The cost of capital isn't free. On a depreciating asset like a new M600 it will greatly exceed the cost of opex.

The cost of capital isn't free. On a depreciating asset like a new M600 it will greatly exceed the cost of opex.

The newer TBMs can have bathrooms. It’s an option on all 900 models.

Honeywell coverage is around $21K/year. The warranty covers anything Honeywell in the plane which in the NG, in addition to all of the avionics, includes coverage for some mechanical parts for the environmental control system and the radar.

Ask anyone who has flown behind Honeywell for a few hundred hours and they will tell you it is equivalent or better than Garmin. Honeywell isn’t intuitive, but when you get the FMS logic, it is simple and rock solid. Assuming no steam gauges, I wouldn’t let the avionics be a part of your decision, they all will get the job done. If you are open to an older PC-12, Garmin is working on certification for an autopilot and EIS after that. This will bring a lot of value to the legacy birds. They hold their value probably better than any $2.5M+ turboprop out there.

With turbines, you need to consider your service center options. Typically, you will want to take it to a factory authorized center for the inspections and other major work. How far are you from a service center and what are your transportation options to get it there?

That about sums it up quite well...in addition, I want to make sure that I can still afford to fly the plane myself, being the partner with less financial strength. That's why I am calculating the cost to come up with a self-hire price that works for all partners. And I am super grateful and excited that after 4 years of owner-flying, the fantastic opportunity opens up to get access to an SETP, after all 2020 has also presented some positive things.

I am curious about the 441, how can it be at lower cost, besides the cheaper purchase price, having two engines and being an old airframe?

About Jets, we are in Europe, and everything is smaller here, even the runways :-). Especially in the Mediterranean, we have many grass or gravel fields at or under 3000 ft.

Service centers are close by. We have a TBM dealer/service center with a great reputation 1h drive, PC12 is nearby as well. The only problem is Piper Germany, I have a friend who keeps taking his Malibu there despite the horrible service he's getting. For that I am considering European Aircraft Sales in Odense, Denmark. I have been talking to Bjarne, the owner and he has been very helpful and customer oriented so far. It's a 1,5h flight though...not sure how we would get back from there while the plane is in maintenance...

And thanks for clarifying the Honeywell point!

Thanks to everybody for all the input! Will keep you posted...

Based on what I see these three airplane operate around the same hourly, except that the M600 burns less per hour to go the same speed. If you can afford the hourly operating on a M600, then you can afford the hourly on a PC12, acquisition costs aside.

We have HAPP/MAPP and it will run you about 23k per year. The issue I currently have with Honeywell is the parts swapping costs time and money to get to the service center even though it's covered.

The system itself is fantastic. As Brent says, better than Garmin

I think you will find opex between TBM and PC12 to be similar. The PC12 has a better depreciation profile and so should cost less to own over time given a similar acquisition cost. The PC12's cabin and therefore passenger experience is superior. The cockpit of the PC12 is more comfortable. The hand flying qualities, if that matters to you, of the TBM are superior. The PC12 can handle rough, unimproved strips and the TBM cannot. The TBM has a more active owner's group. Both have excellent manufacturer's support. Avionics in both planes are excellent though Garmin is faster to boot up, cheaper to maintain and easier for most pilots to use as more have experience with Garmin.

Based on your passenger numbers and baggage requirements both planes will do the job.

The big advantage of a TBM over a PC12 is speed. On an 800 mile trip the time difference is about a half hour.

I don't think you can go wrong with either choice. The M600 isn't in the same league and I wouldn't consider it. Overall I'd give the edge for what you've described to the PC12 (I'm a former TBM owner for reference).

First generation PC12 which has Garmin and probably better UL. They used to be around $1MM but seem to have gone up considerably!

Maintaining the Honeywell Apex suite is not trivial, although it is an excellent set of glass.

Very efficient engines which last a very long time, and which require less money to HSI and OH than a big block PT6.

310 knots speed makes it use less airframe hours than a PC-12 or M600, particularly if you do any modeling of typical headwinds in your flights. Less airframe hours means less money per mile for maintenance overall. TBM is a touch faster than a 441.

Two engines are not necessarily more expensive than one.


Where you get your plane serviced is almost as important as which plane you buy.

Mike C.

the bathroom in the pc12 will be a game changer.

People will very happily sit in an airplane for four hours when they can walk around and go to the bathroom. I promise you they will like that much better than a three hour and 20 minute trip in a tbm

This is certainly my experience!

PC-12 hands down. It's not even really a close call based on what you have said. What little more you may spend in opex over the smaller planes you'll make up for in retained value when you sell on the other end. PC-12 market is STRONG. You and ALL your passengers will enjoy travel infinitely more in a PC-12.

What about the cost of items that must be serviced on a calendar rather than an hourly basis? My understanding is that gives an advantage to Piper over the TBM for airplanes flying fewer hours per year - probably not an issue in this case with three owners. Does the Pilatus have any calendar service intervals?

I suggest fly in all of the above with one of your partners. Your best plane choice will reveal itself.

As a happy M600 owner, I'm happy to chat with the OP offline if you would find it helpful.

If you are really taking 4-6 people, I agree that the PC12 is the best choice. A new M600 will have the auto land and auto throttles, as will the TBM 940. A 930/910/900 will not - if that is important from a safety perspective, then the M600 would do the job.

Because of the fuel capacity (260 gallons/1742 lbs), the M600 has more useful load flexibility for a 7-800 nm mission no problem - you can fill the seats. I would rule out the Meridian/M500 from your mission on that basis alone. Note that the baggage area in an M600 is limited to 100 lbs which could be an issue for your mission. The TBM can carry more luggage (300 lbs). And of course, the PC12 can carry everybody and all their stuff

TBM does have a fancy potty seat option but it requires you to eliminate one of the seats to create the privacy area. And anecdotally, very few owners have purchased it according to some TBM folks I know, including a 135 charter operation who runs a few of them.

The M600 is the easiest to fly, I think, but is also the slowest. I routinely cruise about 265 knots. The PC12 (earlier generations) run 280 knots plus or minus. TBM 9xx can get 300+

All good aircraft and depends on your priorities. Cabin comfort and useful load - PC12 kicks everyone's butt by a wide margin and retains value the best. Speed nod goes to TBM. Lowest opex cost goes to M600, as does the SLS/autothrottle/autoland (not in 930 and earlier TBMs).

My best advice to the OP is to go fly all three and see what makes the most sense. Again, happy to chat about our M600 ownership experience if that would help.

PS - as noted above, depreciation on a new aircraft is significant. Don't underestimate that impact ...