BeechTalk - BT - How I set out to buy an MU-2 and ended up in a 441

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Jun 2016, 20:25

Username Protected wrote:

Get rid of the lousy hartzells and add value to your aircraft by installing MT's.

Yeah, I could probably add $20K worth of value by spending $90K! Sounds like aviation!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Jun 2016, 20:50

Username Protected wrote:

Get rid of the lousy hartzells and add value to your aircraft by installing MT's.

Yeah, I could probably add $20K worth of value by spending $90K! Sounds like aviation!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 16 Jun 2016, 23:58

Username Protected wrote:

My 7 year prop AMOC comes up early next year, so I do plan on writing a larger than usual check for 2017.

Are you going to just "inspect" or "overhaul"? Personally I think all the overhauls over the years have not made the situation better, there are pretty compelling economic reasons to just comply with the inspection.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Jun 2016, 09:38

Username Protected wrote:

When I ran the numbers most of the birds came up to about the same on per nautical mile, even with acquisition cost, give or take 10% or so.

I need to see that accounting magic where a $3M airplane is that same cost as a $500K one.

Just the interest on the loan exceeds my entire yearly budget.

Smells like some self delusion is occurring here, often a necessary ingredient to aviation.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Jun 2016, 09:40

Username Protected wrote:

I have no need and certainly no budget to move up to this class of plane any time in the future, but I sure do enjoy reading posts/topics like this! I concur with Thomas...and worry what the world might look like in another 20 years since nobody is making planes like the 441, MU-2, etc. any more.

People asked the same question 20 years ago and the planes are still going strong.

The best evidence the next 20 years will be the same is that some turboprops are used in high cycle, high hour situations and have 30,000 hours on them. So the rest of the owner flown fleet has many more hours yet to go.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Jun 2016, 14:01

Quote:

.I recently closed on the 441, but won’t take delivery until September as the GTN750 is installed and approved by an ACO, the engines are overhauled, and I add some other items like auto-ignition, a ground clearance switch, etc.

I just did my engines and panel if I can help let me know.

I installed a ground com switch in my commander and use it almost every leg, it's good idea. I also installed a hook for my headset and a push to talk to use when on AP.

Really like these simple upgrades.

Enjoy.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Jun 2016, 18:41

Username Protected wrote:

When I ran the numbers most of the birds came up to about the same on per nautical mile, even with acquisition cost, give or take 10% or so.

I need to see that accounting magic where a $3M airplane is that same cost as a $500K one.

Just the interest on the loan exceeds my entire yearly budget.

Smells like some self delusion is occurring here, often a necessary ingredient to aviation.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Jun 2016, 18:59

Conklin & deDecker seems to pull numbers out of their, um, backyard. They have always estimated high on op cost compared to my personal experience. I have no idea where their estimate for the PC12 falls relative to experience.

Plus, importantly, they assume 300 hours per year (by your snapshot, seems like most of the C&D sheets I've seen assume 400hrs/yr). I fly 100 hours per year. That substantially changes the percentage of capital costs relative to the total. My entire year's all in cost is not much more than your interest cost alone.

If you are a high hour operator, it makes more sense to get a higher capital cost aircraft to gain lower operating cost. If you are a low hour operator, it does not.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Jun 2016, 19:24

Jon,

Conklin is the only reliable online source that I can produce that's freely available for all viewing.

I am on course for a 400 hrs this year. I fly a crapload.......a turbine has been a godsend.

I do not disagree with you that they may be high and take into account some of the items that we as owner pilots do, like no pro pilot, maintenance review/ferrying, etc. etc. I believe that they factor in upgrades or interior/paint etc.

That being said, my point to folks thinking about a turbine step up, should realize that the hourly costs are not as great as I thought they were, that most turbine prop airplanes are around the same operational costs give or take 10%/15%/20%, so if you are going to step up and go turbine, purchase the airplane you feel most comfortable with AND most importantly that suits your mission. I actually needed a minimum of 9 seats and 1500 mile range. My airplane has been back and forth from South Florida to Cali 8 times this year alone.

This was us a few hours ago.........the amount of stuff that came outta that airplane today astounded me.

......you will also note Kenneth in the back with the handheld doing all the interior vacuuming.......told him no surfing until it was spotless

Attachment:

Crew_And_Stuff.jpg

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Jun 2016, 20:02

Username Protected wrote:

......you will also note Kenneth in the back with the handheld doing all the interior vacuuming.......told him no surfing until it was spotless

If Kenneth needs more practice with the vacuum he can come practice on my airplane next.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Jun 2016, 20:07

Username Protected wrote:

I installed a ground com switch in my commander and use it almost every leg, it's good idea.

What's a ground com switch? I doubt it's a grinder that grinds com switches..

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Jun 2016, 21:51

Username Protected wrote:

I installed a ground com switch in my commander and use it almost every leg, it's good idea.

What's a ground com switch? I doubt it's a grinder that grinds com switches..

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Jun 2016, 22:38

Username Protected wrote:

It is more commonly called a hot switch which will turn on one comm(+ a xponder maybe) unit which allows you to get your IFR clearance (if you are one of the oddballs that flys tprop IFR) along with ATIS or whatever else is nice to have before you start both engines. IE, let's you work a comm without draining the batteries with the avionics master (or burning a bunch of gas)

Stevens switch is labeled PTT, don't know why. The radio has to be turned on and the xmit depressed.

Thanks. Sounds like a smart upgrade. Heard a lot of guys who use a handheld as they preflight and listen to ATIS and get clearances there.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Jun 2016, 22:54

Username Protected wrote:

Thanks. Sounds like a smart upgrade. Heard a lot of guys who use a handheld as they preflight and listen to ATIS and get clearances there.

In the words of my late great instructor "cut out that private pilot bullshit"!

(what he told me when I was flying square patterns in the Merlin....said just turn it on around son)

Everybody who's anybody has a hot switch!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Jun 2016, 23:44

Quote:

Stevens switch is labeled PTT, don't know why. The radio has to be turned on and the xmit depressed.
.

That's actually a push to talk for transmitting. I also have the original PTT on the yoke.

That remote PTT in the picture is used when flying on the AP. Its a very comfortable place for a PTT

The ground com is next to the radio stack and only powers up my GTN 750. I like to get ATIS and clearance before I load passengers maybe 5 to 10 minutes prior to closing the door.

I can then load any modifications to the clearance onto my iPad before engine start and before loading passengers. Once I have engines running all I need to do is send route to the 750 from my iPad through the 210.

Less distractions after start.