BeechTalk - BT - Aero Commander 500S- Opinions Please...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 00:00

All:

As you can see on the website we operate some great examples of both the Aerostar and the Aero Commander:

www.texasaviationlaw.com

The Aerostar passes many King Airs and is a true 250 knot aircraft at 65% cruise power at FL 250, burning about 42-44 gph. The winglets vastly improved every aspect of the way she flies and performs. We have flown her non-stop for 4.5 hour legs like Southern California to Houston.

The Shrike delivers 180 knots at 7-8000 feet burning 34-36 gph, the single biggest aerodynamic improvement being the flap gap seals.

Both aircraft are truly "pilots" aircraft, with great visibility (the edge going to the Shrike), a single door in the Aerostar so the pilot is last one in and first one out, and a separate crew door in the Shrike for the privileged use of the flight crew. We have flown both aircraft up to 9 hours in one day with no undue discomfort due to the way the seats were designed and built including select use of memory foam.

I could give you numbers all day, but the difference in flying them is this: if you want to get some where fast take the Aerostar. If you want to enjoy the flying characteristics of what may be the finest piston twin design ever take the Aero Commander. It has flight controls the size of barn doors, will never surprise you, and does exactly what you ask her to do. Since 2002 when we started operating the Shrike, and through engine and prop replacement, etc., we have never failed to dispatch a single flight. While the Aerostar has the 350 HP motors and does quite well on SE, the Shrike is no slouch on SE with the 290 HP motors, and weighs just a little more. Both do about what the book claims as long as you get them properly configured, promptly. The Shrike is tolerably quiet even without the ANR headsets, and is as smooth running as many turboprops, with the engine/props balanced to the best numbers reasonably attainable.

Ted Smith designed both of them, the man was a genius, and there are very descriptive articles and loads of photographs on our experiences with both aircraft on the website as well. It is truly a privilege to keep these aircraft flying. I simply don't know what you could replace either one with that does what they do so consistently and beautifully. Hope this helps. Enjoy!

Gary

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 00:09

Username Protected wrote:

All:

As you can see on the website we operate some great examples of both the Aerostar and the Aero Commander:

http://www.texasaviationlaw.com

The Aerostar passes many King Airs and is a true 250 knot aircraft at 65% cruise power at FL 250, burning about 42-44 gph. The winglets vastly improved every aspect of the way she flies and performs. We have flown her non-stop for 4.5 hour legs like Southern California to Houston.

The Shrike delivers 180 knots at 7-8000 feet burning 34-36 gph, the single biggest aerodynamic improvement being the flap gap seals.

Both aircraft are truly "pilots" aircraft, with great visibility (the edge going to the Shrike), a single door in the Aerostar so the pilot is last one in and first one out, and a separate crew door in the Shrike for the privileged use of the flight crew. We have flown both aircraft up to 9 hours in one day with no undue discomfort due to the way the seats were designed and built including select use of memory foam.

I could give you numbers all day, but the difference in flying them is this: if you want to get some where fast take the Aerostar. If you want to enjoy the flying characteristics of what may be the finest piston twin design ever take the Aero Commander. It has flight controls the size of barn doors, will never surprise you, and does exactly what you ask her to do. Since 2002 when we started operating the Shrike, and through engine and prop replacement, etc., we have never failed to dispatch a single flight. While the Aerostar has the 350 HP motors and does quite well on SE, the Shrike is no slouch on SE with the 290 HP motors, and weighs just a little more. Both do about what the book claims as long as you get them properly configured, promptly. The Shrike is tolerably quiet even without the ANR headsets, and is as smooth running as many turboprops, with the engine/props balanced to the best numbers reasonably attainable.

Ted Smith designed both of them, the man was a genius, and there are very descriptive articles and loads of photographs on our experiences with both aircraft on the website as well. It is truly a privilege to keep these aircraft flying. I simply don't know what you could replace either one with that does what they do so consistently and beautifully. Hope this helps. Enjoy!

Gary

Very nice remarks Gary.

Can you elaborate on anything different (odd) about the Shrike? Example - I was just watching a YouTube vid on the start sequence on Commander 520. One of the first things you have to do is HAND pump the hydraulics to build pressure for brakes, flaps and landing gear. I call that " different". Sounds like this doesn't apply to the 500S or conversions?

What is the single engine rate of climb on the Colemill Shrike conversions with 300 HP Engines? This is a deal breaker in my fantasy land purchase!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 08:34

Gary, your Shrike and Aerostar are absolutely gorgeous! :bow:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 08:41

The pictures don't do them justice. Gary has the finest examples of either that I have seen.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 09:59

Username Protected wrote:

I like this one!

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetai ... 256335.htm

Me too! That's a lot of airplane for the money!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 11:03

Thanks Don - you are way too kind! Thought I would upload some pics for the convenience of the group! The side-by-side photos really illustrate the lineage. Enjoy!

Gary

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 11:15

Username Protected wrote:

The outboard arrows point to the unguarded fuel shut-off switches. The inboard arrows point to the fuel pump switches. I know of one fatal accident that occurred during 135 training because the pilot turned off the fuel instead of the pumps. With that time, was it a freighter?

Andy & All:

If you look carefully you can see the metal band that encircles the fuel shut-off valves, requiring the pilot to be intent upon using those valves instead of the nearby fuel boost switches. We took the additional precaution of finishing those bands in powder-coated red (which seems to be the color they were from the factory) just to emphasize their importance and to make them pilot proof. So far it has worked . . . ;-)

Before and after photos of the overhead panels attached. BTW - the LH overhead was not the worst of the panels, by far!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 11:32

Username Protected wrote:

All:

As you can see on the website we operate some great examples of both the Aerostar and the Aero Commander:

http://www.texasaviationlaw.com

The Aerostar passes many King Airs and is a true 250 knot aircraft at 65% cruise power at FL 250, burning about 42-44 gph. The winglets vastly improved every aspect of the way she flies and performs. We have flown her non-stop for 4.5 hour legs like Southern California to Houston.

The Shrike delivers 180 knots at 7-8000 feet burning 34-36 gph, the single biggest aerodynamic improvement being the flap gap seals.

Both aircraft are truly "pilots" aircraft, with great visibility (the edge going to the Shrike), a single door in the Aerostar so the pilot is last one in and first one out, and a separate crew door in the Shrike for the privileged use of the flight crew. We have flown both aircraft up to 9 hours in one day with no undue discomfort due to the way the seats were designed and built including select use of memory foam.

I could give you numbers all day, but the difference in flying them is this: if you want to get some where fast take the Aerostar. If you want to enjoy the flying characteristics of what may be the finest piston twin design ever take the Aero Commander. It has flight controls the size of barn doors, will never surprise you, and does exactly what you ask her to do. Since 2002 when we started operating the Shrike, and through engine and prop replacement, etc., we have never failed to dispatch a single flight. While the Aerostar has the 350 HP motors and does quite well on SE, the Shrike is no slouch on SE with the 290 HP motors, and weighs just a little more. Both do about what the book claims as long as you get them properly configured, promptly. The Shrike is tolerably quiet even without the ANR headsets, and is as smooth running as many turboprops, with the engine/props balanced to the best numbers reasonably attainable.

Ted Smith designed both of them, the man was a genius, and there are very descriptive articles and loads of photographs on our experiences with both aircraft on the website as well. It is truly a privilege to keep these aircraft flying. I simply don't know what you could replace either one with that does what they do so consistently and beautifully. Hope this helps. Enjoy!

Gary

Very nice remarks Gary.

Can you elaborate on anything different (odd) about the Shrike? Example - I was just watching a YouTube vid on the start sequence on Commander 520. One of the first things you have to do is HAND pump the hydraulics to build pressure for brakes, flaps and landing gear. I call that " different". Sounds like this doesn't apply to the 500S or conversions?

What is the single engine rate of climb on the Colemill Shrike conversions with 300 HP Engines? This is a deal breaker in my fantasy land purchase!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 12:19

Gary, I can see the guards, now. I like your's better.

I found the report on the accident.

Quote:

The investigation revealed that there are unguarded fuel shutoff switches next to the boost pumps, and the circumstances of the accident are consistent with the these fuel shutoff switches being inadvertently placed in the off position, instead of the fuel boost pumps.

http://dms.ntsb.gov/aviation/AccidentRe ... 120000.pdf

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 12:42

As far as I could tell, looks like 425 ft/min with full fuel, sea level, 20 degrees higher than standard and Pilot plus 3 people

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 15:26

Nice planes but I really like their Stinson 108. go look at their website. It is worth the browse. Gary How do you find time to do BT??

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 15:54

I remember a Central Air freight pilot telling me every one of their Aero Commanders carried a spare starter and a maintenance manual. Not certain if that was an airplane issue, or a pilot issue.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 16:27

The Shrike is an awesome and classy ship...

Bob Odegaard who I flew with in the Hoover Tribute at Osh for 2 years was a world class aviator and he loved his Shrike. I flew it several times and while it wasn't real fast, it was real comfortable... Bob was never in a hurry when he was having fun, and flying the Shrike was fun....

We were in a descent one day doing about 180 indicated at 800 fpm and coming through 8000 ft and he pulled both mixtures and feathered both props. Nothing changed except it was a little quieter. Going through 4000 ft he unfeathered and started up the left one, put his feet on the floor, and centered the ball with the throttle, entered a downwind 10 mph below blue line, threw out the gear, flaps, and landed in the first 100 feet of the runway.

I asked him why he was below blueline and he said, if I don't slow it down, it will never land. Aspect ratio is a wonderful thing. Truly an amazing wing on that airplane.....

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 16:31

Username Protected wrote:

I remember a Central Air freight pilot telling me every one of their Aero Commanders carried a spare starter and a maintenance manual. Not certain if that was an airplane issue, or a pilot issue.

I think that was a Central Air Southwest issue.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Aug 2013, 16:33

Most freighters have a starter hidden away somewhere on board...

Even if it is the pilot.... (hand prop)