banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 17:58 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 611 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 ... 41  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 08:27 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/01/14
Posts: 2128
Post Likes: +1607
Location: 0TX0 Granbury TX
Aircraft: T-210M Aeronca 7AC
How difficult can it be to rebuild an actuator? Unless the chrome was damaged I’d think standard hydraulic seals and o-rings would be the extent of it unless proprietary tools were involved.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 08:44 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 10/11/13
Posts: 889
Post Likes: +697
Location: Raleigh, NC
Aircraft: Malibu,Husky,TBM7C2
Username Protected wrote:
In my experience I agree overall ownership cost is about 100AMU for 200 hours a year considering fuel, insurance, hangar, subscriptions, repairs/inspections, etc. Excluding reserve for engine replacement.



Tony's 100AMU figure was mx and annuals only. Fuel, insurance, hangar, subscriptions were above and beyond that.


The previous owner had kept the plane maintenance top notch with little deferred and I purchased right after a C+ (most thorough) inspection. That may have something to do with my lower costs. Or I may just be lucky so far. Both work for me.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 08:52 
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
Good explanations Tom. Thanks much!

_________________
Don Coburn
Corporate Expense Reduction Specialist
2004 SR22 G2


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 09:09 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 08/24/13
Posts: 8407
Post Likes: +3662
Company: Aviation Tools / CCX
Location: KSMQ New Jersey
Aircraft: TBM700C2
Username Protected wrote:
How difficult can it be to rebuild an actuator? Unless the chrome was damaged I’d think standard hydraulic seals and o-rings would be the extent of it unless proprietary tools were involved.


One of the great things that Daher (Socata) does is publish all their maint manuals and IPCs for free. They also publish a lot of the CMMs, including for the LG actuator. But I imagine the issue is parts availability and special tooling.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 09:27 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 08/24/13
Posts: 8407
Post Likes: +3662
Company: Aviation Tools / CCX
Location: KSMQ New Jersey
Aircraft: TBM700C2
My L/G actuators were overhauled by DRJ Technologies in Corona, CA in 2018. https://drj.aero


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 10:14 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 08/23/10
Posts: 843
Post Likes: +660
Username Protected wrote:
they are not the same size, nor do they have the same mission profile or performance.

TBM is physically larger, inside and out. our UL is 2,734 lbs. It's also 40kts faster. and built by a defense contractor, so yes, the mindset from the beginning was likely different.

But I agree the gear OH is onerous at best, and some owners defer it.


Yes I know the TBM is faster and further and a slightly larger airframe but these differences don't justify developement of an airframe with such vastly difference mx requirements with jet-type interval inspections vs. an annual inspection on the Meridian.

I love the TBM. I just wish the added performance didn't come with all these additional mx requirements and cost.


I have had a Meridian and have lusted after the increased payload/range and mostly cargo door of the TBM (don't really care about the speed). I've read every maintenance discussion I can find on the TBM. For every operator claiming maintenance costs of $40k/year there is an operator experiencing $100k/year. I've concluded the average is about $70k/year. At least for the 15 year old models I'd be able to afford. New TBM's in warranty seem to be about $20k/year, which is what my 15 year old Meridian costs me. The TBM is simply an expensive aircraft to maintain and is more in the ballpark cost wise of a KA90/200 or Mustang/CJ. That's not an indictment just a reality of more capability, foreign defense contractor factory, etc.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 11:06 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 05/31/13
Posts: 1227
Post Likes: +598
Company: Docking Drawer
Location: KCCR
Aircraft: C425
Quote:
Unless the chrome was damaged

The overhaul price on my 425 actuators includes re-chroming the piston rod. There's even a procedure for building the bore I.D. back up if it's scored or out of spec (although that's additional cost). The point is that almost any defect can be fixed during an overhaul with FAA approved processes.

The company that did my actuators is www.aaiair.com One of the owners is Kevin Kevin@aaiair.com

If Daher publishes the repair manuals for these components why don't you guys get in touch with them and see if they will develop an approved overhaul. It seems like the fleet size is plenty big enough.

_________________
ATP, CFI-I, MEI
http://www.dockingdrawer.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 12:07 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 06/02/15
Posts: 2690
Post Likes: +1687
Location: Fresno, CA (KFAT)
Aircraft: T210M
Username Protected wrote:
How difficult can it be to rebuild an actuator? Unless the chrome was damaged I’d think standard hydraulic seals and o-rings would be the extent of it unless proprietary tools were involved.


One of the great things that Daher (Socata) does is publish all their maint manuals and IPCs for free. They also publish a lot of the CMMs, including for the LG actuator. But I imagine the issue is parts availability and special tooling.


Terry, you are correct, but it hasn’t always been that way.
_________________
Tom DeWitt
Previous: TBM850/T210M/C182P
APS 2004


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 21 Sep 2020, 12:09 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 08/24/13
Posts: 8407
Post Likes: +3662
Company: Aviation Tools / CCX
Location: KSMQ New Jersey
Aircraft: TBM700C2
Username Protected wrote:
The company that did my actuators is http://www.aaiair.com One of the owners is Kevin Kevin@aaiair.com

If Daher publishes the repair manuals for these components why don't you guys get in touch with them and see if they will develop an approved overhaul. It seems like the fleet size is plenty big enough.


Good idea.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 02 Oct 2020, 15:58 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/16/15
Posts: 2868
Post Likes: +3577
Location: Ogden UT
Aircraft: Piper M600
Username Protected wrote:
...doesn't seem to be justified given their similar size, mission and performance.


they are not the same size, nor do they have the same mission profile or performance.

TBM is physically larger, inside and out. It's 5 feet longer, and 3 feet taller. the cabin is 1' longer (although .5" narrower and 1" flatter).

Our UL is 2,734 lbs (1,000lbs more than the M600). The max GW is 1,430 lbs more than the M600.

It's also 40kts faster. and built by a defense contractor, so yes, the mindset from the beginning was likely different.

But I agree the gear OH is onerous at best, and some owners defer it.


The useful load of the M600 is 2400 pounds, the TBM does not have 1000 pounds more than that, the cabin of the M600 is 51 inches in the M600 versus 47 in the TBM, So 3 inches narrower, the VMO is similar to 266 versus 251’knots, and the maneuvering speed is similar 158 versus 153. So maybe worth $1 million more? Maybe not ;-)
_________________
Chuck Ivester
Piper M600
Ogden UT


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 02 Oct 2020, 17:54 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 06/02/15
Posts: 2690
Post Likes: +1687
Location: Fresno, CA (KFAT)
Aircraft: T210M
The useful load of my TBM850 is 2,853 lbs. Not sure what they did with the 900 series.

_________________
Tom DeWitt
Previous: TBM850/T210M/C182P
APS 2004


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 02 Oct 2020, 19:06 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 07/14/17
Posts: 373
Post Likes: +145
Company: Finch Industries,Inc.
Location: Thomasville,NC
Aircraft: TBM900,M600
The TBM900 gained about 30 pounds so the useful is a little less than the 850


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 03 Oct 2020, 07:48 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 09/05/09
Posts: 4082
Post Likes: +2731
Location: Small Town, NC
Username Protected wrote:
The useful load of the M600 is 2400 pounds, the TBM does not have 1000 pounds more than that, the cabin of the M600 is 51 inches in the M600 versus 47 in the TBM, So 3 inches narrower, the VMO is similar to 266 versus 251’knots, and the maneuvering speed is similar 158 versus 153. So maybe worth $1 million more? Maybe not ;-)


I am only going by what is on their website and brochure. they claim 6000lb max TO weight. they also list the cabin as 49" wide. other than OSH, I've never been inside one;I have no dog in this fight.

Not bashing the M600- I love them; and I applaud Piper for the clean sheet design.


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.

_________________
"Find worthy causes in your life."


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 03 Oct 2020, 08:34 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/16/15
Posts: 2868
Post Likes: +3577
Location: Ogden UT
Aircraft: Piper M600
Username Protected wrote:
The useful load of the M600 is 2400 pounds, the TBM does not have 1000 pounds more than that, the cabin of the M600 is 51 inches in the M600 versus 47 in the TBM, So 3 inches narrower, the VMO is similar to 266 versus 251’knots, and the maneuvering speed is similar 158 versus 153. So maybe worth $1 million more? Maybe not ;-)


I am only going by what is on their website and brochure. they claim 6000lb max TO weight. they also list the cabin as 49" wide. other than OSH, I've never been inside one;I have no dog in this fight.

Not bashing the M600- I love them; and I applaud Piper for the clean sheet design.


:peace: I have to admit, I have never pulled a tape measure across the cabin. Sometimes the advertising people and engineering people don't communicate well. Anyway, you would be hard pressed to tell a difference going from cabin to cabin. Pretty similar. The cockpit of the M600 does seem a little wider. But as you mention not as tall. They both work for most people once you are in place. If you look at the avionics stacks, you can see there is a little more width in the M600. With the 3 screen G3000, there is still room for an aspen backup on the left, and a generous ELT panel on the right. Would be a squeeze to do that with the TBM9. But again, small differences.

Attachment:
1.jpg


Attachment:
2.jpg


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.

_________________
Chuck Ivester
Piper M600
Ogden UT


Top

 Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850
PostPosted: 03 Oct 2020, 09:01 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 08/10/14
Posts: 1730
Post Likes: +828
Location: Northwest Arkansas (KVBT)
Aircraft: TBM850
Username Protected wrote:
…the VMO is similar to 266 versus 251 knots, and the maneuvering speed is similar 158 versus 153. So maybe worth $1 million more? Maybe not ;-)

Vmo of 251 is a huge upgrade from the Meridian and M500 (188kts).


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 611 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31 ... 41  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

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