08 May 2024, 00:50 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850 Posted: 27 May 2023, 16:27 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/12/16 Posts: 28 Post Likes: +2 Location: KIXD
Aircraft: TB20, Pegase101a
|
|
“I hit 313 knots in a Mirage in level flight, running lean of peak at 15.6 gph. That calculates out to 20 nautical miles per gallon!!!”
Chuck - I thought, perhaps incorrectly, that the Mirage (Lycoming) did not run well LoP (as opposed to the Continental powered Malibu which only runs well LOP). What TAS did you get in the flight levels LoP with the Lycoming?
Thanks,
Sebastien
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850 Posted: 27 May 2023, 16:53 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/12/16 Posts: 28 Post Likes: +2 Location: KIXD
Aircraft: TB20, Pegase101a
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Fastest groundspeed yet. I wish it had this tailwind all the time, but amazed at how efficient it is. Funny how flying a turboprop redefins ones definition of efficiency I hit 400 knots in a Meridian once in level flight. Burning 38.8 gph. That calculated out to 10.3 nautical miles per gallon. That did seem efficient. Attachment: 1.jpg I hit 313 knots in a Mirage in level flight, running lean of peak at 15.6 gph. That calculates out to 20 nautical miles per gallon!!! Now that did seem pretty efficient. Attachment: 2.jpg Pretty sure I lost all that efficiency going back in the opposite direction. I specialize in headwinds most days.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850 Posted: 27 May 2023, 17:00 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 10/11/13 Posts: 895 Post Likes: +714 Location: Wake Forest, NC
Aircraft: Malibu,Husky,TBM7C2
|
|
Username Protected wrote: “I hit 313 knots in a Mirage in level flight, running lean of peak at 15.6 gph. That calculates out to 20 nautical miles per gallon!!!”
Chuck - I thought, perhaps incorrectly, that the Mirage (Lycoming) did not run well LoP (as opposed to the Continental powered Malibu which only runs well LOP). What TAS did you get in the flight levels LoP with the Lycoming?
Thanks,
Sebastien I had a 98 Mirage. The first engine did not like LOP even w GAMIs. I purchased a new replacement engine (when the first one started making metal) that did fine with it. I asked Lycoming "what had changed, did they use different injectors in the newer engine?". They replied nothing charged. I did not believe them.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850 Posted: 28 May 2023, 07:26 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 07/17/15 Posts: 530 Post Likes: +502 Location: KSRQ
Aircraft: C510
|
|
Username Protected wrote: My 2019 M350 would run LOP perfect at around 15.5 GPH and a turbine temperature of 1620,the TAS would be around 180 KTS and all cylinders would be below 370 degrees Same on my 2012. My dads 2000….not so well
_________________ Tony
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850 Posted: 29 May 2023, 23:41 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/12/16 Posts: 28 Post Likes: +2 Location: KIXD
Aircraft: TB20, Pegase101a
|
|
Thanks all for the clarifications about the Mirage’s LOP capabilities. Sebastien
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850 Posted: 08 Jul 2023, 14:31 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/04/11 Posts: 93 Post Likes: +47
Aircraft: 2014 Baron G58
|
|
I’m currently a Baron driver and have been looking at SETP’s. The biggest issue I have encountered is my size. Being 6’6” with an athletic build doesn’t equal comfort in most I’ve sat in. I recently has the opportunity to fly in the Epic on a lengthy trip from NQA to MTH. The plane was extremely comfortable and cruised consistently at 320kts at FL330 with a service ceiling of 340. Fuel burn was just over 50 GPH. It is a true six person, full fuel and bags airplane that was rock solid. Anyone else have any experience?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850 Posted: 08 Jul 2023, 14:32 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 06/04/11 Posts: 93 Post Likes: +47
Aircraft: 2014 Baron G58
|
|
I’m currently a Baron driver and have been looking at SETP’s. The biggest issue I have encountered is my size. Being 6’6” with an athletic build doesn’t equal comfort in most I’ve sat in. I recently had the opportunity to fly in the Epic on a lengthy trip from NQA to MTH. The plane was extremely comfortable and cruised consistently at 320kts at FL330 with a service ceiling of 340. Fuel burn was just over 50 GPH. It is a true six person, full fuel and bags airplane that was rock solid. Anyone else have any experience?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Flying the TBM 850 Posted: 08 Jul 2023, 18:58 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/02/12 Posts: 336 Post Likes: +100
|
|
I’m also over 6’ and have to scoot the seat forward and raise it from the lowest position to have the right seat position. With a pilot door, it’s especially easy to get in and out of once you figure out which steps to take first.
Evolution is pretty compelling, but I thought it was pretty limited and difficult to get insurance? Unless you are taking 6 people, loading bags or golf clubs in the TBM seems way better.
|
|
Top |
|
|
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
|
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
|
|
|
|