JP great post! I wish I was as thorough as you were when I bought the KA - I learned a number of expensive lessons afterwards.

You are going to find the turbo prop so much easier to fly than the 421. High performance piston engines are a lot of work to fly (well). I'd bet you'll also jump up in the number of hours that you fly just like you did when you upgraded to the 421.

Don - there isn't a 10yr SID where you basically do all the initial SIDS all over. Once the initial SIDS are completed, most of the SIDS have a date and a hour due date on them afterward. By following the Corrosion Program (which I will be) you get to extend to the hour limits, which a SID may say it has to be completed at 5 years or 2000 hours. I view the SIDS as ongoing mx rather than a big, one time event. For example, the tail inspection on this plane is due in October and is generally viewed as one of the more expensive ongoing SIDS ($18k-ish just for the inspection). Bottom line - I am not budgeting for a $300k SID in 2018.

That's very good to hear. Thanks for the feedback JP.

Great post JP and congrats on the 441, they are magnificent airplanes!

Thank you for taking the time to post this JP!

Congrats JP!
Make sure you check all your 337's from the original SID's and check for any repairs. We have to address some original repairs now that were done in 2008 (our tail is off right now for the Corrosion Control Program Initial inspection).

441 Conquest II is a terrific airplane, almost bought one myself, though happy in the Solitaire for my missions. I fly a fairly frequent short hop that the Mits does quite well.

Also, while I agree the SIDS are basically just part of the ongoing maintenance program, they definitely add some expense, particularly for low time operators. The calendar limits add up. For example, your $18K tail inspection probably has to be done frequently enough that a 100hr/yr operator would never come close to the hour limits. So if it's a five year item, it adds $3500/yr nearly automatically. The mandatory boot change is another example...

Anyway - my point is not to disparage the 441, or your decision, it is an awesome airplane and very capable. But the SIDS impact on your overall costs are somewhat dependent on the amount of utilization, and for lower time operators it can be a significant annual difference in mx expenses. My annual mx costs have been on the order of $20K all in, so adding a couple of $3-5k per year items would be a signifiicant bump. I currently have one calendar related item - 4 blade props - that adds about $3-4k per year, but at least it's only one.

Anyway - congrats on the Conquest, it is an awesome airplane. Enjoy it!

Jon,

There is a program for low utilization that puts recurrent SID's on much longer intervals (Corrosion Control Program).We're going through that right now.

Ah, that would help a lot.

Great Post



Ditto



You are a good man, if I get remarried, it will be to a P51



Amazing how much better the pressurized turbines are for making meetings happen. I've yet to cancel because of weather. The increased face to face time I get now has practically doubled business in the last 6 months. Client referrals are off the charts.



When I ran the numbers most of the birds came up to about the same on per nautical mile, even with acquisition cost, give or take 10% or so.



Dang, now that's well put...........one of the MAIN reasons I went with PC12.

For the piston pilots using their airplanes as business tools, you will be amazed at how economical a turbine is.......fuel costs on a per gallon basis for jetA are really 1/2 that of AvGas...........Factor in delays/hassles and they are a downright bargain.

The gentleman that has my baron under contract has a Conquest II and absolutely loves it. Frankly I shoulda looked harder at the Conquest II......that being said, short unimproved runways in the islands are easily handled by the PC12........

No matter what you choose turbine is indeed the way to go.

Thanks for the great report. I'm currently on the hunt for a 441 for most of the reasons you've already called out, but I didn't know about the avionics upgrade issues.

I am convinced that most of these turboprops are the best kept secret in aviation. They are often no more to run that a pressurized piston with little to no mx issues in between 100 hrs.

My 7 year prop AMOC comes up early next year, so I do plan on writing a larger than usual check for 2017.

Are you going to just "inspect" or "overhaul"? Personally I think all the overhauls over the years have not made the situation better, there are pretty compelling economic reasons to just comply with the inspection.

Are you going to just "inspect" or "overhaul"? Personally I think all the overhauls over the years have not made the situation better, there are pretty compelling economic reasons to just comply with the inspection.

I have no need and certainly no budget to move up to this class of plane any time in the future, but I sure do enjoy reading posts/topics like this! I concur with Thomas...and worry what the world might look like in another 20 years since nobody is making planes like the 441, MU-2, etc. any more. Will today's planes still be soldiering on, or will the TBM and PC12 replace them for those of us on a used budget?

Similar situation for the cabin class piston twins... I wonder what happens when the fleet is really "used up."