Mike Ciholas

[mciholas]

Presently flying MU2.

Lurking here to see if Turbine Commander might be my next airplane.

Seeking long range, so looking only at FL350, 474 gallon aircraft.  I think that's only 690D, 695A, 695B, right?

Mike C.

[Adam Frisch]

Welcome Mike. I think you should get a Commander too! 

Yeah, all the Jetprop models (840, 900, 980 and 1000) can be expanded to 474gals, and most already have it. The 840 and the 980 have bladders or a combination of bladders and wet wing. The 900 and 1000 series have pure wet wings. All of them can be RSVM certified, but for some the push might not be worth the squeeze.

The 840 (690C) has a 5.2psi differential and is certified to FL340.
The 900 (690D) has a 6.7psi differential and is certified to FL320.
The 980 (695) has a 5.2psi differential and is certified to FL370.
The 1000 (695A) has a 6.7psi differential and is certified to FL350.
There was also a few 695B's made, they're still called Jetprop 1000's, but they were certified with the -10 from the factory. Only eight were made.

All the 6.7psi models are easy to spot because they have the smaller windows on the sides instead of the bigger "picture window" under the wing the Commanders were famous for. They also are pressurized to the outer hull, whereas the 5.2psi models have the floor as outer pressure hull. Most of them were originally certified with the -5 engines, but the -10 conversion has been a very popular STC and just like in the later MU-2's it's almost rare to see any Jetprops with the original -5's on them these days, although they do exist. As you know, the -10 conversion adds more speed and performance, without burning more fuel.

Owners bicker about what version is the best. If money is not an object a 1000 is a top of the line plane. If you want to get into the RSVM space and have to be on a budget, then the 840 is the cheapest entry.

Now, if you're really need to watch the budget, you can expand a 690A or a 690B to 480gals by adding the Javelin slipper tanks on the wings. They add another 100gal to the internal 382gal. It's about 50K installation and it robs a few knots in top speed and does make the wing look a little less gracious… Don't think you can RSVM them, but I'm unsure. You can see an example of the slipper tanks here:

[ghancock]

I'm curious about the reasons you're considering moving from an MU2 to a Turbine Commander. 

Thanks,

Glenn

[Steve binnette]

You will need to focus on the 1000 model.  The 900 has 6.7 differential but I do not think it is certified to fl350.  I don't know why.

The 5.2 psi airplanes are no good for RVSM.  They are certified to FL310.  It's a compromise I made when I bought my 980.  I did it for the big window primarily and the large cargo space secondarily.

The Windows  in the 1000 are not position quite right and although the potty room gives you extra seat belts if you don't need them they don't add value.

The big wing on the 840 - 1000 make them good for higher altitudes.

[mciholas]

I'm curious about the reasons you're considering moving from an MU2 to a Turbine Commander.

Range.

I have more and more business on the west coast, so I need 1700 nm range.  MU2 is about 1200 nm.  So 474 gallons on engines at FL350 are enticing.

Considering Cessna Conquest II (441) as well.

Mike C.

[mciholas]

The 840 (690C) has a 5.2psi differential and is certified to FL340.
The 900 (690D) has a 6.7psi differential and is certified to FL320.
The 980 (695) has a 5.2psi differential and is certified to FL370.
The 1000 (695A) has a 6.7psi differential and is certified to FL350.

Unless I am missing something, the TCDS on the FAA web site says the 690C (840) and 695 (980) are FL310.

The only FL350 airplanes are the 690D (with kit 149), 695A, 695B.

Now, if you're really need to watch the budget, you can expand a 690A or a 690B to 480gals by adding the Javelin slipper tanks on the wings. They add another 100gal to the internal 382gal.

The lower altitude limits and slower speed from more drag make them quite a bit less range then the FL350 airplanes.

Mike C.

[Adam Frisch]

Yeah, I think your right. I got the numbers from the TCFG website. They're certified higher, but for RSVM purposes I think limited to FL310. So, might not be worth the extra cost to get another 3000ft up from FL280.

Like Steve talked about the 900 and 1000 series have appropriated some of the baggage area into the cabin for an extra seat, so they don't have the same cavernous baggage space. So depending on how important that is, that might also be a factor.

[mciholas]

Yeah, I think your right. I got the numbers from the TCFG website. They're certified higher, but for RSVM purposes I think limited to FL310.

The 840, 980 are certified to FL310 per the TCDS.  If they lack RVSM, then they are limited to FL280.

If they don't do the 1700 nm flight reliably, then there is no advantage to them over my MU2 and I'll keep what I got, or decide to get a jet instead that can do it non stop.

Mike C.

[Adam Frisch]

Don't know what the difference in fuel burn is between FL280 and FL350. But I doubt it would make 300nm difference. 1700nm is probably the limit anyhow with comfortable reserves. They all do 2040nm on paper with big tanks, but that's until dry. Maybe at 96% you might eke out a little more even.

[SKYFLYER]

This might provide so additional data .... http://www.eagle-creek.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Commander-Package-2013.pdf

[SKYFLYER]

Slipper Tanks
22500.00 approx 6 week delivery
This kit is no longer PMA sign off will have to be done by Toms Aircraft

This was from Bobby Cook when i was looking for them earlier this year.. I am not sure, however I was given to understand that most of the series production aircraft were already plumbed for them.. which makes the install super simple about an hour and they can be removed if you do not need them in about the same time...

[mciholas]

Don't know what the difference in fuel burn is between FL280 and FL350. But I doubt it would make 300nm difference.

A -10 engine burns about 65 GPH at 96% RPM at FL280 (mine do anyway).  From what the 441 and others have said, a -10 engine at 96% at FL350 will burn about 50-52 GPH.  That is a reduction of 20% in cruise fuel flow.

So it seems FL350 will add about 300 nm or so.

Since no one seems to want to list a price for a 1000 on any web page, I called and the going rate seems to be $1.5M.  At that price, the jets start to look much more appealing.

Mike C.

[Steve binnette]

I was faced with the same decision.  The shorter runways and typically longer range of a TP beat the jets advantage of higher cruising altitudes.

The 1.5 million is a nice 1000 or 980.  You can get them for less, engine times drive it as does timing.

I would think the range would be 1.7 to 1.0 asking price.

[Adam Frisch]

Mike, your numbers will wary. The Jetprop 1000 can be had for well under a million if you're willing to wait for the right one. That's the one with a little less time left on engines. But even a 840, 900 or 980 will offer you a great range at FL280. And in the case of the 900, you're still enjoying the 6.7psi cabin for less fatigue. You'll go further than any jet can go, get into shorter strips and carry more load. That equates times saved. I think a Jetprop will beat most, if not all SP jets, over 1500nm.

There's a 980 for sale in Japan with run outs for $496K. Or rather, it's got just enough hours left to be able to ferry it back to the US. OK, so it's not RSVM, but still a stellar performer with the last generation -10's.  Depending on how one feels about running turbines past TBO, or if you if you want to hang midtime engines on it, this could be a decent deal. It's got some sort of camera aerial survey hatch, but I checked with owner and it still pressurizes with this mod. This would probably have to be removed, but can't see that being too costly.

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/COMMANDER-980/1981-COMMANDER-980/1374057.htm

[mciholas]

The Jetprop 1000 can be had for well under a million

Find an example.

But even a 840, 900 or 980 will offer you a great range at FL280.

If it can't do the west coast non stop in most headwinds, then it doesn't matter.  I have the airplane already if I have to make a fuel stop.  I have essentially zero destinations that fall in the range between 1000 nm and 1650 nm, that would be the intermountain west where there is mostly nothing.  In other words, more range only matters if it is enough range to make the west coast.  A 1500 nm airplane is worth nothing more than my 1200 nm airplane I already got.

To make a 1650 nm flight reliably, say 95% of the time given typical weather, winds, and ATC, you need a 2000 nm airplane.  That means a FL350 + RVSM + TPE331-10 + 474 gallons.  Nothing else will do.  That means 900 with mods (optional fuel, FL350 upgrade) or the 1000 from what I can tell.  A 441 also fits the bill.

Mike C.