The TPE's in mine, the 151K's, are temp limited to 575 degrees for 5 minuets and 545 degrees continuous. I understand that the 151's on the early Mits are 650 degrees max, which results in costlier HSI's according to a source. Not sure if this is true.

Most of the AD's on the Commander have been complied with in the current fleet. Hasn't been any new ones.

Usually the difference in numerical values is just an artifact of measurement, I.e. Where probes were placed, what temp SRL Red line is set to, etc. Internally they are similar.

I occasionally fly an F model and that's not the temperature they use.


This one came out in 2013 and affects 690s:

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guida ... -09-05.pdf

2009 and affects wing skin corrosion:

http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guida ... -25-02.pdf

It seems the Commander engineers didn't under dissimilar metal corrosion.

Mike C.

You don't need no pavement.



MU2 is very good off the pavement. In fact, it lands better and the tires last much longer! With beta reverse thrust, you don't care about the braking action, either.

Main tires are 65 PSI, nose tires are 55 PSI, which is reasonably low pressure for surfaces.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGRBzbmwJxQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s4GcQB6YyQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SggESoOw97g

Mike C.

Are you referring to having to do the HSIs soon Jim? What's the verdict on the AMU count for those?

It's an interesting dynamic. I would have guessed this bird would have been snapped up very quickly.

Good condition, good modern panel.

If I were in the $350k airplane market I would buy it. What else do you get for that kind of money? A very early and slow King air, a G36 or non WAAS G58, a matrix or Malibu.

Instead of a very early and slow MU2?

You can also get a G500, TAT, TKS, O2, GTN'd A36 in that range.

I think the problem is that the operating economics are still daunting by virtue of the turbine fuel burn. That, plus the multi-day SFAR requirement puts a pretty high minimum on the annual expenses to operate.

I know where you can get a Lear 25d for 125k.

Slow = 260 kts.

If only my 421 were so slow.

The F model is an odd bird. Most people who get past the mu2 myths/voodoo do so out of a desire to go FAST. And thats -10. Most people who can tolerate 260kts are in a meridian or some flavor KA

A old, slow C-90 is going to be ~220 knots, 30 knots slower than a later model.

This MU-2 is 260, about the same percentage slower than the later models...

I get that it's WAY faster than my current ride, but in the MU2 world, the -1 airplanes are the dogs speed-wise.

Isn't the "f" also the cheapest/most simple to maintain. It seems like it has a plexi windshield with spray bar, no AD props, and those dirt cheap to replace -1 engines. It takes a pretty expensive KA to run 260 knots.

Nope. The Commander is basically as stout as a Malibu Jetprop. Va is 137 in the Commander, 127 in the Jetprop. Do we really need to do this again?

While we're at it, and yeah, I know I'm going to get flamed for this but f it anyhow, the SFAR was designed specifically for pilots who fly by the seat of their pants and skimp on training. People who make insanely cavalier decisions. People who make the rest of us look bad when their luck runs out and they auger into a house full of people and kill half a family.

Know anyone like that? I was like that when I was younger and I knew my superior skill would carry the day, because really, I was that good. A legend in my own mind. I can't believe I didn't kill myself. I'm eternally grateful that I didn't kill anyone else.

Here's the deal: if you're the guy who thinks he doesn't need the SFAR, you shouldn't be flying a high performance airplane.

Instead of a very early and slow MU2?

You can also get a G500, TAT, TKS, O2, GTN'd A36 in that range.

I think the problem is that the operating economics are still daunting by virtue of the turbine fuel burn. That, plus the multi-day SFAR requirement puts a pretty high minimum on the annual expenses to operate.

Vs a 58P at 200/210, it looks about like:
170 gallons x $4.50 = $765 (5 hours)
$54 more on a 1000 mile RT for a/c, pressurization, 10% faster, more comfortable. (more comfortable from better environmentals and ride quality, not space)

vs a 421C, you'd probably be $100 more, 20% faster, way more comfortable...

It turns out the aircraft market is pretty efficient. Better/more economical/more flexible airplanes cost more to acquire.

Expensive engine events are
1) rare. Really rare compared to piston trouble
2) often FOD and covered by insurance
3) solved by purchasing used engines and not a $250k overhaul