Your assumption is that HT blades only last one HSI period. The on condition HT blades typically last much longer than that for -5A engines and prior, around 5 HSI periods or so. The -5D engine (Ultra) is different, it has expensive HT blades that do not last very long.


For a -4, -5A engine, 71 blades per engine, $2400 cost per blade, lasting 5 HSI periods is $38/hour ($19/hour per engine).

Nowhere near the Williams tax.

For a -5D engine, 71 blades per engine, $4900 cost per blade, lasting 2 HSI periods is $193/hour. That's a pretty hefty penalty for a little extra engine power.

This is one of the reasons I did not buy an Ultra, the other being it couldn't be fully Garminized due to the Primus 1000 AP being integrated into the displays.

Mike C.

I hope to never find out.

My inspection intervals are very long due to the Textron LUMP program. 3 years, 450 hours for phase 1-4, 6 years 1200 hours for phase 5. My next major inspection is in late 2025. I've been told King Air intervals are not so generous.

Mike C.

Chip

I think you are on to something. Two groups of people. One that care about overall annual cost to fly and ones that don’t. I am in the camp that overall cost including Capex and OPex matter to me. I get a total at the bottom of my aircraft expenses for the year. Pretty easy for my bookkeeper to show me what the overall number is and I can divide it by the miles I flew. Been doing it for years over 5 different aircraft.

Then I guess there are guys that don’t care about that as much and want newer planes.

Guys like me need a loan on a plane. If I was paying for a new SETP loan it would be more than my overall cost I pay now.

It’s weird to keep having this circular argument.

You keep jabbing at the end of an argument that it will cost him more then he thinks. Then he has to argue back. You guys have been saying the same thing for days in two different threads. I really don’t think it’s helping either side at this point. Haha

Two types. The ones that care about overall cost and the ones that care about what people think about the planes they own. Hehe

Mike

Your assumption is that HT blades only last one HSI period. The on condition HT blades typically last much longer than that for -5A engines and prior, around 5 HSI periods or so. The -5D engine (Ultra) is different, it has expensive HT blades that do not last very long.


For a -4, -5A engine, 71 blades per engine, $2400 cost per blade, lasting 5 HSI periods is $38/hour ($19/hour per engine).

Nowhere near the Williams tax.

For a -5D engine, 71 blades per engine, $4900 cost per blade, lasting 2 HSI periods is $193/hour. That's a pretty hefty penalty for a little extra engine power.

This is one of the reasons I did not buy an Ultra, the other being it couldn't be fully Garminized due to the Primus 1000 AP being integrated into the displays.

Mike C.

That seems to be a reasonable average based on my research.

The blades are not generally replaced all together. You usually have a few each HSI that fail and are replaced.

The -5A blades are shared with the popular -4 series engines. There are used ones you can buy. The -5D blades are unique to that engine and there are essentially none you can buy used. This further limits the choices you have with the -5D engine on the Ultra.


If all of your HT blades fail, then you had an abused engine. Abused engines can cost a lot to repair. This is not news.

A borescope would help identify these issues before purchase or during operation if an issue is suspected. If the plane is making book speeds, then your engines are likely to be healthy.

My plane operates well off temp and N2 limits which also suggests good engine health.

When a plane for sale says they have "on condition" HT blades, that is a big bonus. The prior type have to be replaced at a certain life limit. I believe the limited blades only appeared in the -4 engines, but I'm not entirely sure about that.

Mike C.

You are right! Two groups of people… and two groups of supporting characters.

And it’s important to point out that people who aren’t worried (as much) about the cost, aren’t delusional, in fact they are probably using the airplane primarily for business and the cost are outweighed by the benefits. If the airplane makes you money, you’re less concerned about cost.

I jumped into this because I saw some inaccurate or incomplete information being shared about cost. I dislike it when anyone paints an unrealistic picture of aircraft operating cost.

Good example: TBM - “they cost $30k a year for annuals.”

Ask any TBM owner on here and they’ll say “sure, maybe an annual, but what about a B, a C+?

One of the issues of our industry is that airplanes have always been sold, and sold by sales people. I’m not saying that’s bad, I’ve sold a lot of airplanes, but the reality is when you are selling something it is not your obligation to share all of the information you might have. Sure, great brokers will share the information and help the buyer make a good choice, I’d like to think that’s the kind of broker I was. True story, a guy I worked for told me I was a crappy salesperson because I told customers about damage history first instead of saving it for later in the conversation. Unfortunately, there are more not so great brokers than great ones.

As someone who deals with brokers and aircraft salespeople on a daily basis, I can tell you that it’s clearly the buyers responsibility to gather all of the pertinent information.

Beechtalk is one source of information, I’m always going to challenge information provided that I believe is inaccurate or incomplete. I’m not always right, I do make mistakes, but I’m on the buyers side so I rarely err to the side of making things seem better than they are. I know that when everyone else is saying “it’s cheap, fast and good. Don’t worry, it’s the greatest” and I come along and start saying “what about” that it can come across as negative, that’s not it at all. I’m just trying to make sure BT remains an excellent source of complete information.

I like threads like this because in the back and forth the truth always comes out.

That seems to be a reasonable average based on my research.

The blades are not generally replaced all together. You usually have a few each HSI that fail and are replaced.

The -5A blades are shared with the popular -4 series engines. There are used ones you can buy. The -5D blades are unique to that engine and there are essentially none you can buy used. This further limits the choices you have with the -5D engine on the Ultra.


If all of your HT blades fail, then you had an abused engine. Abused engines can cost a lot to repair. This is not news.

A borescope would help identify these issues before purchase or during operation if an issue is suspected. If the plane is making book speeds, then your engines are likely to be healthy.

My plane operates well off temp and N2 limits which also suggests good engine health.

When a plane for sale says they have "on condition" HT blades, that is a big bonus. The prior type have to be replaced at a certain life limit. I believe the limited blades only appeared in the -4 engines, but I'm not entirely sure about that.

Mike C.

Your information contradicts what owners and engine shops have told me, and what I see on the HSI logs I have seen.

Your desire to showcase supposed expertise with these statements is causing collateral damage by scaring away potential new turbine owners. They already mentally compute risk as piston engine failure rate times turbine engine repair costs, which is just not the case. Turbine engines are very robust and reliable and only rarely have unscheduled maintenance. You are not buying an entire new set of HT blades every HSI. That just isn't the way it works.

Mike C.

Your information contradicts what owners and engine shops have told me, and what I see on the HSI logs I have seen.

Your desire to showcase supposed expertise with these statements is causing collateral damage by scaring away potential new turbine owners. They already mentally compute risk as piston engine failure rate times turbine engine repair costs, which is just not the case. Turbine engines are very robust and reliable and only rarely have unscheduled maintenance. You are not buying an entire new set of HT blades every HSI. That just isn't the way it works.

Mike C.

Talk about twisting words.


Your advice just doesn't fit the owner flown legacy Citation market any more. This is the gold plated shop argument all over again, the "buy the reputation and not the actual work" philosophy.

The only JT15D DOF in the USA that isn't PWC is Dallas Airmotive. A very expensive shop, roughly the same price, as PWC itself.

I am aware of no owner flown legacy Citations which go there for major engine work. Maybe the corporate and charter folks still do.

All the extra money you recommend owners spend to preserve their value exceeds the value they are preserving.

Mike C.

Talk about twisting words.


Your advice just doesn't fit the owner flown legacy Citation market any more. This is the gold plated shop argument all over again, the "buy the reputation and not the actual work" philosophy.

The only JT15D DOF in the USA that isn't PWC is Dallas Airmotive. A very expensive shop, roughly the same price, as PWC itself.

I am aware of no owner flown legacy Citations which go there for major engine work. Maybe the corporate and charter folks still do.

All the extra money you recommend owners spend to preserve their value exceeds the value they are preserving.

Mike C.

This is a great thread!

@MIke - for old times sake...how about at least one shout-out to the MU-2 as the best owner flown airplane? I think that community is feeling a bit under-represented with your shift in alliance.

@Mike & @ Chip - I have tentative plans to fly my buddy to KOWB to pick up his SF50 from service on Monday. Lunch is on me, and I'll figure out how to livestream the event if you two will join and continue the debate. Mike has to agree to a picture sitting in the left seat of the Vision Jet as well...which will be published widely.

There was talk pages back about PT-6's being $100/hr/engine for reserves. Pratt charges roughly double that for their program - about the same as Williams "tax." Previous owners of my plane invested in the program so I'm keeping it up until overhaul.

Perception of jet vs. "prop plane" is a real-thing. Get yourself out of the pilot community and talk to a cross section of folks. They have three categories of planes in their mind - Airliners, jets & "small prop jobs." I like showing up in my little prop job.

I think of myself as moderate/middle of the road in most things. I think my old, fast, efficient prop-job puts me in the middle on this debate as well.

Carry-on...it's a great read.

Thanks Matt!

I agree on the MU2... where's the love?

Unfortunately, tied up, will be inputting a owner flown CJ2+ to a gold plated shop on Monday. But, if it pushes let me know. Would love to run up and meet you, and meet Mike as well!

I'm thinking about starting a new thread for just me and Mike... we'll call it "Mike and Chip got a room"

you owe me a keyboard, Chip!!!! Mine is now covered in morning liquid caffeine........

No such statement exists.

I said you should not expect to replace all the HT blades every HSI and offered an estimate that they last 5 HSI periods on average.


They are DOF only for PT6, not JT15D, and only in Canada.

Educate yourself on Pratt's service network, see page 8:

https://www.pwc.ca/-/media/files/suppor ... ities.ashx

Only USA based JT15D DOF is Dallas Airmotive. They are $$$$$.


Owner flown legacy Citations almost never do that now, and there's only one DOF in the USA to go to, anyway.

Nobody with a $500K 501 is going to pay Pratt or Dallas Airmotive to do $1M overhauls on their engines. Doesn't make sense.

Mike C.