banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 19:57 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 710 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44 ... 48  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 14 Jan 2019, 19:20 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23613
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
Which one?

Chuck Walton, Chushon Aircraft, Dickson, TN, M02 airport.

There's kind of a good old boy network around MU2s in central TN for some reason.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 14 Jan 2019, 20:03 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 11885
Post Likes: +2848
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
Username Protected wrote:
Which one?

Chuck Walton, Chushon Aircraft, Dickson, TN, M02 airport.

There's kind of a good old boy network around MU2s in central TN for some reason.

Mike C.


Ah too far west, my stomping ground was on the east side of TN.

Tim

Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 15 Jan 2019, 11:59 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/22/10
Posts: 960
Post Likes: +1375
Location: Milwaukee WI
Aircraft: Ex J35, Onex
Username Protected wrote:
I will not get my money back when I sell it. But I still think overall it's acceptable as it got me into turbines for not a ton of money - I'm probably $350K into it now with a new panel and new interior. I doubt I could get much more than $275K for her?



So you are only in the hole for $75k on a turbine? Am I understanding that correctly? That is not bad at all in the airplane economy (actually I shouldn't use those two words together). I can get $75k underwater in a Grumman Cheetah in my sleep, and it won't take 4 years either!

I am currently building one of the most economical airplanes on the planet (one that I am hoping will maximize my enjoyment versus cost function), and I most likely will be $20k underwater on it the day it rolls off the assembly line in my garage!


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 15 Jan 2019, 16:31 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 6322
Post Likes: +5521
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
Username Protected wrote:


So you are only in the hole for $75k on a turbine? Am I understanding that correctly? That is not bad at all in the airplane economy (actually I shouldn't use those two words together). I can get $75k underwater in a Grumman Cheetah in my sleep, and it won't take 4 years either!

I am currently building one of the most economical airplanes on the planet (one that I am hoping will maximize my enjoyment versus cost function), and I most likely will be $20k underwater on it the day it rolls off the assembly line in my garage!


I appreciate your positive outlook! :D :thumbup: :cheers:

Well, I don't know if I can get $275K for her if I sold it, it might be less. So the delta could be higher. Also, the estimates for the work done now is in the $60-75K region (which I accounted for in my $350K estimate), so if that changes (and it probably will) I'll go over that number.

_________________
Problem is the intelligent people are full of doubt, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 20 Jan 2019, 23:02 
Offline



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 03/26/11
Posts: 1277
Post Likes: +123
Company: Hensley / Elam
Location: Lexington, KY (KLEX)
Aircraft: 1965 Baron B55
As I have evolved my aviation affliction and see my peers in the same condition something has became apparent to me.

The transition in ownership from piston to turbine is not clear. Very educated and technically minded people struggle with the gaps of understanding.

Is there ANYONE in the aircraft sales or brokerage business who has developed a primer or guide to the transitional data points that we seem to hash OVER and OVER here and a dozen other places on the internet.

For example:

Basic explanation of how TBO in Pistons and Turbines are different.
What Hot Section Inspections and the magical numbers of 3600 and 8000 hours mean for Part 91 and those who intend to use 135.

The hoops and options of putting a plane on the MORE program and costs of that and timing of a plane with fresh hots that isn't on the MORE program.

Phase inspections vs aircraft that don't have them. Beech Calendar items vs MU2 and Twin Commander and Piper actual time items.

etc

As the potential buyer, this information to me is agnostic to any broker I might deal with. This is something that every pilot should and wants to know for themselves before engaging a contract with a broker on the plane but is below the knowledge that they need before engaging someone to help them buy a plane.

Basic - "shopper knowledge".

There is too much "tribal" verbal relay of this information and a lot of error in the passing of the knowledge from owner/buyer/operator to potential buyer.

_________________
CP ASMEL IA PP RH AGI IGI
http://kybaronpilot.blogspot.com/


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2019, 12:28 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/16/07
Posts: 17512
Post Likes: +21029
Company: Real Estate development
Location: Addison -North Dallas(ADS), Texas
Aircraft: In between
Russ: I tried to do a lot of that in the flying the C90 thread on here. That was a step up from the P Baron for me. Maybe you can condense some of the facts to make it fit your purpose better.

_________________
Dave Siciliano, ATP


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2019, 12:43 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 08/03/10
Posts: 1562
Post Likes: +1781
Company: D&M Leasing Houston
Location: Katy, TX (KTME)
Aircraft: CitationV/C180
Username Protected wrote:
As I have evolved my aviation affliction and see my peers in the same condition something has became apparent to me.

The transition in ownership from piston to turbine is not clear. Very educated and technically minded people struggle with the gaps of understanding.

Is there ANYONE in the aircraft sales or brokerage business who has developed a primer or guide to the transitional data points that we seem to hash OVER and OVER here and a dozen other places on the internet.

For example:

Basic explanation of how TBO in Pistons and Turbines are different.
What Hot Section Inspections and the magical numbers of 3600 and 8000 hours mean for Part 91 and those who intend to use 135.

The hoops and options of putting a plane on the MORE program and costs of that and timing of a plane with fresh hots that isn't on the MORE program.

Phase inspections vs aircraft that don't have them. Beech Calendar items vs MU2 and Twin Commander and Piper actual time items.

etc

As the potential buyer, this information to me is agnostic to any broker I might deal with. This is something that every pilot should and wants to know for themselves before engaging a contract with a broker on the plane but is below the knowledge that they need before engaging someone to help them buy a plane.

Basic - "shopper knowledge".

There is too much "tribal" verbal relay of this information and a lot of error in the passing of the knowledge from owner/buyer/operator to potential buyer.


For Part 91 overhauls are the same for turbines as for pistons. The primary difference with turbines is the hot section inspections and cycle counts. The inspections are mandatory and are almost always based on hours. If you have cycle limited parts, those have to be replaced and some can be quite expensive.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2019, 14:27 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/30/09
Posts: 3343
Post Likes: +1948
Location: $ilicon Vall€y
Aircraft: Columbia 400
The discussion raises another point. We're mostly discussing older turbines that are going into pt91 operations, sometimes recently or just now.

But what about someone who say, purchases a new or newer turbine aircraft, and operates it under pt91 rules? If he goes to sell the airplane a few years down the road, if it hasn't been operated and maintained using the same schedules and rules as a pt 135 would, does that limit the value of the aircraft to say a pt 135 operator?

Would it need a lot of "catch up" to go over a list of things deferred that aren't mandatory for pt 91, but would perhaps be for commercial operations?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2019, 15:48 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/16/07
Posts: 17512
Post Likes: +21029
Company: Real Estate development
Location: Addison -North Dallas(ADS), Texas
Aircraft: In between
Larry: I think the newer turbine alternative would be M.O.R.E. if one didn't what to overhaul and engine. All the other scheduled items would have to be brought current as you mention. One would just have to see how much that would cost and factor it in.

_________________
Dave Siciliano, ATP


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2019, 16:25 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/16/12
Posts: 610
Post Likes: +279
Location: London
Aircraft: TC690A
Username Protected wrote:
The discussion raises another point. We're mostly discussing older turbines that are going into pt91 operations, sometimes recently or just now.

But what about someone who say, purchases a new or newer turbine aircraft, and operates it under pt91 rules? If he goes to sell the airplane a few years down the road, if it hasn't been operated and maintained using the same schedules and rules as a pt 135 would, does that limit the value of the aircraft to say a pt 135 operator?

Would it need a lot of "catch up" to go over a list of things deferred that aren't mandatory for pt 91, but would perhaps be for commercial operations?


Not an expert but a turbine owner... From my understanding, it would generally be the case that if the part 91 operator opted to inspect but not overhaul an engine, that would mean that a part 135 operator and, probably other buyers, would adjust their bid for the airplane to reflect the deferred maintenance. That doesn’t mean the corollary would necessarily be true, though, that the potential buyer will give you 100% credit for the money you’ve spent on an overhaul, if you had opted to overhaul, rather than just inspect and only replace timed/cycled out bits... it depends on which shop you used, what the overall maintenance status is...
From my understanding, from shopping around various alternative turboprops, it seems like the huge value driver is around engine overhauls and how you deal with them. Other maintenance, where an owner has discretion of inspect vs. overhaul is not a huge value driver. You don’t have a lot of discretion, certainly in twin turbines, except maybe on landing gear and props, on inspect vs. overhaul.
The exception which I’m aware of may be TBMs, where there is a lot of scheduled maintenance which isn’t mandatory part 91 but which lots of potential owners want to have been completed, so you are likely to pay early or pay later, certainly among younger airframes. Please correct my understanding if I am incorrect, i shopped them and joined the owners forum but would defer to anyone with firsthand knowledge.

The overall truth with the legacy fleet of older KAs, turbine Twin Commanders, MU2s, Cessna twin turbines and Cheyenne’s is that generally a buyer can get one pretty close to the value of the engines plus or minus obvious upcoming maintenance events and upgrades (-upcoming gear overhaul, -upcoming wing spar inspection, -upcoming ADSB upgrade, +a bit of recent avionics upgrades, +a bit of recent paint job, +a bit of recent interior...).

For maybe sub 5-10 year old turbines the math is different, because buyers are comparing to new as an alternative, so their reference point and their pricing is different.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2019, 16:27 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 6322
Post Likes: +5521
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
It's important to remember that MORE program is only really available for older aircraft. You can't MORE the desirable TBM's, PC12's, P180's or latest King Air or mod planes because they all run -66's and -67's.

But I agree it's a steep learning curve and not well mapped out or understood for beginners. Just cycle limits on rotables was something I learned about pretty much after the fact. Never heard about it before that - I thought you did HSI's and that was that. ;)

_________________
Problem is the intelligent people are full of doubt, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2019, 16:36 
Online


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/16/07
Posts: 17512
Post Likes: +21029
Company: Real Estate development
Location: Addison -North Dallas(ADS), Texas
Aircraft: In between
Our shop checked all that on the pre-buy and gave us a list. On the last overhaul, several things were addressed that eliminated the life limited parts issue for several years. A good shop should provide an inspection cycle list of things coming up, address ADs, SBs and life limited parts. Get comfortable with upcoming inspections. They come fast and often on the King Airs. There isn't a program for low flight time users.

_________________
Dave Siciliano, ATP


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2019, 17:33 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/16/12
Posts: 610
Post Likes: +279
Location: London
Aircraft: TC690A
And, while the TBO number of hours on the engines is significant, the big picture is more complicated, with certain blades being time or cycle limited. The only certainty seems to be that it will be expensive, hopefully not catastrophically expensive. :)
Good planning and research can limit your “known” upcoming expenses, but the unexpected can throw some big curveballs.
Buying well can protect yourself a bit but the cost of purchase on a legacy airframe is going to be less than the medium term operating and maintenance costs.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2019, 19:22 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12798
Post Likes: +5224
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
Username Protected wrote:
It's important to remember that MORE program is only really available for older aircraft. You can't MORE the desirable TBM's, PC12's, P180's or latest King Air or mod planes because they all run -66's and -67's.



Yes and No. Technically correct - no MORE STC for the big block PT6's. But ... if you're part 91 you can roll your on MORE. But ... the market values adherence to published TBO's and you'll get hammered on resale.

Might start to make sense for the sub-million dollar TBM's thought.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Turbine step up?
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2019, 22:43 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/30/09
Posts: 3343
Post Likes: +1948
Location: $ilicon Vall€y
Aircraft: Columbia 400
Username Protected wrote:
Yes and No. Technically correct - no MORE STC for the big block PT6's. But ... if you're part 91 you can roll your on MORE. But ... the market values adherence to published TBO's and you'll get hammered on resale.

Might start to make sense for the sub-million dollar TBM's thought.


That's the part I was wondering about. Yes, a pt91 owner can save some money by not following TBO's and other "recommended" items, but he could be shooting himself in the foot by doing so, particularly on newer or higher value aircraft which have resale value into commercial service, or to pt91 operators who want to buy those with all mandatory and recommended items ticked off in the logbooks.

There's probably some sort of optimization function to be written that weighs the value of the optional items vs. resale impact in terms of money and/or time it will sit on the market at resale.

I'd guess that on a 40-50 year old aircraft, probably doesn't matter much, but it would on a 4-5-year old aircraft, especially if it had value as a charter.


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 710 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44 ... 48  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

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