banner
banner

29 Mar 2024, 07:16 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 01:56 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 06/01/10
Posts: 217
Post Likes: +54
Aircraft: C425, Pitts S2B
Hey guys,
I'm looking for real world experience with the piston PA46's. After looking long and hard at pressurized twin cessna's, 58P's, and Aerostars, I'm back to singles :eek:

Our V35B has served us very well, but I've got this itch to fly in the flight levels' and to have a few more IMC options, deice, etc.

Because I know it will come up, we are a family of 4, I'm 6', and most of our trips are 450 to 950nm. We live on the Oregon coast, so going anywhere except straight up or down the coast requires crossing mountainous terrain. One flight we want to do more is Oregon coast to Colorado Springs, which is the 950nm trip. Doing this non stop would be ideal.

So, what I know about PA46's i've learned from the side comments on this forum, and talking with Joe Casey and reading through his website: http://flycasey.com/home-2/

What brought me to looking at piston PA46's was my interest in the jetPROP. I can't afford a jetPROP at this point, but I think that is the goal sometime in the next 5-10 years.

So, back to the piston PA46's

The 86.5-88 Malibu's seem to be the sought after ones due to the flap/gear and the continental. The continental gives LOP options and is smoother, according to some. My question is, at 16gph LOP, what TAS is expected from the Malibu? From what I've gathered, a Mirage (89' on up) with the Lycoming is going to burn 21gph with a TAS of 210 or so at FL250. There doesn't seem to be any issue with running the Lyc at lower power settings to get the fuel burn down, but of course, the TAS goes down as well.

So, how realistic is it to use FL200-250 in a piston PA46 for longer trips, say 400nm or more? Is the climb rate really an issue? I don't see putting all 120-140 gal on board for the shorter trips, but definitely like the option of stretching leg lengths when needed. The family is used to using a travel john for a bathroom on longer flights.

I am aware of MMOPA, but haven't put in my CC #'s yet to pay the yearly $250 subscription.

Thanks for your thoughts,
Brent


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 02:05 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 6322
Post Likes: +5522
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
Brent, you mentioned that you're back to singles and I'm a little curious what made you change your mind when as you said, all your trips pretty much take you over the Sierras and Rockies? Not questioning, just curious. Was it the cost of operating twin?

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


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 09:12 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/15/11
Posts: 2388
Post Likes: +1055
Location: Mandan, ND
Aircraft: V35
Username Protected wrote:
Brent, you mentioned that you're back to singles and I'm a little curious what made you change your mind when as you said, all your trips pretty much take you over the Sierras and Rockies? Not questioning, just curious. Was it the cost of operating twin?


Yes, curious as well. Have you spent (or maybe more importantly has your spouse) spent any time inside a PA46? They are pretty small, compared to a 421.


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 11:00 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 11/24/11
Posts: 76
Post Likes: +33
Aircraft: Mitsubishi Solitaire
How old are your kids? Big difference between toddlers and teenagers in terms of room.

How often do you fly? That might affect the tradeoff between variable and fixed costs.

Nathan


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 11:45 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 06/20/13
Posts: 31
Post Likes: +9
Location: Jackson Ms
Aircraft: 58 Baron, P Baron
I had a '91 Mirage. I had 3 major engine incidents, it was on the market after the second. The day I signed the papers to sell it one went in 2 miles north of our airport, engine failure. Scariest thing was that I was IMC over the Rockies one hour before one of these episodes. In my 5000 hrs plus, and 15 airplanes I have owned I have never had an experience like this.... just food for thought!


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 12:07 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 07/01/11
Posts: 70
Post Likes: +30
RJ's experience is NOT the norm for PA46's.

I have owned a late 2000s Mirage for a few years, and just recently (September) I upgraded to a Meridian. I'm 6'3 215 and I am probably near the max size as far as height goes upfront. There is a fun yoga move you can do to get in and out of the front seats, that becomes easy once you get the hang of it.

I was able to fly my Lycoming LOP and I don't have my notes, but my numbers will be close. I generally expected my FF to land around 15-16 gph in the FL200-250 and depending on the altitude you would expect to see a TAS around 192-200. I can't speak to the legacy Malibu's, but I would expect them to a hair faster if they have a 2 blade prop and no radar pod.

A fully loaded Mirage, expect to climb 800FPM on most days, once you get in the low flight levels, it starts to crawl to maybe 500FPM. The last 2000 feet to get to 250 is a crawl. Certainly doesn't give you any confidence if you were to encounter a layer that had icing potential and it topped out at FL240.

MMOPA will be your best true resource and worth the money to join just to read the forums (very active).

Your Oregon coast trip to Colorado Springs likely won't be a problem with helping winds depending on the size of your family (weight). Going back will vary. If you have that amount of mountain flying though, a turboprop likely will need to be a serious contender to think about. I will let the forum talk more about the pros and cons of that.

I'm happy to answer any questions you might have on a PA46 as an actual owner. I use to make a trip from Iowa to Ft Myers (1050nm) and do it none stop all the time in the Mirage flying LOP.


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 12:17 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 01/11/16
Posts: 462
Post Likes: +361
Aircraft: Bonanza G36
Username Protected wrote:
I had a '91 Mirage. I had 3 major engine incidents


Can you please tell us what the three major incidents were?


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 17:08 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 01/31/09
Posts: 5233
Post Likes: +3026
Location: Northern NJ
Aircraft: SR22;CJ2+;C510
Sit in a PA-46 with your family and make sure you are comfortable in the pilot seat and your family fits before you spend lots of time looking into them. Some folks fit in fine and others don't.

Run a sample W&B and project what your family will weigh in a few years.

_________________
Allen


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 19:49 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 12/17/12
Posts: 170
Post Likes: +117
Location: Des Moines, IA
Aircraft: CE-525
I think the sweet spot for the Mirage is 15,000-FL200. For some reason, it actually seems to climb a little better above 10,000'ish. Pretty good boost in TAS cruising up there and lots of gliding options. If you configure the glide ring in an app like Garmin Pilot and look at it in the flight levels, there's almost always an airport within reach.

I agree with the comments about sitting in one. I'm 6'4" and the cockpit ceiling of the one I fly is pretty scratched up from my headset hitting in turbulence and I've yet to master gracefully getting in/out of the cockpit after around 100 hours. The cabin is pretty comfortable for passengers, though.


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 19:56 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 06/01/10
Posts: 217
Post Likes: +54
Aircraft: C425, Pitts S2B
Username Protected wrote:
Brent, you mentioned that you're back to singles and I'm a little curious what made you change your mind when as you said, all your trips pretty much take you over the Sierras and Rockies? Not questioning, just curious. Was it the cost of operating twin?


This is a good question. I go back and forth, every other day or so :oops:

I've had this response open on my computer all day, writing out my concerns with single engine in or over solid IMC , my concerns about being able to fly and maintain a twin to a safer standard etc. Eventually I deleted it........These thoughts are all bouncing around in my head, but I want to consider all of my options, and the PA46 is another one of those options that seems to meet the want to fly in the flight levels, and it also seems to have great range with reasonable speed. Of course, if it's one engine that is working to its limit decides to let go, it's most likely going to end bad.

I have not ruled out moving into a twin, but in the last 8 months of lots of internet searching and looking at a few in person, I have not come away really excited to spend my hard earned cash! I guess I am having a hard time justifying the expense for the marginal speed and range increase. The Aerostar does really appeal to me given the performance, but I don't want to give up a few of the shorter runways that we like to use.

Anyway, I don't want to start a twin vs single debate as I've read them already, but I am just wanting to explore all of the options.


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 20:04 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 03/03/11
Posts: 1845
Post Likes: +1819
Aircraft: Piaggio Avanti
Username Protected wrote:

The 86.5-88 Malibu's seem to be the sought after ones due to the flap/gear and the continental. The continental gives LOP options and is smoother, according to some. My question is, at 16gph LOP, what TAS is expected from the Malibu? From what I've gathered, a Mirage (89' on up) with the Lycoming is going to burn 21gph with a TAS of 210 or so at FL250. There doesn't seem to be any issue with running the Lyc at lower power settings to get the fuel burn down, but of course, the TAS goes down as well.

So, how realistic is it to use FL200-250 in a piston PA46 for longer trips, say 400nm or more? Is the climb rate really an issue? I don't see putting all 120-140 gal on board for the shorter trips, but definitely like the option of stretching leg lengths when needed. The family is used to using a travel john for a bathroom on longer flights.


Incredible planes. I have found anyone speaks poorly of the 86.5 thru 88s conti birds either has never really flown one, owned one or has an opinion worth listening too:-0

I routinely did 1300nm trips, non stop, into the wind. 16.5gph was 200-205 true. I flew high all the time - it rarely made sense to fly low. In 400ish hours over 3 years, my ownership costs were extremely reasonable. Here is a post I did after my first year:
viewtopic.php?f=49&t=101558&hilit=malibu

From that post on, it actually got much cheaper to fly as I had very little break. For those who think I was scrimping on maintenance, I had a kevin meade pre buy done and he also did the buy for the new owner. only minor issues to resolve for the new owner (who, coincidentally, loves the plane too). I never had one of the expensive Malibu shops maintained. It is not a very complex plane, peanut gallery comments aside, and the issues are all known.

The climb rates were great. I saw 1000fpm up to 18k or so then it bled off above that. Only time it ever felt doggy to me was a 105 degree day leaving PHX at gross weight. We still made it to 250 in about 30 minutes. Passengers loved the cabin and it had a great AP. If you are taking long trips, I have no idea why one would want a Bonanza or a Cirrus over one of these - pressurization changes the game completely.

Downside is it is a traveling airplane. Not really a yank out of the hanger and go for breakfast kind of bird, though I did do it!

MMOPA is a great investment - amazing community of folks on there and good history of every issue that has ever occurred in the type.


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 20:57 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 06/28/09
Posts: 14129
Post Likes: +9075
Location: Walnut Creek, CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1962 Twin Bonanza
Username Protected wrote:
Sit in a PA-46 with your family and make sure you are comfortable in the pilot seat and your family fits before you spend lots of time looking into them. Some folks fit in fine and others don't.

Run a sample W&B and project what your family will weigh in a few years.


Agree wth this. I loved the specs, seemed perfect and a partnership in a great one is available at my home drome. I could make it work with a seat cushion mod, in ear headset etc but the whole experience is just a little too crammed. I wish the whole tube was an inch or two bigger in diameter.

_________________
http://calipilot.com
atp/cfii


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 20:58 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 10/11/13
Posts: 889
Post Likes: +697
Location: Raleigh, NC
Aircraft: Malibu,Husky,TBM7C2
Username Protected wrote:
RJ's experience is NOT the norm for PA46's.

I have owned a late 2000s Mirage for a few years, and just recently (September) I upgraded to a Meridian. I'm 6'3 215 and I am probably near the max size as far as height goes upfront. There is a fun yoga move you can do to get in and out of the front seats, that becomes easy once you get the hang of it.

I was able to fly my Lycoming LOP and I don't have my notes, but my numbers will be close. I generally expected my FF to land around 15-16 gph in the FL200-250 and depending on the altitude you would expect to see a TAS around 192-200. I can't speak to the legacy Malibu's, but I would expect them to a hair faster if they have a 2 blade prop and no radar pod.

A fully loaded Mirage, expect to climb 800FPM on most days, once you get in the low flight levels, it starts to crawl to maybe 500FPM. The last 2000 feet to get to 250 is a crawl. Certainly doesn't give you any confidence if you were to encounter a layer that had icing potential and it topped out at FL240.

MMOPA will be your best true resource and worth the money to join just to read the forums (very active).

Your Oregon coast trip to Colorado Springs likely won't be a problem with helping winds depending on the size of your family (weight). Going back will vary. If you have that amount of mountain flying though, a turboprop likely will need to be a serious contender to think about. I will let the forum talk more about the pros and cons of that.

I'm happy to answer any questions you might have on a PA46 as an actual owner. I use to make a trip from Iowa to Ft Myers (1050nm) and do it none stop all the time in the Mirage flying LOP.


My experience makes me agree with Martin. I started out leasing an 86 Malibu, purchased a 98 Mirage (that is currently for sale if you are interested) and eventually shifted to a TBM because of mission creep. Some of the Lycomings run great LOP and some just do not. My old Lycoming would only do LOP at 15k, even with GAMIs. Climb was about 7-800. The new factory reman runs happily LOP at altitude and climbs at 1100 at sea level but that also slows as you get higher.


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 21:08 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12798
Post Likes: +5224
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
Former 1986.0 Malibu owner. Agree with Anthony above. Great family airplane.

PM me your email and I can send you performance charts. But basically will get

210/200/190 kts on 16/14/12 gph at FL250 and about 20 kts less at 15,000.

Agree 12-18000 is the sweet spot.

Also talk to Charles Ivester on here. He has extensive experience operating piston PA46 for family travel in the icy, mountainous west


Top

 Post subject: Re: PA46 Malibu/Mirage
PostPosted: 06 Feb 2017, 21:53 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 06/01/10
Posts: 217
Post Likes: +54
Aircraft: C425, Pitts S2B
Thanks guys for all of the great thoughts and advice.

I did search before posting, but didn't find this link that was posted above. Great info:https://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=101558&hilit=malibu

It sounds like I need to go sit in one with my family. I am 6', 190, my wife is 5'4'' and fit, and the kids are 6 and 9 years old. We are 430ibs together at this point. The kids are growing of course, and hopefully since triathlon race season is coming up, I will be shrinking ;)

At this point, an 86-88, 550 3 blade with a recent windshield is looking really interesting.......but, that seems to be what everybody else wants and those airplanes seem to bring a premium or just not for sale. I have been sent specs on a few really nice Mirages, and they have their benefits also. My initial search through controller indicated that a 300K budget could get us a really nice PA46, but from talking to some, this may not be the case. 400K may be a more realistic number if I want a modern panel, great maintenance, etc.


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 96 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 7  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

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