemnes bookshelves.

Same type of conversations here, I do believe it is a widely held feeling among mechanics... I'm not a mechanic either so I can't say if it's justified.