Turbine Legend Anyone?

Some days now and no-one has commented? sorry, wish I could help but don't know.

Looked it up and looks intriguing format.. dare I say "hot rod"? I like what I saw!

wonder if it has any vices or issues or what the current equivalents are..

 

I'd look into the Garrett-powered version, personally. It does look like a pretty cool airplane.

Turbine Legend (Garrett) | Innovative Wings Inc

Am I reading correctly that it's not pressurized? That would really cut into it's usefulness, in my opinion.

 

saw this cool example a few weeks ago at KGMU...I'll put up a separate thread about the Evo
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I flew one once - the one in the picture as a matter of fact. Bob Russell was kind enough to give me a go when I was considering a Legend. I also looked at a Marchetti SF 260TP.

Nice aircraft and handles very well. Seems to be fairly easy to fly as long as things are going right. However, a number of them have killed their owners. Given there are very few Turbine Legends out there, it is an unfortunately large proportion and I would expect the risk level to be fully equivalent to flying a hot warbird. I think the Legend suits people like Bob Russell and Dave Clinton. These are consummate pilots. Not sure of your aviator chops but I don't consider myself good enough to own one.

For a safer platform have a look at an older Piper Meridian. I had one of those for a few years. I find the formality of flying a certified turbine keeps me honest and on top of training, maintenance and documentation. On the other hand, it does require training, (expensive) maintenance, and documentation.

 

Neat. I was wondering if that was his plane. Bob also built a FW190 I posted on here a few years ago. The Lancair is an awesome plane and I suppose a value at what I've seen them listed at compared to other turboprops. Fast planes too.

 

How much do these cost? No ice protection. Where you gonna get it fixed? Parts? You don't want something like this for business travel. You need something reliable.

If it's home built you'll never be able to sell it. Just buy a Cirrus for 500NM trips.

What's your budget?

 

GE now owns Walter, and the GE H80 TP is based on the Walter 601. I expect parts are readily available. There are enough Walter's flying around that maintenance experience should not be an issue.

If its an amateur built aircraft and you buy one then obviously someone was able to sell it.

 

Well, for me, pressurization is essential but I guess to each his own...

Personally, for that mission, if you want a single engine turboprop, I'd go with a TBM of some sort. Although, if it's just you, why not get an L-39? I would think it would perform better than any of these kit deals, probably be safer (although that's not saying much), and more fun.

As for the business flying and taxes question, obviously consult a knowledgeable tax professional. However, if it is all for business then yes, you can write everything off.

Keep in mind two things, though: 1) business aircraft use is a red flag which probably will get you audited, and 2) when you get audited, they will want documentation that all of your use REALLY is for business. If it really is all business and you can document that, then you should have no issues.

If some of your flying is actually personal, you can take the percentage of hours flown for business and write off that percentage of the costs, which is a much safer route.

 

Sounds like you are good Legend material. I seem to remember the accidents were with reasonably experienced people. Been a while since I looked so please check it out.

I see the TBM mentioned (much better than the Piper) but I assume you want to say in the six figure range. You'd be totally bored with the Meridian but, hey, that can be a good thing. I think you'd also be bored with an L39. The thrust-weight is just not what you were used to. Meanwhile, there's 200 gal/hr blasting through the tail pipe and a safe runway is pretty long. Limits your choice of destination. I really did like that Marchetti turbine, but it has short legs. I think range is about 1.5 hr.

I fly airplanes from 1937 and 1941 now. No, they're not fast and no good for IFR, but they feel fast and freedom is not having to be anywhere on someone else's schedule.

Good luck with the search.

 

There's more to the plane than the motor. I've never had a motor break. It's all the other stuff.

 

If you were to nix the turbo prop idea, my first choice would be a Cessna/Columbia 400. They're well within your price range and can cruise up to 235 KTAS if you want to go up high and burn some gas. Cost of ownership would be ridiculously cheaper than a turbo prop.


Mark

 

Cirrus.

I don't know why you'd consider an L39 or this Legend thing. For business travel you need your airplane to work. You need ice protection. $300-$600 will get you an almost new turbo Cirrus or if you really want to get fancy a TurboNormalized Bonanza. I have personally owned each. You can't beat them for the price and mission you quote.

I fly myself over 300 hours a year all over the world. You know what I see parked on every ramp? Cirrus, Bonanza, Pilatus, CJ, Phenom, Bombardier, Gulfstream. Buy one of those for service and parts availability when you're AOG in the middle of nowhere.

 

I actually think, for the budget you quote, a Cirrus or Columbia would be the best choice. For $300-600 you're not going to get a Meridian, you're going to get a converted Mirage, and IMO (for whatever it's worth), I think the conversions are a little dodgy.

You might also look at a Turbo Commander. For $600k you can get a -10 powered 690 (just be careful about the service bulletin compliance), which will give you 300 kts, two engines, pressurization, and fuel burns not too far off of the TBM. Of course, you need to be willing to live with an older airframe, and some on here will scoff at that.

 

Which ones?

 

This discussion is quite interesting in that it demonstrates two types of pilot. Some of us are fully grown up (Jason, you know who you are). You are right, of course. Others never will - grow up, that is. In fairness to Hannibal, there are reasons people still fly taildraggers and warbirds. Fellow up near my area used to do his business travel in a Sea Fury. Even I thought he was strange.

As to why a turbine, for me it justifies itself over a large body of water. If that engine is a PT6, it's just a warmer, fuzzier feeling. I go around the great lakes in piston singles. Thought nothing of going over them in turbines, which also gave me more options with ice. If fuel were cheaper and maintenance were not industrially-priced, I think a lot more of us would opt for turbines. Sadly, though, it's a whole different world of cost. How does a $50K annual sound? $600/hr operating? The fixed gear piston singles are so much more practical for Hannibal's mission. Sigh.

 

Actually, what it says is that you have to understand the mission, and choose the appropriate airplane for that mission.

If the mission is mostly have fun, and travel a bit on the side when you can, that would indicate one choice. If the mission is reliable transportation, and try to have a little fun doing it, that's a very different mission.

Sometimes one airplane can't do it all. Maybe Hannibal needs a Cirrus or Columbia AND a Pitts.

 

This is a pretty legit business schedule. For me, this is ATL to NYC and back every week. Not something I'd want to in anything less than a turbo Cirrus.

 

Lancair Sentry TP ?

 

ATL-NYC is a completely different environment than SBA-PHX (wag from Hannibal's profile), and would not require the same equipment to reliably operate 95% (or more) of the time. You would not need to operate in the FL's, nor need hard IFR/icing capability. The southwest is a perfect environment for commuting in a Legend.