But do you plan on flying in the west?
As to the turbo side, I can understand from a mx point. I tended to stay away from turbos and retracts for various reasons, but I had the flexibility to do so. However, if a 5000TT airframe is giving him heartburn, then there is probably more to the story. I've worked on 30K+ TT airframes and never blinked an eye. Perhaps sit down with him and ask him the real reasons why? I would have welcomed to the opportunity to explain my reasons why to an owner.
How has your dispatch been with the turbo? Relatively new to a bravo here.
I hate working on Mooneys. Period. They are awesome to fly but they are ten pounds of **** in a five pound sack. The only airplane I dislike more is the duke. Those turbo 541 engines are a P.I.T.A
want something faster than the Arrow, but like the other m says, the Arrow works, why risk a new airplane for marginal gains in speed, BUT we need to get there faster.But overall it may not be, depending on climb and descent speeds.
Look at the manufacturer’s numbers for climb and descent before you assume the trip will be 25-30% shorter. Last one I did the math on was 3 minutes faster at FL180 than 4000 ft from Minneapolis to Oklahoma City.
@mandm, This is why they created "Fractional Aircraft Ownership". I believe you'll be very surprised by the cost and the opportunities to do your own flying. Sometimes things work out and you may find yourself hiring on as an eligible pilot.The airplane type is offered in both NA and turbo versions, my mechanic is fine with a NA version but I kind of want the altitude to fly in the flight levels solely for purpose of taking advantage of tailwinds, also the added speed and climb performance when going on xc flights.
A 3-4 hour flight is a big difference compared to a 5-6 hour flight especially if you want to go somewhere for a long weekend. Longer journeys take me longer to recover and to get to my holiday enjoyment status mode.
I almost want to create another which airplane to buy thread
nbaa.org
What most folks call turbocharged is really turbo normalized. But there are turbo/super charged engines out there.
People often forget the difference of 130ktas to a 160ktas is a matter of a few minutes. A piston single vs another piston single will hardly ever gain an hour, much less a couple. I agree.
You can get too much boost if the engine isn't handled properly, especially in manual wastegate systems, where the wastegate is linked to the throttle. That high induction pressure can lead to detonation, which trashes cylinders. It shatters rings, cracks pistons and heads.
www.aviationsafetymagazine.com
www.aviationsafetymagazine.com
The 252 is on the top of my list of turbocharged aircraft I would own.
Or some really nice headwinds.
At first, I didn't believe this. I paid 88,000 for this engine rebuilt in November 2021, which is now going for 114,000.Check the overhaul price of a turbocharged engine. If the price doesn't scare you, then Go-For-It. A friend had a turbocharged Piper Saratoga with a TIO-540-S1AD and the factory was not going to overhaul it but changed their mind and charged $115,000.00. Then Lycoming said they will never do it that cheap again.
Then fly lower. That’s the advantage of the turbo. Pilot can fly low or high.
Money is becoming worthless.
"A nickel ain't worth a dime anymore"
Some turbo systems are automated. Fully-mechanical, though, since electric stuff tends to fail too often. This system has been around a long time. Go here and read about it:
I should of been more explicit. Dan Thomas explained it well. Just to add:
