Rami1988 wrote:
im single, have no family, and don’t intend to ever change this situation :)
That I would think is one great prospect for an extended GA career 
I would have to second what others have said here: Fly your TB20 to at least 500 hrs before thinking of upgrading (window shopping sure). In the US and therefore also N-reg you’d probably struggle to get insurance below that and from what I hear, European insurers start looking closely at what their American colleagues do.
Rami1988 wrote:
I have been reading around about the Jetprop and it doesnt seem to be much more complex to fly. I feel flying a twin piston is probably a bigger step up than that..
Somehow I’ve never felt too safe with the Malibu series, the Jetprop included, particularly with low experience and low time. Also you need to check the payload of any Jetprop you would consider: Some are absolutely absymal when it comes to flying with full fuel if you need the range or want to tanker cheap fuel. It may well be just my gut feel but I’ve lost one guy I knew in a regular PA46 when it came apart over the lake of Konstanz and we probably will never know why it did. I would not consider the Jetprop or any PA46 a “low experience” airplane at all. But again, talk to people who have one and possibly hitch a couple of flights.
There is also another factor: Quite a few stats say that 200-500 hrs are the most dangerous in terms of accident probability. People in that time range think they know how to fly but are still in a steep learning curve which tends to flatten out much later than those 500 hrs and hugely depend on what kind of experience you get. I am a 500 hr pilot myself and I have never been more careful than I am now, knowing those stats.
So again, I’d take that TB20 for some extended trips, do with it what you feel comfortable doing and get experience. Maybe some times take more experienced folks with you to do longer trips, I find it adds a lot of fun to it too, personally I find flying alone boring.
gallois wrote:
Talking of twin turbo props I know a couple of private pilots who operate King Air C90s here. One is based at Sarlat Domme which IIRC is 745metres. It has a service ceiling of 30000ft and cruises 75% at 275kts.
I agree, King Airs are great performers and also quite nice to fly. And yea, C90ties and below can sometimes be found as a steal and no, not all of those are “Dogs” but nice old ladies which need someone who appreciates them. I might add the Piper Cheyenne into that fold, it also is a very nice turboprop with about the same running cost and quite a considerable range. It is not as fast as a King Air but also a bit more economcial to run.
Turboprop Twins definitly have the advantage that engine failures in them enroute, over water or mountains, usually are a “non event” in the sense that once you have managed the initial failure, the 2nd turbine will easily carry you to the nearest diversion alternate without any big concerns about terrain clearance or over water performance. Most turboprops have Auto Feather and quite a few also have yaw assist in this case, so they are much more managable than certain piston twins.
I would not tend towards those (MEP) anyhow. First, they really need pilots on top of their (OEI) game, which many who are not doing regular drills are not. Apart, all of them are pretty old by now. MEP’s are for folks who want the multi engine safety, are willing to invest in a lot of training (initial and recurrent) and who can’t afford turboprops. I’ve always been musing about getting one, have actually been sorely tempted at some stages but have always had rationality take the better of me.
As the Vision Jet has been mentioned: The major obstacle to jet flying in Europe is the fact that you need a lot more organisation and training than you do with any turboprop. This is an irrational thing, particularly for the Vision Jet which is as easy to fly and operate as they come, but it means sim sessions every 6 (or 12?) months, it means a lot of overhead which US based VJ owners don’t need, so you really need to want it to make sense. Also while the VJ is a lovely plane to fly and it does have the shute as well as the autoland feature too, it is not really that fast. I understand the TBM is faster almost in all cases and also has a much better range. So while I would love to fly a jet, given the choice, I’d probably go for a TBM any time.
Or, if you consider flying more folks and in and out of “farm strips”, consider a PC12. Those things are the original “Swiss Army Knife” in aviation, they literally can get in and out of just about anywhere (just search for Locher Airfield on yt) and again have huge range and possibilities.
Rami1988 wrote:
Most courses seem to have 200h minimum. I think if i add 50-100h of IFR on top, it should be ok?
As others have said, I very much doubt you’ll get insurance cover with anywhere less than 500 hrs.
In your position and with the financial background you appear to have talking about TBM’s e.t.c, what I’d do is to fly your TB20 and at the side go and try out whatever you can get your hands on. Find out who has the planes you are after, go talk to them and maybe see if you can fly with them to see for yourself what they really are like. Use the time to see where you want to go and then make an educated decision.
That’s actually the target of the vision jet. It’s damn easy: fadec, deiced, G2s have auto throtlle, pressurized, single engine and quite performing. I would say a bit better than a jetprop, but slower than a tbm. You will need a specific QT for this, but I’m sure cirrus will be pleased.
It’s cabin interface is copied from the SR22. The thing it doesn do well is takeoff and lading vs piston and turbo props, you’ll need 1000m for each at mtow.
Did I mention prohibitive pricing ?
I would not go for a piston twin. these machines are for either MEP training and passionated pilots, but you can definitely get in love with them and start training your legs muscles for OEI training :).
I know a guy who was buying a brand new SR22T every 2 years, and now he has the Cirrus jet A great way to blow money. And yes he was the Cirrus marketing target exactly. But he got a good price by locking in some early option, Cirrus were doing amazing deals to capture repeating SR22 buyers.
But the only way to not blow big money in the TP world is to have either a TP 210 (RR engine) or a Jetprop. If you want something more solid than a Jetprop and as capable as anything below a bizjet, and way more capable in Europe than the Cirrus Jet, a TBM700C2 is great value now, especially if you are into sacrilege and run it on Part 91 (see the TBM part 91 thread)
A 1000m runway is quite limiting in Europe.
I don’t think ignoring overhaul times is what the OP had in mind in order to reduce real and perceived risk
Part 91 is not ignoring overhaul times On e.g. a TBM it is not doing totally silly stuff like removing all servos at every annual and checking their clutch torque on a special rig, when you can (and should) do it on every preflight. Most of the Socata TB and TBM MM is designed to make money. I was hangared for 10 years at a TBM/KA service facility so I know it
But yes indeed this kind of operation needs technical competence, so cannot be recommended to a new entrant to the ownership game.
Peter wrote:
especially if you are into sacrilege and run it on Part 91 (see the TBM part 91 thread)
Does it mean N-reg? i.e. going to the US, getting the PPL+IR and maintaining UK PPL+IR and the US ones at the same time?
Yes this is what I have except I did a standalone FAA CPL/IR in the good old days. You can get a US PPL/IR via 61.75 and the Foreign Pilot exam route.
N-reg and Part 91 is the way to go unless you want to blow money away. But as the TBM thread shows, nobody does it due to market value preservation.
arj1 wrote:
Does it mean N-reg?
My understanding is legally one can do pretty much the same under Part-M Light, one just has to follow at least the MIP. In practice, this probably requires that one is willing to self-declare and take responsibility for the AMP (aircraft maintenance program), I “guess” a CAMO will be far more conservative.
Part-ML on a TBM?
I “guess” a CAMO will be far more conservative.
You don’t need to guess 
That is why I said you need your own technical capability. As with most thing in life, the more you know, the less you pay. Following my own TB20 ownership experience I cannot possibly recommend most options presented in this thread to a novice owner.
Peter wrote:
Following my own TB20 ownership experience I cannot possibly recommend most options presented in this thread to a novice owner.
Peter, I don’t think he has got any realistic non-novice owner options – all of those require effort and/or money. And of course quite a bit of knowledge, otherwise it requires a LOT of money. :)
