Jackk Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 New to the site, liked what I read on the vector fee scheme posting and some other topics. alas I’m a tailwheel guy and aside from a few BFRs haven’t flown much in a Mooney, but I do have some time in TBMs if that counts :)
Hank Posted July 13 Report Posted July 13 42 minutes ago, Jackk said: I do have some time in TBMs if that counts Welcome. The "M" in TBM is for Mooney, so that counts! 1
Pinecone Posted July 14 Report Posted July 14 Welcome. Also a tailwheel guy, as well as a Mooney guy. 1
wombat Posted July 14 Report Posted July 14 Tailwheel - Check Mooney - Check TBM - I've been considering upgrading to a TBM from my Rocket but it's a big step up financially and I'm not sure if my finances will really support it in the long term.
Jackk Posted July 14 Author Report Posted July 14 5 hours ago, wombat said: Tailwheel - Check Mooney - Check TBM - I've been considering upgrading to a TBM from my Rocket but it's a big step up financially and I'm not sure if my finances will really support it in the long term. If it were me I’d look at a lancair evo turbine The TBM is a nice plane, but I think it’s overpriced compared to a Pilatus, king air, etc
wombat Posted July 14 Report Posted July 14 (edited) 48 minutes ago, Jackk said: If it were me I’d look at a lancair evo turbine The TBM is a nice plane, but I think it’s overpriced compared to a Pilatus, king air, etc I agree the cost is higher than those when you look at the additional capability of the other aircraft but the hourly operational cost (or cost per mile traveled) for the TBM is way lower. I don't need or want 9 seats. I really don't even need 6 seats although I would like to carry 3 passengers and luggage occasionally so having 6 seats is pretty necessary. The Lancair is a cool plane and ticks almost all of the boxes for me. But for me the additional useful load of the TBM seems like it'd be worth it. Hard to tell. I have not bought anything yet! And when I am already doing 200KTAS on such low fuel burn and low maintenance costs, it's hard to say I should spend the additional money for the speed and pressurization. I'd also have to move to a different airport, even though it's only about 5 miles further away. Oh, the horrible first world problems I have to make decisions about! Edited July 14 by wombat
Ragsf15e Posted July 14 Report Posted July 14 7 minutes ago, wombat said: I agree the cost is higher than those when you look at the additional capability of the other aircraft but the hourly operational cost (or cost per mile traveled) for the TBM is way lower. I don't need or want 9 seats. I really don't even need 6 seats although I would like to carry 3 passengers and luggage occasionally so having 6 seats is pretty necessary. The Lancair is a cool plane and ticks almost all of the boxes for me. But for me the additional useful load of the TBM seems like it'd be worth it. Hard to tell. I have not bought anything yet! And when I am already doing 200KTAS on such low fuel burn and low maintenance costs, it's hard to say I should spend the additional money for the speed and pressurization. I'd also have to move to a different airport, even though it's only about 5 miles further away. Oh, the horrible first world problems I have to make decisions about! Consider an M500 or M600 as well. Lower costs than a TBM and good utility. I fly an M500 for a company as a corporate airplane. Let me know if you have questions. Pressurization is a game changer, however turbine maintenance costs should be well understood first!
wombat Posted July 14 Report Posted July 14 11 minutes ago, Ragsf15e said: Consider an M500 or M600 as well. Lower costs than a TBM and good utility. I fly an M500 for a company as a corporate airplane. Let me know if you have questions. Pressurization is a game changer, however turbine maintenance costs should be well understood first! I've looked at them. They only gain me about 50 knots on my Rocket, and effectively no useful load gain. What I've been using as my target is 100 KTAS airspeed increase and 400# more useful load with full fuel. The TBM 850 will get me those things. The maintenance costs of the TBM (According to Avex, for one specific example I've been looking at, for the next 5 years) should be about 2X my Rocket's maintenance. They don't include any engine overhaul reserve though. And the fuel burn is about 2.5X, but it's jet A instead of AVGAS.
Ragsf15e Posted July 14 Report Posted July 14 7 minutes ago, wombat said: I've looked at them. They only gain me about 50 knots on my Rocket, and effectively no useful load gain. What I've been using as my target is 100 KTAS airspeed increase and 400# more useful load with full fuel. The TBM 850 will get me those things. The maintenance costs of the TBM (According to Avex, for one specific example I've been looking at, for the next 5 years) should be about 2X my Rocket's maintenance. They don't include any engine overhaul reserve though. And the fuel burn is about 2.5X, but it's jet A instead of AVGAS. It’s really hard to compare useful loads. There are Citation Jets with UL under 800lbs with full fuel. Probably under 500. Heck, my 252 has Monroy tanks and it’s FF load is only ~400lbs. Especially when looking at turbines, you have to consider your mission. The M500 holds 1140lbs and the M600 holds ~2100. I’ve only actually filled it maybe 6 times in 1000 hours. My normal mission is ~350 miles and 750lbs gives me both a one hour reserve and an ifr alternate a good distance away. With that fuel load, I now have ~950 of actual pax/baggage available. The M600 has even more capability for flexibility with load vs fuel vs range. It will never be as efficient as your mooney but fl250 at 250ktas true and pressurized is pretty darn good. Cost for the TBM… I don’t know, but ask an owner instead of the internet. The M500 has had annuals between ~17k and over $120k (FOD damage that was partially covered by P&W). Average around $30k-$40k. Most annuals were at a service center and covered all ADs, SBs etc (not inexpensive). It’s not a Mooney!
Jackk Posted July 14 Author Report Posted July 14 (edited) It’s more than the 50kts, sitting behind a turbine is a game changer on many front To me the TBMs always felt like a 1.5-2M aircraft, having flown them and also PC12, C208Bs and King Airs as far as turbo props go, build quality and use for daily operations, I just can’t wrap my head around paying what they ask for a TBM. Edited July 14 by Jackk 1
dkkim73 Posted July 14 Report Posted July 14 Does anyone have experience specifically comparing the original Meridian vs. the later M500? (If I understand the models correctly...) I was given to understand the Meridian is the first real step up in useful load, vs. a Jetprop... the later models being significantly more expensive.
Ragsf15e Posted July 14 Report Posted July 14 12 minutes ago, dkkim73 said: Does anyone have experience specifically comparing the original Meridian vs. the later M500? (If I understand the models correctly...) I was given to understand the Meridian is the first real step up in useful load, vs. a Jetprop... the later models being significantly more expensive. I’m sure there are small differences, but the M500 is a rebranded Meridian. Mine is a G1000 and some Meridians are as well. I think they’re pretty similar. However, There’s a huge difference between M500 and M600 because they certified a whole new wing on the 600. It’s faster, has much higher Vne (which the M500 is very limited in) and can carry more.
LANCECASPER Posted July 14 Report Posted July 14 I was in a partnership on an early 2003 Meridian with the gross weight increase. I loved the pressurization and the reliability of a turbine, but with the range and figuring in a needed fuel stop on the Meridian, a Mooney Bravo or Mooney Acclaim with Monroy tanks, or a Piper Mirage (M350) with long range tanks will sometimes beat the Meridian to destination. Obviously comfort is greater in a turbine pressurized airplane. Everything is a trade-off in aviation. 4
toto Posted July 15 Report Posted July 15 7 hours ago, Jackk said: If it were me I’d look at a lancair evo turbine The TBM is a nice plane, but I think it’s overpriced compared to a Pilatus, king air, etc I don’t have any first-hand experience, but I understand that it can be nearly impossible to get insurance on a turbine-powered experimental. Especially if it’s owner-flown by a pilot with less than a ton of turbine time. I sometimes drool over the turbine LX7, which seems like an absolutely amazing aircraft and surprisingly affordable relative to peers. But most of those planes aiui are essentially self-insured.
jrwilson Posted July 15 Report Posted July 15 13 hours ago, wombat said: Tailwheel - Check Mooney - Check TBM - I've been considering upgrading to a TBM from my Rocket but it's a big step up financially and I'm not sure if my finances will really support it in the long term. I fly a TBM at work and it’s crazy fast and the useful load is surprising. Fill all the seats, bags and still put in 220 gallons which will get you a LONG way. the landing/ramp/handling fees at airports are what get me. Much higher than the Mooney. Plus of course the fuel burn of 65 gph in the TBM is much worse than the 12gph in my Mooney. 1
Jerry 5TJ Posted July 15 Report Posted July 15 9 hours ago, jrwilson said: ….landing/ramp/handling fees at airports are what get me. Much higher than the Mooney. The PA46 line has both piston and turbine versions. Same size airplane but the turbine variants often are charged higher facility fees. 2
Jackk Posted July 15 Author Report Posted July 15 12 hours ago, toto said: I don’t have any first-hand experience, but I understand that it can be nearly impossible to get insurance on a turbine-powered experimental. Especially if it’s owner-flown by a pilot with less than a ton of turbine time. I sometimes drool over the turbine LX7, which seems like an absolutely amazing aircraft and surprisingly affordable relative to peers. But most of those planes aiui are essentially self-insured. Just flew with a 800-1200hr time IFR PPL guy who transitioned to one from a piston trainer type plane, think he goes to a recurrent class yearly Awesome aircraft however
dkkim73 Posted July 15 Report Posted July 15 On 7/14/2025 at 3:00 PM, Ragsf15e said: I’m sure there are small differences, but the M500 is a rebranded Meridian. Mine is a G1000 and some Meridians are as well. I think they’re pretty similar. However, There’s a huge difference between M500 and M600 because they certified a whole new wing on the 600. It’s faster, has much higher Vne (which the M500 is very limited in) and can carry more. Thank you. Sounds like you fly the earlier one... What's your opinion of it? A local charter guy says he likes them and won't engage any leasebacks with lesser capability.
Ragsf15e Posted July 16 Report Posted July 16 15 hours ago, dkkim73 said: Thank you. Sounds like you fly the earlier one... What's your opinion of it? A local charter guy says he likes them and won't engage any leasebacks with lesser capability. I fly the M500 (2015 model). It’s great if it meets your mission. It is limited on range or weight or both depending on what you’re doing. Pressurization at 250kts and 25000’ is nice. It climbs initially at ~1500fpm and above 15000’ at about 1000fpm all the way up. Maintenance expenses are an order of magnitude higher than the Mooney. Maybe this is an exaggeration, but they are at least triple or more from msc maintenance on a newer mooney. Can be even more depending on what parts you need.
Jerry 5TJ Posted July 16 Report Posted July 16 20 hours ago, Jackk said: Just flew with a 800-1200hr time IFR PPL guy who transitioned to one from a piston trainer type plane, think he goes to a recurrent class yearly Last month I provided transition training for a new 190 TT pilot into his M600. It can be done. It was not cheap. 2
toto Posted July 17 Report Posted July 17 On 7/15/2025 at 10:03 AM, Jackk said: Just flew with a 800-1200hr time IFR PPL guy who transitioned to one from a piston trainer type plane, think he goes to a recurrent class yearly Awesome aircraft however Was he able to get insurance? Even with a recurrent training program, I’m surprised someone can get insurance on an experimental turboprop without a ton of turbine experience. Getting the Meridian first and logging some hours before transitioning to the TP Lancair seems more realistic, but I dunno. Maybe it’s no big deal.
Jackk Posted July 17 Author Report Posted July 17 6 hours ago, toto said: Was he able to get insurance? Even with a recurrent training program, I’m surprised someone can get insurance on an experimental turboprop without a ton of turbine experience. Getting the Meridian first and logging some hours before transitioning to the TP Lancair seems more realistic, but I dunno. Maybe it’s no big deal. He was, not sure the price, not sure cost is too much of a factor for him
Fly Boomer Posted July 17 Report Posted July 17 52 minutes ago, Jackk said: He was, not sure the price, not sure cost is too much of a factor for him Sometimes, the insurance company says "yes, we will write coverage, but you won't like the price".
Recommended Posts