I guess if your yearly usage is <100 hours, it would be about the same wash then, correct?

And it doesn't require a "service center" per se for the Mits, does it? Any I/A can sign off the 100-hour inspection on a turbine aircraft.

I understand a service center will obviously know the eccentricities of the aircraft better than someone who doesn't work on them regularly, but is there anything special to a service center that requires the expenditure to fly there specifically?

100 hours / year makes for an easy Mu2 interval.
I wish they had set the 1 year interval to also trigger at 150 or 200 hours instead of 100.

Mu2 doesn’t require a Service Center, just an A&P (not even the I.A. required for a C150).

But you want somebody with a lifetime of experience working on a Mitz. Not a training program for mechanics type of plane. We flew from AZ to TN every year for Mx just to reach the tribal knowledge.

It’s the kind of plane you need some phone support on now and then.
Me in panic: “OMG~it just did this, OMG”
Answer from a guru: “LOL not a problem. just pull this and reset that and I’ll ship you a new thing Monday”.

That’s a level of airplane management I’m not replay prepared for and really don’t want. The idea that the local guy on my field can’t solve any problem with the airplane, maybe with the help of a tech guru from the type club on the phone would be scary to me. Makes it way to easy to end up AOG at home, much less on the road. I know turbine planes are more reliable but they do break sometimes. Obviously flying for specialized maintenance (major engine or critical airframe work) would be fine but to have to do so every 100 hours seems a bit much.

It’s my understanding that for part 91 ops only the inspection part of the maintenance programs are required. None of the actual maintenance tasks are. Can you not just have a local guy do the inspections and take it to the guru for every fifth one or something like that?

Maybe I misunderstood what you were saying here, but a non-IA A&P cannot sign off progressive inspections. It has to be an IA.

Or did you mean inspections between annuals?

Well, I'm in Nashville, actually on the field with Reese and company, so I know they're local, they're just a bit pricey.

The difference between a $5,000 annual and a $32,000 like I just paid for on Laz.

Not that those places aren't worth their weight in gold for the depth of experience on the Mits, but I would also fall in the camp of "I'll let my local I/A do the annuals and take it to the tribal knowledge folks if something weird pops up my mechanic isn't familiar with", kind of like I have a local I/A installing a G4 in Laz because it's pretty straightforward but hunting a Duke expert to put this firewall shutoff cable in.

Saves a good bit of money with that approach. Don't go cheap on the important stuff, but don't drop an open checkbook annual with a retail shop, either.

Just my approach.

I think maintenance plans become a combination of your belief structure, the plane you fly, and your location. Where I live, there really isn’t a “local guy.” Both the King Airs and the Mits fly elsewhere for service. The King Airs are a whole lot more common than the Mits so the flight is shorter because service centers are more numerous. I wouldn’t say that service at a specialized facility is necessarily more expensive, often the opposite is true. They know exactly what tends to break (more effective preventative maintenance), they can troubleshoot problems more rapidly and with greater efficiency (they’ve seen it all before) and often times if a part needs replacing they have it in stock or they can try it and see if it fixes the problem and go a different direction if it doesn’t. If the starter/generator brushes don’t meet spec, for example, they just overhaul them in house and move on. Things like that make it cheaper, not more expensive. If you have an experienced mechanic for your type of plane on your field, that’s great, and it makes sense to use them. But if you don’t and need to travel anyway, for me, it makes more sense to go someplace specialized. Your mileage may vary.
I don’t know if it’s the plane, the systems, or the service level, but in 3.5 years and 750 hours so far in the Mits, flying on a schedule 2-3x/week, I’ve never had to ask a mechanic to come to my hangar to look at the plane. Can’t say that about my prior piston twin experience (even with specialized service center care), not by a long shot.

Maybe I misunderstood what you were saying here, but a non-IA A&P cannot sign off progressive inspections. It has to be an IA.

Or did you mean inspections between annuals?

So if you don't fly 100 hours in a year, say it's 50-60, you don't need an annual inspection?

Or you do the 100 hour as the annual and don't need an I/A?

Assuming not on a maintenance program Part 91 individual owner.

It's 1 year or 100 hours. Mine is going in next month. I'm going to have to make up fake squawks to fix to give him something to do.

That is actually not correct. Progressive inspections per an approved program (whether from the mfr or another FAA approved plan) must be signed off by an IA or a Repair Station.

FAR Part 65 does not give an A&P without an IA the authority to sign off a progressive inspection. The only required inspection an A&P can sign off on is the 100 hour inspection done for non-part 135 aircraft for hire (that flight school 150).

Part 65 explicitly gives an IA the authority to do a progressive inspection, the A or P does not have this.

Do you have anything back that understanding up? Like a letter from the FAA?

In my Solitaire I quite often fly from KPDK to KFXE which takes just under 2 hours. The Atlanta class B keeps me at 4-5000ft for 15 minutes and I generally burn 100-105gph, in cruise I typically see 70-80 gph @98% and 290-300ktas. I don't push the limits (314ktas), but I don't pull back to to 96-97% either.

I just put my plane in for its 100/200/600 inspection, and had no squawks. In fact, over the last 5 years, I can count the squawks on one hand and I never cancelled a trip.
I certainly can't say that about all of the twin Ceesnas that I've owned.

The inspections are 100hr/12 month. So you have to do them annually anyway.


All twin turbine aircraft are on a maintenance program, not on annual inspections. See 14 CFR part 91.409(f).

The Mits maintenance program is based on 100/200/600 hour intervals, and the 100/200 are specified as “or 12 months”.

That's what I thought, still have to do the Annual and it still has to have an I/A.

I knew the turbines had to go by the manufacturer's interval inspections, but when I said "Maintenance Plan" I'm thinking more of Power by the Hour (if that even exists still) or similar ESP.

I haven't been in the 91/135 Turbine world for over a decade, not sure what has changed. Thanks all for the clarification.

Actually our provider Chuck Walton in TN is not even an A&P, just an A. He’s been around for a minute...

When I had my come-to-Jesus at the FSDO they poured over our Mx records and only commented that I had failed to write the letter selecting out Mx Program per Jon’s note of 91.409f. Letter added, problem solved.

T

It seems you are in the majority opinion....phase inspections for mfr programs only require an A&P. I find it really odd, as a maint program for a single engine turbine must be overseen or signed off by an IA (or repair station or mfr) per 91.409(d)(1), but add another engine and only an A&P is needed.

Maybe the reasoning is that 91.409(d) programs are not mfr developed so they want more scrutiny of when the program should change.