banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 06:31 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 2880 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147 ... 192  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 27 Apr 2021, 18:58 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 10/18/11
Posts: 1026
Post Likes: +584
Aircraft: Seabee Aerostar 700
It can happen for other reasons also.

I had my turbocharged 350 hp engine rich out on takeoff. luckily with 350 hp a side it stayed level with one windmilling until I got my head back together. As I started the drill to "verify" and as I relatively slowly pulled the throttle back, the engine started developing power.

the point is when an engine quits, doing things slowly allows time to possibly get the dead engine running depending on what is wrong.

It was a blown out intake manifold gasket.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2021, 14:26 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/11/17
Posts: 15
Post Likes: +3
Aircraft: PA30 Twin Comanche
Step Up Aircraft – PA30 to 600, Seneca III... something else
?
Hello Aerostar owners. I have read through this thread and am seeking a little advice. I will try to be detailed but brief.

A little about me. I a fly a GVII-500 and a PA46-600TP (M600) professionally. The later out of the same 3700 foot airport where my personal operations are based (T67). Big girl out of the nearby big airport.

I have been given a order by my Domestic Dictator to “get a bigger plane”. Who am I to disagree? I currently own and maintain a 67’ PA30 Twin Comanche, which has been in the family for 13 years. In 2017 I had been actively looking for an inflated Aerostar, even paid a visit to AAC in ID and spent an afternoon with Jim Christy showing us around the place and giving us some tips on our search…but during that summer, we purchased a Lake House in MO on a private runway. That runway (Asphalt 3000x60 @ 820MSL), made me rethink my choice and we stuck with the Twinkie My home airport T67, may also be tight at 3700’ (no problem for the PA30 or M600).

Over the last 4 years, my primary mission has been/is 650nm round trip from Fort Worth to the Lake and back with a load of 3 people, 1 Joey Dog and supplies (total of about 600 lbs) plus enough fuel for there and back… right at my 1140 lb Useful load. While that still is my primary mission, we would like to be able to haul another 2 passengers (Parents in their Late 70s or Brother and Wife) so for easy math lets say 1000 lbs or people and stuff.

My initial search for an aircraft has/had me considering a Seneca III. Most have a useful load of around 1500lbs. For the 20% of mission that require the full 1000 lbs of people and stuff, we could always leave fuel behind and depart with about 85 gallons… fuel stops on both ends are not a problem. Sometime over the last few weeks I came to the realization that maybe I should consider an uninflatable Aerostar. I had already left the idea of pressurization behind apparently.

I have my eye and a few inquiries out on a couple 600/600A’s with under 3000TT. These also have round 1500 lbs useful load. Burn more gas but go faster… a wash. Initial calculations if fuel cost seem about even between the Turbo’d Seneca and NA Aerostar.
Maintenance wise, it seems the NA would be easier and more affordable (read cheaper and less frequent and more reliable) to work on… essentially a bigger version of the PA30. That said I would still love to be able to do FIKI and Pressurization. (My wife likes the Mohave… fuel burn… OUCH)

So the big question. Can the 600/600A safely be operated into and out of 3000 feet on a hot/humid MO summer day? It’s a hard 3000 feet with an NTSB report on either end if it exceeded. We don’t have fuel on the field so I would need to haul enough to get at least 30 mins with reserves for the 20% mission above, or carry enough for the full RT with the 80% mission (600 lbs going 650 nm)

Full disclosure, so far this has been a paperwork exercise. I have not flow either of these models and don’t know anyone that owns either. I would be more than happy to meet anyone within 200NM or so of DFW and buy fuel for a demo in either.

Please set me straight. Can a 600/600A do this mission safely and comfortably? Can I do it in any of the “P” models? Should I stick to the hunt for Seneca III?
--mick
(mick at gulfcrews dot com)


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2021, 17:31 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 6322
Post Likes: +5519
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
I think 3000ft is fine, any shorter would scare me (although I heard of someone who was based on a 1900ft airport). I used to take mine into KAJO (3200ft) all the time here in SoCal and it was fine.

But just out of interest, have you thought about a Twin Commander 500B? Slower, but roomier and something you could load up completely and be very comfortable with on a 3000ft strip.

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


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2021, 17:55 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 10/18/11
Posts: 1026
Post Likes: +584
Aircraft: Seabee Aerostar 700
I owned a sennica III and it is a real truck. It was very roomy. I could haul more than fit in my Suburban I now own an Aerostar 602P 700 (350 Hp engines) and if flown carefully it is OK on a 3000 ft strip but the end of the runway comes up really fast as it rotates at 90 knots. Your maintenance on the turboed Aerostars is 2x at least what a Sennica III would be.

If you really want to know everything about aerostars etc. join the Aerostar Owners Association. it will be the best $200 you spend to make sure you really understand what an Aerostar can do and how it will fit your mission.

Warning do not go and fly an Aerostar unless you are ready to buy. Spectacularly great aircraft to fly.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2021, 19:11 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 11884
Post Likes: +2848
Company: Looking
Location: Outside Boston, or some hotel somewhere
Aircraft: None
A while back I knew a former pilot of a charter company that flew Aerostars out of S37. A 2700ft runway.
For the paper analysis, I suggest pulling the manuals. In my experience, they are accurate. Then determine how much margin you want; but be careful to not mix and match numbers. I have seen a fair number of pilots confuse distance over 50ft versus rollout vs runway length. With your 300ft overruns each direction you have some built in margins.

Tim


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2021, 20:26 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 11/22/08
Posts: 2913
Post Likes: +921
Company: USAF Propulsion Laboratory
Location: Dayton, OH
Aircraft: PA24, AEST 680, 421
I don’t have a 600 performance chart, but the 601P will get in and out of less than 3000 ft. The accelerate/stop distance will be longer than 3000 ft, closer to 4000 ft depending on wt, temp, elevation. Personally I prefer greater than 4000 ft, but have gone into a small as 3200 ft. The end comes up quickly!


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2021, 22:52 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/19/09
Posts: 329
Post Likes: +269
Company: Premier Bone and Joint
Location: Wyoming
Aircraft: BE90,HUSK,MU-2
The Aerostar does a lot of things very well, but one of them isn't really short field operations. If you had a displaced threshold or something, that would be nicer. The Aerostars can definitely do it. We had a member based in Canada that operated his Aerostar out of an even shorter field quite regularly and just left some fuel behind so it is doable, but with little margin for error.
As to going fast/far/carrying a ton, the Aerostar will smoke the Seneca.
You had written that your wife likes the Mohave? Are you talking Navaho? That would certainly carry a load, not sure about the short field ops but likely pretty good.
As Bill wrote, a pressurized Aerostar will definitely cost more to maintain than the Seneca.
But if you want to carry 2100# of stuff, go 230-245 kts and have the option to tanker 210g of fuel, A 700 with GW increase will do the deed.
That much said, if I were picking a plane for a 3000 foot field, I'd probably look elsewhere. In the summer in my Superstar, my ground roll was more than 3000 feet, but I'm up pretty high.

_________________
Thomas


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2021, 23:05 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 01/23/18
Posts: 611
Post Likes: +887
Aircraft: Aerostar
3,000’
Aerostar?

No

Get an AeroCommander.

Or a 310

Please

:bud:


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2021, 23:10 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/11/17
Posts: 15
Post Likes: +3
Aircraft: PA30 Twin Comanche
Username Protected wrote:
.
You had written that your wife likes the Mohave? Are you talking Navaho? .

Thomas, yes... Navaho. Even if it could safely do the 3000 feet... The fuel burn would make me cry.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2021, 23:12 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/11/17
Posts: 15
Post Likes: +3
Aircraft: PA30 Twin Comanche
Username Protected wrote:
3,000’
Aerostar?
No
Get an AeroCommander.
Or a 310
Please
:bud:

Forrest, not trying to be a statistic, or run up the collective insurance premiums. I appreciate your input. Airplanes can change. The 3000 feet is fixed.
--mick


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2021, 23:18 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/11/17
Posts: 15
Post Likes: +3
Aircraft: PA30 Twin Comanche
Username Protected wrote:
. In the summer in my Superstar, my ground roll was more than 3000 feet, but I'm up pretty high.

Do they run true to book numbers? I am hoping someone here is willing to share some performance charts for the 600A so that I can make a decision to go truck (Seneca) or Ferrari (Aerostar)
--mick


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 28 Apr 2021, 23:24 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 03/11/17
Posts: 15
Post Likes: +3
Aircraft: PA30 Twin Comanche
Username Protected wrote:
I think 3000ft is fine, any shorter would scare me (although I heard of someone who was based on a 1900ft airport). I used to take mine into KAJO (3200ft) all the time here in SoCal and it was fine.

But just out of interest, have you thought about a Twin Commander 500B? Slower, but roomier and something you could load up completely and be very comfortable with on a 3000ft strip.


Adam, nice to see you are still contributing here. You may not remember but we had a discussion over a lunch in Hawthorne back in 2016. I cam in on a G550. Aerostar idea has been festering since.

Tell me more about the Aero Commander. I thought they had bad corrosion issues and a spar AD that made them worthless... I'll admit, I know nothing about them, but I did get to see Bob Hoover fly his in 1988. What should I look for?
--mick


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 29 Apr 2021, 00:08 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/09/11
Posts: 1726
Post Likes: +2048
Company: Naples Jet Center
Location: KAPF KPIA
Aircraft: EMB500 AC95 AEST
Username Protected wrote:
.
You had written that your wife likes the Mohave? Are you talking Navaho? .

Thomas, yes... Navaho. Even if it could safely do the 3000 feet... The fuel burn would make me cry.


Mickey - if your primary concern is fuel burn when it comes to 40-60 year old complex and luxurious piston twin operations, you‘re doing it wrong. It’s a rounding error. I love a Shrike and an Aerostar (own both), and a Navajo would be cool too. For that matter a B58 or even a 414, 5 or 15 gallons an hour is not even on the radar relative to what these things cost to properly maintain to the level a Gulfstream pilot should demand. :bud:

That said, operating a nice Seneca is not comparable to a pressurized, quadruple turbocharged airplane. If I had to run loaded out of 3,000’, I’d have an Aztec.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 29 Apr 2021, 00:25 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 01/06/08
Posts: 4665
Post Likes: +2678
Aircraft: B55 P2
I think people vary a lot on their short runway tolerance. For me there is a big difference between a runway I can land on 99% of the time and 99.99% of the time. May not be true for others.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 29 Apr 2021, 00:47 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/09/11
Posts: 1726
Post Likes: +2048
Company: Naples Jet Center
Location: KAPF KPIA
Aircraft: EMB500 AC95 AEST
Username Protected wrote:
I think people vary a lot on their short runway tolerance. For me there is a big difference between a runway I can land on 99% of the time and 99.99% of the time. May not be true for others.


Landing is never the problem.


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 2880 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 141, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147 ... 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

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