Has anybody considered or involved in a 2-4 person partnership to own a bird like this and make it make more sense?

David,
talking about FOD, do you operate on unimproved airstrips or you dont recommend it?

A light A model @ $1m would be sweet, most of the depreciation is taken care of.

:

We don't operate into any unimproved strips, but the POH does talk about such operations. I personally don't feel the TBM is suited for anything less than a well groomed, dry grass runway. The skinny high psi tires, stiff struts, and minimal prop clearance just invite problems off the pavement. This is where the PC-12 shines.

I can respond with some experience to this thread - I just sold my TBM 700 SN 75 N975TB and replaced it with a TN'ed A36 - N435DG.

I had owned the TBM for 10 years and put about 1,000 hours on it. It was a wonderful plane with few of the problems that plagued the newer models. It started cool, was cool on a quick turn start, was very light, hence was very fast - as in flight planning for 280 kts.

Before RVSM, I would routinely make long flights at FL:310 and had phenomonal speeds west to east. It was easy to fly - provided you stayed ahead of the plane, and the most enjoyable plane I.ve ever flown. Imagine a flight envelope that includes stall speed of 61 kts and top speed of 290Kts.

But a number of you have found the critical issue: $$$$. It was expensive to fly, maintain and insure . Plus you'd better be planning to go high quickly when you turn on the P&W dash 64. It burns 35GPH taxiing out for departure The $100 hamburger quickly becomes a $450 meal.

On the other hand, I've already put nearly 25 hours on the Bonanza in 1 1/2 months, and I'm just getting started. Boy this is great!

Nice John,
I just read on TBMOPA a tread about the new owner who bought N975TB.
I like the lighter A model.

Wow! Is that true? 35GPH taxiing? I didn't think that was possible. Surely that equates to quite a bit of power. Where does it go?

That's easy Eric...hot air, smoke, and noise. My work plane is 2gal/min each P&W at idle.

I read an account of someone reminiscing about flying 'straight pipe' Lear 25s for an on-demand parcel courier service. Their fuel-burn during taxi was apparently higher than in cruise so it was standard procedure to taxi on one engine. Any clearance delay had a potential to create a fuel emergency at the destination.

In the 850 and I believe in the 700 also, you bring the condition to HI idle after start to keep the prop RPM out of the yellow and also to turn on the bleed air and a/c. This creates a lot of noise, a high fuel burn, and a lot of power while taxiing. I have to taxi in beta the entire way even at max weight to keep the speed under control. When I do feather checks enroute to the runway, the 850 actually sprints forward in feather and I have to ride the brakes a little bit. There's usually enough thrust from the exhaust to push me all the way down the taxiway in feather if I let it.

To expand on my earlier TBM story, the P&W -64 that powered my plane was a seriously de-rated engine. If I recall, it was 1200 Shaft Horsepower flat rated at 700 HP. This meant that the engine was not being taxed at all when in normal flight, and it would maintain power at high altitudes. My first hot section at 1500 hours was a non-event. They did a compressor wash and put it back together. FOD could be a non-issue if you used the inertial seperator as per book instructions.

There is a TBM owner that is well known in TBM circles that has an early A model. He is an experienced NASCAR mechanic/operator who has a wealth of knowledge about engine mechanics. He has taken the de-ice boots and the radar pod off his plane, and routinely runs it over temp and torque limits. He gets phenoninal speeds and claims that he is not damaging his engine/gearbox because of the serious de-rating that P&W has applied to the engine. P&W officials distance themselves from him and toe the company line on temp/torque limits.

While the Pilatus PC12 has had some engine failures associated with its fuel control unit, the TBM, to my knowledge has only had one catastrophic failure of a -64. In that occurance, a turbine wheel failed, and the plane was "glided" to an on-field landing that resulted in a couple of flat main tires. This failure resulted in a SB that dictated the replacement of the offending turbine wheel. P&W offered a one-time discount on the wheel replacement which extended the TBO by 500 hours.

My experience with Socata and P&W was positive, and, in the case of Socata, a gradual recognition that they needed to consider customer satisfaction as it applied to their main source of sales - the USA. They may be a French company, but one that is open to "constructive criticism" by its plane owners.

In sum, I would recommend an early A model TBM to someone whose requirements and pocket book fit the correct profile. The plane is built like a bridge and the engine runs like a swiss watch. Plus the early models are so much lighter than the recent ones that they really do perform close to the original claim of 300 Kts.

In the 850 and I believe in the 700 also, you bring the condition to HI idle after start to keep the prop RPM out of the yellow and also to turn on the bleed air and a/c. This creates a lot of noise, a high fuel burn, and a lot of power while taxiing. I have to taxi in beta the entire way even at max weight to keep the speed under control. When I do feather checks enroute to the runway, the 850 actually sprints forward in feather and I have to ride the brakes a little bit. There's usually enough thrust from the exhaust to push me all the way down the taxiway in feather if I let it.

David, thanks for the interesting reading! Any more info, pictures, videos, stories, etc. that you could share with us??

Ditto what John said. I owned an A model for 3 years, purchased new back in 1992. Consistently trued out at 285 knots on 50gph. Very easy airplane to fly, I had no problem with landings, in spite of the "stiff" landing gear, in fact I found it lands just like a Bonanza--I guess to each his own in this regard.

Like most have said, you own an airplane like this because it enhances your business, or you have the money to spend. Regardless, it is a wonderful way to fly.

To see how times have changed, when we sold the TBM in 1995, we actually turned a substantial profit, so much so, that it covered all of our operating expenses over the 3 year period we owned the airplane.

The only negative was Socata's customer service, I'm sure it has improved over the years but back then they made it seem like they did you a favor for selling you the airplane.....P&W wasn't much different either.

I no longer have a business need for a TBM, but if I did have the discretionary income I would buy another one.

In a nutshell, fast, smooth, pressurized comfort that is easy to fly. The expense to achieve all this is relative to your vantage point.

Everyone is recommending the A-model, mhhh, they are right around a million let me see, how many partners does that require .

I found this post on the Socata list quite instructive about the differences between the models:

The main differences are the door, oxygen system, air condition, and MTOW:

- TBM700A: small door, no air condition, chemical oxygen system, MTOW 2954kg
- TBM700B: large door, Keith air condition, chemical oxygen system, MTOW 2954kg
- TBM700C: large door, Honeywell air condition, gaseous oxygen system, MTOW 2954kg
- TBM700C2: large door, Honeywell air condition, gaseous oxygen system, MTOW 3254kg

All types above have the P&WC PT6A64 engine 700shp. The TBM700N (Trade name TBM850) has a P&WC PT6A-66D engine with 850shp. Optional equipment is applicable on all versions.

Due to the higher weight TBM700C2 and TBM700N have a higher Vs0 of 65kt. The lighter types have a Vs0 of 61kt.

I bought a TBM700C2 18 month ago. I decide for this because it has more payload than the former types. Indeed it is havier and a little bit slower, only if you use the MTOW. Normally I fly with one or two paxes and not full fuel, so I have only the same weight as a TBM700B has MTOW. But I have a buffer if I need the weight.

Typical empty weight of a TBM700B is 1990kg
Typical empty weight of a TBM700C2 is 2125kg

So is the empty weight 135kg more. But the MTOW is 370kg more. So you have 270kg pay load more! I can fly with full fuel, 3 paxes and luggage and have a endurance of 1400 nautical miles.

The TBM700N is about 10-15kt faster, but it needs also 15% more fuel. On typical 2 hour legs you spare 10 minutes but burn a lot of more fuel.