I consider these to be entry level SETP aircraft. Either can be obtained for significantly less than $1mm. I’m curious as to the pros & cons of these 2 specific aircraft. The Rocket Engineering literature seems to indicate that their product is superior than the factory Meridian. Is it?

Jim

I looked close at the Jetprop for a while. Rocket does a great job. In pure performance terms the JP may be better BUT:

1. It is a converted plane and the bottom of the yellow speed "limits" on the ASI are somewhat lower than those of the Meridian.

2. Useful load. Early Meridians were limited but so is every JP. For 2 it is nice, more than 2 and a JP is offloading fuel. Meridians have improved UL through a mod from Piper for earlier planes and changes to later planes. I am not certain the UL increase mod is available for all early Meridians, never got that far into the detail.

3. There really is a difference in the later Meridians, they are better planes. The early planes UL issues, intake issues etc have been thoroughly ironed out. ISTR that the Meridian tail is substantially reinforced either from day 1 or as a change early on, compared to the JP tail. All that power up front …

OTOH, with a Meridian you are mostly locked into the avionics in it - the G1000 or the earlier plane's Avidyne systems. The very early Meridians now on market seem much to have been converted to G500 or 600 - that is always an option with the JP, not so much with later Meridians. Avionics flexibility to the JP...

OTGH (tip of the hat to Jerry Pournelle), I like them both a lot.

RAS

This Jetprop owner did a walk around video about his plane. Informative info about some of the differences between Jetprop and Meridian.

https://youtu.be/0niYv8PcsFU

The biggest single problem with Jetprop conversions is the useful load. I have spoken with many operators, USA and Europe, who routinely ignore the paper limits, and still overload these aircraft with 3+ luggage, or 4 persons, no luggage. Buying the paper STC for thousands of dollars might assuage some guilt. If you follow the POH, one airplane I looked at, with some extra battery weight, allowed for a 26 pound pilot, with full fuel.
The client I was shopping for ended up with a TBM 850, which has some stout useful load numbers.

There was a jetprop listed about a year ago that had a full fuel payload of -50 lbs. I met a jetprop guy in the pilots lounge one day and he told me everyone basically flies them way over gross, but they do just fine.

Very interesting, thanks.

Out of curiousity, if one wanted to take a pilot and 3 pax plus luggage (say 800 lbs. for people and luggage) how much fuel would remain and how far might one be able to go?

While the 1000+ NM range of full fuel tanks is attractive it’s not necessary for the vast majority of our trips.

These 2 planes are pistons converted to turbines with compromise.
Try a real turbine aircraft, TBM 700A.
You will have range and payload with a proven airframe.

Hi Jim-

For a high-performance guy like you, I think Marc has it right!

Regards,

Bob

Foreflight has a performance profile you can download for the jetprop and play with numbers on. I don’t know what you’re looking to do but you’ll probably be disappointed when you see the totals stacked up against a bonanza. It will certainly get there faster even with fuel stop but probably not much. Etc.

Sadly the entry SETPs are 1 or 2 people airplanes it appears. The M600 and Tbms show that you have to pay for significant useful load.

Having been (and still am) on both sides PA46/TBM Marc is absolutely right.

I've heard them described as

PC( Jetprop) vs. Mac (Meridian)

5 speed M5 (jet prop) vs. automatic E-class (Meridian)

The two planes were created with very different engineering design philosophies.

The Meridian was meant to be simple at the expense of capability/efficiency. The Jetrop was meant to be capable and efficient at the cost of simplicity. Which one you prefer says more about you than it does the plane.

Couple notes
1) There are no G1000 jetprops
2) the UL issue is real but not universal.
* 80's airframes have reasonable range/payload capabilities.
* Full fuel isn't always necessary
* The Meridian advantage isn't as good as you'd think - they burn notably more fuel for a given trip
* yes, it's widely known that people routinely fly the jetprop overgross. This is clearly illegal (though no one seems to care). It's arguable whether it's unsafe, though there's not a good line for where safe ends. Best quote I heard from a PA46 instructor telling a former student's story "well that's the last time I fly a Jetprop at 1000 over gross!" But with the right mission and the right airframe, you can stay under gross.

If your typical trips are under 600nm then the Meridian can take two average weight couples and bags. If you need to move four or more non stop over 600nm then neither is the plane for you. For me a plane that flies in this speed range and can go 1000 plus miles better have a head on board or someone is going to be telling me to land anyway. (My people are not troopers!)

Hi David,

Thanks. There are a lot of things to like about the Meridian. 600nm certainly covers the vast majority of our trips.

For us the decision is to keep our TN A36, get a Malibu, or a Jetprop/Meridian.

The reality is our A36 is great, but I keep thinking about pressurization.

Regards, Jim

Great topic Jim!

Unfortunately I don't have enough time to go into a lot of detail but I've been looking at both for some time to the point where I believe I've got my arms wrapped around it.

Charles summed it up quite well but there's a fair amount of education to be had here. In summary:

Jetprop
- prices range from $600K - $1.2M
- comes in -21, -34 and -35 varieties
- -21 is good for about 240kts on 28-30gph. Runs well in the low to mid 20's
- -34 and -35 are good for 260kts on 32 gph. Runs well in the mid to high 20's.
- most desirable models are '99 and newer due to beefed up wing spar in '99
- manual inertial separator which allows for better performance when 'off' but pilot has to turn on when in potential icing conditions (Meridian has IS on all times)
- shorter engine block allows for nose baggage compartment space whereas Meridian -42 engine is longer and occupies the space that the JP has available for baggage compartment
- since it is a conversion, is a bit more 'manual' and not as highly integrated as Meridian
- low UL but when you run mission analyses you understand it's not as bad as some make it to be
- can support many different avionics options. Nicer models have G500 / GTN750.
- engines can be put on trend monitoring that can extend intervals for HSI
- seem to be slow to move on the market. Expect a much longer sales cycle when you're ready to move on compared to Meridian

Meridian
- used prices range from $600K - $2M+
- performance is 260-270 kts on 40-42 gph
- more elegant from an integration standpoint
- interiors a bit nicer than most JP's
- Fall into (3) buckets:
- 2001 - 2005 - Meggitt avionics that can be replaced by G500 / GTN 750/650 and many have been
- 2006 - 2009 - Avidyne avionics. Best you can do is upgrade GNS430 to GTN650. Stuck with Avidyne PFD / MFD
- 2010+ - G1000
- No nose baggage space available. Only baggage space is aft cabin.
- Very robust market.

Overall the two compare much closer than you'd think from an overall value standpoint. From a bang for the buck perspective, the JP wins. According to my math, I can own a JP for ~15% less overall cost compared to Meridian, assuming similar purchase costs.

The Meridian has more UL but as pointed out, a good chunk of that gets eaten up by the need for more fuel. For 90% of my flying, I could make either work. For multi passenger missions, the Meridian offers 150-200lbs more UL than the JP but that number can vary quite a bit from JP to JP.

Here's a great summary of Jetprops by Joe Casey:

https://flycasey.com/thinking-of-buying-a-jetprop/

Adding a bit on the nose baggage.

The Piston PA46 nose baggage is quite useful. I could fit two carseats in there easily.

The Jetprop has one of two options for the nose baggage

1) 10 gallon header tank (giving 150 gal capacity) takes about half the space, still usable for baggage
2) 20 gallon header tank (giving 160 gallon total capacity - trivial space left for chocks & cowl plugs.

Meridian - no nose baggage as noted above.


I'd disagree with Don a bit on the market - good jet props go quick. It's just a more heterogenous market. The older/lighter/cheaper airframes make a nice match for the -21 engine (used parts for which are everywhere come HSI/OH time) and the high teens is a great spot for that airframe.

Also get familiar with the GW upgrades on the early Meridians. The 2001 and some 2002 have a lower fairly restrictive GW.