MiTasol
1st Lieutenant
The recip needs technical people to assemble it. Turbines are simple assembly, just tons of repetitive parts to install, like turbine blades and such.
Non tech types can assemble the turbines much easier than complicated old radial engines. My young grand kids could assemble the blades in a turbine, and probably better than the assembly line workers.
Engine shop? Yes not aircraft though.
Are your grand kids watchmakers then?
Turbines depend on extremely close tolerances both dimensionally and mass wise (to obtain the dynamic balance needed). Far tighter tolerances than on piston engines.
On any of the variable stator angle engines just one stator off angle will cause the engine to self destruct within seconds. Clearances are so critical that many of the bigger engines have manifolds around the outside of the turbine spraying "cold" (as in 200-400C) compressor air over the outside of the turbine case to shrink it to maintain blade tip clearances at the required dimensions.
On piston engines the connecting, master and articulating rods and the piston weights can vary considerably inside any single engine. The weight of the cylinders and all their mechanisms have no weight limits.
For many years the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority allowed the PT-6 turbine engines to run 12,000 hours between overhauls - well beyond what Pratt and Whitney recommended and far beyond what any piston engine is capable of. I am not aware of any failing but the overhaul cost would have been horrendous as erosion and cracking of internal parts would have put many of those parts outside repairable limits.
