BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 14 Mar 2022, 14:27

The 58TC poh claims 218 KTAS at 14.3 gph/side at 25K.

A C55 baron POH claims 195 KTAS at 10K, 13.6 gph/side. (my C55 was pretty close to book speed).

An Aerostar is faster than a baron but not by a huge factor. Its a fast efficient airplane, but not magic.

Username Protected wrote:

What newbies don't understand is that an aerostar can do things that no other piston twin in the history of the world can do (credits to my friend Steve L. Of beechtalk For pointing that out to me.).
Its been 50 years SINCE her type certificate, but what plane can do either 190 knots at 28gph or 280 knots at 50gph (jack brush world record holder)? See a big tailwind? Climb easily up to fl250 and enjoy 345 knots groundspeed in pressurized, heated comfort...ive done it many times.......all for less than, in my case, the cost of a new chevy suburban. I'm flying both a 601p and a 700p. I challenge any other piston twin to a race for pink slips...thats how much better the aerostar is than any other piston twin. California to Dallas non stop? I do it all the time. Its a simple, bullet proof airframe over engineered to be a jet transport coupled with the legendary lycoming 540...whats there not to love? You can trust your life to her engineering, strength and build. She's a complete %#$@# cat oei, been there done that, lived to tell about it. My friend just dropped his off for a factory refresh at the factory in Idaho, and I noticed, it wasn't very costly. I think the factory labor rate is $75/hast I checked. Try getting a plumber to unclog your toilet for less then that, you wont.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 14 Mar 2022, 20:21

Barons and A*'s are both great airplanes. Like almost everything, nothing comes without a "cost" somewhere else. When I bought a 601P in 2013, I chose it over the Baron because of the Lycomings. A friend of mine had owned a 58P and those engine were not kind to him. In defense of the 58P he is anal about everything and probably doubled every issue with overkill.

Horsepower to horsepower, the A* will be a bit faster, but you give up the fabulous Beech airfoil. I loved the 601P and could I go back, I would have hung two new engines on it and kept it. They were mid time, but with experience, I had doubts that showed themselves to be well founded.

I love my C55 and it pretty well removes the issue of time from lift off speed to blue line. I will take it into fields where the 601P was a no go.

But then, i have zero brand loyalty. I loved every airplane I ever owned. Yes, I'm an airline whore. I love them all.

"mine is better than yours" seems pretty adolescent to me. All airplanes are trade offs.

Fly and enjoy, them all.

Jg

Username Protected · **Posted:** 14 Mar 2022, 22:24

I love Aerostars, but $60K for a “descent one” and expected cruise speed of 280kts? Please, let’s keep it real! They ARE great planes and do many things well. My Aerostar was a little faster than our -21 C90A’s but climbed slower, did less well in ice, carried far less and was substantially less reliable mechanically. Our -135 KA is quite a bit faster than my Aerostar was. Of course all of the KA’s burn much more fuel than the Aerostar for the distance traveled and cost a boatload more to do routine maintenance. It all depends on your mission and “down time tolerance”. No plane is “magic” in terms of checking all the boxes better than anything else, but in terms of getting you off the ground and enjoying the beauty of flight, all planes are magic.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 15 Mar 2022, 03:05

Username Protected wrote:

I love Aerostars, but $60K for a “descent one” and expected cruise speed of 280kts? Please, let’s keep it real! They ARE great planes and do many things well. My Aerostar was a little faster than our -21 C90A’s but climbed slower, did less well in ice, carried far less and was substantially less reliable mechanically. Our -135 KA is quite a bit faster than my Aerostar was. Of course all of the KA’s burn much more fuel than the Aerostar for the distance traveled and cost a boatload more to do routine maintenance. It all depends on your mission and “down time tolerance”. No plane is “magic” in terms of checking all the boxes better than anything else, but in terms of getting you off the ground and enjoying the beauty of flight, all planes are magic.

You may get a descent one for 60k but I’d rather pay more for a climb one..

Username Protected · **Posted:** 15 Mar 2022, 09:18

Username Protected wrote:

I love Aerostars, but $60K for a “descent one” and expected cruise speed of 280kts? Please, let’s keep it real! They ARE great planes and do many things well. My Aerostar was a little faster than our -21 C90A’s but climbed slower, did less well in ice, carried far less and was substantially less reliable mechanically. Our -135 KA is quite a bit faster than my Aerostar was. Of course all of the KA’s burn much more fuel than the Aerostar for the distance traveled and cost a boatload more to do routine maintenance. It all depends on your mission and “down time tolerance”. No plane is “magic” in terms of checking all the boxes better than anything else, but in terms of getting you off the ground and enjoying the beauty of flight, all planes are magic.

You may get a descent one for 60k but I’d rather pay more for a climb one..

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Mar 2022, 12:06

The OP wasn't exaggerating (too much). I've seen plenty of 600s (and a few P models) on the market in years past asking less than six figures.

I'd want the OP's A&P before I touched one at a price like that, though.

California to Dallas? Hope you meant northern California. How about Houston KHOU to NYC KLDJ? Been there, done that. In a 600.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Mar 2022, 13:09

I've had my finger on the pulse of the A* market for a while now. Pretty much all of the sub $100K ones have dried up. The ones that are left, you don't want.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Mar 2022, 13:15

Funny how times change - I got no bites whatsoever on my 601P with two freshly overhauled engines at $125K and squawk free in 2014/2015. Took a year to sell.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 17 Mar 2022, 14:48

Username Protected wrote:

Funny how times change - I got no bites whatsoever on my 601P with two freshly overhauled engines at $125K and squawk free in 2014/2015. Took a year to sell.

I feel your pain. I remember thinking Tesla stock was wildly overpriced at $100/share.

But well sorted Aerostars are selling quickly right now.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Mar 2022, 21:26

Thoughts on this Aerostar? Just how rare is a 601B with a Machen 700 Superstar upgrade?

https://www.controller.com/listing/for-sale/204197317/1980-piper-aerostar-piston-twin-aircraft

https://www.ianbaillieaircraft.com/index.php/twins

Username Protected · **Posted:** 29 Mar 2022, 22:06

Username Protected wrote:

Thoughts on this Aerostar? Just how rare is a 601B with a Machen 700 Superstar upgrade?

https://www.controller.com/listing/for-sale/204197317/1980-piper-aerostar-piston-twin-aircraft

https://www.ianbaillieaircraft.com/index.php/twins

First thought is that it is on the other side of the planet. Next thought is that if you’re going to pump and squeeze air, why not make human respiration a part of the equation? As a corollary: do you really want to suck a hose long enough to make this thing shine? I’m sure it’s a beast up high.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Mar 2022, 15:49

Username Protected wrote:

Just how rare is a 601B with a Machen 700 Superstar upgrade

It would be a rare bird indeed if it is a 601B with the 700 conversion. The 601A/B is the turbocharged, non-pressurized Aerostar. They are rare to begin with. There were only 117 A and 44 B models built according to Wikipedia.

I've never heard of a 601 being upgraded to 700 since there's no cabin pressurization.

If you look closely at the photos, there does not appear to be a door seal. Which means it's not pressurized. You could verify by asking for a photo of the center pedestal. If it doesn't have the extended pedestal between the pilot / co-pilot seat with pressurization controls below the autopilot controls then for sure it's a 601. Also, the serial number would tell you which model.

A non-pressurized 700 is likely an only one of its kind.

On the other hand, in the mid- to hi-100s that's not a such a bad asking price even for a plain 601 with deice and low time engines. But the avionics are dated and there's the cost of repatriating it. I can't find any 601s listed for sale for comparison. There is one 600 (non-turbocharged) with low time engines / no de-ice asking a quarter million.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 30 Mar 2022, 17:57

I know of at least one 601B that has IO-540U2As (350hp engines used in the factory 700P) engines installed... Could be others.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 31 Mar 2022, 08:01

If it is truly a 700 conversion the useful load would be literally off the charts incredible.
At one point I actually thought of putting U2A's and turbo's on my 600. That would be crazy. I decided against it.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 31 Mar 2022, 09:03

Username Protected wrote:

If it is truly a 700 conversion the useful load would be literally off the charts incredible.
At one point I actually thought of putting U2A's and turbo's on my 600. That would be crazy. I decided against it.

Couple of data points. It's a 601B, non-pressurized. Tail number VH-LEO, Serial number 61-0788-8062150

It's been advertised a few times over the years and in the ads it claims to be a 700..."Lycoming IO-540-S1A5 Engines Machen Upgrade to 350HP 99.4Hrs SMOH (Done 2009)"

It does also carry a Machen Superstar data tag on the tail for a 700 and it's got the short props.

Different pics in the same ad with different MP gauges..facing the panel the manifold pressure gauge is 10"-35" which is the correct gauge for 290hp naturally aspirated and 290hp turbo normalized.

In the panel picture off center it's 10"-50" with a redline at 42"...that's the correct MP gauge for a 700.

Anyway, given the STC's it's likely a 601B Superstar 700...so yes; it would be fast and a load hauler.