Pros and Cons of a blackhawk conversion on a BE-200


We are flying a BE-200 BB-1346, most of our flights are 1:00-1:20 mins at around FL200/Fl220. We have the PT-6-42s that are the 3000TBO’s engines.
So at 2800 hours now we have a few options we are looking at. Move up to a 2004 BE-200, and or go with the Blackhawks -61s on this ship.
We have raisebeck inhanced leading edge, highflowtation gear doors, wing lockers, and raisebeck props already. Updated to a good avionics package already also
Any good opinions out there on the blackhawks from those who have operated them?


My recommendation would be to keep the -42’s.

Here’s Why:
The Blackhawk -61 (or -52) engine conversion really only performs well once you get above 15,000’. If you looked at a climb chart for 200 from sea level to 15,000’, the charts for a 42, 52, and 61 would be almost identical. Above that the -52/61 will start to look prettier than the -42.

With your short mission duration flights, getting an extra 10 knots of cruise speed for the 40 minutes you are at cruise seems hardly worth the capital that the -52/61 conversion requires.

My first thought would be to buy the MORE STC for the engines ($8k each) which gives you a new TBO of 8,000 hours. You have more frequent inspections–150/300/450 hour, but factor those increased compared to an extra 5000 hours of TBO, and it’s a pretty nice deal.

If that’s not a course of action you wish to take, I would recommend getting a pair of OH/low time -42’s.

Just so you know the -52 is same engine as the -61, just with a 20 (or 30, can’t remember) degree increased ITT redline and an extra $50k.


MORE program = MORE MX MORE Money MORE Down time

Stay stock or upgrade just please don’t do MORE.


MORE inspections will increase your downtime and maintenance costs. No argument there.

One must balance the cost of the downtime & maintenance costs versus the costs of a pair of engines.

A set of low time -42’s will easily run $800k + labor. If you want OH engines, the costs go higher.

Balance the cost of that versus the cost to get the MORE STC and the increased downtime & maintenance costs.

If you have a maintenance shop that can do MORE inspections on a timeline that fits your operation, it’s great.

If the increased downtime & maintenance costs are prohibitive for your operation, then going with OH -42’s would be best.

I work for a company that operates multiple aircraft with engines on the MORE program, and it has worked well for us.


Thanks Guys for your in put.


Our experience with the MORE program is that although the program is approved by the FAA, it is not recognized by Pratt. A number of engines have experienced serious faliures after flying 5000 or 6000 hours and those that do make TBO usually have more scraps than overhaulable parts. Also, buying the STC for $8,000 is misleading. You have to split the engines and anything found must be rectified - usually runs around $30,000 per engine plus the STC to put it on the MORE program - if done properly. You also have to split the engines every 300 hours and of course repair what you find which can be significant. Most MORE program operators are flying much older King Airs and those that come up for sale are considered as run out so the MORE program gives it no value and in some cases - decreases the value. As far as overhaul - why pay $800,000 just to keep using your old engines and go the same speed when you can spend a little more and have brand new engines and go a lot faster?