Cost of ownership - Piston vs Tubine

[Canuck223]

I am trying to wrap my head around the costs of operating an aircraft. I realize that this isn't exactly an apples to apples comparison, but with all other factors being equal, is there a signifigant difference in the ongoing operating costs of similar power turbine vs piston engines?

For a small commercial operator, if they had the option to run a plane with either power plant for the same number of hours or cycles per year, would the cost of maintainance push them in one direction?

[Heliian]

Turbines are always more expensive. Overhauls, components and even the oil used is more expensive. Also, you need type training on the turbine engine.

[Canuck223]

Turbines are always more expensive. Overhauls, components and even the oil used is more expensive. Also, you need type training on the turbine engine.

OK, so is there any trade off or selling point besides fuel cost and availability? As in, is the turn around time better? Is the time between servicing greater?

[plhought]

I think it's all about speed...

Time is money for lots of people out there....

[Heliian]

Most turbine engines are on a 100 or 150hr inspection cycle. With a turbine you get increased passenger comfort and higher reliability and also improved performance over piston engines. Turbine conversions are lighter than their piston counterparts. Just compare the stats from a beaver/turbo beaver and otter/turbo otter. Rental engines are also popular when overhauls or other requirements for removal of the engine arise. depending on where you are and what type of engine you operate will also affect t.a. times.

What kind of aircraft/engine combination are you thinking of?

[Canuck223]

What kind of aircraft/engine combination are you thinking of?

In truth, I was just trying to seperate out the variables.