In CapEx definitely. In OpEx is depends on how long you own the plane, how much you use, and if sh** happens.
If you take a freshly overhauled Aerostar with new or zero timed engines, and compare it to an MU-2 with the same. Keep both for 3500 hours in seven years doing scheduled and preventive maintenance (such as IRAN turbos every 1000 hours, one mag every 250); and overhaul both sets of engines and the planes at that point.
The numbers on an OpEx perspective are very close. The largest variable will be which fuel is cheaper.

So it comes down to perspective. It can be argued multiple ways which plane is cheaper to operate. If looking at historical data, it will mostly depend on when you buy, the condition of the plane, when you sell and if sh** happens. If doing a future prediction, it will depend more on assumptions than anything else.

The oh sh** factor is why I never went turbine when I needed the step up in capability the Aerostar gave me.

Tim

+1 !

I'm an A&P/IA and I have a fully equipped shop. The biggest risk is on an A* is an engine grenading and I can handle that for > $25K . Anything above that is probably going to be covered under the hull insurance.

An FOD, or any other turbine event for that matter, starts @ $50K and escalates very fast from there ...

Also, a multi-turbine MUST be run on an FAA $$$ Approved Inspection Program $$$, Vs Part 43,14 CFR Appendix D, short checklist Annuals for pistons or SETP.

And then there's things like props: TP props typically cost x3 more than piston props. Batteries are x4 and they eat them for breakfast, lest you have a hot start event, then we go straight to 6 figures.

Such is the reality of operating a turbine.

Yes the scheduled inspections on turbines can cause greater cost than annuals if you fly your plane a lot. But the inspections are also usually concluded in three business days and typically don’t cost much. The parts on turbines are very robust. A few years ago the wings and gear were removed on my MU-2 and got sent in for NDT. First time they were done in 7500 hours. One bolt was replaced, everything else passed and was reassembled as is.
When my cylinder left the block on my Aerostar, it was the start of a 4 month ordeal with overhaul…it was more than $25K. But the biggest problem was that the plane was out of service for 1/3 of the year.
My shop can drop the TPE-331 off the wing in 30-40 minutes. They are just much easier aircraft to work on. It is also the expectation that turbines will be back in service rapidly. I’ve only had two inspections/repairs go longer than a week in 7 years.
The turbines are designed and serviced as “working aircraft”. They are easy to fix, relatively easy to diagnose, and rarely break. That’s why they are usually selected when the plane “has a job.”
We have 5 turboprops in our business. FOD has happened and it is always covered by insurance. With 10 engines to maintain, we’ve seen our share of maintenance costs. We used to run Baron and Aerostar. Baron had an engine failure on takeoff; Aerostar had several. Wouldn’t go back to pistons for “working planes.”
But for fun, I love my Aviat Husky!

I’m going in for annual this month on my 601P, I’ve flown about 275hrs this year and it’s never stranded me.

I had an oil leak (some loose nuts on hydraulic pump drive, bad turbo drain back fitting) - Had basically firewall forward (engines and turbos etc) overhauled last annual by the flight shop in Brigham city utah.

The 25 hour oil changed have gotten royally annoying and being limited to 25,000’ has been inconvenient a few times… but otherwise the aerostar has hauled me around storms and ice, missed 200’ approaches and in general has become an amazing tool for growing my business across the Midwest and hauling my wife to Taylor swift concerts

i was at intercontinental jet the other day looking at MU2s… 3/4 of my total time is in turbine aircraft and helicopters, the mx exposure is high and the aerostar is getting it done for now. But I think an MU2 is in my future.

I’m the OP on this discussion, I just wanted to thank everyone for their input here. I went out of the country on vacation and didn’t bring my laptop or iPad. I read the responses on my phone but don’t enjoy typing on it very much. I’m actually glad I let it play out without my input, lots of great stuff here in the discussion. After reading through all of this and a couple side conversations with folks as well as my own research, I’m really leaning towards a 601P. I want the pressurization but don’t really need the extra power. Time to climb would be nice but the 601P efficiency is darn good compared to the larger engine airplanes. It’s 95% of the time going to be 1 or 2 of us onboard without much baggage. Another big factor in this is I’ve always wanted an Aerostar. While that may be a bad reason, it’s a reason. It’s why I’m looking at this and not a 58P/340/MU2 etc. I also already have hangars on both ends of my mission that fit an Aerostar but any larger would be an issue. So for the 601P folks, what are absolute must-have mods or things you would look for when shopping? I know all the pros and cons of airframe time/engine times/flying regularly etc, so just really STC information is what I’m looking for. Thanks!

I think the essential mods are:

Intercoolers
6-puck brakes
Door seal pump
Vortex generators
Aux hydraulic pump

And it's always nice to have:

Aux tank
5.5psi pressurisation
Winglets
Engine driven A/C

Honestly, the only downside with the 601P in my opinion is that from rotation until it reaches blue speed it climbs like crap, and that time in the "dead zone" isn't ideal. But once it gets going after that they climb very well. My remedy was alway to get gear up as fast as possible and then push nose over and stay in semi-ground effect until blue line.

I loved the bleed heat, I forget the formal name. But it pumped warm air into the cabin as long as you maintained enough engine power since it was bleed off the turbo chargers somehow. It allowed me to fly in the upper teens and above in most conditions without running the flame thrower in a can in back.
Note: I had the 700, not sure if this option was available on the 601P (do not see why not, just a caveat).

Another nice to have. The 100amp alternators which spun up and provided power at 800 RPM. I forget which company....

Tim

Tim your 700 had electric doors on the inter coolers at the wing roots from the turbos to the cabin. I don’t think anyone else has this one off modification. Jim told me these actuators were originally from a B52.

Andy

25 hour oil changes?
Once break in is over, with that kind of utilization you should be fine with 50 hour oil change intervals.

Adam’s list is good.

Winglets will help with the reluctance to climb between rotation and blue line.

Electric AC.

Andy,

I "upgraded" to the official STC. It worked roughly the same way.

Tim

as Forrest stated the winglets help the dead zone climb

again it is" what is your mission". the 700 has no more parts so is not much more expensive to fix however it will use more fuel but has substantially better single engine performance (I know because I lost one on take off and it flew fine without expert technique with the gear up.)and better take off performance. you can get good fuel economy if you pull it back but it will cost about 20 knots in my experience. you will want the aux tank with the 700 but you can haul a lot more when necessary.

If you want really good dispatch reliability, as Thomas says, a MU2 or ? designed for heavy use will be better.

Andy,

I "upgraded" to the official STC. It worked roughly the same way.

Tim

https://aerostaraircraft.com/wp-content ... -20-16.pdf

Option 276