Was Achim joking, maybe? ;-))
So there cannot be any grass airfields with ILS, can there?
Depends on the minimum you want to establish with that ILS – if you are happy with 400ft and 1,5km you need no lighting during daylight hours.
200ft DH – no way …
Second hand Cirri sound quite a good deal, although $400/hour depreciation on his 890TT from new is a bit eye wincing.
OTOH You need to be a passionate enthusiast to feed a 30 year plus pressurised SE. Although I recall quite fondly the SE with a quarter of its wing missing, which made it from Ireland to Jersey. Now that is tough.
Although I recall quite fondly the SE with a quarter of its wing missing, which made it from Ireland to Jersey. Now that is tough.
Was that the one where the pilot was unaware of it?
While I would not take the Meridian into a grass strip, it is approved for it. The Jetprop is certainly the most appropriate as its engine mount is known to be the strongest in the PA46 fleet. I still wouldn’t however many do.
Logically therefore you are looking at a PA46, which immediately leads to the Jetprop as the fully logical conclusion
Umm not necessarily…..Peter, why is it you love the Jetprop so much – you make this statement all the time? They are very good of course but vs Meridian it is not as cut and dried as you seem to suggest.
May I throw a molotov cocktail into this?
Get a multi rating and go buy a Mitsubishi MU-2. They’ll get into any field you need to go, they’ll cruise faster and higher. And after the SFAR they now – surprise – have the best safety record of all of them. The Garretts have 5400hrs TBO and they burn less fuel than the PT6’s. Hot sections are few (think it’s every 2000hrs) and don’t cost an arm and a leg. You can have a decent example for $400K. For $600K you’re getting one with almost newly O/H engines. They are extreme value for money. They’re built like brick outhouses and they’re still fully supported. Almost no AD’s on this airframe.
But what about the fuel burn? Well, around 60gal/hr up there. But for the minimum of the $2-500K you save by buying it compared to a Jetprop or new Cirrus, you can run fuel for decades before you’ve spent that. Also, this airframe will not depreciate as much as others – they’re being rediscovered and it’s one of the few frames that have risen in price since the SFAR was put in place.
Here’s landing at a short dirt strip in Haiti. I’d like to see a Jetprop or Cirrus do this.
Adam I was going to make the same suggestion, but deleted the line before posting!
Brilliant design and 360 knots to boot – overtaking Citations.
The MU-2 is too noisy for Europe. Your flying would be seriously limited.
Adam, I admire your enthusiasm for exotic ultra high maintenance airplanes 
I have never flown one but they are supposed to be great. Maintenance costs are apparently pretty high though. Weight would add a lot to landing fees and enroute IFR charges.
More a competitor to a King Air however.
Don’t think they do 360tas however. Max was low 300s but that is at low altitude. Economy is 270ish at 280.
Another alternative for the budget is either version of the turbine Bonanza. Newer airframe than the SE but without pressurization so less costly than the Jetprop. Not flown one myself but I’m told they have a good reputation for the strength of their landing gear – so maybe a better option for unmade (and short) strips.
