29 Mar 2024, 03:55 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 19:21 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 02/10/12 Posts: 6819 Post Likes: +7927 Company: Minister of Pith Location: Florida
Aircraft: Piper PA28/140
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I need to stop reading this thread. The Aerostar is the only airplane that could cause me to defect.... The performance numbers (aka speed) are mind-blowing. Good thing it won't fit in either of my hangars! Are you sure? It fits in the same hangar as most other twins. Plus, you could always switch hangars.... Oh, in terms of speed, I beat multiple KA-90s from TN to NJ. The local shop where I was based in TN was a KA specialist, and I had business in NJ. So there were multiple times we took off together and flew to NJ. They would beat me on climb out, but I would stay with them in high 20s cruise, and beat them on descent or down low where the fuel burn would kill them to keep up. Tim
You need a door that goes at least 13.5' high, correct?
Also, because the wing is so far back from the nose you need a wide "tail" opening to accommodate the trailing edge of the wing.
A lot of places don't have availability of larger hangars, or the price is insane, or both.
AC designers never seem to take practicality into account (PA46 has to go in a "corporate" hangar...)
_________________ "No comment until the time limit is up."
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 21:52 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/14/15 Posts: 218 Post Likes: +175
Aircraft: Piper Cheyenne II
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I need to stop reading this thread. The Aerostar is the only airplane that could cause me to defect.... The performance numbers (aka speed) are mind-blowing. Good thing it won't fit in either of my hangars! Are you sure? It fits in the same hangar as most other twins. Plus, you could always switch hangars.... Oh, in terms of speed, I beat multiple KA-90s from TN to NJ. The local shop where I was based in TN was a KA specialist, and I had business in NJ. So there were multiple times we took off together and flew to NJ. They would beat me on climb out, but I would stay with them in high 20s cruise, and beat them on descent or down low where the fuel burn would kill them to keep up. Tim
A 700 hp Aerostar is unquestionably at or better than the block times of entry-level turboprops. Interestingly, because turbines are essentially normally aspirated engines (I say essentially because they do have compressor sections, which could be analogous to direct-drive surperchargers in pistons), they lose power as they climb. I get 2,200 fpm on initial climb in my Cheyenne II, but at 18,000 the Aerostar is actually holding better climb at a faster IAS. The 350 hp TIO-540 keeps all its power well into the 20's, so the speed just keeps on improving until you hit your turbo critical altitude. For pure speed I'll stay a little lower in the Cheyenne (around FL180-FL210) and in the Aerostar I'd go up to FL240-250 and see 245 TAS all the time.
In truth I usually flew the Aerostar around 55% power to yield about 220 KTAS because it was the best all-around combo of speed, fuel efficiency, noise level, etc. But man I did love the number of times ATC had me slow down for turbine traffic in front of me !!
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 01 Sep 2017, 22:07 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/06/10 Posts: 11885 Post Likes: +2848 Company: Looking Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: You need a door that goes at least 13.5' high, correct?
Also, because the wing is so far back from the nose you need a wide "tail" opening to accommodate the trailing edge of the wing.
A lot of places don't have availability of larger hangars, or the price is insane, or both.
AC designers never seem to take practicality into account (PA46 has to go in a "corporate" hangar...) Before I replaced the door in my hangar in TN, I had a bifold that only opened roughly twelve and half feet. I just lifted the nose about a foot in the air and slide the tail under. I only did this a dozen times before we got the door replaced and then I had roughly a fourteen foot clearance. The T-Hangar as BSF Airpark was a "standard" 40 foot width, so not sure what that means in terms of the tail box area. If memory serves, I had about one extra foot off each wing, and about a foot for the length also. So kinda tight. In KDMW, it was a in what is considered a "twin hangar", and that had a lot more room. Tim
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 02 Sep 2017, 04:34 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/05/11 Posts: 314 Post Likes: +226
Aircraft: 1969 Aerostar 600,
|
|
For all practical purposes you need 14' in height, especially if you're light. I never hangar with full fuel. It's not really recommended especially in an Aerostar. 13.5' would be minimum clearance and that would make me nervous. That is the tale of my tape.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 04 Sep 2017, 17:55 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 02/10/12 Posts: 6819 Post Likes: +7927 Company: Minister of Pith Location: Florida
Aircraft: Piper PA28/140
|
|
Found these pix on Controller (Kent Cook), this is what an Aerostar would look like in a "larger" T hangar): https://www.controller.com/listings/air ... ostar-601pNote: For info only, I have no connection whatsoever with the seller/agent.
_________________ "No comment until the time limit is up."
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 05 Sep 2017, 07:13 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/06/10 Posts: 11885 Post Likes: +2848 Company: Looking Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Found these pix on Controller (Kent Cook), this is what an Aerostar would look like in a "larger" T hangar): https://www.controller.com/listings/air ... ostar-601pNote: For info only, I have no connection whatsoever with the seller/agent. So Tom, you are looking at Aerostars. Any impending news.... Tim
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 05 Sep 2017, 09:57 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 02/10/12 Posts: 6819 Post Likes: +7927 Company: Minister of Pith Location: Florida
Aircraft: Piper PA28/140
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Found these pix on Controller (Kent Cook), this is what an Aerostar would look like in a "larger" T hangar): https://www.controller.com/listings/air ... ostar-601pNote: For info only, I have no connection whatsoever with the seller/agent. So Tom, you are looking at Aerostars. Any impending news.... Tim
No, they are great but between my hangar and runway (3200' @ 500MSL) limitations they are probably not a contender.
_________________ "No comment until the time limit is up."
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 05 Sep 2017, 09:59 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 02/10/12 Posts: 6819 Post Likes: +7927 Company: Minister of Pith Location: Florida
Aircraft: Piper PA28/140
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I would point out that the structural design of some hangars allows for a cut out in the front wall for the taller tail. Even if there is a heavy structural member holding the front of the hangar and door in place, it can be done.
It just depends of the design of the supporting truss/beam and wall above and may be a relatively inexpensive option.
I've seen pics of such a modification many times; just don't know where to find one right now.
Jgreen Sure, all I'd have to do is get the county (who owns the hangars) to go along with that!
_________________ "No comment until the time limit is up."
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 05 Sep 2017, 17:23 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/06/10 Posts: 11885 Post Likes: +2848 Company: Looking Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
|
|
Username Protected wrote: No, they are great but between my hangar and runway (3200' @ 500MSL) limitations they are probably not a contender. 3,200 may not be an issue. It is going to depend on what is on each end. Get some the landing and take off performance tables. You will be rather surprised. Note: To do this, you need to practice and work up to it. I flew in/out a 3,500ft runway many times and close to max weight (with the gross weight increase). With practice, a 3200 would be doable; but you need to be on your game. Tim
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 06 Sep 2017, 07:55 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/05/11 Posts: 314 Post Likes: +226
Aircraft: 1969 Aerostar 600,
|
|
Get yourself a 600A and you can get in and out of a 2,000' runway. A 600A is on the order of 500 lbs. lighter (+-) than a 700. All of that turbo and pressurization performance comes at a cost. In addition, wing extensions and winglets increase the short field performance of a 600. Wing extensions alone increase gross weight by 200 lbs., something like 185 lbs. net. You can't get wing extensions on a P model.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 06 Sep 2017, 08:24 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 11/25/11 Posts: 9168 Post Likes: +17159 Location: KGNF, Grenada, MS
Aircraft: Baron, 180,195,J-3
|
|
Username Protected wrote: I would point out that the structural design of some hangars allows for a cut out in the front wall for the taller tail. Even if there is a heavy structural member holding the front of the hangar and door in place, it can be done.
It just depends of the design of the supporting truss/beam and wall above and may be a relatively inexpensive option.
I've seen pics of such a modification many times; just don't know where to find one right now.
Jgreen Sure, all I'd have to do is get the county (who owns the hangars) to go along with that!
Tom,
The modifications could be quite minor, and if presented with detailed drawings, should not be an issue to the owner. I "once" considered a King Air and my hangar door would not be tall enough. Mine would not be an easy mod, but certainly doable, maybe ten to fifteen thousand at today's prices. I wouldn't think the idea should be dismissed until at least asking "may I" and "how much".
Jgreen
_________________ Waste no time with fools. They have nothing to lose.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 06 Sep 2017, 08:45 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 01/14/12 Posts: 2070 Post Likes: +1492 Location: Hampton, VA
Aircraft: AEST
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Get yourself a 600A and you can get in and out of a 2,000' runway. A 600A is on the order of 500 lbs. lighter (+-) than a 700. All of that turbo and pressurization performance comes at a cost. In addition, wing extensions and winglets increase the short field performance of a 600. Wing extensions alone increase gross weight by 200 lbs., something like 185 lbs. net. You can't get wing extensions on a P model. Clarification: Some early (1974?) 601Ps had the short wings, you'd need to check with Jim @ AAC to determine whether a short wing 601P could be modified to the long wing configuration. Later P models all had the long wings. The 601B (turbo normalized / unpressurized) had the long wings (like the P models) The wing extension modifies the short wing planes to the longer wing design and makes adding the winglets possible. Bottom line: You can't get wing extensions on P model Aerostars because they (mostly) already have long wings. A long wing, 600 with winglets would be an excellent option for someone looking to operate out of a short(er) field.
_________________ Forrest
'---x-O-x---'
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 06 Sep 2017, 16:54 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/08/14 Posts: 102 Post Likes: +118 Company: Innovation Two
Aircraft: Piper PA 60
|
|
RE: Door height
Fin height is 12 ft 1 inch - as long as the struts are not over-inflated. (Normal inflation is 1 to 3 inches of strut showing.)
You can buy a great tug with a nose-lifter (Aero-Tow is one example) and 4-6 inches up front lowers the fin height considerably. The runway may be a tad short unless you limit weight. In my experience 3,500 gives you a balanced accelerate/stop field. The winglets would be a big help there on a 600/601 - but a 700 would likely not need them.
Bob
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: Aerostars Posted: 06 Sep 2017, 21:12 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/02/15 Posts: 377 Post Likes: +164 Location: KBLM KAPF
Aircraft: Aerostar600A
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Get yourself a 600A and you can get in and out of a 2,000' runway. A 600A is on the order of 500 lbs. lighter (+-) than a 700. All of that turbo and pressurization performance comes at a cost. In addition, wing extensions and winglets increase the short field performance of a 600. Wing extensions alone increase gross weight by 200 lbs., something like 185 lbs. net. You can't get wing extensions on a P model. The long wing plus winglets help in getting out of a short field but in getting in.
|
|
Top |
|
|
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
|
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
|
|
|
|