Matt,
According to Avex a TBM authority long range speed for A/B models is 242 knots and from what I've heard with radar you lose a couple of knots

I guess I'd look at this different. The main variables would be speed of the aircraft, fuel burn per hour, depreciation cost. I'd try to keep everything else the same such as hangar, maintenance, fuel cost per gallon, insurance, training-- These items should be relatively close for the comparison. I'd also take an eyes open approach on what aircraft would hold it's value better for when the time come to sell, so depreciation plays a factor.

If I was in a position to purchase any plane I'd look at how much I would be loosing when time comes to sell. Buying an aircraft for 2m and flying for 2 years then selling for 1.9 m is a win in my book vice buying a buying for 2m and selling for 1.4m.. I like to buy value.

Of course 2M vice 600k tied up on a plane is lost opportunity on cash return also.

They are spread annually by a lot more than 10%. 218k per year mu-2 and 370k for king air. Those numbers represent the high end garret airplanes!

I think you are missing a large segment of airplanes by ignoring TPs that can complete the same mission for half the total costs of these more expensive planes.

The commander 690, mu-2 or Merlins advantages are Lower purchase price and garret engines.

I understand the lack of data can be a problem. If you just lowered the insurance and the purchase price of the solitaire and marquise by half and adjust speed to 270kts. You would have a good ball park figure.

Payload and range are very important factors if you are more than 5 people. Brand new King Air 250 can carry 10 people. Fill it with gas and it can't even take a pilot.

Payload and range are very important factors if you are more than 5 people. Brand new King Air 250 can carry 10 people. Fill it with gas and it can't even take a pilot.

Mike- I guess that would be another discussion with regard to aircraft mission.

I would look at the spreadsheet as if I was paying cash for ALL aircraft just to get a true cost to operate each aircraft. Finance charges just skew the numbers... On the flip side Depreciation is what it is and market dictates this... IE; PC12 has no make depreciation - which signals a demand for the product and a large number in aircraft ownership.

Ok- so lets assume for comparison we only need to carry 4 pax and these are the planes we are comparing. The distance is not specific either for comparison.

Take a look and see what you think. If there is a plane I've overlooked, or I've made an egregious error I can easily update the data.[/quote]


i cannot get the formulas but i suggest you plug in an evolution lancair and see the numbers
fits all the categories except experimental
>250 knots, range over 1300 NM, turbine, 28 gallons/hr

Andy,

Avex are certainly experts. I got my information from the TBM's Pilot's Operating Handbook. But it depends on temps and altitude. It's not worth debating.

Matt



Matt,
According to Avex a TBM authority long range speed for A/B models is 242 knots and from what I've heard with radar you lose a couple of knots

The aircraft market is powerful and grounds older aircraft that are no longer economically competitive. You can pick on individual line items such as I think the CJ1 insurance is too low and the Mustang insurance is too high but that is not going to materially change the rankings.

You can draw the line on your list at aircraft with annual costs of around $300K or below. If they can all do your required missions in range and payload then you should look at subjective criteria of safety and quality of ride.

The TBM700 has been the economy winner for a long time. The PC12 is the long distance hauler. For basically the same cost you can fly a twin engine turbojet Citation at 360+ kts up to FL410 above most weather as long as you are willing to commit to the on-going training requirements. That is hard to beat if the CJ/Mustang fits your range and payload needs.

I'll make this easy for you..

Since you have a new SR22 you're not going to buy a bird that needs loads of avionics work and still not have the ease of use you have with your SR22. No matter what you put into an old bird it's still not going to have a GFC700.

If you want a fast SR22 get the Mustang. It's the exact same payload and range as your Cirrus. It's a lot of airplane for the money.

If you need more payload and range get the PC12NG.

If you want a fast PC12NG get a Phenom 300.

These are the most bang for the buck (hold their value) options on the market.

Are Mustangs holding there value like PC12's? I wouldn't think so but I don't follow that market.

Not so Tim! Whether you finance and pay interest or pay cash and lose interest capital has a cost. The more expensive to purchase the plane the more it costs in interest paid or foregone.

i cannot get the formulas but i suggest you plug in an evolution lancair and see the numbers
fits all the categories except experimental
>250 knots, range over 1300 NM, turbine, 28 gallons/hr[/quote]

I would have been happy to do it for you but they don't include experimentals in the database. Does C&D or BC&A? I don't think they do and it's probably because they aren't considered "business" aircraft. BWTHDIK.

Are Mustangs holding there value like PC12's? I wouldn't think so but I don't follow that market.