19 May 2025, 19:20 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 2007 TBM 850 Posted: 27 Oct 2009, 19:19 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 04/06/08 Posts: 2718 Post Likes: +100 Location: Palm Beach, Florida F45
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Dale,
How long did the trip PA to KEYW take in the Meridien compared to the Bonanza? That's about 950 nm direct. If you can do this flight without a fuel stop, you're putting the best light on the Meridian preformance.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 2007 TBM 850 Posted: 27 Oct 2009, 19:52 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 10/01/09 Posts: 1197 Post Likes: +552 Location: Key West (KEYW)
Aircraft: 1973 Bonanza A36
|
|
in the meridian it took 4 1/2 hrs with a fuel stop in georgia ( bladder stop was ness as the plane's owner was 68 yrs, but plane wouldn't do non stop anyway) bonanza does it it 6 + (flightaware n7bw) with a fuel stop in GA if you could go non-stop it would take about the same time, the meridian had to climb to FL280 for best fuel economy under about 250 it burnt 315pph and only did about 240kts,,at 145knts,1,500fpm, and was speed restricted at 186kts ind so the decent had to be timed, altho it will do 2-3,000fpm descents but you want to get as high as possible as fast as possible and stay there as long as possible for the fuel burn, i did make it non stop from MTH to THV one day with a good se tail wind and it was late at night so Wash Center left me up above FL220) over Washington or we would not have done it,,,sooo with the 2 climbs and 2 decents verses 6,000ft in the bonanza the times almost equal's out,(that's what i'm telling myself anyway just so i don't cry any more) but those trips from PA to JFK were a lot faster in the meridian !!
_________________ Me 73/A36
A fact of life : After Monday and Tuesday even the calendar says W T F !
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 2007 TBM 850 Posted: 28 Oct 2009, 00:43 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 02/15/09 Posts: 707 Post Likes: +177
Aircraft: 1984 B36TC
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Agreed.
How does an airplane like this have only 182 hours?? Why would you buy this thing and not fly it?
That thing would have 800 hours on if it I bought it in 2007. Did you notice it had 360 + cycles. Lots of short trips. And one of those 850's has DH I can't remember which one
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 2007 TBM 850 Posted: 28 Oct 2009, 09:47 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/10/08 Posts: 10014 Post Likes: +2440 Location: Arizona (KSEZ)
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Agreed Rick.
All this talk me still has me thinking the PC-12 is the most bang for the buck plane out there. Yes, it's more expensive to acquire but you get so much more with the acquisition..
And, it won't cost any more to operate than a Meridien. The PC12 burns 10 more gallons per hour than the Meridien. we have those PC12's and TBM 850's coming to our airport all the time. The PC12 is huge but what's with that tail it looks out of proportion with the rest of the plane? How's the cross wind handling of that plane? Russ
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 2007 TBM 850 Posted: 28 Oct 2009, 09:51 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08 Posts: 26338 Post Likes: +13079 Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The PC12 is huge but what's with that tail it looks out of proportion with the rest of the plane? Russ
I think it looks great. Never thought it looked out of proportion and "bigger is better".
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 2007 TBM 850 Posted: 28 Oct 2009, 19:38 |
|
 |

|
|
Joined: 04/06/08 Posts: 2718 Post Likes: +100 Location: Palm Beach, Florida F45
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The massive size of the PC12 would be one of the downsides for me because it's such a hassle to find a place to put it. I'm still thinking King Air 90B ... now I just need a million bucks.  Plus $200,000.00/yr. to operate it.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 2007 TBM 850 Posted: 28 Oct 2009, 20:17 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 01/29/08 Posts: 26338 Post Likes: +13079 Location: Walterboro, SC. KRBW
Aircraft: PC12NG
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The massive size of the PC12 would be one of the downsides for me because it's such a hassle to find a place to put it. I'm still thinking King Air 90B ... now I just need a million bucks.  It's not a hassle to find room for a KA90 but it is a hassle to find room for a PC12?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 2007 TBM 850 Posted: 29 Oct 2009, 21:21 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/13/07 Posts: 803 Post Likes: +117
Aircraft: King Air C90A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The massive size of the PC12 would be one of the downsides for me because it's such a hassle to find a place to put it. I'm still thinking King Air 90B ... now I just need a million bucks.  Plus $200,000.00/yr. to operate it.
Yep. That too
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 2007 TBM 850 Posted: 29 Oct 2009, 21:37 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/13/07 Posts: 803 Post Likes: +117
Aircraft: King Air C90A
|
|
King Air 90B 35 ft 6" length 14 ft 3" height 50 ft 3" wingspan Pilatus PC12 47 ft 3" length 14 ft height 53 ft 3" wingspan I'm surprised that the King Air 90B actually has a larger wingspan than the Pilatus PC12 ... the Pilatus is however much longer. I guess the truth is, they are both much larger than a Baron. I always disliked the long wings on the Malibu but at 43 ft, it's a little smaller than the PC12 or the King Air. There is a point at which the airplane becomes too big or complex and then to me, it stops being fun. The JetProp Malibu had a good dose of that. The combination of entering through the air stair door ... flying at 23,000 feet, long wings and stiff handling with very little seat of the pants feel, poor unimproved runway ability all led me to the Baron instead. The grass is always greener certainly applies to airplanes ... I try to remind myself to love my own airplane and stop drooling  over something else.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: 2007 TBM 850 Posted: 30 Oct 2009, 09:21 |
|
 |

|
|
 |
Joined: 12/12/07 Posts: 2947 Post Likes: +1462 Company: Stonehouse Supply,Inc. Location: Wellington-Palm Beach, Florida
Aircraft: Van's RV-14A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: King Air 90B 35 ft 6" length 14 ft 3" height 50 ft 3" wingspan
Pilatus PC12 47 ft 3" length 14 ft height 53 ft 3" wingspan
I'm surprised that the King Air 90B actually has a larger wingspan than the Pilatus PC12 ... the Pilatus is however much longer. Mike, Maybe you made a mistake in the above figures, and I did not research it myself. At Sun-N-Fun, the PC-12 was diagonally across from the TBM 850, and I was amazed at how much larger the PC-12 was.
_________________ "Don't Fight the Fed" ~ Martin Zweig
|
|
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
|
|
|
|