Dunno...Paul can speak for himself.

But I do understand how warm water or a desert may look different than the Rockies in a single.

There is one thing about airplanes like the Conquest II and Commander that costs more and that's a hangar, at least where I live. I had a piston commander (50' wing) before and the only hangar that would work was a 60x60 executive which was costing me $1500/month. The Conquest II is 49' + change so same as a commander pretty much. The Conquest is 44' so it fits in a large T hangar (barely) and I save $1K per month. That was actually the tipping point that got me to take the turbine leap. Saving $12K per year on the hangar pays for a good size chunk of the additional expenses related to owning the turbine compared to the commander. An MU2 is also very hangar friendly and I was seriously considering one but in the end I went with the Conquest.

Scott, your landlord does not allow MU2’s in his hangar complex.

Depends on your glide, most piston twins ain't perfect at altitude on one engine...........and that's assuming that the remaining engine is perfect too.

Jerry - I guess that is another form of the "Garrett Salute"!!

Breezy lands in < 200 ft.
Pretty easy to put it down almost anywhere and not injure someone on the ground.
As far as 182 and the desert, can't imagine a better landscape to land on after an engine failure....I'm much more concerned about an engine failure while flying over civilization than over water or desert....

The process of flying a single ANYWHERE is a continuous "where am I landing if the engine quits"...mental exercise. I've always got a spot, and I'm always looking for the next spot....

This is much harder to do IMC or at night.
I've done the San Diego to the bay and back trip many times in a single...
It usually adds an extra day to the trip as I don't cross the LA mountains at night and I don't skirt the Class Bravo to the west in a single.... I routinely do both those things in a twin...

Thanks for the info. I was thinking more of the schedule being more complicated, rather than the actual work, though even that perception looks less-than-fully-correct.

So what about the programs that allow inspection intervals to be extended? I've seen references to MORE for the PT6 family; are there other such programs? Is there anything comparable for the Garrett engines? What do they do for real-world operating costs?


Honestly, the odds of me ever buying a turbine are pretty slim, but I can dream, can't I?

MORE - an STC'd program that allows pt 135 operators to go past 3600 TBO on P&W PT6 engines. Not really needed for part 91

As for the Garrett Engines, over time and field experience, the intervals have been extended.

I think they were 1800/3600 very early on, then 1800/5400, then 2500/5000 and recently 3500/7000 for certain engines. "Certain" has a lot of contours to it, but even 2500/5000 approaches infinity for most private operators.

Opex is basically fuel. HSI costs are highly variable with how the engine was operated, where it was operated (corrosion), luck, and the cycle time of the engine. An HSI on an 1800 SNEW engine will typically be very cheap. You could have an HSI on a 10,000TT engine that might require replacing a lot of parts that will cycle out before the next HSI. But as a general rule for garretts, the HSI costs seem to be in the not too fancy new car range. Overhaul costs I can't remember as much, but the other big option available in turbines is used engines. Compared to pistons, they're much more readibly and reliably available. So if your engine has some six figure problem and you don't wanna pay that, you can buy an engine with 1000 hours left for fancy new car money and not small new house money.

Propulsion International is the program that is more like the MORE program for Garrett's. There you can get on the 7000hr program.

Hey, the turbine Duke listing is gone. Does anyone know if it sold?

Jim

I LOVE your accounting method!

Dunno...Paul can speak for himself.

But I do understand how warm water or a desert may look different than the Rockies in a single.

I LOVE your accounting method!

You can get a 7000 hr tbo on some Garretts but it is not tied to PI. Some parts have to be changed out including the burner can. PI is actually nothing like the MORE program. To my knowledge there is no MORE type programm for Garretts, but they have been adjusting tbo's as field data has shown that they safely can. My engines were first overhauled at the original 3600 hr mark, afterwhich they were put on a 1800/3600/5400 hr schedule. Currently getting the 3600 HSI/gearbox done and am told all looks good.

Listing probably expired.