BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 10:15

Username Protected wrote:

Yes, there's an MU-2 in the area for $175k currently flying with great avionics, decent P&I, but high time engines that we'd get 20 years of usage at our usage rate before we had to do the engines. I'd be 68/69 and probably looking to downsize - who knows what would be available by then in terms of GA.

There's a second one that has "decent" avionics (same as Laz actually) that we'd never hit HSI or OH at our usage for $240k that they can't move and probably go lower, good P&I as well, but it's out in Arizona.

Capex on the earlier short body models is certainly reasonable.

We just got Laz and I'll want to fly him a year anyway and work out the kinks, get an engine monitor and such in, etc, but if I could get $140k back out of Laz when everything is perfect and flying regularly with these low-time engines, it wouldn't be a stretch to move to $175k, maybe even the $220k-225k range.

Good to have options and the knowledge now to make a good comparison. If I could just get that company up in WA to let me bring a donor MU-2 and put Garretts on the Duke as part of a new STC...

Just sayin' it's a lot cheaper to put used Garretts on something than it is two brand new PT-6's. There's probably a better market there for them. Wonder what their all-in profit margin is on the Grand Duke conversion...?

:pilot:

Something I would highly consider is that you wouldn't want to be in a turbine airplane that you can't financially swallow an unexpected catastrophic engine problem. While I too have put my dollar votes toward the turbine (for all the reasons I used to argue against), you have to be able to absorb the (extremely rare) occurrence of a thrown turbine blade giving you a $100,000 uninsured event. The next step of that problem is if you have a nearly depreciated older airframe, you;re putting that money into an assert that won't appreciate enough to cover the money you just had to put in to keep it airworthy.

Engine issues like that may be very rare, but the occurrance rate is greater than zero.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 10:33

I have two 2,400 remaining mid time Garretts sitting in my hangar that I paid $60K for both motors. Let's not scare the world with 100K repair bill stories. Sure, those problems exist but I have a lifetime of Mitsubishi motors for less than the cost of a new IO-550.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 10:47

Username Protected wrote:

That isn’t all that much worse than the $80k you’d be looking at if a big bore Conti puts a rod through the side of the case.

And Garretts won’t push rods through the side of a case. There is a very high probability a turbine will reach TBO without a catastrophic failure forcing an OH - the decision to cease its operation is a paper time limit.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 10:52

Wondering out loud why there are no Garrett driven SETPs ?

IMHO: A Garrett -10 driven Meridian would be a hot set-up !

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 11:28

Username Protected wrote:

I have two 2,400 remaining mid time Garretts sitting in my hangar that I paid $60K for both motors. Let's not scare the world with 100K repair bill stories. Sure, those problems exist but I have a lifetime of Mitsubishi motors for less than the cost of a new IO-550.

Traver, these images are almost pornographic to a prospective MU2 owner. :bugeye:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 11:49

Username Protected wrote:

That isn’t all that much worse than the $80k you’d be looking at if a big bore Conti puts a rod through the side of the case.

And Garretts won’t push rods through the side of a case. There is a very high probability a turbine will reach TBO without a catastrophic failure forcing an OH - the decision to cease its operation is a paper time limit.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 11:55

Username Protected wrote:

I have two 2,400 remaining mid time Garretts sitting in my hangar that I paid $60K for both motors. Let's not scare the world with 100K repair bill stories. Sure, those problems exist but I have a lifetime of Mitsubishi motors for less than the cost of a new IO-550.

Traver, these images are almost pornographic to a prospective MU2 owner. :bugeye:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 11:56

[/quote]
And Garretts won’t push rods through the side of a case. There is a very high probability a turbine will reach TBO without a catastrophic failure forcing an OH - the decision to cease its operation is a paper time limit.[/quote]

Is TBO somehow more mandatory for turbines than pistons? What keeps you from just continuing to run them?[/quote]

No, you can do a hot section, replace any life limited components. You are never required to overhaul ANY engine part 91.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 12:57

Username Protected wrote:

Wondering out loud why there are no Garrett driven SETPs ?

IMHO: A Garrett -10 driven Meridian would be a hot set-up !

Intercontinental Jet Service Corp in Tulsa does a Caravan conversion to a Garrett. The the long TBO's and lower consumption costs make it very attractive to some commercial operators.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 13:12

Given the $60,000-$75,000 cost of overhaul on just about any turbo charged piston engine, a Garrett giving up the ghost wouldn’t be all that more costly.

You can buy an entire running short body MU-2 these days for $200-$225,000.

The one I’m considering buying to rob engines off of is $160k. Near-original avionics on a high time airframe, the engines are worth more than the plane.

That said might be easier just to eventually sell both Dukes and buy an MU-2.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 13:40

Username Protected wrote:

Given the $60,000-$75,000 cost of overhaul on just about any turbo charged piston engine, a Garrett giving up the ghost wouldn’t be all that more costly.

You can buy an entire running short body MU-2 these days for $200-$225,000.

The one I’m considering buying to rob engines off of is $160k. Near-original avionics on a high time airframe, the engines are worth more than the plane.

That said might be easier just to eventually sell both Dukes and buy an MU-2.

I don't think you could stick Garretts on an Experimental Duke for anything under $750,000 even if you did all the work yourself. Abandon this terrible idea please!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 14:10

A rough guide is:

1. Used or replacement Garrets tend to be valued at about $30/hr, give or take.

2. You can also estimate prices for rotables at about $3/cycle.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 14:32

Username Protected wrote:

Is TBO somehow more mandatory for turbines than pistons? What keeps you from just continuing to run them?

Part 91 - nothing - as noted, you just need to conduct a hot section.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 14:33

Username Protected wrote:

I don't think you could stick Garretts on an Experimental Duke for anything under $750,000 even if you did all the work yourself. Abandon this terrible idea please!

Exactly - why waste the time, effort and money - just buy an MU2 and be done with it.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Dec 2019, 15:05

Username Protected wrote:

I have two 2,400 remaining mid time Garretts sitting in my hangar that I paid $60K for both motors. Let's not scare the world with 100K repair bill stories. Sure, those problems exist but I have a lifetime of Mitsubishi motors for less than the cost of a new IO-550.

Yup - I agree... I have just dealt with a few people who are looking at buying an old depreciated turboprop on the basis that the engines simply will never have an expensive failure, and make their financial plans accordingly. Indeed I came to the same conclusions you have, a rod through a TIO-540 case will likely cause just as much expense (although in a turbine you can spend all that and be right back where you started, but without a freshly overhauled engine to boost your equity). In the long run the math is simply better on turbines. It's just not accurate to think there is no exposure.

WTB: MU2