banner
banner

28 Jan 2022, 01:19 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Greenwich AeroGroup (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: to overhaul, or not to overhaul, that is the question
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2021, 18:31 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 08/21/10
Posts: 259
Post Likes: +131
Location: Newport, Rhode Island
Aircraft: Piper Mirage jetProp
whether 'tis nobler in the market to suffer
the costs and time of a complete turbine overhaul
or to inspect the hot section and repair on condition
and by passing TBO to incur unknown rath


seriously though, without getting into the politics of going beyond TBO how does the market look at an airframe with say 2000 hours left and a small PT6A-34 2000 hours beyond TBO? Is it better marketwise to overhaul with 4000 left on the airframe to get another 4000 TBO, or to do a hot section and repair on condition? To maybe sell after 2000 hours?

An overhaul is 2-300K depending on who, or a PWC zero time for 350. A simplistic view is that the engine beyond TBO wont depreciate much while a newly overhauled engine will depreciate at 300k/4000hrs = $75/hour and the hull insurance will be higher. But life is not simple.

Some of this was discussed for larger engines in the 62 page drifting treatise on inventory levels.

Insights welcome!

Ed


Top

 Post subject: Re: to overhaul, or not to overhaul, that is the question
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2021, 18:53 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 01/18/11
Posts: 6518
Post Likes: +2996
Location: Lake Marion, SC KOGB
Aircraft: B60 Duke
Currently you will get near zero value for your engines.
So what would your value be with zero time or purchasing a midtime?


Top

 Post subject: Re: to overhaul, or not to overhaul, that is the question
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2021, 21:15 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 08/21/10
Posts: 259
Post Likes: +131
Location: Newport, Rhode Island
Aircraft: Piper Mirage jetProp
To recast the question a bit, how does the time left on the airframe change the value of an overhaul? I’m not sure you would overhaul with only say 500 left on the airframe, would you?

Ed


Top

 Post subject: Re: to overhaul, or not to overhaul, that is the question
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2021, 22:49 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 07/10/10
Posts: 795
Post Likes: +452
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Aircraft: Conquest
I would just do the Hot Section. Pointless to overhaul in your situation.

_________________
----Still emotionally attached to my Baron, but loving my Conquest----


Top

 Post subject: Re: to overhaul, or not to overhaul, that is the question
PostPosted: 22 Nov 2021, 23:00 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 01/06/08
Posts: 3051
Post Likes: +1859
Aircraft: B55
If an airplane is airworthy, I think its never worth doing engine work to sell it. I think the potential customer is unlikely to overestimate the cost of doing the work.


Top

 Post subject: Re: to overhaul, or not to overhaul, that is the question
PostPosted: 23 Nov 2021, 15:36 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 06/01/16
Posts: 379
Post Likes: +283
Location: Citrus County Florida
Aircraft: Shopping
Most of those P&W overhaul schedules are not submitted on engine condition but the financial condition of the entity and those engines are loafing in most of these applications. If the TBO was magically doubled would it change the decision?

When i owned the TBM it had a 3,500 TBO but the military version of the exact same aircraft had a TBO of 7,000 hours. The "story" is the military version received better maintenance over its lifetime. I call BS. its a reoccurring revenue number not an engineering number.

When i sold the aircraft no one cared about the hours on the engine as long as the maintenance was completed. Yes it will cost you resale value but the air frame having a hard stop life limit is more a detriment to me than the engine being over TBO. Personally I would not buy any aircraft at 2K hours from a hard stop unless it was really cheap.

_________________
Anthony Dennis


Top

 Post subject: Re: to overhaul, or not to overhaul, that is the question
PostPosted: 23 Nov 2021, 17:48 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 08/31/17
Posts: 1156
Post Likes: +425
Aircraft: C180
jet prop has a hard stop life limit?



I knew a guy once who was buying a new to him plane. his current turbine was near TBO his plan WAS to HSI and fly on but he decided to trade it in.

since in our state parts arent' subject to sales tax he overhauled and captured a huge amount of additional trade in value tax free the then reduced the sales tax on the plane he bought.

Saved a couple tens of thousands in the end he calculated out.

:shrug:


Top

 Post subject: Re: to overhaul, or not to overhaul, that is the question
PostPosted: 23 Nov 2021, 22:34 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 04/24/18
Posts: 537
Post Likes: +180
Location: NYC
Aircraft: ISP Eagle II SR22 g2
Username Protected wrote:
To recast the question a bit, how does the time left on the airframe change the value of an overhaul? I’m not sure you would overhaul with only say 500 left on the airframe, would you?

Ed


Your airframe has a life limit?
Would you mind sharing details?


Top

 Post subject: Re: to overhaul, or not to overhaul, that is the question
PostPosted: 24 Nov 2021, 10:33 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 08/21/10
Posts: 259
Post Likes: +131
Location: Newport, Rhode Island
Aircraft: Piper Mirage jetProp
Attachment:
Pa46LifeLimits.png
From the type certificate data sheet, A25SO Sept 2000. May stem from findings or other issues. And may get revisited as the fleet ages.

Ed


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


Top

 Post subject: Re: to overhaul, or not to overhaul, that is the question
PostPosted: 24 Nov 2021, 10:54 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 04/21/16
Posts: 160
Post Likes: +57
Username Protected wrote:
Most of those P&W overhaul schedules are not submitted on engine condition but the financial condition of the entity and those engines are loafing in most of these applications. If the TBO was magically doubled would it change the decision?

When i owned the TBM it had a 3,500 TBO but the military version of the exact same aircraft had a TBO of 7,000 hours. The "story" is the military version received better maintenance over its lifetime. I call BS. its a reoccurring revenue number not an engineering number.

When i sold the aircraft no one cared about the hours on the engine as long as the maintenance was completed. Yes it will cost you resale value but the air frame having a hard stop life limit is more a detriment to me than the engine being over TBO. Personally I would not buy any aircraft at 2K hours from a hard stop unless it was really cheap.


A more likely explanation is that the basis of civil certification (FAR 23, EASA 23) requires life limits whereas the military does not. As the fleet ages,manufacturers often concoct a SLEP, Service Life Extension Program. $$$$$ It definitely is an engineering number on the civil side, but yes, revenue is a factor.


Top

 Post subject: Re: to overhaul, or not to overhaul, that is the question
PostPosted: 24 Nov 2021, 16:55 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 06/01/16
Posts: 379
Post Likes: +283
Location: Citrus County Florida
Aircraft: Shopping
Username Protected wrote:
Most of those P&W overhaul schedules are not submitted on engine condition but the financial condition of the entity and those engines are loafing in most of these applications. If the TBO was magically doubled would it change the decision?

When i owned the TBM it had a 3,500 TBO but the military version of the exact same aircraft had a TBO of 7,000 hours. The "story" is the military version received better maintenance over its lifetime. I call BS. its a reoccurring revenue number not an engineering number.

When i sold the aircraft no one cared about the hours on the engine as long as the maintenance was completed. Yes it will cost you resale value but the air frame having a hard stop life limit is more a detriment to me than the engine being over TBO. Personally I would not buy any aircraft at 2K hours from a hard stop unless it was really cheap.


A more likely explanation is that the basis of civil certification (FAR 23, EASA 23) requires life limits whereas the military does not. As the fleet ages,manufacturers often concoct a SLEP, Service Life Extension Program. $$$$$ It definitely is an engineering number on the civil side, but yes, revenue is a factor.


Do not think so - Revenue is the prime directive regardless. But i have been doing product development engineering for 30 years so what do i know. Engineering life limits try to keep you out of court, revenue life limits keeps your job in C-suite. B10 life has been around since the beginning, if you want to believe a Pratt PT6 has a B50 life then go ahead. I will still call BS.
_________________
Anthony Dennis


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 




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 2007-2022

.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.echelon-85x50.png.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.McPeck_85x50.jpg.
.Marsh.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.EagleFuelCellsTriple.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2021-11-22.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.komn-85x50.png.
.instar.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.airpower-85x50.jpg.
.greenwich-85x50-2020-08-10.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.dshannon.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.concorde.jpg.
.Davis_Aviation_85x50.jpg.
.avionicssource-85x50.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.xnaut-85x50.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.southseas-85x50-2021.png.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.kingairdom.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.Expert_Aircraft_Solution_85x50.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.forge-85x50.jpg.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.STLAir_85x50.jpg.
.dynon-85x50.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.jaair-85x100.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.bkool-85x50-2014-08-04.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.