banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 20:09 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 2880 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 ... 192  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 19 Jul 2018, 10:49 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 01/06/09
Posts: 444
Post Likes: +146
Aircraft: A185F
As with all planes they are faster at higher altitudes (turbocharged). When I had a 602P/700 we got 265kts all the time at FL250. The previous point about minimizing the turbulence is also correct, the Aerostar has a great ride in rough air.

Andy


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 21 Jul 2018, 08:36 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/08/14
Posts: 102
Post Likes: +118
Company: Innovation Two
Aircraft: Piper PA 60
You can get a WORD or PDF version of the Aerostar POH on line - remembering that they are specific for the aircraft they were attached to when new. If you can't find one try the Aerostar-Forum.

Also fun is to use one of the tracker programs like FlightAware to look at real world Aerostar flights. You get everything but the fuel burned. My 601P experience - 16/side at 75% cruise. Block plan at 220k - low 20's fL

Bob Keeping


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 22 Jul 2018, 11:34 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 07/04/11
Posts: 1712
Post Likes: +242
Company: W. John Gadd, Esq.
Location: Florida
Aircraft: C55 Baron
Username Protected wrote:
As with all planes they are faster at higher altitudes (turbocharged). When I had a 602P/700 we got 265kts all the time at FL250. The previous point about minimizing the turbulence is also correct, the Aerostar has a great ride in rough air.

Andy



That's stunning speeds.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 22 Jul 2018, 20:19 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 08/03/10
Posts: 1562
Post Likes: +1781
Company: D&M Leasing Houston
Location: Katy, TX (KTME)
Aircraft: CitationV/C180
Username Protected wrote:
As with all planes they are faster at higher altitudes (turbocharged). When I had a 602P/700 we got 265kts all the time at FL250. The previous point about minimizing the turbulence is also correct, the Aerostar has a great ride in rough air.

Andy



That's stunning speeds.


It’s MU2 F model speed.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 22 Jul 2018, 20:56 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 6322
Post Likes: +5521
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
Username Protected wrote:

It’s MU2 F model speed.


Problem is they burn 50-55gal/hr of Avgas doing those speeds, so the per-mile-cost is probably higher than a MU-2 or Commander... :stir:

_________________
Problem is the intelligent people are full of doubt, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 23 Jul 2018, 21:03 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 07/04/11
Posts: 1712
Post Likes: +242
Company: W. John Gadd, Esq.
Location: Florida
Aircraft: C55 Baron
Username Protected wrote:

It’s MU2 F model speed.


Problem is they burn 50-55gal/hr of Avgas doing those speeds, so the per-mile-cost is probably higher than a MU-2 or Commander... :stir:



Damn. Way higher than I'd have ever thought. Of course, way cheaper to maintain I suppose.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 23 Jul 2018, 21:08 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 07/04/11
Posts: 1712
Post Likes: +242
Company: W. John Gadd, Esq.
Location: Florida
Aircraft: C55 Baron
Username Protected wrote:
Yes, the key to owning an Aerostar is recognizing first, you are buying an aircraft that is 40 to (in my case) 50 years old. I don't care how good it looks or how little time are on the engines and or airframe, things are going to have to be re-built or replaced. What I am finding out, replacement is the better choice. Second, you have to have a shop that knows Aerostar's maintain the aircraft. If you don't they may cause more problems than you already have. There are plenty Aerostar shops around, you just have to know where to go. The Aerostar community http://www.aerostar-owners.com/ is very active and knowledgable.

The good thing is AAC (Aerostar Aircraft Corporation) http://www.aerostaraircraft.com/ owns the type certificate for the aircraft. Support for the Aerostar could not be better. Yes, I know John well and so does my wallet. I've gone through one complete refurbishment and am in the process of going through another. They are magnificent aircraft in every respect and will reward you in every respect. You just have to get to know them and understand them. Once you do, look out.

By the way Marty, you will not be happy until you completely repaint your Aerostar.



Wow. Love the leopard print.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 23 Jul 2018, 21:31 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 6322
Post Likes: +5521
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
Username Protected wrote:

Damn. Way higher than I'd have ever thought. Of course, way cheaper to maintain I suppose.


Yeah, they're cheaper. I wouldn't say way cheaper, but certainly cheaper. I don't have reliable numbers on mine, but the Aerostar was roughly about $450/hr. My friend Stan Perkins runs his Turbo Commander 681 for $550/hr (but he's got her dialed in after 15 years of ownership and has a whole hangar full of spares...). I would say it's hard to get below $650/hr for a turbine owner, and that's if everything runs smooth most of the time.. ;)

_________________
Problem is the intelligent people are full of doubt, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 23 Jul 2018, 23:27 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 05/26/13
Posts: 438
Post Likes: +336
Aircraft: Aerostar, SR22,RV8,
Username Protected wrote:

It’s MU2 F model speed.


Problem is they burn 50-55gal/hr of Avgas doing those speeds, so the per-mile-cost is probably higher than a MU-2 or Commander... :stir:


Ahh yes, for the 700hp airplanes. The 601P will do 225-235 in the low 20s on about 34 GPH ROP depending on temps, altitude, and weight.

If you have a good engine monitor, 205-210 KTAS at closer to 26 GPH.

The turbonormalized/Intercooled high-compression 540s are very robust and efficient.

Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 24 Jul 2018, 00:29 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/14/15
Posts: 218
Post Likes: +175
Aircraft: Piper Cheyenne II
You really won't see 265 knots TRUE airspeed even at FL250 unless you are really light and using 75% power, which is functionally impossible without being range limited due to the fuel burn. Most use 65% as their "high speed cruise" setting, and you can bank on 240 knots true in the lower 20's. I have seen as high as 250 knots true as we were just about to tip over for descent (i.e. light weight with a lot of the fuel burned off). Real world 235 to 245 at that power setting. You'll burn 45-47 gph.

Some make the point that the 700 isn't that much faster than a 601P with the high-compression engines. They are correct, but the 700 earns its keep with noticeably stronger climb (especially OEI).


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 24 Jul 2018, 19:45 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/09/09
Posts: 5550
Post Likes: +2503
Location: Owosso, MI (KRNP)
Aircraft: 1969 Bonanza V35A
I don't know, 246 knots seems pretty easy at 17,000' in my SuperStar 700. I have no doubt that it'll chug along at the advertised 262 KTAS at FL250....
Jason
Attachment:
IMG_20160926_144700.jpg


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 24 Jul 2018, 20:49 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 11885
Post Likes: +2848
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
Username Protected wrote:
You really won't see 265 knots TRUE airspeed even at FL250 unless you are really light and using 75% power, which is functionally impossible without being range limited due to the fuel burn. Most use 65% as their "high speed cruise" setting, and you can bank on 240 knots true in the lower 20's. I have seen as high as 250 knots true as we were just about to tip over for descent (i.e. light weight with a lot of the fuel burned off). Real world 235 to 245 at that power setting. You'll burn 45-47 gph.

Some make the point that the 700 isn't that much faster than a 601P with the high-compression engines. They are correct, but the 700 earns its keep with noticeably stronger climb (especially OEI).


From memory, depending on weight, I usually started around 260 when at MTOW (6850), and ended at 265+ by the end of the trip as I burned off fuel 25-28K. I normally ran 65% ROP for fast cruise.

Tim


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 25 Jul 2018, 10:35 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/14/15
Posts: 218
Post Likes: +175
Aircraft: Piper Cheyenne II
I'm sorry - I don't buy it. I am as big an Aerostar cheerleader I know,and I submit that the Aerostar is about 20 knots faster than any other pressurized piston twin on the same fuel flow. But you guys must have the super duper wham-o turbo option that boosts the power beyond the usual 700. to get those speeds at 65% power.

Jason - post a pic of the rest of the panel - 190 knots indicated is not a number I have ever seen in a 700 at 17,000. What power were you running? Were you level and stabilized?

Tim - I observed about a 1 knot per 150 lb weight variance - taking off at my MTOW of 6315, I would start out about 235 ture at top of climb (FL230 for example) and shortly settle in around 240. I just don't buy you seeing 260 true to start at 6850 TOW. Even Aerostar's own performance tables (which I found very accurate in different Aerostars I have flown) don't come close to those numbers at 65%.

No disrepect at all intended, I just think accuracy is helpful to newbie lurkers doing their Aerostar homework.

:cheers:


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 25 Jul 2018, 11:16 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 6322
Post Likes: +5521
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
I have to say I never saw the speeds I heard about all the time on my 601P either. Even with newly overhauled engines, new turbos and wastegates, I couldn't really get much more than 220-230kts, ba**s to the wall. 200kts seemed to be the cruising speed slightly pulled back at around 25-30gal/hr.

_________________
Problem is the intelligent people are full of doubt, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 25 Jul 2018, 12:00 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/15/09
Posts: 1859
Post Likes: +1345
Location: Red Deer, Alberta (CRE5/CYQF)
Aircraft: M20E/Bell47
Boots vs. no boots?

When asking other 601P drivers about their fuel flow/speed the ones without boots seemed to be 7-15 knots faster on the same fuel flow.

Glenn


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 2880 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 ... 192  Next




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us

BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner, Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.

BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates. Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.

Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024

.pure-medical-85x150.png.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.lucysaviation-85x50.png.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.concorde.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.aeroled-85x50-2022-12-06.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.Latitude.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.daytona.jpg.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.AAI.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.aircraftferry-85x50.jpg.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.dbm.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.SCA.jpg.
.one-mile-up-85x100.png.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.Marsh.jpg.