I rest my case.

One would really, really, really want to have an A* to put up with all those restrictions and extra costs.

Yeah - from what I have seen, for an apples to apples comparison with same limits of liability, pilot resume, hull value, etc, the Aerostar is no different than. P-Baron, C340, C414, Duke, etc.

I had 500TT with 150 multi, all in a 58P. Insurance required 10 hours dual and a sign off on type for the Aerostar. 4200$ per yr, 200k hull and 3M liability. I had no time in an Aerostar before the purchase.

I had 1,600 TT with 50 hrs. in a DA42. Initial requirements were ground school with approved instructor, 10 hrs. dual, (of which I had more at my request) sign off and 10 hrs. solo. $200k hull, 1m liability and under 4k premium first year declining after time with time. It's not a hard airplane to fly, just fast. You just have to know the systems and get used to the speed. I don't see how that is any different than any other aircraft out there.
Factory support by AAC (Aerostar Aircraft Corporation) is outstanding along with a very strong owner, community support.

Red Pill Time:

The answer to why?

There are two kinds of buyers (of all sorts things) folks who look at all the factors/specs and weigh them against their specific requirements and make a decision.
These folks are a minority, most buyers look at what the other guy is doing and they do the same.

There is apparent risk in making an independent decision on a major purchase, most buyers are going to look around and make a similar choice. Staying with the crowd is protection from making a really bad decision, and being the target for criticism, (the first penguin to jump off an iceberg gets eaten if there is an predator around).

Every Aerostar owner I've met is different, they have very limited interest in what the crowd is doing (which is why they considered owning an Aerostar in the first place).
Folks willing (or looking) to go out of the norm are a small portion of of the total market for airplanes, which is why it is a challenge selling an aircraft that falls outside the norm.

I suspect the Aerostar's worse than average safety record is a function of Aerostar owners' greater risk tolerance, it isn't the aircraft, it is the folks who choose to own the aircraft.

Transitioning from a simple S/E to a complex high performance twin is a big jump, Tim covered all the new skills to learn, in addition the a whole another set of airspeeds and procedures at speeds twice what they were accustomed to.

Insurance companies understand the higher risk exposure of insuring pilots with limited experience in these aircraft, they have requirements to help get pilots safely through those first 100 hours.

Aerostars, P-Barons or Dukes, and 421/414//340s are all big leap for a pilot moving up from a C-172 or PA-28, lots of pilots have safely made the jump, with training and discipline (the real key to safe operation).

This W/E I did a short trip that was a good demonstration of the flexibility and utility of an Aerostar.

Friday afternoon Departed KORF (IFR) w/1 pax and 60 gallons of gas up to 7K' at 1800'/ min, 193 KTAS @ 28 GPH, picked up a pax in KRIC, and ran over to KROA at 198 KTAS, Sat afternoon KROA- KORF @ 15K' (cabin at 1K') to stay above WX, (203KTAS @ 27 GPH), less than theee hours flight time to save about twelve hours drive time.
(For a trip like this commercial air would have been slower than driving.

Could have other planes have done the same trip?

In an unpressurized aircraft 15K and 1500+'/ min descents into Norfolk and Roanoke would have been an issue, in a pressurized aircraft, it wasn't a big deal.

High wing loading made for a smoother ride climbing and descending through the bumps, for three to four folks, there is no other aircraft that offers the same speed, economy, and operational flexibility as an Aerostar.

Three T&Gs - Norfolk, VA.



Picture taken from inside the "Ground Run-Up Enclosure" just off "F".

They are a nice ride. Have a good friend with one. He's never had 6 adults in it and I am quite sure the range would be shortened dramatically with 6. That being said, I have not had nor could in my B-55 either.

They are a very nice airplane. I would take one if anyone wishes to gift me one in their will.

With the gross weight upgrade to 6800 lbs, you could take six adults and 200 gallons, as long as two of the adults were models and two were vegetarians...

I've got more than a few hours in a 700 (and a couple in Forrest's bird) and I can't understand why these airplanes are considered dangerous by anyone. It's as docile as you could ask and it's a dream on one engine.

I've got no dog in this fight, I don't own one or anything, and I'm a pretty blunt kind of guy anyhow. Aerostars are the best piston aircraft period. Jim and his bunch in Spokane support the aircraft as if it were new- I never waited longer than FedEx could deliver on a part. Handles ice well, lands easy, climbs well. Not a bad manner in the thing.

Pretty Weather over NYC this AM.



For folks who prefer a video:

https://youtu.be/cbbjZEf3-LY

Nice photo Forrest, what a view!

Enjoyed watching some of your youtube videos as I learn more about aerostars.

You are welcome Brent.

Short soapbox speech:

This morning I saw an Aerostar that had been allowed to depreciate to the point where it's value was basically $0.00, (or less).

It is listed for sale for quite a bit more than $0.00, by an owner who can not afford to keep it.

Planes with this kind of history (and their owners) have been responsible for the majority of hull losses in the last few years.

To me, letting a plane go to ruin is like owning a horse and refusing to care for it; it is just a crappy way to operate.

What's worse is attempting to foist the resulting mess off on an unsuspecting (or uncaring) new owner.

I suspect the last two fatals (as well as some of the more recent losses) were in aircraft that were purchased for a song (and were worth even less, based on the cost of bringing the planes back into shape). The attitude that went along with purchasing a piece of junk, and just flying it with little, or no, attempt to restore it to airworthy condition, led to an inevitable bad outcome.

Please don't buy an Aerostar, unless you are willing to spend what it takes to maintain it in good condition, and don't buy a run-out junker unless you are willing to do what it takes to restore it. An admirable project (especially for an Aerostar)

And, if your circumstances change and you can't afford to keep an Aerostar, sell it quickly, it is false economy to hold on to an asset that is dropping in value because you can't afford to maintain it.

Bermuda!