MU-2 ownership experience?

"Mike Ciholas" wrote in message
om...
"Mike Rapoport" wrote in message
link.net...

The only places that training is availible are TN and FL.

I live about 3 car hours from Smyrna, TN where there is both an MU-2
shop and training center. So I have proximity to those resources.

You are lucky! I will be flying 2017nm on thursday to get to Simcom.



The big items to check are engines, props, windshields and
windows, air cycle machine and boots. If these things are in good
condition
you shouldn't have any huge disasters.

I'm trying to reconcile this statement with your maintenance figures
below.

In the 1200 hours over 5 1/2 years that I have owned/flown MU-2s I have
spent

$178,000 Fuel
$26,000 Training
$45,000 Insurance
$417,000 Maitenance
$48,000 Supplies
$42,000 Hanger
$5,000 Tools

Okay, very useful information. For an airplane with a reputation for
not breaking down, this seems like a lot of money to keep it flying
1200 hours. Totals $761K or about $140K/year to fly.

I'm curious about the $417K for maintenance. Unless you've done
engine overhauls or had bad hot section inspections, how could you get
to that figure? It feels like you should be able to replace
everything in the airplane for that. At almost $350 per hour for
maintenance (not counting "supplies"), I'm stunned. That is not the
overall reputation the airplane has regarding maintenance.


Maintenance includes a
$60,000 interior see:
http://www.alexisparkinn.com/rogue's_gallery_q_-_z.htm

NEW air cycle machine (an incredible bargain at $11,000 I bought it
immediately)
$25,000 windshield (one side)
$65,000 Garmin 430/530/GAD42/Shadin ADC2000 and a lot of stuff to make it
all fit and work in the panel
$15,000 Some of the boots
$10K four cabin windows

So there is $186K of the $417K and we haven't done any traditional
maitenance yet! The question becomes: was that $186k really nesessary?

The cabin windows had to be replaced. They had crazing at or beyond limits.
it is also cheaper, labor wise, to replace all suspect windows on one side
to avioid taking the whole interior apart several times.
If the air cycle machine fails, it is $35K to overhaul so proactively
replacing one with 4000hrs on it for $11K is a hell of a deal. If you don't
take advantage of something like this then you will end up paying the $35k
eventually (or sooner)
The windshield was going to have to be replaced in the next year or two.
All heated glass windshields have lifespans of 20yrs or so.
The avionics weren't strictly required but my home airport only had GPS
approaches, so I needed something.
Boots are always a judgement call but I have homes in the PNW and the Lake
Tahoe area in NV so icing is a major issue. I don't really care what they
cost and I don't want to hear about "refurbishing" old rubber.
The interior was excessive (but very nice).

It is not really a matter of "breaking down', I have never had a "break
down". These parts are common to all turbine airplanes, are often the exact
same part # (windshields), cost exactly the same and last the same length of
time. On the bright side 2003 was, by far, my least expensive year at $25K.
This is a sign that I have gotten ahead of the curve. In '04 I will replace
a few more boots, have the 530 upgraded with Garmin's TAWS (a new AD
requirement for all 6+ passenger seat turbines) and possibly get it
repainted.

Cost per mile (assuming an average block speed of 300 MPH, consistent
with climb, headwinds, etc) works out to $2.12 per mile. This is
consistent with the cost per mile of smaller jets like the CJ1.

Yes but I doubt that the opererating cost of that nearly new CJ1 takes into
account items that have 20yr lifespans like windshields. The cost to
replace the CJ1 windshields is going to be the same as on the
MU-2/Learjet/King Air ect. They are things that you are going to have to
replace on a 20-30 year old airplane. Same with the cabin windows. They
"dry out",start crazing and then the crazing starts fatigue cracks from the
preasurization cycles. All manufactures have specific limits on windshield
crazing and limit polishing. When you buy a new CJ1, the reason you pay
millions of dollars is to have all the parts NEW. If you buy an older CJ
you will be replacing all that stuff one thing at a time. This is also a
major reason why new airplanes depreciate and older ones don't (much). On a
new airplane the average part is getting worn out whereas the used airplane
average part is not.
By the time the airplane is 20yrs and 4000 hrs old, the average part is half
worn out. It is either just been replaced, just about to be replaced or
somewhere in between. So it isn't getting older like all the parts on a new
airplane. You can see this on the used value charts.

Also consider that the fixed costs on a new airplane will be higher because
of the high value. It is going to be a lot more expensive to insure and/or
finance a 3.5M airplane than one that costs a small fraction of that. If
you finance the airplane, that 2.5M extra will cost $150K more the first
year alone and insurance will probably be $50K more. This exceeds the total
cost of owning/operating a MU-2 for a 200hrs a year. The numbers only work
on new airplanes if you fly them a lot and ammortize the high fixed costs
over a lot of hours.



Basically, if your numbers are correct, they are about 50-60% over
what my research led me to believe.

I know that my numbers sound high. Because I expense these costs, I track
them carefully. The problem with most cost studies is that they take place
over too short a time frame. In a five year period, you may incur no big
expenses but the next year you may have a dozen. Ask any turbine operator
what his maitenance costs are. Then go over each inspection and what it
costs. Then ask the cost of the major parts and how long they last. When
you add up these things I can assure you that the number will be A LOT
higher than the one he gave you when you first asked what his maitenance
costs were.

Of course, if you could find an airplane where everything had been replaced
in the past five years....


Mike
MU-2

Okay, very useful information. For an airplane with a reputation for
not breaking down, this seems like a lot of money to keep it flying
1200 hours. Totals $761K or about $140K/year to fly.

I have a friend with a Solitare. What others have said about the training
is absolutely true. You will be dangerous in it without the training. One
acquaintence from long ago lasted about 20 hours in theirs. At the time,
the need for training wasn't fully understood. On the other hand, it's a
hell of an airplane... he routinely kept his at a 2200' strip in Canada.

This airplane has 1000 hp/side. Yet if you mismanage an engine out, you
can get in a situation where you can't climb. This is because the roll control
is by spoiler... the ailerons are actually the trim tabs. So if you
control adverse yaw with the stick the drag goes up and you are coming down.
The more affordable ones have less horsepower. They cruise in the low 20s
where the ice can be pretty bad.

You must act like a professional to fly it safely. (You may grin during the
time, however). Climbing thru 15,000 feet at Vy of 196 knots at 2000'/min
is addicting. It's a real hot rod. An introduction to cruising at red-line!

The engines have long tbo, etc. But you will get blindsided by all sorts
of stuff. Like new fuel pump $10+K. When it fails, you have no choice but
to replace it whereever whenever. You need to have ready access to the 10K.
My friend didn't wince at this. Windshield, many thousands. He had the
problem that the metallic paint stripes on his were generating static
discharge at cruise speed and frapping all the radios. That took a lot to
figure out. A big prop AD costed more than the price of a good piston single.
He spent thousands getting an intermittent out of the very excellent spz500
autopilot. The feds will demand a progressive maintenance plan of some
sort... one does not "annual" such an airplane. Of course, the shop rates
will be higher. That's to amortize stuff like the monstor cabin leak
testing setup that they have at International Jet in Tulsa. It's a
different world. You eat up traffic like nobody's business, so you
want TCAS, etc. $$$$. Be ready.

In fact, if the idea of standing there & flushing $100 bills down the can
one at a time causes any emotional response from you, you are not a candidate
for an airplane like this.

Bill Hale

My dads good friend is putting a glass panel in his MU-2B. I think it is
going to turn out very good. I have a few hours in it, only in the right
seat though. They are very fast. They repainted the bird and they got
15knts in cruise out of it. His pilot has 7000+ hours in a few types of
the MU-2. He flew the IN & OUT executives in theres. Sad story what
happend to them going it KSNA in a lear i think it was. I would have to
say they are one of the nice turboprops out there. Lots better then the
KingAir by far. Stay up on training, this plane can get ahead of you
real quick. I know you can go to Simcom and Flight safety for the MU-2.
I talked to a guy from Flight safety about the MU-2 and he said the are
a pile of crap. The only reason they got such a bad rap is Hot Shot
Pilots think they can fly anything, then they hop in one of these and
crash them. They are a nice plane and you should have fun with it.

Tony
N8389P

*** Sent via http://www.automationtools.com ***
Add a newsgroup interface to your website today.