How is this so cheap.....

[Mark89114]

Well seems relatively cheap.  I realistically have no idea what I am looking at....just browsing.

2002 AMERICAN LEGEND TURBINE LEGEND For Sale in San Antonio, Texas | Controller.com

 

[jetdriven]

Maybe everything else  is over priced

[KSMooniac]

A very niche plane with little practical value in terms of transportation... so basically a toy that might not be insurable.  It sure would be fun, though.

[jetdriven]

Whats interesting is the Canadian guy who put the TPE 331–10 on his, it’s like 80 kn faster than the PT-6 ones. 

[toto]

3 hours ago, Mark89114 said:

Well seems relatively cheap.  I realistically have no idea what I am looking at....just browsing.

2002 AMERICAN LEGEND TURBINE LEGEND For Sale in San Antonio, Texas | Controller.com

 

I understand that turbine E-AB aircraft are really hard to insure, so you’re probably talking about a pool of buyers who can pay cash for the aircraft and are comfortable with a significant amount of financial risk. That’s a pretty small pool

[M20F]

If you were to buy it, I believe you would find it to be the most expensive thing you have ever owned to the point you would give it away….

[toto]

4 minutes ago, M20F said:

If you were to buy it, I believe you would find it to be the most expensive thing you have ever owned to the point you would give it away….

It’s a modern aircraft with a modern engine. It would gulp fuel like any turbine, but I’d guess the maintenance is way cheaper than, say, a MiG-15

 

[A64Pilot]

The real question is what’s the pedigree of the Walter engine, Get him to define “overhaul” I’d bet lunch it’s not an airworthy engine and his use of the word overhaul is meaningless.

Then it may have been poorly built, or may not, but with home built that’s a very real possibility.

[A64Pilot]

1 hour ago, jetdriven said:

Whats interesting is the Canadian guy who put the TPE 331–10 on his, it’s like 80 kn faster than the PT-6 ones. 

If it was a -10, that’s 1000+ HP Odd thing about a Garrett is you can literally turn one up.

[EricJ]

1 hour ago, M20F said:

If you were to buy it, I believe you would find it to be the most expensive thing you have ever owned to the point you would give it away….

Usually when the acquisition cost is lower than expected it's a sure sign that cost of ownership is very high.

[Shadrach]

11 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

The real question is what’s the pedigree of the Walter engine, Get him to define “overhaul” I’d bet lunch it’s not an airworthy engine and his use of the word overhaul is meaningless.

Then it may have been poorly built, or may not, but with home built that’s a very real possibility.

I'm confused by this statement.  Walter is a Czech company that been around for more than 100years. They built radials under license for BMW in the 30s, turbojets for Migs in the 50s and a number of other engines under license. They have been a subsidiary of GE Aerospace since 2008. The Walter 601 is a certified engine with an FAA TCDS.  I am sure that the definition of overhaul is well codified.

[steingar]

Buy it, fly it and then take a saws-all to the airframe and sell the engine.  You might come out ahead.

[N201MKTurbo]

45 minutes ago, steingar said:

Buy it, fly it and then take a saws-all to the airframe and sell the engine.  You might come out ahead.

My friend had a hangar fire. I remember watching him take a SawsAll to his Cozy. What a sad day...

[A64Pilot]

4 hours ago, Shadrach said:

I'm confused by this statement.  Walter is a Czech company that been around for more than 100years. They built radials under license for BMW in the 30s, turbojets for Migs in the 50s and a number of other engines under license. They have been a subsidiary of GE Aerospace since 2008. The Walter 601 is a certified engine with an FAA TCDS.  I am sure that the definition of overhaul is well codified.

GE bought Walter years ago, closed the plant in Prague and built a new one out of town. I know the Walter, remember I Certified the first and maybe only aircraft with the then new GE turboprop, which was a modernized M-601. If you have a 601 and need help I can give you the number of the guy who at the time ran Walter America a few years ago, Walter America was owned by Darrel Rydell at the time, he was one of our dealers. My phone is full of the Walter Engineers numbers still, so I’m probably more familiar with the Walter than I am with a PT-6

GE, not Walter overhauls the engines if they are still supported, they may not be, I know there was talk of that, but I’m Retired and out of the business completely. There has been a facility down in Fl even before GE bought Walter that has been supporting “experimental” engines, they aren’t airworthy, many don’t even have data plates, the hours or where these engines come from is unknown, they are not airworthy engines, but they will run

I define airworthy as an engine that can be installed in a Certified aircraft type certificated for that engine. Or used in an STC

They will sell you a Walter for less than you can buy an Overhauled 4 cyl Lycoming, and tell you it’s good for 1500 hours, and it might be.

Now that was true 10 years or so ago and I assume still is.

Yes the FAA has defined overhaul, but that’s for engines under their rules, that is “Airworthy” engines, I bet lunch this one is not and as such the term has no real meaning.

I could be wrong though but if it’s a “real” Walter overhauled by GE, then it is in fact one Hell of a deal, turbines aren’t cheap to overhaul.

I don’t think Walter is a subsidiary of GE, I don’t think Walter exists anymore, originally they we’re going to stay Walter and during negations With Brad Mottier (VP of GE) I told him I really didn’t want a Walter, I wanted a GE, that I and others feared that if it didn’t have that blue meatball, maybe GE would drop it if it didn’t work out like they hoped. 

Somewhere I have a clear cube of the engine cutaway with GE / Walter on it

Brad used to own Unison until he sold it and went in with GE as their general aviation guy

[A64Pilot]

This airplane on a truck doesn’t say powered by Walter on it

 

[Mark89114]

I just thought it was an interesting piece of kit...... and seemed "affordable"....... the meaning of that is dubious.  

I googled walter turboprop overhaul/repair and all of the references are really old and finding current information wasn't easy, almost like they have been purged from the internet.  P&W comes up as the first response.    

 

[Shadrach]

1 hour ago, A64Pilot said:

GE bought Walter years ago, closed the plant in Prague and built a new one out of town. I know the Walter, remember I Certified the first and maybe only aircraft with the then new GE turboprop, which was a modernized M-601. If you have a 601 and need help I can give you the number of the guy who at the time ran Walter America a few years ago, Walter America was owned by Darrel Rydell at the time, he was one of our dealers. My phone is full of the Walter Engineers numbers still, so I’m probably more familiar with the Walter than I am with a PT-6

GE, not Walter overhauls the engines if they are still supported, they may not be, I know there was talk of that, but I’m Retired and out of the business completely. There has been a facility down in Fl even before GE bought Walter that has been supporting “experimental” engines, they aren’t airworthy, many don’t even have data plates, the hours or where these engines come from is unknown, they are not airworthy engines, but they will run

I define airworthy as an engine that can be installed in a Certified aircraft type certificated for that engine. Or used in an STC

They will sell you a Walter for less than you can buy an Overhauled 4 cyl Lycoming, and tell you it’s good for 1500 hours, and it might be.

Now that was true 10 years or so ago and I assume still is.

Yes the FAA has defined overhaul, but that’s for engines under their rules, that is “Airworthy” engines, I bet lunch this one is not and as such the term has no real meaning.

I could be wrong though but if it’s a “real” Walter overhauled by GE, then it is in fact one Hell of a deal, turbines aren’t cheap to overhaul.

I don’t think Walter is a subsidiary of GE, I don’t think Walter exists anymore, originally they we’re going to stay Walter and during negations With Brad Mottier (VP of GE) I told him I really didn’t want a Walter, I wanted a GE, that I and others feared that if it didn’t have that blue meatball, maybe GE would drop it if it didn’t work out like they hoped. 

Somewhere I have a clear cube of the engine cutaway with GE / Walter on it

Brad used to own Unison until he sold it and went in with GE as their general aviation guy

I misunderstood your previous post.  The fact that you referred to “Walter”instead of Walters read like you weren’t aware that they were an engine manufacture.

Are you have the opinion that every Wright, Jacobs and P&W radial is now experimental? If so, are they all unairworthy?

It’s a genuine question. Wright and Jacobs are no longer going concerns and I don’t think Pratt supports their old radials. I don’t believe Lycoming does either.

We have a number of those engines flying on the field and none of the aircraft are placarded as experimental.

 

[A64Pilot]

All of those engines have publications, and as long as they are repaired IAW their manuals, (TCDS) using PMA or equal parts by a properly rated person and have logbooks, a data plate etc. they are air Airworthy engines. If someone shows up with a turbine engine without logbooks and even possibly without a data plate, then that engine cannot be made airworthy, because if nothing else it’s full of life limited parts, cycles and hours etc, if they are unknown, then they can’t be airworthy.

Well maybe it could be made airworthy with a new data plate and every life limited item replaced, generally ALL rotables are time limited, and I’m sure other items as well, but it would be cheaper to buy an airworthy engine.

But the engine can run of course, and an Experimental airplane engine doesn’t have to be airworthy, just has to run, doesn’t even need to be an aircraft engine, VW, Chevy, Subaru, Mazda rotary and even Model T engines have been used, so why not a Walter that used to pump water, make electricity or lord knows what. 

But the value of an “Experimental” engine and one that is Airworthy the difference is quite large, my guess is an airworthy Walter with the hours that one is said to have would be worth more than the asking price of the airplane, maybe. Not sure what a good Walter brings now, before GE bought them it was about half of a new Pratt

We built 24 R-1340 Thrushes for one contact long ago, did what the FAA called a production restart for those 24, but they were Airworthy aircraft, had to be to be exported, Airworthy P&W radials are plentiful. Jacob’s etc, Lycoming radials too.

Just looked the exchange price of a PT6A-34 (750 HP) seems to be about $400,000. On paper the M-601E is 751 HP. I say on paper because in an airplane it can’t make near the power of the -34 Pratt.

 

[A64Pilot]

Oh, just about everything is available for an R-1340 as a PMA part, even crankshafts.

If you have an old P&W round motor, these guys are excellent, but not cheap, there are others of course but I used to work with theses guys a lot.

https://www.covingtonaircraft.com/engines/

[MikeOH]

On 10/17/2022 at 5:21 PM, toto said:

I’d guess the maintenance is way cheaper than, say, a MiG-15

 

Well, damn! With a sales pitch like that I'm sold

[carusoam]

MS has one Walter user in a Lancair IV-PT… and a few that use the PT6… in their Piper/Rocket Engineering six seaters…

It is an experimental aircraft… and the effort of having the engine set-up properly was akin to hiring the right person to do it…

OHs have different names in the Jet world…. Hot section inspection is a big one…

These are where the expensive parts see a lot of heat…

Flying a turbine on a Mooney budget… requires the plane to be a forever-plane…. Because the OH process is very expensive, but lasts a really long time….

PP thoughts only, not a turbine pilot..

Best regards,

-a-

[carusoam]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_M601
 

-a-

[A64Pilot]

No, an overhaul is just that in the turboprop world, but there are other inspections like the hot section, but it’s just an inspection, its not a scheduled replacement of parts. it’s done looking for damage in the hot end, often caused by partially clogged injectors, as the Walter / GE has no injector nozzles, there is no hot section inspection requirement, the Walter / GE dumps fuel onto a slinger ring that disperses it evenly in the burners. The Walter / GE also has torch igniters, fuel is actually fed to the igniters and they have a sort of torch, everybody else has a very high energy spark plug, called an igniter.

Walter I believe has the only aerobatic turbo prop. This is one on a Sukhoi, the Dr who flies it is interesting, he’s Swedish I think and was a Nuclear Physicist, that bored him so he became a heart surgeon. You can’t make that up. 

http://www.turbo-shark.com/Default.aspx

This web page is years old and it’s been years since I met him so I have no idea what he’s doing now, but look at the numbers, thrust, weight, climb rate, takeoff roll etc.

PT-6 hot section overview.

https://agairupdate.com/2021/11/08/hot-section-inspections/