You write like AI.

Chip-

What does annual maintenance look like on the jet prop? Curious how that compares to say, an Mu-2 or Cheyenne flying roughly 100 hours per year.

In my 5 years of owning the plane my annual (it only has had to visit a mechanic at annual) avg. has been ~$20K.

Not included in that cost would have been an FOD incident (insurance covered), battery and door cable. Battery was the most expensive (but all batteries are). Door cable was a fun 2 hour project that we upgraded to the thicker cable. That part cost was under $100, but of course does not include labor time.

I have had ‘bigger’ items like a starter / gen overhaul.
I think a decent way to view it will be a ‘normal’ annual will be ~$15K with somewhere between 0-2 bigger items that will cost between $5-$10K.

Also note that all my maintenance has been performed by the top PA46 shop in the county, so these are real #s done by premier mechanic.

Consensus on MMOPA was ~BY FAR~ the cheapest available. Reasons

1) no "turbine" maintenance requirements either from FAA or MFR. Regs are the same as a Cherokee.
2) plane is piston systems that got a heart transplant that reduced vibration by an order of magnitude. People who did the transplant said mainenance dropped notably afterwards

As for the gross weight - there are some with double digit UL's, but not some (especially earlier/lighter models) have several hundred lbs. You can also depart with less than full fuel. It's an open secret that people routinely fly them FAR over gross. Wise? no. Legal? no. Buncha dead bodies and revoked certificates? Also no.

So it's an open secret that everyone flies over gross, and that it is fine if you avoid turbulence, but what about insurance? If you knowingly take off 200lb over gross and the gear collapses on landing (not over gross in landing since you burned off fuel) will the insurance company pay, or is that on you? Asking for a friend

Insurance pays for a lot of dumb and contrary to reg operations. I think this is a more imaginary boogeyman than real.

But overall, I think the more relevant point is that earlier Jet props do have viable useful loads. And it is quite possible to operate the plane with 500 pounds less fuel than it can hold. If you’re trying to move for adult men and four sets of golf clubs, no, not your plane. Single person business travel or mom/dad, preteen kids, very viable.

Insurance pays for a lot of dumb and contrary to reg operations. I think this is a more imaginary boogeyman than real.

But overall, I think the more relevant point is that earlier Jet props do have viable useful loads. And it is quite possible to operate the plane with 500 pounds less fuel than it can hold. If you’re trying to move for adult men and four sets of golf clubs, no, not your plane. Single person business travel or mom/dad, preteen kids, very viable.

On MooneySpace today, someone at KSFF posted a picture taken this morning of Rocket Engineering's office and hangar which is where all the JetProp conversions were done. He said it looks deserted. Does anyone have any PIREP's on Rocket Engineering/JetProp DLX support and recent contact? Internet shows founder Darwin Conrad to be 75 now. Are they still in business?

The “crazy thought “ is the concept of the yellow arc. How “smooth” must the air be? How confident in it remaining “smooth” must the pilot be?

8-12 days seems like a fantasy for an annual. I did all of mine at Malibu Aerospace and I don’t think they got through their initial assessment in that amount of time.

I did 3 years in my ‘06 Meridian and each annual was at least a 6-week event. My last 12 months of ownership, I was down a combined 5 months for things like a bad Meggit DAU and a defective overhauled starter generator.

Everyone talks of running their Meridian annual to annual, but mine was a maintenance hog.

The “crazy thought “ is the concept of the yellow arc. How “smooth” must the air be? How confident in it remaining “smooth” must the pilot be?

There have been a few threads on BT with mention of Rocket and/or Jetprop. Most of these were back in 2024, where there was a recently converted Duke for sale, a Realtor sign on the facility at Felts field, website that hasn't been updated since 2017 AND the JetProp domain now owned by a squatter, and a detailed thread where Tom mentioned that he was at MMOPA 2023 in the JetProp session and 1 - Darwin was not there, 2 - Owners were concerned about ongoing support, and 3 - There was mention of Rocket having similar supply chain issues that other manufacturers have been having.

Spokane County Treasurer still shows that Rocket Engineering owns the business. Taxes are paid and up-to-date.

STC LTD was a business at that address, had a Rocket Engineering e-mail address registered with the state, and had a business license that expires in 2022. I believe this may have been for the Mooney side of the business.

JetProp's last corporate filing to the State was April 2022 and their business license is expired as of 2023.
https://opengovwa.com/corporation/601714835

Rocket Engineering's last corporate filing was 29OCT2022 and their business license expired 30NOV2023.
https://opengovwa.com/corporation/601282715

It would be a shame to see all of that IP and knowledge lost if there is a chance to get it out and into the hands of a company with someone who cares about the fleet. While I can't imagine that Cygnet, Blackhawk, or Mike Jones Aircraft would be in the market for the Rocket Engineering related IP, they are three solid companies who would be good corporate stewards and maybe find a profitable way to support the owners. I doubt there would be any conversion business for the Duke or Piper PA-46 market but if anyone could pull it off, it would be Blackhawk first and maybe Mike Jones Aircraft second then Cygnet.

I believe there are only a couple of parts that ONLY Rocket can provide for the JetProp.... nose tire and engine mount.

They don't make tires, so I'm sure that could be solved, and engine mounts are a fairly mature product.

Joe Casey, a big PA-46 dude spoke on his podcast about Rocket Engineering and their step away from the PA-46, and I think it was mainly the tires.

It should not be very difficult for someone else to setup to supply the nose tire with the simple modification!