banner
banner

29 Mar 2024, 10:27 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 11 Mar 2016, 13:43 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 08/03/10
Posts: 1562
Post Likes: +1781
Company: D&M Leasing Houston
Location: Katy, TX (KTME)
Aircraft: CitationV/C180
I learned this lesson in TN this week when I walked over to a Solitaire owned by a BT'r. I opened the door poked my head in and immediately closed my eyes and walked back toward my lowly F model.


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 11 Mar 2016, 14:10 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12798
Post Likes: +5224
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
Username Protected wrote:
Book numbers for a 421B at FL250/32.5"/1950 RPM is 227 KTAS


Charles

Not sure if yours were that fast, I see max 210 KTAS at 21-22K in the 421B.


I generally operated mine between 55-60% power. Never had it balls to the wall at FL250. 227 doesn't seem crazy though. A malibu will easily do 210 at FL250 and 220 or so is possible in a Mirage.

I'm not saying a 421 is faster than an mu2 at 250. The question was whether a TPE 331-1 would make more horsepower at GTSIO-520 at FL250. I suspect the power outputs are pretty close, maybe a bit higher for the piston.

Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 11 Mar 2016, 14:15 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 02/24/14
Posts: 223
Post Likes: +151
Location: Ponoka AB
Aircraft: P210N
Username Protected wrote:
I learned this lesson in TN this week when I walked over to a Solitaire owned by a BT'r. I opened the door poked my head in and immediately closed my eyes and walked back toward my super nice, ultra economical turbine that outflies comparable pistons for less op-ex F model.


I fixed your post.

Hilgard


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 11 Mar 2016, 17:15 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 10/10/10
Posts: 676
Post Likes: +489
Aircraft: C441 Conquest II
Charles,

I suspect your number is about right for what the -1 is doing at FL250. The important thing to remember is that the TPE could produce more power than that but is temp limited and thus you can't operate it at a higher power setting without damaging it. It's effectively the same thing, but a minor distinction.

We talk about turbines as being normally aspirated but of course that's not true in the way a piston is. All turbines compress the intake air and then it goes to the combustor for combustion. In this way a turbine is more like a turbocharged piston with an exhaust driven power turbine driving an intake compressor which compresses inlet air. Th issue is that there's. O automatic waste plate, so there is a constant drop off in pressure as one climbs similar to a NA engine.

My experience with TPEs is that temp limit becomes the limiting factor far before power loss due to altitude kicks in....in effect (unlike a NA piston) you are not operating with power levers fire walled but rather have them pulled back to keep the temps below max operating.

Hope this makes sense.


Last edited on 11 Mar 2016, 23:57, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 11 Mar 2016, 17:17 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 10/10/10
Posts: 676
Post Likes: +489
Aircraft: C441 Conquest II
James. - don't say that. You looked at a Solitaire and then walked back to your MU-2 to fly home. There will always be a bigger, better, more capable plane...but you are now an MU-2 owner operator....something 95% of pilots would kill to be able to say!


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 11 Mar 2016, 20:01 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/15/13
Posts: 753
Post Likes: +297
Location: Florida-Missouri
Aircraft: V35B
Username Protected wrote:
James. - don't say that. You looked at a Solitaire and then walked back to your MU-2 to fly home. There will always be a bigger, better, more capable plane...but you are now an MU-2 owner operator....something 95% of pilots would kill to be able to say!


Dave, I already told James this very same thing. He's got a great looking bird, inside and out,- and a huge step up from his former Baron in capability!

_________________
__________________________


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 11 Mar 2016, 21:57 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 08/21/14
Posts: 280
Post Likes: +86
Location: KPDK
Aircraft: C421B MU2-40 Solitai
I think people under-estimate an F model. At any altitude it will leave a 421 in its dust. Don't get me wrong, I had a 421 for years and I loved it. 421s are the nicest piston planes out there, but there is no way that it will perform like an F model.

_________________
Sandy


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 11 Mar 2016, 23:04 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 11/11/12
Posts: 1560
Post Likes: +809
Location: san francisco (KHAF)
Aircraft: C55 baron
shoot. maybe I shouldn't go to PROP.
Username Protected wrote:
Ignorance is bliss. Never educate yourself unless you can afford the post-educational results...


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 11 Mar 2016, 23:29 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/15/13
Posts: 753
Post Likes: +297
Location: Florida-Missouri
Aircraft: V35B
Username Protected wrote:
Ignorance is bliss. Never educate yourself unless you can afford the post-educational results...


I caught the bug after attending a PROP back in 2002 :shrug:
_________________
__________________________


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 11 Mar 2016, 23:58 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 10/10/10
Posts: 676
Post Likes: +489
Aircraft: C441 Conquest II
Username Protected wrote:
shoot. maybe I shouldn't go to PROP.

Even if you never fly an MU-2, you will find the technical/safety briefings at PROP to be some of the best safety and aviation training you have ever received in your career. I remain impressed that Mitsubishi picks up the tab and generously allows those who don't own/operate MU-2s to attend...


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 12 Mar 2016, 00:44 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 11/11/12
Posts: 1560
Post Likes: +809
Location: san francisco (KHAF)
Aircraft: C55 baron
Username Protected wrote:
shoot. maybe I shouldn't go to PROP.

Even if you never fly an MU-2, you will find the technical/safety briefings at PROP to be some of the best safety and aviation training you have ever received in your career. I remain impressed that Mitsubishi picks up the tab and generously allows those who don't own/operate MU-2s to attend...

I'm looking forward to it. I'm there to decide if it's the next plane (it's just about perfect for my mission), though probably a year or two out from a purchase.

Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 08:59 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/30/15
Posts: 1503
Post Likes: +641
Location: Dalton, Ga. KDNN
Obviously I don't know what I don't know :scratch: about turbines and MU2's but what are the drawbacks to this one. Obviously missing logs and the 7500 hour coming up but the engine hours seem pretty decent ???

http://www.controller.com/listings/airc ... ishi-mu-2j

Is there a website that educates on hot section inspections, overhauls etc ?

_________________
Mooney Bravo & Just Superstol


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 10:46 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 10/10/10
Posts: 676
Post Likes: +489
Aircraft: C441 Conquest II
It's a former freighter (copilot door is the tell tale data point). Fairly low time for a former freighter. Missing logs are an issue. Value drop probably balanced out by the low-ish time engines.

I think it's priced high and will ultimately sell for less than asking.

These are some of the slowest MU-2s out there - long body with 665hp engines. That said, it would be a cheap entry cost to the turboprop worl.

As far as maint pricing, that's like asking how much the phase inspections are - prices vary wildly. Best source for info is MU-2aopa.com and their forum (most is blocked unless you register). Full disclosure - I'm the webmaster for that site.


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 11:03 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/19/11
Posts: 3302
Post Likes: +1424
Company: Bottom Line Experts
Location: KTOL - Toledo, OH
Aircraft: 2004 SR22 G2
What would you guess the performance on that long body to be David?

_________________
Don Coburn
Corporate Expense Reduction Specialist
2004 SR22 G2


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 11:29 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 11/09/13
Posts: 1911
Post Likes: +926
Location: KCMA
Aircraft: Aero Commander 980
If you have a 40 ft hangar the MU-2 is the answer.

When I was shopping planes the long body mu-2 with -5 or -6 engines were really attractive because of price. I was given some advice to only look at the long bodies if they had -10s. Without the -10 there is just not enough power for the wing and you will be altitude limited.

With less weight or a longer wing those engines work at altitude.

With a longer wing the -5 works well here is an example at a good price.

http://www.controller.com/listings/airc ... ander-690b


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us

BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner, Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.

BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates. Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.

Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024

.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.Marsh.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.pure-medical-85x150.png.
.SCA.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.midwest2.jpg.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.tat-85x100.png.
.Latitude.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.one-mile-up-85x100.png.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.AAI.jpg.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.lucysaviation-85x50.png.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.aeroled-85x50-2022-12-06.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.aircraftferry-85x50.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.tempest.jpg.