Just checked with my friend who bought a TBM900. He is an owner and very concerned with FOD.
"Yes, land and take off with bypass, start and taxi without to not hover up junk backwards through bypass exit port. "

This was discussed with both of us at Sim Com. Initial and recurrent. Maybe different instructors are different. Though not by the book. There is some video out there that shows crap getting sucked up, where air should be exiting.

But I can only say what some people do.

(I am addressing TBMs but King Airs are likely different because of the vertical distance involved.)

edit, repeat post.

Sorry for the confusion. No, the Mustang does not have auto-actiivating boots. You have to flip the switch, but you activate them at the first sign of visible ice. Same idea.

So.... Daher just laid their cards down on the table and looked Textron in the eye and said, "What you got?" The Swiss fellow over on the other end of the table is watching to see if either blinks. The question is, what are the other two players holding, and when will they show? I'm surprised that they didn't wait until SnF. I wonder if someone else is about to announce something.

I guess one could argue that the (pressurized) SETP market has a two tier stratification, with TBM/PA46 on one tier and Denali/PC-12 on the other, with a bit of crossover between the tiers.

Yeah I wouldn't say Pilatus cares much what TBM does. But Pilatus is looooong overdue to upgrade the PC12 similarly to what TBM has done with the 940. So yes, they're watching and waiting.

I think Pilatus has had a replacement ready to drop and are just waiting for the right time to drop it.

Just checked with my friend who bought a TBM900. He is an owner and very concerned with FOD.
"Yes, land and take off with bypass, start and taxi without to not hover up junk backwards through bypass exit port. "

This was discussed with both of us at Sim Com. Initial and recurrent. Maybe different instructors are different. Though not by the book. There is some video out there that shows crap getting sucked up, where air should be exiting.

But I can only say what some people do.

(I am addressing TBMs but King Airs are likely different because of the vertical distance involved.)

IIRC the auto de-ice was just for the IS and the heated surfaces. It comes on when icing conditions are met, gives the pilot a yellow CAS warning, which the pilot is supposed to press (to extinguish), and turn on the de-ice manually, which prevents the CAS warning from coming back.

I don't recall anything about the boots cycling.

I think, like others with TBM's and wanting to own folks, feel the biggest benefit Daher could come out with is more range. A new engine with the same or minor improvement in BHP but with 20 % more fuel efficiency came to market it would be a huge winner....
Makes many more flights that are on the edge very doable.

Is that a GE engine or TPE (doubtful). Sorry for those who are hopping on the Denali bandwagon but look at GE's financial situation and decide whether they and Textron are going to keep moving forward together. I hope so but GE is not the cash cow today like yesterday.

In my case I stop usually in winter heading west ~900nm's for fuel against winter head winds. I have made the trip on long range cruise settings but that slows the TAS to KA/Pilatus speeds of 240-250KTAS. Give me a new TBM traveling at 330KTAS burning 45-52GPH and range is dramatically better. Currently in the Legacy 850 Max Cruise is ~302-308KTAS and fuel burn for the trip is 58 GPH door to door. New TBM 9XX would then be able to carry you 1650 nm possibly, in 5 hours, with (IFR) plenty of fuel reserve. Just think Midway to Henderson KHND (Las Vegas) in 5 hours 16 minutes non stop against 70kt headwinds. Give some cheap jets a run for their money.

My preference for most flights is max 3-3.5 hours. Give me range and the same 305-330 TAS and makes a speed demon have even better legs... Now the engineers can tell me how that is in the mix design wise.

There's not that much improvement to get in a PT6.

Easy to do with a large block TPE331 (-14 or -15). Hard to fit to singles, though.

Maybe the new GE engine has far better specifics?


Well, an "easy" way is to raise the ceiling and fly higher. That increases still air range numbers nicely. Unfortunately, in the headwind bucking scenario, higher means higher headwinds usually, so it doesn't actually help those cases very much.

You want more range and nearly the same speed? Get a 441. Easily 500 nm longer legs than a TBM.

Mike C.

I was just thinking along these lines, how could they really improve beyond this without a complete redesign of the airframe? Do they need to for marginal market share vs. other platforms it would start competing with?

They've done (not in order) the avionics, they've cleaned up the airframe as much as possible, they've added the pilot door, 5 blade prop, and now they have really improved single pilot engine management. I think the powerplant is the last frontier.

The PT-6, while reliable, is a thirsty girl. It would be interesting to see them hang some derivation of the GE engine on the front and see what that will do. Beyond that, not sure, could they do a new wing (for more fuel) like Piper did with the M600, without having to redesign the whole plane?

I figure the next step up for a TBM 8xx/9xx pilot would be something more cabin-class, or a twinjet, or both. I always thought the Epic E1000 was basically a TBM/PC-12 love child in terms of spec sheet, although I haven't heard much about them lately. If there was a 330 kt PC-12, that would be the next logical step...

PT6 isn't an option for better SFC. GE seems to be the only game on tap. PC12 for those who like having the ferrari of the SETP world, is not the girl to take to the dance. Too much metal following you around.

I'm not looking, but if I was range, would increase useable "speed" for me. Door to door would have a lot more airports in full fuel range if we got a 20% decrease in FF. Oh well a non engineer can always dream of that "best of all planes" tail dragger that looks like a P51, burns 35GPH, carries two and all the luggage you can dream of, range of 1500nm and perhaps a few bombs and 50 calibers in case there is a domesticate dispute that required attention in the future.

Daher has a very loyal owners group and there are some who have regularly moved up as newer models come out, though not in the numbers Cirrus experiences.

While I was at Simcom a couple of weeks ago I went through a series of thought exercises regarding whether it was worth it to me to upgrade. I looked at the various things that have been upgraded since my 2007 model: G1000 or G3000, GFC 700 auto pilot, winglets, Rubik's Cube potty, single lever power control, passenger heat/cool switches, heated seats, 5 blade prop, 330 knot top speed, autothrottles, autoice, IS deployment above 200KIAS.

Depending on new or used I'd need to spend between $1.5 to $2.5 million more than what I paid for my plane to get those things.

I'd gain 10 knots real world airspeed, avionics that are less flexible in my opinion that what I have now, winglets that don't do much and some doo dads. I've got the prop, a potty and lambs wool seats that render heated ones meaningless. The IS flexibility is nice.

My conclusion is I wouldn't gain enough from the additional cost and depreciation to make it worth it. Instead I've decided to upgrade the autopilot with the GFC600 gets certified later this year. My interior is fine but I'd like to have more cabinetry so I may do an interior redo to go with the newer paint.

Now, if they get the speed up to 350 knots that's something I'd be very serious about spending more money on.

So, Don, unless I'm an outlier I think you're just going to have to belly up to the bar. The TBM is an incredible airplane, you should buy one!

The Denali will certainly compete with PC12. But I don't think the TBM and PA46 are pointed at the same market at all.

I would love more range if it came with no more flying time. I'm with you and 3.5 is enough. After that it's just a question of how much discomfort you can endure. I was the leading bidder on the TBMOPA auction for the ferry flight until I watched the video of one on YouTube. After that I let someone else beat me...

There is a lot of range now if you're willing to pull the throttle back to Pilatus speeds. What we need is a bigger motor (or less derating).

You should always start with IS off so you get cooler start, then on for taxiing & takeoff.
As per the POH or PIM as DAHER calls it.







Just checked with my friend who bought a TBM900. He is an owner and very concerned with FOD.
"Yes, land and take off with bypass, start and taxi without to not hover up junk backwards through bypass exit port. "

This was discussed with both of us at Sim Com. Initial and recurrent. Maybe different instructors are different. Though not by the book. There is some video out there that shows crap getting sucked up, where air should be exiting.

But I can only say what some people do.

(I am addressing TBMs but King Airs are likely different because of the vertical distance involved.)