banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 14:24 [ 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: 13 Mar 2016, 11:51 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/30/15
Posts: 1503
Post Likes: +641
Location: Dalton, Ga. KDNN
I think the maint pricing has been covered. I was asking where good info was regarding when to overhaul, when HS inspections are due. I have seen something that referenced a greatly delayed overhaul if HS is done.
Just trying to learn.
Thanks


Username Protected wrote:
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.

_________________
Mooney Bravo & Just Superstol


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 11:55 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12798
Post Likes: +5224
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
Hot sections are mandatory and must be done every 1800 hrs on the -5/-6 engines. There are also some components that are cycle limited, and you might need to split the hot section to replace them independent of a required hot section inspection. Overhauls under part 91 are entirely optional and you can run the engine indefinitely without overhaul if you wish.


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 11:59 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/30/15
Posts: 1503
Post Likes: +641
Location: Dalton, Ga. KDNN
Username Protected wrote:


Not bad and I don't dislike Commanders but those yokes.... They are uglier than this girl I once met and.........never mind :angel:

_________________
Mooney Bravo & Just Superstol


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 12:04 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 11/09/13
Posts: 1911
Post Likes: +926
Location: KCMA
Aircraft: Aero Commander 980
That's funny! I am a Rams horn man, love getting a hold of those!

Different strokes.

Some of the commuter jets have that setup and don't forget the Airbus has a side stick!


Last edited on 13 Mar 2016, 12:10, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 12:05 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 6322
Post Likes: +5520
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
Username Protected wrote:
Hot sections are mandatory and must be done every 1800 hrs on the -5/-6 engines. There are also some components that are cycle limited, and you might need to split the hot section to replace them independent of a required hot section inspection. Overhauls under part 91 are entirely optional and you can run the engine indefinitely without overhaul if you wish.


That's the situation I have on mine eventually. 137 cycles left, but over 400hrs to HSI. So I'll probably have to split them open before HSI runs out to address the low cycle part they put in last time to save a dime. Now, an inspection and replacement does not mean you have o hot section, but it doesn't much make sense not to. Plus, if they open it up and find anything unairworthy, out of tolerance or not complied with SB, it's a hot anyway, so might bas well do it the. Estimate is $50-60K.

_________________
Problem is the intelligent people are full of doubt, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 12:06 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 04/19/09
Posts: 375
Post Likes: +161
Location: Montego Bay, Jamaica W.I. (MKJS)
Aircraft: Baron B55/Cessna 140
Username Protected wrote:
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 ?



Tony,

I flew this aircraft when it was owned by George Mall / IBA aircraft ; George purchased it as a bank repo / keep it intending to turn it into an Air Ambulance but sold it to Epps instead.

George Mall was the largest MU-2 owner and broker in the 70's - 90's / he built the facilities now occupied by I-jet and mounted the MU-2 on the Pole in TUL. He passed in 2001 and Mike Laver / air 1st bought all his inventory and spares.

The missing logs didn't worry George as he has sold it new and brokered the last sale prior to the books being lost. Randy Barbee peformed the Hot section in 1997 . Tom Oskendorf put the crew door in and signed it off. IBA put @ 324 hours on it then sold as they were switching to Cargo door equipped birds.

This airframe was also owned by two other MU-2 freight operators; Corporate Flight Management owned by Reece Howell's sons and Bank Serveair Inc which was Epps Air Service out of KPDK fleet of MU-2s running the Federal Reserve Bank Contract.

George convinced the FRB board that J, L and N models could do the contract as originally it called for -10 powered birds only. Hence sold / traded to CFM then Epps. The parts -5/6 was a 45 percent cost savings over the -10 engines.

The missing logs aren't an issue to me ; speak to Reece he can verify its provenance.

Regards,
Nigel


Last edited on 13 Mar 2016, 18:11, edited 4 times in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 15:25 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 10/10/10
Posts: 676
Post Likes: +489
Aircraft: C441 Conquest II
Username Protected wrote:
What would you guess the performance on that long body to be David?


It has the 5.0 paid cabin differential so hits 8K cabin alt at 23K. From a speed perspective, its sweet spot will be high teens (say 170-190) as compared to a -10 with a sweet spot of 210-230. Cruise with fresh engines would be around 255-265 kts TAS. With these engines, probably more like 245-255). This model will cruise about 30 kts slower than a -10 long body. Think of this model as flying KA90 speeds with a cabin slightly bigger than a KA200.


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 13 Mar 2016, 19:38 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23612
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
The -1 is a normally aspirated engine with no flat rating to speak of. 280/665 = 43%. That's probably pretty close to what it's making with the 8-10" of pressure available at altitude.

You forgot two factors, ram air recovery and colder temps. So you can make more power than your computation suggests.

Still, the -1 engine is a high teens, low 20s engine. The -10 is high 20s. I was at FL270 recently, made 70% power, and it wasn't particularly cold, either.

Fuel mileage between a -1 F and a -10 M are about the same, but the M goes 30-40 knots faster.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 14 Mar 2016, 23:34 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/30/15
Posts: 1503
Post Likes: +641
Location: Dalton, Ga. KDNN
Steve, I just saw the picture of your panel in the Commander thread. It looks VERY nice.
All I have seen were industrial gray, chipped, paint flaking. Just looked military/industrial and not appealing at all.
Not that most MU2's don't lean toward the industrial look too.



Username Protected wrote:
That's funny! I am a Rams horn man, love getting a hold of those!

Different strokes.

Some of the commuter jets have that setup and don't forget the Airbus has a side stick!

_________________
Mooney Bravo & Just Superstol


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 15 Mar 2016, 10:03 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 11/09/13
Posts: 1911
Post Likes: +926
Location: KCMA
Aircraft: Aero Commander 980
You are hanging out with the wrong group of commander owners!

Thanks I am real happy with the plane. The panel has a canted G600 that really makes a difference. You can barely see the angle in the photo. It helps viewing angle and eliminates glare.

I also had PTT switches added to the glare shield which I like when flying on AP. Can't see those in the photo.

Lots of commanders owners are upgrading their plane instead of buying a different machine. The good commander shops can make it look fantastic.

Many really nice commanders are tucked away in hangars. Don't usually see those on controller. They get sold by word of mouth.

You should see the planes with the G950 setup. They look like a brand new airplane.


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 30 Jul 2021, 11:59 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 04/12/19
Posts: 8
Post Likes: +1
Aircraft: MU-2B-40
Reviving this thread, as I pretty much have the exact same question as the original poster but with a different MU-2B for $269,000:

https://www.controller.com/listing/for- ... p-aircraft

Engines have about ~800 until HSIs and plenty of green time (~2,900 each). I know the easy answer is panel and interior, but you could upgrade both over time and still be all-in at a very good price? (I don't think G530W --> GTN750 is a big deal.)

On this note, are there any MU-2 people out there that offer the service of helping buyers find the right plane and mentoring them through the process (training, delivery, etc.)? Every time I see one of these short bodies listed--particularly the F--I feel like it's the plane for me. The idea of missing something with a particular plane or at the pre-buy, however, is terrifying...


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 30 Jul 2021, 12:17 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 6322
Post Likes: +5520
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
Username Protected wrote:
Reviving this thread, as I pretty much have the exact same question as the original poster but with a different MU-2B for $269,000:

https://www.controller.com/listing/for- ... p-aircraft

Engines have about ~800 until HSIs and plenty of green time (~2,900 each). I know the easy answer is panel and interior, but you could upgrade both over time and still be all-in at a very good price? (I don't think G530W --> GTN750 is a big deal.)

On this note, are there any MU-2 people out there that offer the service of helping buyers find the right plane and mentoring them through the process (training, delivery, etc.)? Every time I see one of these short bodies listed--particularly the F--I feel like it's the plane for me. The idea of missing something with a particular plane or at the pre-buy, however, is terrifying...


Don't understand the engine times on that ad. It has 9450TSN on engines, 5000hr TBO it says and yet they say it has 2400hrs left before reaching TBO?

So let's assume engines were overhauled on the last schedule, which allowed 5400hrs/2 HSI's. That would leave 950hrs left until reaching the new 5000hr TBO, not 2400hrs.

Unless, of course, it's had a third overhaul somewhere midtime. It's possible, but normally that happens because of some sort of failure/fault, and you'd rarely see that done to both engines in such a case.

My guess it has 950hrs left on engines, which would align better with the price asked. If it had 2400hrs left on both engines, the engine value would be as much as the price asked.

_________________
Problem is the intelligent people are full of doubt, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 30 Jul 2021, 12:41 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 04/12/19
Posts: 8
Post Likes: +1
Aircraft: MU-2B-40
Username Protected wrote:
Reviving this thread, as I pretty much have the exact same question as the original poster but with a different MU-2B for $269,000:

https://www.controller.com/listing/for- ... p-aircraft

Engines have about ~800 until HSIs and plenty of green time (~2,900 each). I know the easy answer is panel and interior, but you could upgrade both over time and still be all-in at a very good price? (I don't think G530W --> GTN750 is a big deal.)

On this note, are there any MU-2 people out there that offer the service of helping buyers find the right plane and mentoring them through the process (training, delivery, etc.)? Every time I see one of these short bodies listed--particularly the F--I feel like it's the plane for me. The idea of missing something with a particular plane or at the pre-buy, however, is terrifying...


Don't understand the engine times on that ad. It has 9450TSN on engines, 5000hr TBO it says and yet they say it has 2400hrs left before reaching TBO?

So let's assume engines were overhauled on the last schedule, which allowed 5400hrs/2 HSI's. That would leave 950hrs left until reaching the new 5000hr TBO, not 2400hrs.

Unless, of course, it's had a third overhaul somewhere midtime. It's possible, but normally that happens because of some sort of failure/fault, and you'd rarely see that done to both engines in such a case.

My guess it has 950hrs left on engines, which would align better with the price asked. If it had 2400hrs left on both engines, the engine value would be as much as the price asked.


I was trying to figure this out and asked for a status sheet. It looks like these engines were installed in 1983 and have 2,821 hours on them. The last HSIs were at 1,868, so I think there are ~850 hours until the next ones.

Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 30 Jul 2021, 13:56 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12798
Post Likes: +5224
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
Is the 7500 hour inspection due again at 10,000?

HSI on a 10000 snew engine might have some pricey cycle count items (or may even have cycle counts before then)

Seems more like what used to be a $150k F model


Top

 Post subject: Re: What's wrong with this MU 2B for $275K?
PostPosted: 31 Jul 2021, 09:34 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 03/23/08
Posts: 6908
Post Likes: +3552
Company: AssuredPartners Aerospace Phx.
Location: KDVT, 46U
Aircraft: IAR823, LrJet, 240Z
Username Protected wrote:
Is the 7500 hour inspection due again at 10,000?

HSI on a 10000 snew engine might have some pricey cycle count items (or may even have cycle counts before then)

Seems more like what used to be a $150k F model

7500 is due at … you guessed it, and never again.
Although there are others along the line in the Mx schedule.

Can’t recall if there is a 15k that is the 7.5 equivalent.

Motors are maybe a 5400 tbo cycle with 2 hots and a gearbox-“Inspection” due along the way. I think Bill just throws the ads up for interest and maybe gets to the details later.

Tj

_________________
Tom Johnson-Az/Wy
AssuredPartners Aerospace Insurance
Tj.Johnson@AssuredPartners.com
C: 602-628-2701


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

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