I have always liked the Commander layout - especially with the separate pilot door. It's a step-in configuration. I have a photo of a Ted Smith Commander sitting next to a Ted Smith Aerostar... so different, but you can see the family likeness.

Both are unique aircraft to be appreciated.

2.4M$, and if i'm not wrong, 130 engine hours before next hot section, right? => 2370hrs since new.

It's probably on the 7000hr TBO program, but that's just a guess. Then hot is due at 3500hrs.

7000hrs TBO is not when you are on Part135?
Part91 is 5000hrs TBO, no?

No, you can do 7000hrs part 91.

http://www.propulsioninternational.com/existing-fleet/

No, you can do 7000hrs part 91.


http://www.propulsioninternational.com/existing-fleet/

Cedric - if you plan on registering the plane on European register, it might not work to get the 7000hr. It's a maintenance program approved by FAA, and unless they've also approved it in EASA land (which I would be very surprised if they did), you're back to the manufacturers TCDS overhaul period. That could be either 5000hr/1hot, or 5400hrs/2 hots.

Still a good deal - the Garretts are about half the cost to run versus PT6's. And they burn 20% less fuel.

Aircraft will be FAA, EASA is too complicate and too expensive + paperwork nightmare.

I have +7.000hrs on PT6 engines, but as owner i really think Garrett engines rocks!

Thanks Adam

Hots are normally 1,800 or 2,500 hr intervals. Or potentially 3,500 on the long program as pointed out. Importantly, they are relatively low risk and cost for high pedigree engines.

You fly a 300? Same performance on 30% less fuel but of course there are normally 2 fewer useable seats.

Hots are normally 1,800 or 2,500 hr intervals. Or potentially 3,500 on the long program as pointed out. Importantly, they are relatively low risk and cost for high pedigree engines.

You fly a 300? Same performance on 30% less fuel but of course there are normally 2 fewer useable seats.