Peter wrote:
Can anyone explain why the Jetprop STC cannot cover a G1000 PA46 airframe?
From what I understand the problem is as JasonC allready suggested. The G1000 has airframe / engine combination for software. Software must be approved trough Piper. Piper likely rather sells a new PA46 instead of supporting older PA46 which have been upgraded with someone elses STC.
Going to G1000 can have disadvantages in some cases. It for sure gives less freedom of future updates, and all software updates have to be approved by aircraft manufacturer as well. As a result you can be stuck with an “older” version.
G500/G600, Aspen or Avidyne give much more freedom with respect to future upgrades.
A G950 would also be possible, though I haven’t seen those on PA46. These don’t come with an AML STC.
Peter wrote:
What is the regulatory path for removing a G1000?
This would be a heavy STC. You would loose lots of money on paperwork, equipment and labour. I can not see how that would be worthwhile. In those cases it would IMHO be more sensible to sell the aircraft with G1000, and buy another one without G1000 to start the upgrade process with that one.
However -
The Jetprop conversion costs at least 550k US before vat. It won’t make economic sense for newer Mirages yet IE you could buy a G1000 Meridian for less than the total cost of doing the conversion and have money left over for Eurocontrol charges.
Well… it is a spectrum of preferences. The better runway perf, longer range, route charges, also landing fees take a hike above 2T… People who pay route charges say they are irrelevant, just as bizjet owners say the cost of a crew is irrelevant. But they aren’t irrelevant…
But for sure if I can ask these questions about the Jetprop, you bet that others are too.
Does one need an STC to remove a G1000? I know this is semantics (because a plane with a G1000 removed is not airworthy, especially as the factory-installed G1000 is on its TC 
) but presumably an STC is required to install the replacement.
BUT is it possible to remove a G1000 and do a straight exact re-fit on a PA46 with the pre-G1000 avionics? Is the pre-G1000 TC limited by airframe S/N? Normally anything that appears on a TC (I am talking about the TC covering the pre-G1000 airframe) can be installed directly, with just a logbook entry.
I have flown in the Jetprop, with John Mariani, and he said the “Piper dealer standard” structural criticism of the Jetprop is nonsense. In fact JM was RHS in my TB20 when I got Eal’s JP pic at the top of this page 
Peter I didn’t say Route Charges are irrelevant or that the JP has structural issues.
I have no idea on G1000. As everything is integrated it would be an enormous undertaking even if possible. Never heard of anyone else wanting to remove it. Still entry of earlier Mirages around.
My understanding is that Piper prevented Garmin from developing a Jetprop specific version of the G1000 software for the PA46 Airframe.
Regardless of this, I think the appeal of the Jetprop is very pilot style specific. There is a higher pilot workload compared to the Meridian, much less system integration, and automation. However what you get in return is a race car type performance and flexibility. That, the limited payload and lack of factory support is only going to appeal to a certain type of owner regardless of the avionics.
In terms of future donor aircraft, yes the pool will shrink, and eventually I am sure the Jetprop conversions will eventually dry up, but there are still a lot of Avidyne and older airframes out there for several years supply. A bigger threat is the lower price delta between the used G1000 Meridian and a newer airframe PA46 Jetprop conversion. The price difference is sure to decrease with the introduction of the M600 and the upgrades on the M500.
I personally do not like the G1000 regardless of the airframe, but I know many pilots who have grown up with it and want to transition to a higher performance airframe with the same familiar G1000 offering, so that route alone will determine purchasing decisions to the detriment of the Jetprop.
Interestingly Rocket Engineering – the Jetprop STC owner are proposing some STC mods to the Meridian, so they too are clearly looking for other future income opportunities.
E
Actually I agree with the analog argument, FWIW, but you would probably guess that
However there is a much bigger argument in favour of individual instruments: you don’t need to go back to a Garmin or Avidyne dealer if anything needs looking at. So maintenance is much easier to manage, unless you have a dealer at your airport or nearby and rarely if ever do long trips (which is actually true for many people with glass cockpit planes, statistically).
If I was based where EAL is based, with any plane never mind a Jetprop, I would want maximum flexibility in case this happens.
Getting back more to the Jetprop, how can this
My understanding is that Piper prevented Garmin from developing a Jetprop specific version of the G1000 software for the PA46 Airframe.
be forced? Sure this is anti-competitive and if such an under the table deal could be proven, it would not look good (in the USA; in Europe nobody cares about cartels so long as they are not major consumer stuff)?
I’m getting a spin in a Jetprop on Saturday and I have to say I’m pretty excited to see what its like :-)
Having had 2 flights in one, it’s very quick
