That is an example of fear from piston unreliability mixed with turbine costs.

If you are truly frightened by some engine event, then get on the engine program which is power by the hour. Craig said it cost him $42.75/hr/engine for the program, at 75 hours/year, that's $6,400 per year. Remember this includes SCHEDULED maintenance, UNSCHEDULED events, HOT SECTION, OVERHAUL, ADs, and SBs. And it includes a bit of profit, too. Think about it.

Nobody would sell you an engine program, that includes ALL of those things, for a Baron for $6400/year to fly 132 hours/year (roughly same miles as MU2 75 hours). That works out to $24/hr/engine, that barely covers overhaul reserve much less any routine maintenance and certainly no "events" along the way.

As for the rest of the airplane, the turbine puts less stress on everything, so that lasts longer, too.

Insurance typically covers FOD damage, too, as mine does.

Mike C.

One RAM engine installed on 58P $60K, according to RAM, TBO of 1600. Include a set of jugs, turbo, some exhaust work in between, and your total cost per side is 80K, or 50 per hour. Just about what it costs of put a Garret Grenade on a engine program and have your costs be exactly predictable. The costs are identical. Yours just happen in $80K increments, instead of $240K increments. The difference is, on an engine program, you won't have to pay for it if it decides to explode. I'd like to see RAM offer a free replacement when it throws a rod.

Once again, check the price on your cowl flap motor. Beech is asking $54K…

Now check the speed delta 280 vs 220 knots, the the fact that Jet A is 70% of 100LL.

One RAM engine installed on 58P $60K, according to RAM, TBO of 1600. Include a set of jugs, turbo, some exhaust work in between, and your total cost per side is 80K, or 50 per hour. Just about what it costs of put a Garret Grenade on a engine program and have your costs be exactly predictable. The costs are identical. Yours just happen in $80K increments, instead of $240K increments. The difference is, on an engine program, you won't have to pay for it if it decides to explode. I'd like to see RAM offer a free replacement when it throws a rod.

Once again, check the price on your cowl flap motor. Beech is asking $54K...

Big difference is you cannot maintain a turboprop in a half assed manner, or at least it's much harder. You can skip a lot of corners on a twin engine piston if you have a "willing" mechanic.

Craig- Flew Tpe-331 for 3000+ hours in the early 90s but never owned a TP but would like to and the MU2 would be great !!
I don't like comparing aircraft per/HR simply because at the lower annual hours the comparison is skewed. I'd like to see the MU2 vice the B58 flying 75 hours a year...
I would expect a MU2 to climb better and cruise higher.

The TP ownership is hard to compare against the 58. Heck, just about every airport has some sort of Mechanic that can work on a Baron or A36-- Just not sure if your AOG that Willie the mechanic could help with the MU2

Only crazy people and fools look for a "willing mechanic"; fortunately, that seems to be another thing that's changed some since the 90's. I feel like people take aviation a lot more seriously these days.

Early MU2s (like mine) have far cheaper plex windshields that require less often replacement and are far cheaper to replace. All MU2s are known ice, even those with plex windshields (which use glycol).


One, engines are universally on oil analysis and they can detect small problems with great precision. The wear "signal" is not swamped by the crap in a piston engine. Problems are caught before they happen. My oil analysis shows not a single wear metal over 1 ppm. Iron is 0.1 ppm on my last sample.

Two, FOD is the most common unpredictable engine event and it is generally covered by insurance.

Three, this event rarely takes out both the gear box and the hot section, so you have half an engine to rebuild, not all of it.

Four, these sorts of events happen VERY rarely.

Fifth, you can buy used engines, so there are ways to keep flying without having to do a complete engine rebuild.


You mean throwing a rod through a case is a broken finger nail?


The 40 minutes is nice but not the major reason to go turbine. The ability to go when the Baron doesn't is nicer. The ability to not have the airplane in the shop for weeks is even nicer still.


You lack imagination of what "worst case" means for piston aircraft.


Yes, but those eyes need to be attached to a brain as well which can assess the situation fairly. If all you can do is evaluate the worst case scenario, you should never have become a pilot in the first place.

Make no mistake, I suffered from great anxiety about all of these issues. Now 7 years into owning an MU2, I have fully recovered from that.

Mike C.

That drives UP the cost of owning a piston twin, IMO.

Mike C.

Early MU2s (like mine) have far cheaper plex windshields that require less often replacement and are far cheaper to replace. All MU2s are known ice, even those with plex windshields (which use glycol).


One, engines are universally on oil analysis and they can detect small problems with great precision. The wear "signal" is not swamped by the crap in a piston engine. Problems are caught before they happen. My oil analysis shows not a single wear metal over 1 ppm. Iron is 0.1 ppm on my last sample.

Two, FOD is the most common unpredictable engine event and it is generally covered by insurance.

Three, this event rarely takes out both the gear box and the hot section, so you have half an engine to rebuild, not all of it.

Four, these sorts of events happen VERY rarely.

Fifth, you can buy used engines, so there are ways to keep flying without having to do a complete engine rebuild.


You mean throwing a rod through a case is a broken finger nail?


The 40 minutes is nice but not the major reason to go turbine. The ability to go when the Baron doesn't is nicer. The ability to not have the airplane in the shop for weeks is even nicer still.


You lack imagination of what "worst case" means for piston aircraft.


Yes, but those eyes need to be attached to a brain as well which can assess the situation fairly. If all you can do is evaluate the worst case scenario, you should never have become a pilot in the first place.

Make no mistake, I suffered from great anxiety about all of these issues. Now 7 years into owning an MU2, I have fully recovered from that.

Mike C.

I think the min hours/year on some programs goes down to 75.


I personally don't share that view. It can also be a negative, too, as there is this requirement to keep paying in or lose the value so far spent. The new owner may not want the program, but the old owner wants the value paid for.

I didn't want to be on the programs, and most MU2s are not.


I'm not a billionaire, and I computed my costs would be better off program and I was willing to take the small but non zero risk of a uninsured major event.

In the end, I'm never going to reach overhaul, so my engine value will be determined by the market when I sell.


It is a lot closer than you think.

I guarantee I have spent less on engine maintenance per mile than a Baron owner who has flown the exact same missions as me even if the Baron has had NO engine events (cylinder pulled, overhaul, etc). The Baron pilot will overhaul his engines 5 TIMES before I overhaul mine for the same miles flown. He will change oil 30 TIMES more often per mile.

Fuel cost per mile is about the same and the 100LL versus Jet-A spread is getting worse. There are a large number of places now I can get jet fuel for under $3/gallon.

For the small cost increment over a Baron, you get 300+ knots, FL280, turbine reliability, known ice, pressurized large cabin. That's a DEAL!

Mike C.

I'd like to see the numbers flying a P Baron and an MU2 75 hours annually. Mid time engines, capital cost, hangar all in...

My minimum on the hours is 75 for GMP.

FYI. My OP has the costs broken out.

It looks like MU2s have various seating configuration, engines etc...
What will $400K get me?

Educated me..

Please post your budget for operating this aircraft..

It's really hard to get your head around something being cheap when overhauls can be north of 300k, but I can say that I've never seen any big surprises with TP's and Jets for over 20 years, at least from the motor side. They are reliable as all get out. Not reliable enough to only have one though...

Other systems can get you, like windows and air cycle machines, but the engines are bullet proof. If it's a concern the engine program makes much sense. Sounds like many go to the Pressurized Piston, which is the worst of all worlds when it comes to maintenance and reliability, so I'm sure the TP is a welcome addition. Essentially, you are going from the worst to the best in terms of efficiency, from an operational and maintenance perspective.

GMP is the cost of the hours used to ante in. One motor had 50 hours; it was 42.75 an hour to play, so just over 2k. The other motor is just about to cycle out, I've got about 40 cycles left; it was 170k to start with a limit of 270k at the overhaul. The program does increase with inflation, but then again, so do the parts from Honeywell. At least I've got a cap on the increases in my contract this way. Also, about three weeks after I got on the program, I saw a note for SBs on the motors-

"Honeywell has recently issued a few service bulletins of interest for MU2 owners and operators. The first one to note is Service Bulletin TPE331-72-2208. This is a Category 2 service bulletin which addresses a substantial improvement to reliability. 72-2208 applies to all second stage compressor impellers P/N 893482-1 thru -5 and 3107056-1,-2 so it will likely affect all MU2 engines currently being operated.





Craig-- Why don't you include you MX program expense in your "ALL IN" numbers? The programs to me are just a prepayment program or insurance.