banner
banner

21 Jun 2025, 04:03 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Garmin International (Banner)



Reply to topic  [ 285 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 19  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2021, 17:23 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12807
Post Likes: +5255
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
Username Protected wrote:
What is it about the PA-46 turbine series which is less expensive to "operate and maintain" than the TBM or PC-12 series?

Cost per mile in gas? Fixed costs? MX schedule (hours vs calendar items)? I see this mentioned a lot but never expounded upon.

-J


600 vs 900 vs 1200 hp is basically the story.

Why does a 206 cost more than an 182 than a 172. Fuel, systems, maintenance. Just bigger, more complex planes


Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2021, 17:32 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/14/09
Posts: 821
Post Likes: +312
Location: Boise, ID
Aircraft: 06 Meridian, C180
Username Protected wrote:
What is it about the PA-46 turbine series which is less expensive to "operate and maintain" than the TBM or PC-12 series?

Cost per mile in gas? Fixed costs? MX schedule (hours vs calendar items)? I see this mentioned a lot but never expounded upon.

-J


600 vs 900 vs 1200 hp is basically the story.

Why does a 206 cost more than an 182 than a 172. Fuel, systems, maintenance. Just bigger, more complex planes

I agree on the engine sizes being different. Outside of acquisition cost what makes a 1200HP more expensive to maintain than a 600HP PT6? Parts cost more but the only cost you should have up to 3600 hours is the HSI. What systems are more complex on a PC-12 or TBM versus an M600?

Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2021, 17:40 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12807
Post Likes: +5255
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
The big block pt6’s are $$$ more to overhaul

But seriously look at a 172 vs 206. Or a 20’ boat vs 24’. Size matters, size brings complexity and cost


Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2021, 17:44 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 02/27/19
Posts: 545
Post Likes: +271
Company: OwnShip Technology AG
Location: Zurich, Switzerland
Aircraft: C33/P32R
Username Protected wrote:
600 vs 900 vs 1200 hp is basically the story.


The easy, golden rule of GA plane costs:

1$ or €/hp/hr.

Try it, you‘ll like it.


Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2021, 17:45 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/14/09
Posts: 821
Post Likes: +312
Location: Boise, ID
Aircraft: 06 Meridian, C180
Username Protected wrote:
The big block pt6’s are $$$ more to overhaul

But seriously look at a 172 vs 206. Or a 20’ boat vs 24’. Size matters, size brings complexity and cost

I agree. More cost to overhaul a big block PT6. But that is overhaul after 3600 hours. More to purchase too. But to maintain, year over year? What is the difference? At the risk of saying size doesn't matter and my wife reading this, how does size increase complexity on the SETP? Same engine accessories. I would say the G300 avionics and Garmin Autoland are more complex on the M600. Same de-ice systems. All have pressurization. Retractable gear. I really don't see why size should matter here.


Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2021, 19:25 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 01/23/13
Posts: 9164
Post Likes: +6917
Company: Kokotele Guitar Works
Location: Albany, NY
Aircraft: C-182RG, C-172, PA28
1200hp requires roughly 2x the fuel that 600hp does. So fuel costs are roughly double.


Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2021, 19:31 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 08/24/13
Posts: 9783
Post Likes: +4573
Company: Aviation Tools / CCX
Location: KSMQ New Jersey
Aircraft: TBM700C2
Username Protected wrote:
I love having a lav.


As we used to tell the new guys, that is the speaking tube


Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2021, 19:49 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20361
Post Likes: +25540
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
I love having a lav.

This is easier and less messy:
Attachment:
tj-small-1.png

https://www.traveljohn.com/products/dis ... le-urinal/

They work, no smelly relief tube left in the cabin, no relief tube port on the outside of the airplane, and no airframe corrosion from urine. My plane came with a relief tube, and I removed it.

I consider it safety equipment since it can remove a very strong distraction. There have been scientific studies to show needing to go approximates being drunk in terms of mental impact.

Mike C.


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

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2021, 19:55 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 20361
Post Likes: +25540
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
The big block pt6’s are $$$ more to overhaul

This is a huge factor.

The PT6A-6x engines can cost $500K to overhaul. The small block engines can be half that.

I saw an invoice for a Cheyenne III with PT6A-61 engine overhauls that was about $1.1M. That was back in 2013!

A PC-12, despite having only one engine, costs way more per mile for engines and fuel than my twin engine MU2. Two engines is not necessarily more expensive.

The M600 engine will be a lot less costly to maintain and fuel than a PC-12. Just being larger means everything costs more. Tires, windows, gear parts, etc.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2021, 20:04 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 10/11/13
Posts: 951
Post Likes: +836
Location: Wake Forest, NC
Aircraft: Malibu,Husky,TBM7C2
"The easy, golden rule of GA plane costs:

1$ or €/hp/hr. "


That's crazy accurate.


Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 21 Jan 2021, 21:09 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/08/12
Posts: 12807
Post Likes: +5255
Location: Jackson, MS (KHKS)
Aircraft: 1961 Cessna 172
Username Protected wrote:
The big block pt6’s are $$$ more to overhaul

But seriously look at a 172 vs 206. Or a 20’ boat vs 24’. Size matters, size brings complexity and cost

I agree. More cost to overhaul a big block PT6. But that is overhaul after 3600 hours. More to purchase too. But to maintain, year over year? What is the difference? At the risk of saying size doesn't matter and my wife reading this, how does size increase complexity on the SETP? Same engine accessories. I would say the G300 avionics and Garmin Autoland are more complex on the M600. Same de-ice systems. All have pressurization. Retractable gear. I really don't see why size should matter here.


The bigger airplane has bigger boots and a bigger windshield and sometimes different class of software and a bigger flap drive motor and that much more square feet to paint and more seats to reupholster.

If you get lucky- or maybe are comparing new to new - it may not matter much. But bought 10 years old and kept for 10 years it will matter

Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 22 Jan 2021, 00:47 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 6652
Post Likes: +5959
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Aerostar Superstar 2
Username Protected wrote:
The big block pt6’s are $$$ more to overhaul

This is a huge factor.

The PT6A-6x engines can cost $500K to overhaul. The small block engines can be half that.

I saw an invoice for a Cheyenne III with PT6A-61 engine overhauls that was about $1.1M. That was back in 2013!

A PC-12, despite having only one engine, costs way more per mile for engines and fuel than my twin engine MU2. Two engines is not necessarily more expensive.

The M600 engine will be a lot less costly to maintain and fuel than a PC-12. Just being larger means everything costs more. Tires, windows, gear parts, etc.

Mike C.


This is what I keep telling them over at the European boards whenever this subject comes up. Nobody believes me, they all think I'm full of BS. Theres this single engine OP cost bias that's just impossible to shake. Heck, the PC12 doesn't even burn much less fuel in total than a MU2 or Commander either, but try to convince them of that on top as well... :bang:
_________________
Without love, where would you be now?


Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 22 Jan 2021, 01:02 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 05/30/17
Posts: 198
Post Likes: +159
I love Travel Johns! I swear by them and they make my long legs possible!!

On the MX costs, most (but not all) of the M600 maintenance is on condition, rather that based on scheduled MX intervals. I think that’s one big difference in the cost expectations. There are some life-limited items and inspections, but for Part 91 operations, there are relatively few of those. That means more flexibility in managing MX costs at annuals.

I believe that’s true for all the PA46s but can’t swear by it as the 600 is the only one I have owned.


Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 22 Jan 2021, 01:48 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 07/28/15
Posts: 67
Post Likes: +41
Aircraft: C510
Username Protected wrote:
I love having a lav.

This is easier and less messy:
Attachment:
tj-small-1.png

https://www.traveljohn.com/products/dis ... le-urinal/


Easier and less messy than a real lav? Really? Did you take out all the toilets in your house too in favor of piddle packs?

I can see arguing that a lav isn’t any good for a single pilot but not that it is worse for pax...

Top

 Post subject: Re: New M600 vs used TBM/PC12
PostPosted: 22 Jan 2021, 03:57 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/19/15
Posts: 1596
Post Likes: +1489
Company: Centurion LV and Eleusis
Location: Draper UT KPVU-KVNY
Aircraft: N45AF 501sp Eagle II
Last time I went to order more travel John’s I saw they have a new version with a zip lock at the top to seal it off after use. Works nice.

Nice sure why but I need to pee more often when I fly then on the ground.

I had a recent flight where I overheated my heater and was super cold. FL250 and -33c I had to fill 3 travel John’s on that flight. I could not believe how much I went. So apparently being cold at high altitude makes me pee more often, who knew. Haha


Mike


Pic for proof LOL


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


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 285 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 19  Next



PWI, Inc. (Banner)

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 2007-2025

.wat-85x50.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.rnp.85x50.png.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.KingAirMaint85_50.png.
.holymicro-85x50.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.puremedical-85x200.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.tat-85x100.png.
.camguard.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.aerox_85x100.png.
.performanceaero-85x50.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.mcfarlane-85x50.png.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2021-11-22.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.ocraviation-85x50.png.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.Elite-85x50.png.
.tempest.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.b-kool-85x50.png.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.