banner
banner

13 Aug 2020, 10:37 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


MRM (Honeywell)



Reply to topic  [ 1932 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 16 Jun 2020, 00:11 
Offline


 WWW  Profile

Joined: 07/19/16
Posts: 44
Post Likes: +53
Company: m29
Location: Arroyo Grande, California
Aircraft: 64 m20e, A* 700
Username Protected wrote:
That and to misquote mike c, 280 knots will change your life...

In other words, if I don't see 340 knots gs, the fight was, ah, ok,


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 16 Jun 2020, 00:27 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 08/09/11
Posts: 952
Post Likes: +758
Company: Naples Jet Center
Location: KAPF KPIA
Aircraft: EMB500 AC95 AEST
Username Protected wrote:
I know POH cruise speeds are not always to be trusted.

For the 601P, 20,000', 19.9 GPH/side gives 230ktas, 14.9gph -> 210ktas
for a 58P 20,000', 19.2 GPH/side gives 232 ktas, 14.6gph -> 210ktas

No making any claims about who is lying more, or which is better in other ways.

I was surprised to see that the book numbers were almost identical


I don’t have any experience in a 58P in decades so wouldn’t know. But it’s interesting and surprising. I’m guessing the winglets and intercoolers on the Aerostar really help it up high.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 16 Jun 2020, 00:27 
Offline


 WWW  Profile

Joined: 07/19/16
Posts: 44
Post Likes: +53
Company: m29
Location: Arroyo Grande, California
Aircraft: 64 m20e, A* 700
Username Protected wrote:
That and to misquote mike c, 280 knots will change your life...

In other words, if I don't see 340 knots gs, the fight was, ah, ok,

for the pics or it didnt happen crowd, i have tons of these

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: 16 Jun 2020, 00:32 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 08/09/11
Posts: 952
Post Likes: +758
Company: Naples Jet Center
Location: KAPF KPIA
Aircraft: EMB500 AC95 AEST
Username Protected wrote:
Furthermore, you might be wondering, why does a guy own two Aerostars, both a straight 601p and a 700...
Because between the costs of confiscatory taxation and divorces, Aerostars are almost free. Can I get an amen on that? Anyone?


Ha! He would know (about the performance anyway) - I was pleasantly surprised at the numbers. Almost wish I wasn’t ‘cause I know what this is gonna cost ...


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 16 Jun 2020, 08:06 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 11/06/10
Posts: 10786
Post Likes: +2165
Company: Looking
Location: 6B6 - Stow, Massachusetts
Aircraft: SR22
Username Protected wrote:
Stewart,

I used to have a 700. (Well a 602 upgraded to almost everything possible from AAC. When I sold it, there were only two mods I did not have. KFC 225 and Winglets.)

Anyway, with the 700/702 you have a choice. You can run ROP 65% and see ~230 to 235 KTAS in the flight levels (go fast mode) with between 45-50 GPH. I was normally closer to 46. Or you can run closer to 28 GPH LOP at 50% and see ~210-215 KTAS. If going really long range I have pulled power back to 40% or so, at @24 GPH and get 190 KTAS.


Tim


That sounds a bit slow for the 65% number. I have seen several of the faster 700's that would do low 230's KTAS at FL250 at 55%.

I have seen quite a bit of variation from the fastest to the slowest Aerostars that I have owned and operated.

The slowest one I had was a 700 that would do 216 KTAS at FL250 at 55%.

The fastest was a Superstar I - 700 without boots that would do a solid 238-240 KTAS at FL250 at 55%!


I had the gross weight increase and almost always was taking off for long flights at MTOW. The extra weight makes a difference. :)

Tim

Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 16 Jun 2020, 11:44 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile

Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 4653
Post Likes: +3418
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
If those diesel engines from EPS ever get certified for the Aerostar, it's gonna be one sweet ride. With the aux tanks installed, I think it's totally feasible to do LA-NY direct.

_________________
Slumming it in the antique turboprop world - so you don't have to!


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 16 Jun 2020, 13:01 
Online


 Profile

Joined: 01/06/08
Posts: 1266
Post Likes: +448
Aircraft: Baron C55
I would have thought that,. but at 25,000 the Baron claims to be noticeably faster (241 vs 232 both flat out - so I doubt either can have reasonable CHTs).

Again, that surprises me, and maybe Beech is just being very optimistic about their numbers

(but since I'm musing over one or the other of those airplanes, its not competely academic) The 58p and P601 seem fairly comparable and are available at similar prices.

Username Protected wrote:
I know POH cruise speeds are not always to be trusted.

For the 601P, 20,000', 19.9 GPH/side gives 230ktas, 14.9gph -> 210ktas
for a 58P 20,000', 19.2 GPH/side gives 232 ktas, 14.6gph -> 210ktas

No making any claims about who is lying more, or which is better in other ways.

I was surprised to see that the book numbers were almost identical


I don’t have any experience in a 58P in decades so wouldn’t know. But it’s interesting and surprising. I’m guessing the winglets and intercoolers on the Aerostar really help it up high.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 16 Jun 2020, 14:46 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 01/08/17
Posts: 200
Post Likes: +96
Aircraft: F33A
Username Protected wrote:
I know POH cruise speeds are not always to be trusted.

For the 601P, 20,000', 19.9 GPH/side gives 230ktas, 14.9gph -> 210ktas
for a 58P 20,000', 19.2 GPH/side gives 232 ktas, 14.6gph -> 210ktas


To pull those kind of speeds in a stock 601P you are in the "bold box".

The 601P is turbo normalized / high compression.

There is a bold box around higher power settings to preclude the possibility of detonation. The Aerostar 601P was introduced as a 1974 model year plane. No GEM's installed back then. They had a fuel flow transducer so you could follow the minimum fuel flows in the "bold box". The fuel flows there are much higher than need be due to the close detonation margin. The fuel flows will be quite a bit lower on an intercooled 601P, which does away with the minimum fuel flow requirements.

601P will go to FL250 (with a 10,000 ft cabin; What is it on the 58P?) and do about 200 knots on 26 gph total burn. Cruise speeds are even better at FL250 with the Aerostar! I am not sure you can get the 58P to FL230 without supplemental oxygen.

Also, 601P runs lean of peak beautifully. Forrest Ward has probably contributed his numbers - would be great to see them for this thread.

If you fly both the Aerostar and the 58P I think you will find the answer on speed. The Lycomings burn a little more fuel per HP but outlast the TSIO520 by a lot.

The 58P TSIO-520 engines do not hold up like the 540 Lycomings on the Aerostar if you run them hard. I have seen many many 601P and 602P Aerostars make the 1800 TBO without cylinder overhauls.

I once bid a 601P Aerostar with 2675 on the plane and both the engines since new. Cylinders (12) had never been touched!

Pressurization differential is much better on the Aerostar too.

Uniform cross section cabin to me is much more roomy in the Aerostar. At 6'5" most Barons are very painful to the knees on a long trip. Some Barons and Bonanzas I just can't fly without pain. I think the aft cabin in the Aerostar is 10" wider and quite a bit taller than the Baron 58P. Visibility is way better up front. Better ride in turbulence.

Takes more runway. Has 4 turbos. Harder to find hangar that fits. Not much downside other than those items!


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 16 Jun 2020, 15:09 
Online


User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 12/30/15
Posts: 1063
Post Likes: +843
Location: Charlotte (EQY)
Aircraft: AerostarCitabriaSR22
Cabin on 601P will be 8,000 feet at FL250 or about 6500 at FL230 (my usual top altitude) if you get the increased pressurization (5.5 differential)

I believe 58P has pressure diff of 3.9
Stock Aerostar 4.2...me tinks

VNE on my Aerostar =246 knots...one of the reasons I bought Aerostar vs Meridian or 58P

3500 fpm descent to get though ice that an Airbus 320 called moderate...no problemo

Stay up high for a bit longer to enjoy tailwind then 2,000 fpm descent with airspeed in 200-225 range depending on turbulence is my preferred let down


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 16 Jun 2020, 16:35 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 03/14/15
Posts: 192
Post Likes: +150
Aircraft: Piper Cheyenne II
Username Protected wrote:
Guys, what am I missing? I seemed to get 233 KTAS @ FL 190 @ -25c IOAT 24” 2200 rpm 17 gph/side in a wingletted, intercooled 601P running it as 1550 TIT and at the settings Jim Christy told me too (at least I think I did it right). It was basically the same @ FL210.

I haven’t done the airspeed vs. gps calibration check yet. But anyway, if it’s accurate, that’s ridiculous performance. Is there anything within 20 knots on that fuel flow?

With new paint and a couple less antennas, I’m hoping it won’t be slower but I did “unfair” the windshield frame to get rid of a bunch of the filler.



Just adding $.02

My experience is that the book numbers on the Aerostar can absolutely be taken to the bank. I have not researched the P Baron (nor have any experience in it) but I have a good friend who had one, and he could never match me on speed for fuel burn. I had a Super 700, so an intercooled 601P (especially with winglets) would have better speed / fuel efficiency number than I got. His P Baron always seemed 15 knots or so less on similar fuel flow.

My average true airspeeds, in the low 20's (no engine monitor, so a couple extra gph)

65% power 245 KTAS 48-50 gph total
55% power 220 KTAS 38-40 gph total
45% power 205 KTAS 28-30 gph total

Again, this was a Super 700 - so not as efficient as a 601P, and I was running 100 to 125 ROP. You can look at the Machen (Now Aerostar Aircraft) performance chart and it is absolutely square wit my real world results (besides me flowing a bit more fuel for my comfort sake).

I do not know nearly enough about the P Baron to say - but I have seen many airplanes that can't make book numbers without some extenuating circumstance, such as running much leaner than you would reasonably due to CHT's, ITT's, etc. To this day I've never seen an airplane as true to it's claims as an Aerostar.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 16 Jun 2020, 19:10 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 01/08/17
Posts: 200
Post Likes: +96
Aircraft: F33A
Username Protected wrote:

I believe 58P has pressure diff of 3.9
Stock Aerostar 4.2...me tinks



Stock Aerostar 601P/602P is redlined at 4.5 PSI, normally regulates at 4.3 or so. Most when working properly seem to sit right at 10,200 ft cabin at FL250.

An old copy of the bluebook says that the 58P is 3.7 PSI .

If regulated about .2 below redline that is quite a bit more cabin altitude!


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 16 Jun 2020, 19:53 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 02/09/09
Posts: 3275
Post Likes: +1140
Location: Owosso, MI (KRNP)
Aircraft: 1969 Bonanza V35A
Username Protected wrote:

I believe 58P has pressure diff of 3.9
Stock Aerostar 4.2...me tinks



Stock Aerostar 601P/602P is redlined at 4.5 PSI, normally regulates at 4.3 or so. Most when working properly seem to sit right at 10,200 ft cabin at FL250.

An old copy of the bluebook says that the 58P is 3.7 PSI .

If regulated about .2 below redline that is quite a bit more cabin altitude!


For what it's worth, my 1976 601P POH says the normal cabin pressure maximum is 4.25, and the safety valve is set at 4.45. This will give an 11,000' cabin at FL250. The redline on my indicator is at 4.25.

I'd love to have the 5.5 PSI system, but there are a few more mod's I'd rather have more (Aux Heat and GW Increase).

Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 16 Jun 2020, 21:54 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 01/08/17
Posts: 200
Post Likes: +96
Aircraft: F33A
Username Protected wrote:

For what it's worth, my 1976 601P POH says the normal cabin pressure maximum is 4.25, and the safety valve is set at 4.45. This will give an 11,000' cabin at FL250. The redline on my indicator is at 4.25.



I looked at a picture (after I wrote that, just to double check) of a stock 601P 1979 pressure controller. It had the redline at 4.5 psi. Resolution is not enough on the scale to differentiate between 4.45 and 4.5. That would make sense that they would calibrate the safety valve at 4.45.

I have had a lot of pressurized Aerostars and own 2 602P / 700's currently, and nearly every one of them was running at about 10,200 ft cabin at FL250 and max diff, with the 4.5 cabin stock. I think if you did a sampling of 10 well maintained 601P's you would find that to be consistent.

In looking at the 5.5 PSI controller on the 602P I have right next to me, the redline looks to be 5.7 PSI or so - I never really payed much attention and thought they were 5.5 redline!

I don't remember ever bumping on the safety valve in all those planes.

Below is a picture of a mid production 1976 601P Pressure controller from a plane I recently did an initial insurance training for the owner on - looks like 4.5 psi to me on the redline.


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: 17 Jun 2020, 13:26 
Offline


 Profile

Joined: 03/14/15
Posts: 192
Post Likes: +150
Aircraft: Piper Cheyenne II
The cabin altitude thing is big....

If the comparison is using speeds at the highest altitudes, 3.7 is going to leave you wheezing and not feeling good after a few hours.

I did not have the 5.5 psi mod on my Aerostar... when I started flying a 5.5 psi airplane right after the Aerostar I realized how much a difference that extra 1.25 psi makes... At work I fly with 8.75 psi but it had been years since I had a direct contemporaneous comparison of 4.25 vs 5.5 psi like that....

SO - If I still had my Aerostar I might really consider that 5.5 mod. If I were looking at a 4.25 psi cabin vs a 3.7 psi cabin, it would be a large factor to consider.

(Kent - I know I am using book figures... I seem to remember getting the same values you mention).


Top

 Post subject: Re: Aerostars
PostPosted: 03 Jul 2020, 07:53 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile

Joined: 10/05/11
Posts: 7287
Post Likes: +4148
Company: Power/mation
Location: Milwaukee, WI (KMKE)
Aircraft: 1963 Debonair B33
I just read an article about Aerostar Balance Tubes. It said they were used to counteract the effects of pressurization. I searched the web a bit and looked at some pictures, but I still don't understand how they work.

Just curious.

_________________

Training Log
AvWx Class MAY '18
Instrument JUL '18
BeechNutz Fall Clinic, SEP'18
BPT FEB'19


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 1932 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129  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 2007-2020

.camguard.jpg.
.New_Horizon_85x50.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.daytona.jpg.
.Expert_Aircraft_Solution_85x50.jpg.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.STLAir_85x50.jpg.
.midwest2.jpg.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.Electroair.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.byerlyaviation-85x50.png.
.kingairdom.jpg.
.McPeck_85x50.jpg.
.Trace.jpg.
.avionicssource-85x50.jpg.
.jaair-85x100.jpg.
.metarmap_85x50.jpg.
.truecourse.jpg.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.dshannon.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.ATCO_85x200_2.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.Davis_Aviation_85x50.jpg.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.airpower-85x50.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.Marsh.jpg.
.hpair-85x50.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.methodseven-85x50.jpg.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.luminary-85x50.jpg.
.ForeFlight.jpeg.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.KalAir_Black.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.dbm.jpg.
.westsky.jpg.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.Showalter.jpg.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.instar.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.rtc-85x200.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.cubcrafters.jpg.
.bkool-85x50-2014-08-04.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.wildblue-85x50.jpg.
.garmin-85x200-2020-07-08.jpg.
.weatherspork_85x50.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.avidyne-85x50-2017-11-22.jpg.
.airplanesusa-85x50.png.
.heartlandsm.jpg.
.aeroturbine-85x50.jpg.
.tas-85x50.jpg.