New Experimental Turboprop

[Floatsflyer]

Ron & Gerry,

Very pleased you guys have made up and can now play nice in the sandbox like good little boys. And because you did, we all now have so much more information and detail on the project and we'll receive more as it progresses. Good luck and all the best to you Gerry and your designer partner.

Ron, I appreciate the kind remarks, thanks very much. Now, if you can convince my wife that my logical and pragmatic approach to most things(except a Sikorsky S-39) is sometimes better than her sometimes let's -just -do -it style, then I would be very appreciative and grateful. :-)

[gabbett1]

I'll share any new information as I receive it. If anyone has any further questions, I will monitor this thread and answer them the best that I can.

[Alex]

Gabbett1, here's what I think:
It's an excellent concept, and complying it with FAR Part 23 is very smart. I'd like to see a pic.

[gabbett1]

Gabbett1, here's what I think:
It's an excellent concept, and complying it with FAR Part 23 is very smart. I'd like to see a pic.

Thank you. I will gladly share when I am able.

[gabbett1]

I created a spreadsheet that shows the cost of flying a turboprop such as the one I suggest vs a G36 Bonanza. Quite interesting how the costs of each work out if you compare the two airplanes with the same number of NM flown a year vs the number of hours a year. IMO comparing NM's flown a year is going to be more accurate since people will more likely have a set of missions they do per year with some extras here and there. Hours per year comparison is less fair because the TP is so much faster that the pilot would be doing a lot of extra missions that he/she otherwise would not have been doing with a G36. Obviously the TP costs more to fly, but not quite as much as I would have expected. Is there a way to share spreadsheets on here?

It includes cost of annuals, insurance, overhauls... pretty much every cost associated with flying an airplane. Some of the numbers could be a tad off.

[gabbett1]

The thing that I find most surprising is that with a piston G36 and a turboprop flying the same number of NM a year, you will do 4.2 overhauls on the piston for every 1 on a tp, almost no matter how many NM you fly a year.

[gabbett1]

Being unable to share the spreadsheet, I figured I would post some of the highlights.

Ccomparison: Experimental vs G36

Altitude:
Experimental: 28000
G36: 8,000
Mission: 700 nm

Trip costs (including engine and prop reserves):
Experimental: $750.77
G36: $526.26
Difference: $224.52

Trip Time Difference
G36:	4:16
6 Seat Experimental:	2:19
Difference:	1:56

6 Seat Experimental Trip fuel cost:	$472.79
Trip Fuel cost per NM:	$0.68
Per Seat:	$0.11

G36 Fuel Trip Fuel Cost:	$388.33
Trip Fuel cost per NM:	$0.55
Per Seat:	$0.09

Difference per NM & Total Fuel Cost		Trip fuel difference
6 Seat Experimental:	$0.68	$472.79
G36:	$0.55	$388.33
Difference:	$0.12	$84.45

Annual Fixed Expense Difference
6 Seat Experimental:	$22,200.00
G36:	$20,700.00
Difference:	$1,500.00

NM flown a year 25,000
Years till overhaul:
Experimental: 44.2
G36: 11.2

Total overhaul costs in 44.2 years:
Experimental: $295,000
G36: $153,664.17
Difference: $141,335.83

Number of Years	11.2
Cost to overhaul G36	% Earnings	Total	Earned
$39,000.00	5%	$67,423.07	$28,423.07
	6%	$74,988.80	$35,988.80
	7%	$83,320.26	$44,320.26
	8%	$92,486.67	$53,486.67
	9%	$102,562.81	$63,562.81
	10%	$113,629.35	$74,629.35

Number of Years:	44.2
G36 overhauls + intrest NOT earned at:	5%	$265,654.12
	6%	$295,463.90
	7%	$328,290.72
	8%	$364,407.37
	9%	$404,108.44
	10%	$447,711.80

TOTAL Annual Cost per HOUR/year
Experimental:	$596.69
G36:	$259.96
Difference Cost/hour:	$336.73

Flight hours/year:
Experimental: 81.4
G35: 151.5

TOTAL cost per year:
Experimental: $48,590.43
G36: $39,388.06
Difference: $9,202.37

Lots of data here, so if you have any questions ask. You can also give me a way to share the spreadsheet if you would like to look at it yourself.

This is obviously assuming a few things. One that the owner would maintain the same missions per year if they owned each airplane. Not typical, but it gives you some way to sort of compare apples to apples this way. This isn't perfect. There are going to be other costs that arise over time that will skew the numbers on way or another. Again, this is just for comparison's sake. The SR22T comparison is interesting as well.

I have also been hearing more and more about people pushing their PT6 overhaul in a PC-12 and TBM out to 6 and even 8,000 hours through a "more" program. Change that data on the spreadsheet and the numbers quickly favor the Experimental in almost every category.

[Flyfalcons]

I the TP going to have full deice capability?

[gabbett1]

I the TP going to have full deice capability?

Yes, it will have a hot wing de-ice system as well as a hot prop. Possibly even a little bit of a TKS system for the windshield and top of the airframe.