I
think there was an ASETPA requirement the aircraft turbine engine had a demonstrated failure rate of less than 1 in 100,000 hours? I seem to recall from many years ago and the early days of ASETPA that the PT6A-114 engine in the C208 (being of the same class as the -27 and -34) demonstrated that reliability rate, whilst the -41/-42 class of engines in the Piper PA46-500TP had not? I was told that by either CASA or P&W Brisbane?
Looking at the
PA46-500 specs and performance, it appears to be more a rich man's toy, rather than a commercial aircraft? The payload at max range appears to be one anorexic pilot plus his handbag? Why bother with Class A maintenance and ASETPA approval?