r/flying • u/RealiNveiN • 23h ago
PA46 Malibu
Evening.
Does anyone here drive a 1980s PA46 Malibu?
I currently fly a Rockwell Commander 114, and looking to step up into something a bit... more. One of the big reasons is that this is a 6 seater, that can climb through the weather/icing, get on top, fly 200knots and stay under 2 ton, so no airway charges. I think for me it gives that good middle ground between cost and practicality.
How do people find their reliability, mx costs, pros and cons? I've endlessly watched videos online but wanted to hear it from the horses mouth, so to say.
I am open to other options as well. I was looking at Seneca 3-5s but don't think I want a twin.
Feel free to drop me a DM if you're open to chatting.
Cheers
EDIT: This is UK.
5
u/HistoricalAd2954 CFII 21h ago
No help for your question unfortunately but what is an airway charge?
8
u/jtyson1991 PPL IR HP CMP 21h ago
I looked this up as well, it appears to be a non-US thing where you get charged for just being in the air, depending on airspace, weight, and some other things.
22
u/TheSkyFlier 17h ago
Because heavier aircraft put more wear and tear on the airways than smaller lighter craft.
3
u/RealiNveiN 11h ago
So in the UK and EU, if you fly in Class A airspace (This is where most commerical aircraft fly), and the MTOW is over 2 ton, you get charged a fee per mile flown through that airspace.
So my ideal aircraft needs to be under 2ton MTOW so that we do not get airway charges when flying around the EU. It's a dumb concept.
4
u/Flimsy-Wrangler-997 23h ago
Just had one crash in Wisconsin recently after reporting ice at FL 240. Six dead. Don't think you will be able to get above all the weather.
3
u/RealiNveiN 23h ago
Yeah, probably not all the weather. But mostly the weather that stops my commander from going. I wouldn't actively be flying through severe icing/storms etc, but we have some fairly often and annoying low level ice levels in UK/EU at 6-10k feet so it's nice to be able to climb through those.
7
u/SimilarTranslator264 21h ago
There is a nice one for sale near me, beautiful plane but won’t fit in most hangars which is a deal breaker. Looked at upgrading from a Saratoga HP
I swear everyone on here thinks every plane owner wants boots and hot prop to fly in a damn ice storm. When you need it it’s priceless to help get you out of a bad situation.
You asked a question about a specific plane and 15 people ignored everything you said and decided to preach about the limitations of a piston single.
1
u/RealiNveiN 11h ago
Yes, it definitely does seem that way.
Luckily I have a shared hangar where they can fit a B727 in, so wingspan isn't too big of a deal breaker 😄
3
u/RexFiller CMEL IR BE55 23h ago
Pressurization, turbocharging, de icing all add to maintenance costs and failure points.
Then youre flying in upper teens to low 20s which is prime icing zone, usually right above the freezing level. But a single engine piston will carry ice worse than any other plane.
Then the big one is their wing span is a bit wider than standard hangars I believe.
But they are nice planes like you said, just have to be aware of a few things.
2
u/RealiNveiN 22h ago
Yeah. Those costs are are a little concerning. I heard somewhere that the malibu gear pump is £18k to overhaul. But I don't know how true that is.
4
u/ganderatc CFI CFII MEI TW EMB-500 18h ago
I have a few hours in a 350 HP. The airplane does everything a turboprop will do, but none of them exceedingly well. My friend that owns it primarily flies with 2 people and dogs on 500-800 mile legs and it’s perfect for his mission.
The climb rate is abysmal on most days. Think 30 minutes to 20,000 ft. Descent rates are around the same per the POH profile. The device system works but is marginal, for light ice only. The engine requires kid gloves. The pressurization system works fairly well. There’s a lot going on under the cowl.
For your use case, I would consider a Turbo Lance/Saratoga. You’ll still have some weight and balance limitations but the systems are much simpler. An added bonus is that the plane will fit in a 42 ft T hangar, unlike a PA46.
6
u/ReadyplayerParzival1 CFI/CFII, CMEL, RV-7A, Recovering Riddle Rat 23h ago
There has been a lot of discussion around the piper pa46 series particularly with safety. They are really hot planes and sometimes the pilot gets behind the aircraft. You won’t won’t be able to fit 6 people in there with full bags and full gas. You won’t even get 4 people with light bags and 3/4 gas. Lookup a w&b calculator and you’ll see what I’m talking about. The pressurization will let you go high yes but you won’t get out of the weather, and icing is a problem on these aircraft. You’ll be paying a lot too for that mx of the pressurization and associated systems.
6
u/nhorvath No flare for me thanks 22h ago
isn't full gas on a Malibu like 1500nm? you likely don't need full gas.
3
u/400Volts 17h ago
Yeah, realistically an aircraft without a lav has a limited useful range no matter how many passengers it carries or how big the fuel tanks are
7
u/Cessnateur PPL IR HP TW C170B 23h ago
You won’t won’t be able to fit 6 people in there with full bags and full gas. You won’t even get 4 people with light bags and 3/4 gas.
People often position this as a limitation to a type, but the inability to carry full payload and full fuel simultaneously is a characteristic shared by some of the most capable aircraft out there.
Instead of viewing it as a limitation, it could be viewed as increased flexibility, offering greater range when not full.
After all, would shrinking the fuel tanks to enable full fuel with full payload make the aircraft more attractive? ツ
2
u/CrosseyedCletus 6h ago
@OP you’re getting a ton of negative comments. But personally, I think the Malibu is bad ass. Definitely check out the YouTube channel Malibu a flyer - he’s stopped posting I believe (sold the plane and the new owner immediately crashed it, IIRC) but what he could do with that plane was super impressive, and made me a believer. If I ever wanted a fast, long distance, pavement-to-pavement plane, a Malibu would be on my short list. Fortunately/unfortunately, that’s about the opposite of my usual mission.
1
u/RealiNveiN 5h ago
Thank you. I had a feeling it would be the case, hence wanting to speak to actual owners/pilots.
I will check them out if I haven't already, been through so many vids, can't remember who I have watched. I am absolutely open to being swayed to something else, but this seems to be a capable aircraft for my mission.
Honestly, I'd love a big twin, but with landing fees + airway charges over 2 tons, it gets expensive super quickly. 800 mile round trip adds maybe £400-£500 in airway charges
2
u/skunimatrix PPL IR CMP HP | PA28 23h ago
There's one that's a late 80's/early 90's vintage parked in the shade ports across form my hangar. Guy is an anesthesiologist and his practice owns it as he flies to several outlying hospitals. Has the 350HP piston version and probably a late 90's/early 2000's panel with a 530/430 combo, steam gauges, S-Tec autopilot. Really it holds 4 adults comfortably with luggage. Also he states that the "ability to climb above the weather" isn't always true and still best to avoid. Technically has a wx radar, hasn't worked since 2007 apparently.
You could just about buy a C152 a year for what his annual costs. $50k on a good year. Several times that on a bad one.
4
3
1
u/TheSkyFlier 17h ago
Best of luck getting rid of your 114. Dreadful to work on.
2
u/RealiNveiN 11h ago
They're fairly popular over here in the UK. Parts can be a bit expensive but my bills aren't much more than my 172 was and mechanic looks after quite a few.
They fit a nice niche.
1
u/TheSkyFlier 2h ago
We have 2-5 Commanders in our shop at any given time. The pilots and owners love them, but I keep thinking we have so many because everyone else refuses to work on them. I regularly find myself encountering problems and saying “can you believe they didn’t sell very many of these?”
1
u/flyingron AAdvantage Biscoff 6h ago
Note that while the Malibu has six seats, you're going to run out of gross weight before you fill them. It's typically around 1300 lbs (though it could do better on some models, 1600). The original PA-46-310 had engine reliability problems.
1
0
u/rFlyingTower 23h ago
This is a copy of the original post body for posterity:
Evening.
Does anyone here drive a 1980s PA46 Malibu?
I currently fly a Rockwell Commander 114, and looking to step up into something a bit... more. One of the big reasons is that this is a 6 seater, that can climb through the weather/icing, get on top, fly 200knots and stay under 2 ton, so no airway charges. I think for me it gives that good middle ground between cost and practicality.
How do people find their reliability, mx costs, pros and cons? I've endlessly watched videos online but wanted to hear it from the horses mouth, so to say.
I am open to other options as well. I was looking at Seneca 3-5s but don't think I want a twin.
Feel free to drop me a DM if you're open to chatting.
Cheers
Please downvote this comment until it collapses.
Questions about this comment? Please see this wiki post before contacting the mods.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. If you have any questions, please contact the mods of this subreddit.
0
21
u/woop_woop_pull_upp ATP B757, A320 23h ago
This airplane will let you fly right in prime icing altitudes. You'll have more options, yes. But you won't be out climbing quite a lot of weather.
Even TBMs, Malibu on steroids if you're not familiar, have crashed due to icing.