Looking for a 2nd 337

[JeffAxel]

I agree with all that is said about the 337 and how easy it is, that why I bought one. Not sure I agree with the MU2 stuff. It is different and has to flown differently, but once you understand those differences and how to fly the plane the way it is supposed to be flown, you will be fine. What works in a 421 won't work in an MU2, but fly it the way you will be trained to fly it and it does exactly what the book says it will do. Training is mandatory and has to be done annually, but this requirement has taken the MU2 from a dangerous plane to a much safer one. The wing with no flaps is very different than with flaps 20 and the airspeeds change accordingly. This is a must learn lesson but when you fly the POH profiles, the plane does fine. You have to commit to learning something different but you don't have to be an extraordinary pilot to fly the MU2, but you do have to be a student of the type and appreciate its differences. You have to learn to use trim, but when in trim it isn't particularly hard to fly, once learned. Think jet like and you get the idea. It is head and shoulders more capable than any pressurized piston twin and much more reliable. It has much better engineered systems too. Downsides, insurance could be a challenge. Needs more runway than a P337 too. But at 260KTAS on 58gph in the 20s, the F model MU2 is the least expensive twin turboprop you can operate. I liked my P337, but the MU2 is in a whole different league capability wise. I am glad I went this route. It has been a challenge, but the rewards are well worth it to me.

[Frank Benvin]

My good friends flight in a MU2 He was copilot They had a double engine failure at night in icing over the mountains fully loaded with freight.. Everything was on their side that night Two part video - communication between ATC and them

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wbm8xzLVgQ4&t=2s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lAu-HpzqM4&t=6s

[JeffAxel]

Awful lot of information in the MU2 POH about flying in icing. Engine inlet heat on (bleed air source), ignitors on continuous, prop heat on, boots on. Pitot heat should be turned on when taking the runway. If you do all that correctly and when entering icing conditions the experience your friend had should be rare. That said, ice can get any airplane. I would rather avoid ice entirely of course, but I would rather be in an MU2 than a P337 if flying in icing conditions. The icing testing the MU2 has undergone is more extensive than most any other turboprop. Tom Batchelor wrote an extensive article on that subject. He was the test pilot for those icing tests. Something every aspiring MU2 pilot should read. I can't seem to attach it here, but I can send it via e mail if someone wants to read it.

[mshac]

Jeff, I admire the MU-2, and your devotion to training in order to fly one. I'd love to have the performance capabilities you have with your Marquis.

A couple of questions, if you would:

What does your required annual training look like?

What is your insurance cost, and at what hull value?

What do you budget for your annual or progressive mx program?

[JeffAxel]

I don't have a Marquis, I have a 1972 F model, the "low performance" MU2, only 260KTAS vs 300KTS. Burns less fuel though. Training was $6K initial and will be $3K annually. Insurance was $9K for $250K hull value. They required 50 hours dual, and that was about right for me. The MU2 is my first turbine so there was a pretty big learning curve. I wanted twin safety, and a turbine actually gives you that. It will actually climb on one engine, properly flown. One thing to keep in mind, both the MU2 and P337 have lousy safety records, but the MU2's has improved due to the training requirement. Something to keep in mind no matter what you fly. My 100/200 hour inspection was $12K plus a $3K battery that was welded to the battery connector. That is in the range I spent on P337 annuals, and less than my first P337 annual FWIW.

[Timcote1960]

Been turning this one over in my mind. Contacted your friend and yes, it's a pretty bird. I love the idea of 9 moving parts in my engine instead of 300+.
But that MU2 is flown by a professional pilot, not some 61yo physician with 800hrs that began 7yrs ago.

Think I'm stepping back to my original plan of owning two 337s as a means to have one flyable all the time. Pouring $s into #1 engines, a P337G with every electronic thing imaginable; and have several candidate #2s also P337Gs from Bill Crew's stable and elsewhere.

The pilot is the most fragile, failure-prone part of the whole air safety system. Might be best to spend my next 10yrs flying just to getting to know this one aircraft inside out.

NB: I was gonna get my CFI. Last February, two days before my checkride in a C150 contaminated with ice-then-water, I had an engine out at 300' with nothing but an oak forest in front of me. We stopped treetops at 70' for 0.5 sec, then descended to the forest floor. Yet I and my CFII (she 32 and 7.5mo pregnant) escaped without a scratch. But two of the three were deeply changed on the inside.

Tim

[JeffAxel]

FWIW, I am a 62yr old physician! The MU2 is my first turbine, and yes it was a big learning curve. I figured if I was going to get an MU2, better do it before my brain was too fossilized to learn anything new! I do have 4000 hours over almost 40 years, plus a lot of IFR time in the Pacific Northwest. You don't have to be a professional pilot to fly an MU2, but you do have to think like one and fly with the flows and checklists you will be taught. The MU2 is definitely a by the numbers airplane, but if operated using those numbers it is wonderful. As to getting older, the 5.0 pressure differential gives you a lower cabin altitude and I notice I arrive feeling better than in the P210 or P337 FWIW, plus I get where I am going a lot faster. Going from a 200mph plane to a 300mph plane makes a big difference, especially into the wind.

[n86121]

As a fun-loving young man,
I scanned the various options, before buying my helicopter.

Back then you could find a small Cessna Paris Jet.
Remember those? Was it even four seats? Cool!
Most obvious problem was 1950's engines would use $200 of fuel before you took off.
That was when fuel was what, $1/gal ...or less?

Having decided AGAINST buying a 1969 Ferrari Dino targa,
because parts would be difficult...
Instead geting a Lotus Eclat, that required 4AM calls to Cheshire England.

I was being "practical"

The MU2's were intriguing also.
But the accident reports always seemed to read the same:
"The pilot had 5,000 hours in make and model"
"The wreckage was spread over a file mile radius"

Too unforgiving.

Having had my 337 for ages, I always offer the following challenge"

"You are IFR/NIGHT/OVER WATER/FOREST/CITY, and something goes "klunk'"

Complete the following sentence: "Damn, I wish I was in a ____________"

Same answer every time.

[JeffAxel]

"The MU2's were intriguing also.
But the accident reports always seemed to read the same:
"The pilot had 5,000 hours in make and model"
"The wreckage was spread over a file mile radius"

Too unforgiving."

David, this was true before 2009 when initial and yearly recurrent training became required. Since then the MU2 has had a better than average safety record. Fly it like you train and it does what it should, get too slow for your wing configuration and you will have issues. You can't make this plane do what its design does not allow. It is different and has to be flown differently than piston and turbine twins with ailerons and more like a jet. You have to fly it by the profiles in the POH, all the time. Different flap configurations require different airspeeds. The good news is the airspeeds are essentially the same, one engine inoperative or with both engines so it is easy to remember. Speeds depend on flaps, not number of engines running. All of this is true for any airplane though. The Skymaster has a pretty lousy accident record too. I have owned a P337 and own an MU2 now, the MU2 is a much more capable plane and much better supported as well. They haven't made one since 1986 but you can still get factory service and factory parts from the factory owned service center in Tulsa, OK. Don't get me wrong, I liked my P337 but it was a quirky plane to work on and finding parts was a challenge ten years ago when I owned it, this isn't better today. Everyone has to make their own choices, but to say an MU2 is dangerous and takes super pilot skills to fly just isn't born out by recent history. I am just a typical guy flying for fun, but I found the training I took for the MU2 to be very good and feel better taking the MU2 on long trips in weather than I did the P337. It is just a more capable plane with many more tools to help deal with situations typically seen on cross country IFR flights. Besides, spooling up those Garretts brings a smile to my face every time I do it too :-)