banner
banner

19 Jun 2021, 14:26 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Greenwich AeroGroup (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 17:51 
Offline


 WWW  Profile

Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 13363
Post Likes: +16329
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEVV
Aircraft: MU-2B-26, C560V
Username Protected wrote:
The fleet and hours of true technologically advanced aircraft, not the AOPA or FAA definition which was horribly irrelevant to todays aircraft, is increasingly Becoming a larger percentage of fleet hours.

Please define "true technologically advanced aircraft". List the criteria to be considered such and which models/years those are.

I suspect they are still a very small percentage of the fleet.

Quote:
The TBM900 fatal accident was an interesting one, but so unnecessary.

Which accidents are necessary?

Most accidents come down to something that could have been avoided. Age of the aircraft doesn't change that. Very few accidents relate to the technology of the aircraft as well, and higher tech doesn't mean it helped, it could hurt as well.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 17:52 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 08/16/15
Posts: 1751
Post Likes: +1867
Location: Ogden UT
Aircraft: Piper M600
Username Protected wrote:

If you are looking at SETPs, you’d be remiss not to look at the TBM700C2. Great performer. Less than the m600, does more.



Also much less prone to have the wings ripped off in case of inadvertent CB penetration.


Why would you say that?? Number of TBM's with inflight breakups: 1, M600's 0. Meridian and M500's, 1.

For the TBM and the Meridian that did suffer an inflight breakup, they had one thing in common, they were dead before the plane broke, up, because they had lost control, and far exceeded the certified performance envelope of the aircraft.

As to the M600, it has a very very strong wing with similar certification speeds as the TBM. Vmo 251 vs 266, Va 153 versus 158, G-factors 3.8
_________________
Chuck Ivester
Piper M600
Ogden UT


Last edited on 24 Apr 2021, 18:00, edited 4 times in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 17:52 
Offline


 WWW  Profile

Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 13363
Post Likes: +16329
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEVV
Aircraft: MU-2B-26, C560V
Username Protected wrote:
Pilot failed to follow EP. sorry, that’s on him.

Same with the 501 example presented earlier.

That's the point.

Old and new aircraft had mechanical failure. Age didn't play a role. Pilot response did play a role. Technology wasn't the answer.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 18:57 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 3870
Post Likes: +1803
Location: San Carlos, CA - KSQL
Aircraft: Mitsubishi MU-2B-40
Re: age vs rate of failure, most parts and airplanes follow the “bathtub curve” where initial infant mortality failure rate is high, then decreases, and eventually age related failure modes begin to dominate.

The trick is to replace the critical parts on older aircraft before they hit the steep part of the right hand end of the curve. When that occurs is dependent on the type of part of course.

But it also shows new is not more reliable. Often it is less reliable for a while.

_________________
-Jon C.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 19:20 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 07/10/10
Posts: 700
Post Likes: +335
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Aircraft: Conquest
The argument I'm making isn't that a new aircraft is safer, it's that a new aircraft provides a less frustrating ownership experience. However, I have only my own experience from which to draw that conclusion. I've never owned a new aircraft and I've never owned an MU2.

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


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 19:37 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: 06/28/09
Posts: 12084
Post Likes: +6227
Location: Walnut Creek, CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1962 Twin Bonanza
Username Protected wrote:
The argument I'm making isn't that a new aircraft is safer, it's that a new aircraft provides a less frustrating ownership experience. However, I have only my own experience from which to draw that conclusion. I've never owned a new aircraft and I've never owned an MU2.


Yeah but you could install a GFC 600 autopilot and replace every electrical relay with new and still be at least a million ahead.

_________________
http://calipilot.com
atp/cfii


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 19:47 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 3870
Post Likes: +1803
Location: San Carlos, CA - KSQL
Aircraft: Mitsubishi MU-2B-40
Username Protected wrote:
The argument I'm making isn't that a new aircraft is safer, it's that a new aircraft provides a less frustrating ownership experience.

I think that can be the case, but is not necessarily the case.

There have been some examples of new aircraft which had major issues that took the manufacturer a while to deal with. That would be a frustrating ownership experience, having an expensive new asset sitting grounded for a lengthy period.

I think there is a decent amount of variability between individual examples of the same breed of older aircraft, due to the many maintenance choices made by owners along the way. Again, some older aircraft can be money pits and quite frustrating.

I don't think there's a single rule that "a new aircraft will always be less frustrating" or "older aircraft are always more reliable" that really applies. As with many types of complex products and machines, a fair amount of due diligence on the buyer's part to figure out what they are getting is just part of the deal. And a dash of luck in some cases too. :shrug:

_________________
-Jon C.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 19:47 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 07/10/10
Posts: 700
Post Likes: +335
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Aircraft: Conquest
I don't know about that. Replacing every electrical relay might cost a million dollars.

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


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 20:10 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: 12/19/11
Posts: 3187
Post Likes: +1294
Company: Bottom Line Experts
Location: KTOL - Toledo, OH
Aircraft: 2013 SR22T G5
I’ve flown quite a few different makes / models of both newer and older aircraft and have dealt with many mx, squawks, headaches and costs of both flavors.

I’ll take the newer for more $ everyday and so would the people that I invite to fly with me. That’s just me.

_________________
Don Coburn
Corporate Expense Reduction Specialist
2013 SR22T G5


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 20:12 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 07/10/10
Posts: 700
Post Likes: +335
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Aircraft: Conquest
The frustrating things about which I speak are not variable between airframes or makes of aircraft. They are age-related and affect the whole fleet. Relay failures, brittle wires and intermittent electrical shorts plague all aircraft of this age. However, apparently not the venerable MU2.

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


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 20:13 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 09/05/09
Posts: 3211
Post Likes: +1654
Location: NC
Username Protected wrote:
For the TBM and the Meridian that did suffer an inflight breakup, they had one thing in common, they were dead before the plane broke, up, because they had lost control, and far exceeded the certified performance envelope of the aircraft.

concur.

_________________
"Find worthy causes in your life."


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 20:15 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 01/14/09
Posts: 753
Post Likes: +276
Location: Boise, ID
Aircraft: 06 Meridian,SuperCub
You conveniently left out Meridian/M500 builds.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 20:21 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 3870
Post Likes: +1803
Location: San Carlos, CA - KSQL
Aircraft: Mitsubishi MU-2B-40
Username Protected wrote:
The frustrating things about which I speak are not variable between airframes or makes of aircraft. They are age-related and affect the whole fleet. Relay failures, brittle wires and intermittent electrical shorts plague all aircraft of this age. However, apparently not the venerable MU2.

Actually the MU2 has a surprisingly robust electrical system and componentry. While I won't say it can't have some of the issues you describe, they don't seem to be common.

I still believe there is a fair amount of variability. When you get avionics done, for example, do you go through and get rid of old and redundant wiring or do you cut it off with a giant set of dykes and leave it there? I believe those kinds of choices, made over time, add up and matter.

New aircraft may have different modes of failure, but they still have some modes of failure.

_________________
-Jon C.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 20:30 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 07/10/10
Posts: 700
Post Likes: +335
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Aircraft: Conquest
Username Protected wrote:
Actually the MU2 has a surprisingly robust electrical system and componentry.

Of course it does. I would expect nothing less of the MU2.

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


Top

 Post subject: Re: Piper Cheyenne II vs M600
PostPosted: 24 Apr 2021, 20:31 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 09/05/09
Posts: 3211
Post Likes: +1654
Location: NC
Username Protected wrote:
You conveniently left out Meridian/M500 builds.


not on purpose. I couldn't find the number. I like the M600 and would be in one if it was a good fit...

_________________
"Find worthy causes in your life."


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 104 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 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 2007-2021

.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.Microkit_85x50.png.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.Expert_Aircraft_Solution_85x50.jpg.
.methodseven-85x50.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.southseas-85x50-2021.png.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.Marsh.jpg.
.aspen-85x100.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.EagleFuelCellsTriple.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.instar.jpg.
.kingairdom.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.Davis_Aviation_85x50.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.dshannon.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.echelon-85x50.png.
.tat-85x100.png.
.daytona.jpg.
.westsky.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.bkool-85x50-2014-08-04.jpg.
.rtc-85x200.jpg.
.greenwich-85x50-2020-08-10.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.STLAir_85x50.jpg.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.airpower-85x50.jpg.
.avidyne-85x50-2017-11-22.jpg.
.McPeck_85x50.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.avionicssource-85x50.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.
.truecourse.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.Flaremeter_85x50_v2.png.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.heartlandsm.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.SierraTrax_85x50.jpeg.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.ps_engineering.gif.
.dynon-85x50.jpg.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.jaair-85x100.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2021-05-24.jpg.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.