BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Dec 2010, 01:03

Very cool King Air adventures.

I heard the NG system sometimes shows the attitude indicator turning after take off - the alleged remedy was not to enter the runway at taxiway intersections midway. Not sure if this is true but I'd be thinking about that during low ceiling departures.

I know one thing for sure, they are doing pretty desperate maneuvers to get the new machines sold - perhaps is just the economy :shrug:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Dec 2010, 09:34

Username Protected wrote:

yea i'm with ya. It's just kind of an interesting distinction if you think about it more philosophically. A twin airplane and pilot always considers the scenario of losing an engine; and from, say, a max gross weight perspective takes a penalty for that. However, a single like a TBM from the very start of design all the way to the pilot flying it, can simply say "screw it, load it up to whatever she can handle, if the engine stops well, the engine stops".

It really gives the turboprop singles a big advantage. If the twin turboprop designer could say something like "not approved for flight on one engine" and had a means to disable a good one should the other fail, then perhaps they could get it done the same way the singles do. Or, perhaps an owner could say to himself "I'll load it up to XX lbs and accept the risk of a PT-6 in this King Air failing on takeoff and maybe ending catastrophically should I not be able to find a suitable place to land...after all, yesterday i flew a PC-12 and accepted that same risk"

But, the fact still remains...... more engine's=more opportunity to lose 1. So, "loading up" either plane has it's own risks but losing 1 in either does not have the same "probability".

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Dec 2010, 10:59

Username Protected wrote:

A recent 6 year gear overhaul set me back $110,000.00 for a few actuators, seals, labour etc. But its worth every cent

Long live the King!!!!!!!!

WTF??!!

Hope my TwinBo gear won't cost that much. If so, I'll just throw this one away and get another. Gulp. :pray:

Back to PilatusTalk...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Dec 2010, 13:06

Username Protected wrote:

A recent 6 year gear overhaul set me back $110,000.00 for a few actuators, seals, labour etc. But its worth every cent

Long live the King!!!!!!!!

WTF??!!

Hope my TwinBo gear won't cost that much. If so, I'll just throw this one away and get another. Gulp. :pray:

Back to PilatusTalk...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Dec 2010, 18:31

This is where the piston twin vs. turbine discussion goes off course. IMO, if you fly an airplane, you need to be able to stroke a check to replace all powerplants at anytime.

If you are flying a P, you need to be ready with $100K minimum in case the worst happens.

If you fly a turbine, the number goes crazy (especially a King Air). This major difference is not factored in when you simply discuss operating costs. It is a whole different league.

My partner took his Citation in for a normal inspection and left with a $250K bill after they found a two square inch piece of an impeller missing. He still swears they broke it with the scope. There were no scratches anywhere inside the motor. Seems like that should have made a mess.

You just can't compare piston twins to turbines, whether its purchase price or required reserves (unless you include the costs of running one on a full replacement program).

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Dec 2010, 19:28

Username Protected wrote:

My partner took his Citation in for a normal inspection and left with a $250K bill after they found a two square inch piece of an impeller missing. He still swears they broke it with the scope. There were no scratches anywhere inside the motor. Seems like that should have made a mess.

Yup, that post pretty much just killed my Controller surfing for cheap jets.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Dec 2010, 21:22

Jesse, you have articulated why I won't/can't buy a turboprop. I have friends who insist that I can fly a MU2 or a King Air for the same cost as a PBaron or other pressurized piston twin. I keep saying, "but what if an engine fails?" You probably (hopefully) will get on the ground with no airframe damage....but then you have to replace/repair the engine...and turbine engines get pricy really quick. $250K....about what I would figure to replace a PT6...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Dec 2010, 22:17

Jesse - stupid question probably but did he turn in a claim for Foreign Object Damage?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Dec 2010, 22:21

Username Protected wrote:

Jesse - stupid question probably but did he turn in a claim for Foreign Object Damage?

There was no evidence of a foreign object. Everything was perfect except that one blade.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 03 Dec 2010, 22:31

Always a good idea to turn it in and let the insurance company tell you that - since they have the experts and such.

The assessment sounds correct but sometimes ice can do weird things and vanish on impact.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2010, 01:31

Username Protected wrote:

Jesse, you have articulated why I won't/can't buy a turboprop. I have friends who insist that I can fly a MU2 or a King Air for the same cost as a PBaron or other pressurized piston twin. I keep saying, "but what if an engine fails?" You probably (hopefully) will get on the ground with no airframe damage....but then you have to replace/repair the engine...and turbine engines get pricy really quick. $250K....about what I would figure to replace a PT6...

Just $250,000 maybe in 1981 dollars. The PT6A-42 on the KA200 will retail for $600,000 per engine or $1.2 million for the pair. Blackhawk might give you two remans for $798,000.
+ 15,000 to hang the pair extra.

No comparison to recips. My IO550B on the Bonanza was $31,000 in 2004 with $15,000 for Black Mac prop and baffles.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2010, 20:29

Jeez. Yeah, that's a big deal.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2010, 22:29

Username Protected wrote:

My partner took his Citation in for a normal inspection and left with a $250K bill after they found a two square inch piece of an impeller missing. He still swears they broke it with the scope. There were no scratches anywhere inside the motor. Seems like that should have made a mess.

Yup, that post pretty much just killed my Controller surfing for cheap jets.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 04 Dec 2010, 22:31

Isn't that the benefit of being in one of the warranty programs like the MORE program, or am I missing something? How long is the P&W warranty program? Why would that not apply in this case?

Best,

Dave

Username Protected · **Posted:** 05 Dec 2010, 15:09

Username Protected wrote:

Isn't that the benefit of being in one of the warranty programs like the MORE program, or am I missing something? How long is the P&W warranty program? Why would that not apply in this case?

Best,

Dave

I would like to hear from someone currently on the program. My understanding is the MORE program allows you to extend TBOs for a price and frequent ongoing inspections.

There are service contracts that will cover full parts and labor on turbines through TBO, however, it's a pay me now or pay me later situation. You pay by the flight hour and it's a BIG number. It does offer the ability to predict true costs so you don't have any surprises, however, you pay a premium for your flight time in the end unless you experience a surprise and the plan pays off.