19 Apr 2024, 02:50 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 03 Jan 2020, 23:30 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/05/09 Posts: 4958 Post Likes: +4796
Aircraft: G44, C501, C55, R66
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I don't know of any other turboprop or big piston twin that can economically compete with a Mitsubishi! I've made this trip in a Baron, P Baron, Eclipse, Citation and a Lancair (well the Lancair doesn't count that's insanely efficient) but the MU-2 was more efficient/cheaper and faster than anything other than the Lancair. I would have thought the Eclipse would have been close.
Eclipse needed 2 fuel stops, Mits is 1.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 03 Jan 2020, 23:37 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/24/14 Posts: 1760 Post Likes: +2217
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Eclipse needed 2 fuel stops, Mits is 1. Forgot that among other shortcomings, the early Eclipse models were short-legged, but didn't realize they were that range restricted.
_________________ Jay
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 04 Jan 2020, 00:14 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 05/05/09 Posts: 4958 Post Likes: +4796
Aircraft: G44, C501, C55, R66
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Hard to imagine two 331s averaging 58gph on both engines when including start, taxi, climb etc. unless you are able start and takeoff really really fast. I have every flights data on our -6 since 2009 but too much work to go through it. We did tend to have long taxi time (burns a lot of gas at idle on the ground).
But really if 10 or 30 additional gph changes the affordablity needle it might not be the type of plane to choose.
The TSG has very detailed fuel consumption data in it for all variants.
Turbines are just cool... a great reason alone to own. No, my 65GPH is flight time, not hobbs times, that's right on man!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 04 Jan 2020, 00:21 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/23/08 Posts: 6945 Post Likes: +3601 Company: AssuredPartners Aerospace Phx. Location: KDVT, 46U
Aircraft: IAR823, LrJet, 240Z
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Another saving nobody talks about. My Aerostar needed oil changed every 50hrs. That was $500 per change if you took it to a mechanic with deckling, manpower etc. That's $18K over the course of a piston engine TBO. TPE's need oil changes maybe every 400-800hrs. They savings almost pay for the HSI's. Almost. TPE oil change every 900 hours if it makes it that far without being opened up. Don’t forget TPE also needs SOAP samples every 100 hours at $500 each go for a twin. The SOAP sample fallout cost ranges from zero to $25k depending on results. Usually clean results though. Although we had a few non-clean and experienced all the extremes of results including boxing a motor up and shipping for repair. We made a nice box.
_________________ Tom Johnson-Az/Wy AssuredPartners Aerospace Insurance Tj.Johnson@AssuredPartners.com C: 602-628-2701
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 04 Jan 2020, 00:48 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/23/08 Posts: 6945 Post Likes: +3601 Company: AssuredPartners Aerospace Phx. Location: KDVT, 46U
Aircraft: IAR823, LrJet, 240Z
|
|
Username Protected wrote: The TPE331 oil reservoir is a transmission case. I've added a 1/2 quart in 100 hours. Correct it’s engine and prop/gearbox. They can usually catch issues in the 100hr screen cycle. Although with a dash-1 or dash-2 torque sensor I’d probably drop that to 50 ish hours. And they can usually pinpoint the problem from the analysis. I always just dropped my samples directly with Ray at the Honeywell SOAP labs and usually got results back that same day. Edit: the process of pulling the SOAP sample probably results in that ~half quart loss~ between what you siphon out and what’s in the filter and filter housing.
_________________ Tom Johnson-Az/Wy AssuredPartners Aerospace Insurance Tj.Johnson@AssuredPartners.com C: 602-628-2701
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 04 Jan 2020, 06:49 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/09/09 Posts: 4573 Post Likes: +3298
Aircraft: C182P, Merlin IIIC
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I don't know of any other turboprop or big piston twin that can economically compete with a Mitsubishi! I've made this trip in a Baron, P Baron, Eclipse, Citation and a Lancair (well the Lancair doesn't count that's insanely efficient) but the MU-2 was more efficient/cheaper and faster than anything other than the Lancair. The Merlin III series of aircraft are built to spec for these trips.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 04 Jan 2020, 11:34 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 04/29/13 Posts: 706 Post Likes: +476
Aircraft: C177RG, ATOS-VR
|
|
Spectrometric Oil Analysis Program (SOAP)
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 04 Jan 2020, 12:02 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/07/17 Posts: 7035 Post Likes: +5807 Company: Malco Power Design Location: KLVJ
Aircraft: 1976 Baron 58
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Another saving nobody talks about. My Aerostar needed oil changed every 50hrs. That was $500 per change if you took it to a mechanic with deckling, manpower etc. That's $18K over the course of a piston engine TBO. TPE's need oil changes maybe every 400-800hrs. They savings almost pay for the HSI's. Almost. TPE oil change every 900 hours if it makes it that far without being opened up. Don’t forget TPE also needs SOAP samples every 100 hours at $500 each go for a twin. The SOAP sample fallout cost ranges from zero to $25k depending on results. Usually clean results though. Although we had a few non-clean and experienced all the extremes of results including boxing a motor up and shipping for repair. We made a nice box.
Why so expensive for SOAP samples?
Is there a required provider? Can you not just use Blackstone?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 04 Jan 2020, 12:10 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/23/08 Posts: 6945 Post Likes: +3601 Company: AssuredPartners Aerospace Phx. Location: KDVT, 46U
Aircraft: IAR823, LrJet, 240Z
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Why so expensive for SOAP samples?
Is there a required provider? Can you not just use Blackstone?
Honeywell kit is $250 each and includes filter and collection bits and the evaluation. The service from Honeywell was fantastic on this. They were always very helpful. I think others have the same process but I liked being able to have consistent analysis and lucky for me Honeywell SOAP lab is a short drive so I just dropped with the techs myself.
_________________ Tom Johnson-Az/Wy AssuredPartners Aerospace Insurance Tj.Johnson@AssuredPartners.com C: 602-628-2701
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 05 Jan 2020, 00:23 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/19/09 Posts: 332 Post Likes: +272 Company: Premier Bone and Joint Location: Wyoming
Aircraft: BE90,HUSK,MU-2
|
|
Another cost to consider if you fly a lot is that the MU-2 requires an inspection every 100 hours while the Aerostar (and other piston twins) can fly a few hundred hours between annuals. But of course they generally don’t make that without service so unless you get very lucky, the piston twin needs service during that time while the turbine rarely needs anything in the 100 hours between inspections. For me, though, that means a pretty long flight to a designated service center and an airline trip home. Repeat in reverse a few days later when done. Another way the turbine service centers seem to be different than what I experienced with piston twin service: when they say it will take them three days to inspect the plane, it’s done and ready in three days; no more, no less. I really enjoy flying, so taking the plane on a trip for service is somewhat fun (except for the airline part). I just bring work and try to make the most of it. But, it’s definitely a cost that adds to the ownership expense.
_________________ Thomas
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: WTB: MU2 Posted: 05 Jan 2020, 00:57 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/20/09 Posts: 2406 Post Likes: +1879 Company: Jcrane, Inc. Location: KVES Greenville, OH
Aircraft: C441, RV7A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Another cost to consider if you fly a lot is that the MU-2 requires an inspection every 100 hours while the Aerostar (and other piston twins) can fly a few hundred hours between annuals. But of course they generally don’t make that without service so unless you get very lucky, the piston twin needs service during that time while the turbine rarely needs anything in the 100 hours between inspections. For me, though, that means a pretty long flight to a designated service center and an airline trip home. Repeat in reverse a few days later when done. Another way the turbine service centers seem to be different than what I experienced with piston twin service: when they say it will take them three days to inspect the plane, it’s done and ready in three days; no more, no less. I really enjoy flying, so taking the plane on a trip for service is somewhat fun (except for the airline part). I just bring work and try to make the most of it. But, it’s definitely a cost that adds to the ownership expense. I can't imagine airlining back and forth for maintenance. One of our shops is two hours away by car, which seems awful. I know you guys fly several different brands...do you have to do that for all of them?
_________________ Jack Stull
|
|
Top |
|
|
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
|
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
|
|
|
|