TBM 900

[AndyFromCB]

I don't hear anybody talking about depreciation on these? Wouldn't that be $100,000 to $200,000 / yr, at least for the first decade?

 

Two ways of looking at it:

 

-fly an new airplane that depreciates at a rate of 300K a year but you get to write 800K a year off income for next 5 years

 

or

 

-pay the tax man 300K a year

 

It's a wash if you have the income and a business case but if the first case, you have a awesome time machine. In the second case you have 500K left after the IRS to look at

 

The older King Airs seem to be a tremendous value, and yes, you can run a lot of fuel through one before you end up spending more than a TBM or PC12.  The former owner of my plane moved up to an Ovation, and just last year into a KA-200 with recent P&I and the G1000 STC.  It was an easy transition from his G1000 Ovation... and he has been going all over in it taking lots of family or friends to the lake, Bahamas, football games, etc.  Not sure what he spent but it was under a million...and probably quite a bit.

 

No way, a KA200 with G1000 is going to be anywhere between 2 and 3 million

[KSMooniac]

Even one almost 40 years old?  Guess I didn't clarify his is a '76 with the aftermarket Garmin G1000 STC.  I don't think the new production models have G1000.  Textron might consider changing that going forward.

 

At first glance there are a few well under a mil, but without the G1000 STC.  One example:

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/BEECHCRAFT-KING-AIR-200/1977-BEECHCRAFT-KING-AIR-200/1312657.htm

 

I have no idea how much time is on my friend's 200, or time left on engines, which is a huge influence on value of course.

[N601RX]

My IA/CFII manages and flies a King Air 90 for a local company. Unlike us, all inspections are on calendar time or hrs. Most are on calendar time regardless of hrs. The props, landing gear, gear transmission, flap actuation ect has to be overhauled or replaced based on calendar time. Last year they spent over 60k on inspections, overhauling props and other things that were low hrs and working fine but the calendar time was up. The insurance company also requires him to go to recurrent training either once or twice a year. The sad part is the plane only gets used 15-20 hrs a year, but the owner likes being able to jump in with his friends and go wherever he wants.

[AndyFromCB]

Even one almost 40 years old?  Guess I didn't clarify his is a '76 with the aftermarket Garmin G1000 STC.  I don't think the new production models have G1000.  Textron might consider changing that going forward.

 

At first glance there are a few well under a mil, but without the G1000 STC.  One example:

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/BEECHCRAFT-KING-AIR-200/1977-BEECHCRAFT-KING-AIR-200/1312657.htm

 

I have no idea how much time is on my friend's 200, or time left on engines, which is a huge influence on value of course.

 

The G1000 install is about $400K. However you look at it, a KA200 is about $300K (not including capital costs) a year aircraft which is way out of my company's league. There is a point where unless one flies about 400 hours per year, charter just makes sense. The KA200 we charter a few times per year runs $1100 an hour. Sometimes I wonder whether or not it would just be much cheaper to get a fun plane like an older Husky to screw around in and just charter trips. It works great for business but sucks for vacations because then you end up paying for deadhead legs. 

 

One area where a twin turboprop really smokes any single engine machine is ability to handle winter winds. I've been in KA200 in WY, CO, KS, SD and ND landing in 50knot winds. Would not want to try in an aircraft that stalls at 61knots or lower.  A non event in the KA200 other than the urge to throw up. I'm a terrible passenger, get really sick in airplanes when I'm not flying so there is nothing for me to focus on. Mooney kills me as passenger with the bathtub feeling. 

[aviatoreb]

The G1000 install is about $400K. However you look at it, a KA200 is about $300K (not including capital costs) a year aircraft which is way out of my company's league. There is a point where unless one flies about 400 hours per year, charter just makes sense. The KA200 we charter a few times per year runs $1100 an hour. Sometimes I wonder whether or not it would just be much cheaper to get a fun plane like an older Husky to screw around in and just charter trips. It works great for business but sucks for vacations because then you end up paying for deadhead legs. 

 

One area where a twin turboprop really smokes any single engine machine is ability to handle winter winds. I've been in KA200 in WY, CO, KS, SD and ND landing in 50knot winds. Would not want to try in an aircraft that stalls at 61knots or lower.  A non event in the KA200 other than the urge to throw up. I'm a terrible passenger, get really sick in airplanes when I'm not flying so there is nothing for me to focus on. Mooney kills me as passenger with the bathtub feeling. 

 

Wow - $400k for a panel upgrade - what does a G1000 do better than a G600 that makes it worth 10 times more?  Other than a few sq inches of extra size?

[AndyFromCB]

Wow - $400k for a panel upgrade - what does a G1000 do better than a G600 that makes it worth 10 times more?  Other than a few sq inches of extra size?

 

A few things:

 

-GFC700 with Envelope Protection

-Highway in the sky

-Engine monitoring/systems integration

-Dual GPS/ILS/Comm

-Ability to define a custom hold.

 

For a king air, it's not really a 10x increase form G600 to G1000, more like 2x if you go with dual G600 and dual GTN750, GWX70 and GTS850. That package installed runs about $200K. When you're spending that kind of money, might as well drop another $200K to have total system reliability with a new autopilot.

[FlyDave]

Funny "commentary" on dukes:

 

[DaV8or]

The big problem with the MU2 or a Duke for that matter is the simply fact that I am just not a that good of a stick to ever want to fly one. Too many damn switches/systems, too high of speeds, too much precision involved. Neither is a weekend warrior's airplane. A TBM is. You can not fly for two months like I do all the time, hop in a TBM and feel at home in minutes and then cross the country 5 times in a month and then put it away for another two months.

 

The above is why the TBM and other single turbines command a good price. All the- "For that you could getta..." really doesn't mean squat to the savvy pilot that knows their limitations and intends to fly within them. Weekend warriors and occasional flyers have no business in a twin engine anything. The only exception being the Air Cam. If I were ridiculously wealthy, I would have a TBM too. I wouldn't even consider twins for the above reason. If I need to go somewhere with the friends and family that involves hard IMC, night time, etc, I'll charter something with a professional crew.

[DaV8or]

I don't hear anybody talking about depreciation on these? Wouldn't that be $100,000 to $200,000 / yr, at least for the first decade?

 

If you're wealthy, older and you know this is likely to be your last airplane, who the hell gives a rat's booty about depreciation? If your finances are secure and this is all the plane you need, you're not thinking of selling, ever. I suspect a lot of new TBMs are sold to this type of person.

[AndyFromCB]

The above is why the TBM and other single turbines command a good price. All the- "For that you could getta..." really doesn't mean squat to the savvy pilot that knows their limitations and intends to fly within them. Weekend warriors and occasional flyers have no business in a twin engine anything. The only exception being the Air Cam. If I were ridiculously wealthy, I would have a TBM too. I wouldn't even consider twins for the above reason. If I need to go somewhere with the friends and family that involves hard IMC, night time, etc, I'll charter something with a professional crew.

 

I agree completely with the above statement with the exception of one airplane, actually easier to fly than even the TBM: Cessna Mustang. A single engine failure is a total non-event. About 20 lbs of pressure on the rudder, lower the nose a bit, trim the pressure away and fly away, still doing 1000fpm. The rest of the speeds that matter are very close to a high performance single. Approaches are done in the mid 90s so no different than a Bravo coming down an ILS. But the real world operating costs are about 2.5 times what a TBM will run flying 120 to 150 hours a year if you add it all up. Plus like a mentioned before, you a severely weight limited at higher elevation/higher temperature fields. One requires a type rating, the other doesn't, but the truth is, after talking with my agent, it really doesn't matter. By the time you're done with your TBM training, you will be flying to type rating standards. If insured, both will require a 3 day refresher annually. Mustang will also require an annual "check ride". But if can't pass it, you should not be flying anyway.

[DaV8or]

I don't know much about the Mustang, but one of the compelling features of the TBM is it's slow speed capabilities. I believe it will operate at much shorter fields than the mustang and lands a lot slower.

[Hank]

TBMs are shown flying out of an unimproved strip in the advertising, rather like piperpainter does. Places I'd prefer to not take my C. Do that in a Mustang!

[AndyFromCB]

TBMs are shown flying out of an unimproved strip in the advertising, rather like piperpainter does. Places I'd prefer to not take my C. Do that in a Mustang!

 

 

there is more engineering in that landing gear alone than there is in the entire mooney airframe ;-) but yes, that's where a SETP shines and where Mustang drops the ball. High altitude/high temperature short runway operations. Truth is that it actually has shorter take off/landing distance than a TBM but due the balanced field requirements, the numbers are much higher on paper. However, operating it like that totally destroys any safety advantage of two engines.

 

Here is a short field landing:

 

[larryb]

I always find these big step upgrade discussions interesting. Sure, if you have the business need (all-weather need, pay the bills, tax advantage, etc.) or just gobs of $$$$'s,  why not. But for personal use, seems kinda like overkill. I calculated my J model, all-in, at around $1.30/mile. Adding depreciation to the TBM costs gives me closer to $5.75/mile. So if you just want to go fly around 'cause you haven't flown in a week, are you going to do that in the TBM? Or do you need a place to go? Or have you upgraded your hobby so much that you no longer have it as a hobby?

[1964-M20E]

TBMs are shown flying out of an unimproved strip in the advertising, rather like piperpainter does. Places I'd prefer to not take my C. Do that in a Mustang!

 

 

We have a TBM operating out of a local grass strip along with a C340 and several Mooneys.

[DaV8or]

I always find these big step upgrade discussions interesting. Sure, if you have the business need (all-weather need, pay the bills, tax advantage, etc.) or just gobs of $$$$'s,  why not. But for personal use, seems kinda like overkill. I calculated my J model, all-in, at around $1.30/mile. Adding depreciation to the TBM costs gives me closer to $5.75/mile. So if you just want to go fly around 'cause you haven't flown in a week, are you going to do that in the TBM? Or do you need a place to go? Or have you upgraded your hobby so much that you no longer have it as a hobby?

 

I'm not making the step up and I'm likely never to be able to, but if I had the necccessary gobs of $$$$s, I'd do it. Flying a personal airplane of any type to get places is overkill. It's all relative. If you have the money to buy a plane like this and the money to easily keep it, you're likely not calculating dollar per mile. If I just want to fly around for a while because I haven't flown in a week, why not the TBM? If you haven't done it yet, go sit in one. It's a whole other world from the Mooney. Given the money, I prsonally wouldn't have just one airplane, but that's just me.

[AndyFromCB]

I always find these big step upgrade discussions interesting. Sure, if you have the business need (all-weather need, pay the bills, tax advantage, etc.) or just gobs of $$$$'s,  why not. But for personal use, seems kinda like overkill. I calculated my J model, all-in, at around $1.30/mile. Adding depreciation to the TBM costs gives me closer to $5.75/mile. So if you just want to go fly around 'cause you haven't flown in a week, are you going to do that in the TBM? Or do you need a place to go? Or have you upgraded your hobby so much that you no longer have it as a hobby?

 

It really comes down to this: you can't take it with you. 

[aviatoreb]

The G1000 install is about $400K. However you look at it, a KA200 is about $300K (not including capital costs) a year aircraft which is way out of my company's league. There is a point where unless one flies about 400 hours per year, charter just makes sense. The KA200 we charter a few times per year runs $1100 an hour. Sometimes I wonder whether or not it would just be much cheaper to get a fun plane like an older Husky to screw around in and just charter trips. It works great for business but sucks for vacations because then you end up paying for deadhead legs. 

 

One area where a twin turboprop really smokes any single engine machine is ability to handle winter winds. I've been in KA200 in WY, CO, KS, SD and ND landing in 50knot winds. Would not want to try in an aircraft that stalls at 61knots or lower.  A non event in the KA200 other than the urge to throw up. I'm a terrible passenger, get really sick in airplanes when I'm not flying so there is nothing for me to focus on. Mooney kills me as passenger with the bathtub feeling. 

 

How about this - 

$7500 for an all one engine monitor, efis, svt, plates, AND digital two axis autopilot?!!!  Astounding the growing price gap between certified and uncertified, in this case from the same company.  Hopefully once the new Congressional mandate on the FAA takes place for 2015 I will get one for my Mooney.

 

Garmin® Team X Unveils G3X™ Touch

http://garmin.blogs.... News Releases)

[WardHolbrook]

It really comes down to this: you can't take it with you. 

 My will reads... I, Ward Holbrook, being of sound mind, spent it all while I was alive. 

[Mcstealth]

The only question that matters for volume sales is.....How does it compare to the Pilatus?\

 

 

 

[AndyFromCB]

 My will reads... I, Ward Holbrook, being of sound mind, spent it all while I was alive. 

 

If you really were of sound mind, you wouldn't be putting around in little airplanes, just saying ;-) Very few people on this board are of sound mind: you can find them in the for sale section.