banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 10:40 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 109 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2022, 04:18 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/15/21
Posts: 2513
Post Likes: +1240
Single-engine turbine crashes due to engine failure do seem fairly rare. I've heard the figure of one in-flight shutdown per about 300,000 hours for the PT-6 compared to 1 in about 3,000 hours for piston engines.

Of course, if you exceed the limits on your turbine, bad things can happen quickly:

https://www.baaa-acro.com/crash/crash-p ... ibbean-sea

_________________
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, Administrate, Litigate.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2022, 06:14 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 09/05/09
Posts: 4082
Post Likes: +2731
Location: Small Town, NC
Username Protected wrote:
parts,
phase-style inspection (yr 1-"A", yr 2-"B", yr 3-"A", yr 4-"C")

As a single engine turboprop, you can do an "annual inspection" and you don't have to do phases or some inspection program the OEM puts out. That said, the phases may be beneficial, it just depends on how they are structured.

91.409(e)/(f) does not apply to you since you are single engine. This is an arbitrary thing in the FAA rules.

Quote:
10 year gear OH.

If it is an overhaul, part 91 doesn't have to do that. You can do it on condition.
Mike C.


Yes- agree to it all. I am not the owner of the TBM- so although I manage and make recommendations, ultimately the owners decide if they want to follow the Mfg programs. If it was mine, I'd probably do the straight annual thing, and never OH the gear.
one of the oddities of the brand is that new buyers heavily discount any (all) service not performed IAW the Daher recommended limits.
so you either pay now, or pay later when you sell (or not at all if it's your last plane).
_________________
"Find worthy causes in your life."


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2022, 08:16 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 07/14/17
Posts: 373
Post Likes: +145
Company: Finch Industries,Inc.
Location: Thomasville,NC
Aircraft: TBM900,M600
The TBM C2,850 and 900 series all received a big gross weight increase as Socata proved a crashworthiness of 25 Gs the stall speed went from 61 KTS to 65 Kts,these all have about 800 usefull with full fuel which is 292 gallons of jet A.The range with full fuel is around 1650 NM with the 900 series having the best range because it is the fastest.In the past year Avex has tracked the increase in value of all TBMs and the 900 has increased 10.5% which is a lot less than some other turbines and jets.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2022, 08:39 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 08/24/13
Posts: 8406
Post Likes: +3662
Company: Aviation Tools / CCX
Location: KSMQ New Jersey
Aircraft: TBM700C2
Username Protected wrote:
parts,
phase-style inspection (yr 1-"A", yr 2-"B", yr 3-"A", yr 4-"C")
10 year gear OH.


The 10 year gear inspection is not actually an overhaul. It used to be an O/H, but they moved the O/H to 5000 landings instead of hours/time.

I just did the 10 year inspection on mine 8 months ago, myself. It consists of removing the gear (very easy on a TBM), removing the scissors and inspecting dimensions of the scissor attachments, removing the bottom plug in the lower cylinder and inspecting for corrosion, and general cleanup. It doesn't replace any seals or remove the lower leg from the body. It took me a week to do all 3 gear.

The 10 year gear actuator O/H is actually more expensive (maybe you were referring to that).

Overall I'm pretty happy with the maint of my 700C2. I've done the A+ and C+ myself. The A+ is typical yearly annual items for any airframe. The B+ and C+ are mostly just more locations to lubricate.

I just bought another 700C2 2 weeks ago (the previous one went away due to an incident I wasn't a part of, and the new one is without a partner), A+ done by the previous owner 3 weeks ago, and the only due items next year are 15 year oxy cylinder replacement and fin fitting inspection.

I looked really hard at a Meridian this year. It's true that there are less O/H items on the PA46, with more items on condition. But I have worked on a lot of PA46 airframes over the years, and stuff breaks a lot more often and in my opinion a lot of items get changed at about the same time anyway.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2022, 08:54 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23612
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
I've heard the figure of one in-flight shutdown per about 300,000 hours for the PT-6 compared to 1 in about 3,000 hours for piston engines.

PWC stated IFSD numbers are only for the "core" engine, not including "accessories" like fuel controllers, prop governors, etc. Obviously, those accessories affect whether you get thrust from the engine.

Also, engines can fail to produce thrust without having any sort of fault in the engine, but faults in the airframe such as block fuel lines or vents, failed pumps, failed valves, etc, or a propeller fault.

So that number is a bit misleading if you are using to judge how often you won't have thrust in a single engine turboprop.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2022, 10:22 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/16/15
Posts: 2867
Post Likes: +3575
Location: Ogden UT
Aircraft: Piper M600
Username Protected wrote:
A jet is so, and I mean SOOO, much safer than any turboprop (and I'll add extra OOOOs if it's a piston twin).


Would be interested in data showing that older single pilot jets flown by owner pilots are safer than modern SETP's.

The GX000 Piper turbine which I think begins the modern SETP generation has 0 fatals. Modern meaning state of the art avionics, stall protection, redundancy, envelope protection etc. Seems like hardly a year goes by and some owner pilot augers some old biz jet into the ground. I don't think the numbers of owner flown single pilot jets exceeds the number of owner flown hours in modern SETP's to include the GX000 TBM's and Meridian/M500/M600 and PC12's. In fact pretty sure the SETP hours and miles flown exceed the jet miles. Part 135 and pro pilot flown part 91 enjoy some extra safety, but then just returned from a safety meeting reviewing the Learjet crash with 2 pro-pilots at Gillespie. Doesn't happen in an M600 with Synthetic vision, TAWS, terrain maps, envelope protection etc. If you have data.... Interested to see it. The numbers in the owner flown jet market keep wracking up.

_________________
Chuck Ivester
Piper M600
Ogden UT


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2022, 10:22 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/15/21
Posts: 2513
Post Likes: +1240
Username Protected wrote:
I've heard the figure of one in-flight shutdown per about 300,000 hours for the PT-6 compared to 1 in about 3,000 hours for piston engines.

PWC stated IFSD numbers are only for the "core" engine, not including "accessories" like fuel controllers, prop governors, etc. Obviously, those accessories affect whether you get thrust from the engine.

Also, engines can fail to produce thrust without having any sort of fault in the engine, but faults in the airframe such as block fuel lines or vents, failed pumps, failed valves, etc, or a propeller fault.

So that number is a bit misleading if you are using to judge how often you won't have thrust in a single engine turboprop.

Mike C.


I was under the impression that those numbers are for in-flight shutdowns due to all causes except fuel exhaustion. But I'm not sure.

I've been trying to find the original FAA source for those figures without success. The closest I came was this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbine_engine_failure

This article notes that:

'The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) was quoted as stating turbine engines have a failure rate of one per 375,000 flight hours, compared to of one every 3,200 flight hours for aircraft piston engines. Due to "gross under-reporting" of general aviation piston engines in-flight shutdowns (IFSD), the FAA has no reliable data and assessed the rate "between 1 per 1,000 and 1 per 10,000 flight hours". Continental Motors reports the FAA states general aviation engines experience one failures or IFSD every 10,000 flight hours, and states its Centurion engines is one per 20,704 flight hours, lowering to one per 163,934 flight hours in 2013-2014.'
_________________
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, Administrate, Litigate.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2022, 10:36 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23612
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
I've been trying to find the original FAA source for those figures without success.

The truth is, nobody really knows with any certainty. The data doesn't exist and the effects of operational circumstances are not normalized, either.

Piston engines do fail far more than turbine but anyone trying to put hard numbers on that is almost certainly wrong.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2022, 10:50 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/15/21
Posts: 2513
Post Likes: +1240
Username Protected wrote:
I've been trying to find the original FAA source for those figures without success.

The truth is, nobody really knows with any certainty. The data doesn't exist and the effects of operational circumstances are not normalized, either.

Piston engines do fail far more than turbine but anyone trying to put hard numbers on that is almost certainly wrong.

Mike C.

Also those Continental Centurion numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. I'm pretty sure that when installed in the DA42, many flights were scrubbed on the ground due to an ECU test failure and a good number of flights had to make an unscheduled landing due to an ECU indicator, even though it did not necessitate an in-flight shutdown.
_________________
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, Administrate, Litigate.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2022, 13:38 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 09/05/09
Posts: 4082
Post Likes: +2731
Location: Small Town, NC
Username Protected wrote:
I've been trying to find the original FAA source for those figures without success.

The truth is, nobody really knows with any certainty. The data doesn't exist and the effects of operational circumstances are not normalized, either.

Piston engines do fail far more than turbine but anyone trying to put hard numbers on that is almost certainly wrong.

Mike C.


probably true. but my own numbers look like this:
~1500 hrs in pistons, 1 total engine failure (loss of turbocharger and consumption of metal from the turbo compressor).

the robust-ness of turbines (and the associated systems) is indisputable. even if they were only 2x higher MTBF (thanks Mike), that's a huge difference.
_________________
"Find worthy causes in your life."


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 29 Oct 2022, 13:57 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 11/15/17
Posts: 668
Post Likes: +335
Company: Cessna (retired)
Username Protected wrote:
I've been trying to find the original FAA source for those figures without success.

The truth is, nobody really knows with any certainty. The data doesn't exist and the effects of operational circumstances are not normalized, either.

Piston engines do fail far more than turbine but anyone trying to put hard numbers on that is almost certainly wrong.

Mike C.


I agree with Mike on lack of data. In addition to the question about what PWC considers chargeable (I thought fuel controls, etc., that came with the engine were chargeable, but I may be wrong), PWC can only report incidents they know about, which is not all of them. That said, the turbine engine data is better than the piston engine data.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 23 Nov 2022, 09:38 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 05/23/08
Posts: 6059
Post Likes: +702
Location: CMB7, Ottawa, Canada
Aircraft: TBM - C185 - T206
Went from a Baron 58 to a TBM 10 years ago, never looked back.
Mine as over 800 ibs with full fuel. Its essentially a 4 passenger aircraft with 1400 nm range.


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

_________________
Former Baron 58 owner.
Pistons engines are for tractors.

Marc Bourdon


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 23 Nov 2022, 09:56 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/28/13
Posts: 6037
Post Likes: +3998
Location: Indiana
Aircraft: C195, D17S, M20TN
2006 Legacy 850 TBM with 840 useful with full fuel(292g). Close to original Honeywell EFIS 40 with 530W’s. At the time of purchase it was ~6 years old when purchased. Each to his own. TBM was easy transition from a Mooney. Few more systems but aircraft handled very similarly in all flight regimes. Most of my training was in airplane.

_________________
Chuck
KEVV


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 23 Nov 2022, 10:07 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/15/21
Posts: 2513
Post Likes: +1240
Username Protected wrote:
TBM was easy transition from a Mooney. Few more systems but aircraft handled very similarly in all flight regimes.

It's almost as if the "M" in "TBM" stands for "Mooney"...

_________________
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, Administrate, Litigate.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Upgrade from Baron
PostPosted: 23 Nov 2022, 14:45 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 09/05/09
Posts: 4082
Post Likes: +2731
Location: Small Town, NC
Username Protected wrote:
Went from a Baron 58 to a TBM 10 years ago, never looked back.
Mine as over 800 ibs with full fuel. Its essentially a 4 passenger aircraft with 1400 nm range.



yep... nearly identical. we have 806lbs available with full fuel, but we never need full fuel.

I've done a 1550nm leg going west (although it was slow), and a 1050 going west with 85kts headwind.

_________________
"Find worthy causes in your life."


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 109 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  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

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