21 Jun 2025, 12:39 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12 Posted: 25 Jan 2021, 14:46 |
|
 |

|

|
 |
Joined: 07/21/08 Posts: 5758 Post Likes: +7146 Location: Decatur, TX (XA99)
Aircraft: 1979 Bonanza A36
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I bet it was a nervous laugh... I would tell you the exact same thing if someone like Covington disrupted the old guard way of charging for my services. There are a lot of Martin and Mather's out there, and unfortunately there are not enough Covington's. These shops don't do the HSI, they send to Pratt or Dallas. Clearly there is a difference here other than markup. Nothing was done on Pennman's invoice other than the inspection. Exactly, because nothing was needed.
_________________ I'm just here for the free snacks
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12 Posted: 25 Jan 2021, 14:53 |
|
 |

|

|
 |
Joined: 06/28/09 Posts: 14383 Post Likes: +9513 Location: Walnut Creek, CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1962 Twin Bonanza
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Exactly, because nothing was needed. Right.. so I'm trying to find out if what happens if nothing is needed when going to Pratt. My understanding is that "needed" is relative and that Pratt is going to replace a bunch of blades, the burner can etc. that were not replaced on Pennman's. you're not paying the 30k for nothing. what it means over a full overhaul cycle is unclear to me, but I'm inquiring to Pratt now.
_________________ http://calipilot.com atp/cfii
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12 Posted: 25 Jan 2021, 15:00 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/16/11 Posts: 11068 Post Likes: +7095 Location: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Aircraft: PC12NG, G3Tat
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I bet it was a nervous laugh... I would tell you the exact same thing if someone like Covington disrupted the old guard way of charging for my services. There are a lot of Martin and Mather's out there, and unfortunately there are not enough Covington's. These shops don't do the HSI, they send to Pratt or Dallas. Clearly there is a difference here other than markup. Nothing was done on Pennman's invoice other than the inspection.
If you look at the invoice it was an HSI. Covington is an approved Pratt company. The labor to remove and reinstall the hot section was $4,730. My shroud segments were in good order and they only had to slightly ground the blades. Way within tolerances. I was really, really lucky. There is an overhaul kit in there that they charge about 1.2k for whilst everyone else comes in around 5k.
Brent's was under 30k replacing ALL the shroud segments AND grinding the blades. Obviously the person who ran the engine before Brent musta not have cared as much.
As an FYI, I flew the airplane to Covington for an 'on wing' inspection. They mainly do Ag birds, I think I was the 3rd or 4th Pilatus that they did at Tunica. Those are stand up folks in Tunica and they're not there to overcharge you. I've heard different about the other companies and folks like Martin and Mathers charge you to remove the Hot Section, ship it to Dallas or whomever, who then just replace everything rather than fix it, and then ship it back and then it gets put on your airplane.
Seems like an asinine way to fix the engine. Why you would chance shipping and that many people in the mix is your problem. Saying that Covington did not do as good a job as Dallas is fundamentally flawed. They did a better job, quicker, and for far less money.
Dallas wants to make as much money as possible and they don't do much ag work. Ag guys are smart. Craig C, does hots every 1000 hrs, you would be amazed at his cost. Tunica folks have mostly AG customers.
Kinda like going into a Gucci store and buying a t-shirt for $40 from them. Exact same material as all the other t-Shirt, you're just paying to have Gucci on it ..........I think you understand where I'm aiming here.
_________________ ---Rusty Shoe Keeper---
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12 Posted: 25 Jan 2021, 15:13 |
|
 |

|

|
Joined: 05/23/13 Posts: 8058 Post Likes: +10384 Company: Jet Acquisitions Location: Franklin, TN 615-739-9091 chip@jetacq.com
|
|
Just a couple of things to throw out here, I love the debate about which is best, but the reality is that the market is very self leveling, what I mean by that is that smart people are buying these airplanes, if an airplane has an inherent weakness it shows up in resale value.
These are hilights, not assessments;
M600 great airplane, new airplane and technology, should be cheap to operate the Meridians have a long history of being the lowest op cost of any common turboprop. The incentives from Piper are enough to make even a skeptic take a second look. As a move up from a Cirrus SR22... the M600 is my first recommendation.
TBM also a great airplane. I'll always have a soft spot for the Mooney and at the end of the day, it's a Mooney. Same exact strengths and weaknesses. Fast but small when compared to the Pilatus or King Air. It is built like a tank and you have to admire how much airplane it is... TBM owners seem to always love their airplanes. It's a way to go fast without a type rating and the op cost isn't horrible. It does cost more to properly maintain a TBM than most transition buyers expect, so we cover that early on, but it's worth it, the TBM has its weaknesses but it does what nothing else does.
Pilatus is the ultimate SETP, period. The only negative is that it's a little slow when compared to the King Air or TBM, but it does everything else GREAT. Like the TBM, the maintenance tends to be a little higher than you would expect, but they both make up for it with fuel savings. The resale value of the Pilatus is unlike anything I have ever seen. If you are a savvy buyer and have the budget, you can own a Pilatus for a very low overall cost for term of ownership, better than almost anything. The Pilatus is a Suburban that gets good gas mileage. The utility is unmatched and having an airstair behind the cockpit is a bigger deal for an owner pilot that you might think.
A couple of engine points and I'll go back to work...
Covington is a great shop, they are building their name and reputation in the private aircraft world. They are buying their market share and that is smart. From a resale point of view you need to be careful. If I'm buying a 25 year old airplane with second or third run motors and they (or Prime) did the hots, I don't even give it a second thought. If I'm buying a first run, 10 year old airplane, that's a problem.
There are a lot of buyers who will not buy an airplane unless it has DOF Hots / Overhauls.
We use Standard Aero for engine events and borescope inspections, we have since they were Vector. I have been to their PT6 facility in PEI and can tell you they are first class and one of the nicest groups of people you'll ever meet.
It's not that Mather or any other shop is up to no good, they charge what they charge because there's a lot involved in participating in an engine event, labor and shipping, liability. There's more to an MRO doing something like that than you might think, and yes they do like that dirty word... profit. But, when you look at having maintenance and hots done at the same time, the convenience and peace of mind in having a trusted shop handle it all for you, it makes sense.
Here's the reality, just doing the HSI on a big Pratt at a non-DOF shop should probably be $15k, Covington is buying market at half that. Good for them. A shop like Mather is paying $20k or more for a DOF shop to do the work, putting a reasonable mark-up on it, plus the labor to pull the hot section and ship it to the overhaul facility, get it back, reinstall it and do engine runs.
I wouldn't say it's a bargain, but they aren't ripping anyone off.
Note: Covington may be a DOF shop now, I had heard they were going to be, don't want to spread any misinformation.
_________________ Winners don’t whine.
Last edited on 25 Jan 2021, 15:17, edited 2 times in total.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12 Posted: 25 Jan 2021, 15:17 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/16/11 Posts: 11068 Post Likes: +7095 Location: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Aircraft: PC12NG, G3Tat
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Still costs you $23k per year for HAPP/MAPP. Cheapest PC12 I’ve ever heard of to operate. I’d love to believe it. Only $100/hr more than my Meridian costs. How many hours per year? What does insurance and maintenance cost? I’m intrigued. around 25k for insurance. hangar is 35k annuals have averaged 30k per year for me. Last year was very little, this year very high, but I had some life limit items replaced. fly about 300hrs per year. I rarely paid more than $3 for JetA, although it will be higher this year. say 3.50 For me to fly from KTEX to KFXE today is about 5hr 40min. Decent tailwind. I land with 700lbs of fuel. Fuel burn for that trip is 365 pph or 55gph for the block, so lets call it 60gph So 25+23+30 for flying out the door or say 115k per annum. Fuel per hour is 60 * 3.5 *300 or $63,000 So total for 300 hrs is 178,000 or 593.33 per hr. Actually cheaper than your Meridian So $600 per hour.......... Read it and weep 
_________________ ---Rusty Shoe Keeper---
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12 Posted: 25 Jan 2021, 15:23 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/16/11 Posts: 11068 Post Likes: +7095 Location: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Aircraft: PC12NG, G3Tat
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Note: Covington may be a DOF shop now, I had heard they were going to be, don't want to spread any misinformation.
Seeing that you're an expert in the biz  let me help you out. There are four approved overhaul shops in the US. The only reason to use them is if your engine still has items within the warranty, that Pratt will replace minus usage. Those are Dallas Airmotive Standard Aero Pratt themselve and my personal favorite.........COVINGTON!!!!! all approved. They're not 'buying' there way into the repair business, they've been doing this for a fair bit of time. They're just less expensive.
_________________ ---Rusty Shoe Keeper---
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12 Posted: 25 Jan 2021, 15:28 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/16/11 Posts: 11068 Post Likes: +7095 Location: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Aircraft: PC12NG, G3Tat
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Exactly, because nothing was needed. Right.. so I'm trying to find out if what happens if nothing is needed when going to Pratt. My understanding is that "needed" is relative and that Pratt is going to replace a bunch of blades, the burner can etc. that were not replaced on Pennman's. you're not paying the 30k for nothing. what it means over a full overhaul cycle is unclear to me, but I'm inquiring to Pratt now.
Just to set you straight to. Convington repaired a few items and their overhaul kit was included in my 6,500 invoice as was the grinding of the blades. If you're burner can liner is toast or has holes, you gonna need to get that fixed or replaced. Same for corrosion or damaged shroud segments.
There are some great service centers, but they're all charging $120 plus an hour for guys working on the line. That ain't chump change. I removed that cost by flying my airplane to Tunica. Furthermore I felt it was a SAFER way to do it, with fewer 'forks in the salad' and the folks that do engine work, just do their thing.
Worked out good, now don't go to Covington and say that it was your idea.
_________________ ---Rusty Shoe Keeper---
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12 Posted: 25 Jan 2021, 15:33 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/16/11 Posts: 11068 Post Likes: +7095 Location: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Aircraft: PC12NG, G3Tat
|
|
Username Protected wrote: or to run a turbine on condition over TBO you can do this now on part 91, don't need MORE
_________________ ---Rusty Shoe Keeper---
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12 Posted: 25 Jan 2021, 15:52 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 20365 Post Likes: +25545 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It seem like it would be a gold mine. What am I missing? The original design data to know how the part was made. The engineering effort to replicate the design. The testing to verify the design works properly. The documentation to get the FAA to approve the design. The manufacturing know how to make the part. The quality control system to monitor and track making the part. The FAA PMA approval of your manufacturing and quality system. The distribution system to deliver the part. The marketing department to sell the part. The liability insurance to stay in business if the part fails. And finally, the capital to put all that together and hope you succeed before you go bankrupt. So, not much, really, go for it. Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
Last edited on 25 Jan 2021, 22:09, edited 2 times in total.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12 Posted: 25 Jan 2021, 15:56 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 12/03/14 Posts: 20365 Post Likes: +25545 Company: Ciholas, Inc Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I thought cycle-limited parts had to be replaced, even under part 91? Yes. Life limited parts are limited, period. No over fly provisions, either. If you have 1 cycle left, you have 1 cycle, that's it. Overhauls are optional under part 91. Inspections are mandatory, but they can include over fly provisions (+/- 50 hours say). Mike C.
_________________ Email mikec (at) ciholas.com
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12 Posted: 25 Jan 2021, 15:57 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 09/05/09 Posts: 4347 Post Likes: +3134 Location: Raleigh, NC
Aircraft: L-39
|
|
Username Protected wrote: It seem like it would be a gold mine. What am I missing? The original design data to know how the part was made. The engineering effort to replicate the design. The testing to verify the design works properly. The documentation to get the FAA to approve the design. The manufacturing know how to make the part. The quality control system to monitor and track making the part. The FAA PMA approval of your manufacturing and quality system. The distribution system to deliver the part. The marketing department to sell the part. The liability insurance to stay i business if the part fails. And finally, the capital to put all that together and hope you succeed before you go bankrupt. So, not much, really, got for it. Mike C.
don't forget "small market size." relative to other manufacturing processes, the number of compressor blades that this STC would apply to is miniscule. this makes an enormous barrier-to-entry for anyone except those with massive capital.
_________________ "Find worthy causes in your life."
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12 Posted: 25 Jan 2021, 16:08 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/14/09 Posts: 821 Post Likes: +312 Location: Boise, ID
Aircraft: 06 Meridian, C180
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Still costs you $23k per year for HAPP/MAPP. Cheapest PC12 I’ve ever heard of to operate. I’d love to believe it. Only $100/hr more than my Meridian costs. How many hours per year? What does insurance and maintenance cost? I’m intrigued. around 25k for insurance. hangar is 35k annuals have averaged 30k per year for me. Last year was very little, this year very high, but I had some life limit items replaced. fly about 300hrs per year. I rarely paid more than $3 for JetA, although it will be higher this year. say 3.50 For me to fly from KTEX to KFXE today is about 5hr 40min. Decent tailwind. I land with 700lbs of fuel. Fuel burn for that trip is 365 pph or 55gph for the block, so lets call it 60gph So 25+23+30 for flying out the door or say 115k per annum. Fuel per hour is 60 * 3.5 *300 or $63,000 So total for 300 hrs is 178,000 or 593.33 per hr. Actually cheaper than your Meridian So $600 per hour.......... Read it and weep  Not weeping. Yet. 
I fly the Meridian 120-150 per year so you divisor is more than double mine. That's a big difference. If I flew 300 hours like you I wouldn't be close to $600/hr. Mine also includes prop and engine reserve. You missed that. Not sure what your hull value is but $25k seems very cheap for insurance for your plane. You are the master, it seems, of flying on the cheap.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12 Posted: 25 Jan 2021, 16:37 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/16/11 Posts: 11068 Post Likes: +7095 Location: Somewhere Over the Rainbow
Aircraft: PC12NG, G3Tat
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I fly the Meridian 120-150 per year so you divisor is more than double mine. That's a big difference. If I flew 300 hours like you I wouldn't be close to $600/hr. Mine also includes prop and engine reserve. You missed that. Not sure what your hull value is but $25k seems very cheap for insurance for your plane. You are the master, it seems, of flying on the cheap.  Sorry, did not include the prop overhaul and engine. I think prop overhaul is like 20k and I'm actually not sure what the TBO is, although I know my time limit is up here in April, but that's not a significant hrly amount. Engine is say 350k if I do it myself or 500k if Adam manages your airplane So add another 100 -140 for engine...... My insurance is with Tom Hauge, it's a goodun. Still went up considerably this year. I think the rate has much to do with the PC12 safety record.
_________________ ---Rusty Shoe Keeper---
|
|
Top |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us
BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a
forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include
the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner,
Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.
BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates.
Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.
Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2025
|
|
|
|