BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2017, 12:05

Username Protected wrote:

I looked at Eagle II (501 with FJ44 plus added fuel). Nice that it is SP out of the box, no stupid SPE, but I don't think it does the west bound mission reliably. The stock 501 is a non starter, as is 550, 551. None of the 525 series are being considered, too expensive and I am pretty sour on Williams engine programs (especially after talking to Williams recently, more on that later).

In all cases, I either want an airplane with steam gauges (no early "tube" systems, or impossible to upgrade), or something like a G600 installed. The mid to late 90s avionics are a bitch to deal with, so steam gauges seem like a better choice to handle the ADS-B situation.

Quote:

the Super SII with the Williams mod has fabulous numbers - although the weeping wing can be a PITA.

I've been trying to find an SII owner to ask them about this and have not succeeded. Obviously the planes are still flown and still command decent prices on the used market, so the TKS wing is not seen as completely debilitating.

Personally, I hate boots. I actually kind of like the TKS wing. No boots to treat, or to replace every 15 years or so. Also, very little performance loss with deice turned on (not robbing huge bleed air amounts from the engine). The TKS wing will have better aerodynamics, too.

So I am willing to give the TKS system a chance. I would think it wouldn't be used all that much. My main concern is the reputation for corrosion, but I have yet to validate this with real evidence.

Mike C.

Before I settled on my CJ (my mission objectives are different to yours), I seriously looked at a 501 Eagle II with fuel mod and a Super SII that were both available and relatively clean. The Eagle II had Jettech's G600 dual GTN conversion and the Super SII had the standard panel. Avionics wise the Jettech conversion is a great option to get rid of legacy avionics that are getting long in the tooth and can be a headache and expensive to maintain.

Performance wise, I would think the Eagle II should accomplish what you're looking for except for that rare day the winds are super strong (remember that at FL410 and above things tend to die down somewhat). I did find out that the nicer and better cared for Eagles on the market were at least 1.3M. The cheaper ones had various "issues" and/or history.

There was only one Super SII on the market when I was looking and the asking price was 1.9M (Citation Ultra prices). The airplane was relatively clean and it had been well cared for except the TKS was going to have to be removed, serviced and there were corrosion issues in the wing because of it. This was probably going to be expensive with lots of downside potential. In terms of range and performance, great numbers though.

I'd be interested to hear what issues you have had with Williams that have you so adverse towards them.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2017, 13:06

Username Protected wrote:

Performance wise, I would think the Eagle II should accomplish what you're looking for except for that rare day the winds are super strong (remember that at FL410 and above things tend to die down somewhat).

I've run the numbers pretty seriously on the Eagle II, so it may come back into consideration, but it seemed to me that it wouldn't do the westbound flights with any greater reliability than about 25%. That is, 75% of westbound required a fuel stop.

It was also slower, around 40-50 knots slower than SII+FJ44, which hurts the headwind case a lot, and the cabin was tight for 8 people.

There are also weird things that can't be explained about the Eagle II. In this Sierra doc:

http://www.sijet.com/download/Sierra_20 ... rmance.pdf

They say the BOW weights are:

501SP stock: 7400 lbs
Stallion (501 with FJ44, otherwise stock): 7470 lbs
Eagle II (501 with FJ44 and wing mods for extra fuel): 7230 lbs

Does it seem odd to you that adding things to the wing to expand the fuel capacity subtracts 240 lbs? How does that work?

In other words, I'm not truly buying Sierra's numbers until I find them substantiated by real world operators.

Quote:

I did find out that the nicer and better cared for Eagles on the market were at least 1.3M.

I figure $1.5M for a good one.

Quote:

There was only one Super SII on the market when I was looking and the asking price was 1.9M (Citation Ultra prices). The airplane was relatively clean and it had been well cared for except the TKS was going to have to be removed, serviced and there were corrosion issues in the wing because of it. This was probably going to be expensive with lots of downside potential.

Is removal of the TKS a periodic inspection thing, or was this some special case for this one SII?

Where does one get the inspection program documents for any given airplane? I'd like to review the intervals and requirements for the factory inspection programs.

Quote:

I'd be interested to hear what issues you have had with Williams that have you so adverse towards them.

I'll post about this soon. Suffice to say that the terms are worse than I thought, and I wasn't favorably impressed to begin with.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2017, 13:26

You get the inspections from Chapter 5 of maintenance manuals. Either have to subscribe to them or find someone that has paper copies. Aviation Techincal Publishers has lots of manuals. It's who we use. Manuals run around 2K and up depending plane.

http://store.atp.com/search?page=9&display=table

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2017, 14:40

Username Protected wrote:

There are also weird things that can't be explained about the Eagle II. In this Sierra doc:

http://www.sijet.com/download/Sierra_20 ... rmance.pdf

They say the BOW weights are:

501SP stock: 7400 lbs
Stallion (501 with FJ44, otherwise stock): 7470 lbs
Eagle II (501 with FJ44 and wing mods for extra fuel): 7230 lbs

Does it seem odd to you that adding things to the wing to expand the fuel capacity subtracts 240 lbs? How does that work?

You need to find out how they added the extra fuel.

AFAIK Citations have wet wings. Could they have removed 120+ lbs of wing structure on each side, sealed the wing cavity, and put a pump in for the extra fuel?

If you find an Eagle II for sale you should be able to ask to review the STC and maintenance documents to understand how it was done.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2017, 15:37

Username Protected wrote:

You need to find out how they added the extra fuel.

They add a "bump" to the top of the wing near the root. This is an additional external wing skin in that area, plus some structure to hold the skin at that shape. The existing top wing skin remains underneath, with holes to allow fuel to pass.

When you see an Eagle II up close, it is quite distinctive from certain angles, has a really fat wing near the root.

Quote:

AFAIK Citations have wet wings. Could they have removed 120+ lbs of wing structure on each side, sealed the wing cavity, and put a pump in for the extra fuel?

You can't take 240 lbs of wing structure out and still have a viable wing, at least not for any half competently designed wing.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2017, 16:36

Username Protected wrote:

You can't take 240 lbs of wing structure out and still have a viable wing, at least not for any half competently designed wing.

These are old designs. Probably way over designed in some areas if you apply today's design tools.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2017, 16:49

Username Protected wrote:

You get the inspections from Chapter 5 of maintenance manuals. Either have to subscribe to them or find someone that has paper copies. Aviation Techincal Publishers has lots of manuals. It's who we use. Manuals run around 2K and up depending plane.

http://store.atp.com/search?page=9&display=table

Two grand for a book?!?

Bwahahaha, this is the kind of gouging that prevents me from owning a jet. F that.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2017, 16:51

For two grand, she better come with the package to read it to me.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2017, 17:14

Username Protected wrote:

These are old designs. Probably way over designed in some areas if you apply today's design tools.

Even the old designs don't have that much weight that you can take out with the removal of parts. To get that much weight out, it takes fine adjustments to the entire structure.

The wing structure on a 501 probably weighs about 350 lbs a side total. So taking out 120 lbs would be an enormous decrease in weight, particularly if you don't change the spars or the skins which is most of the weight.

Sierra didn't redesign the wing to that degree.

That leaves us with numbers that don't add up, so they are either suspect or miscalculated.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2017, 17:18

Username Protected wrote:

Two grand for a book?!?

Yeah, the word "jet" means "charge a lot".

In some ways, jets are regulated to be expensive. Even if you make a cheap one, the rules are all written assuming it is expensive.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2017, 17:55

Username Protected wrote:

You get the inspections from Chapter 5 of maintenance manuals. Either have to subscribe to them or find someone that has paper copies. Aviation Techincal Publishers has lots of manuals. It's who we use. Manuals run around 2K and up depending plane.

http://store.atp.com/search?page=9&display=table

Two grand for a book?!?

Bwahahaha, this is the kind of gouging that prevents me from owning a jet. F that.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2017, 21:06

I've been flying the Mustang for 1 year now, coming from a TBM. Mustang range is 1000nm +/- but I've found that making a stop in the Mustang is not as much work as it was in the TBM. Maybe an illusion, but no waiting for engines to cool down, no dry motoring. Maybe the FADEC makes it seem simpler.
I also think the pressurization increase over a TBM (8000 ft cabin in the Mustang at FL410) makes the flights less fatiguing.
Typically I'm flying less than 1000 nm, and even PA to FL is non-stop. But PA to CA is 1900 nm and needs a stop both ways. Last flight to CA I had 100 kt headwinds the entire way and actually made two stops going west. Three 2 1/2 hour legs. But coming back was only two 2 1/2 hour legs.
It would be more of a hassle with multiple passengers.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 26 Mar 2017, 21:34

Username Protected wrote:

I also think the pressurization increase over a TBM (8000 ft cabin in the Mustang at FL410) makes the flights less fatiguing.

The smooth jet ride over the weather and lack of prop vibration, even in a PT6A, also contributes to less fatigue.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Mar 2017, 01:00

Quote:

Maybe an illusion, but no waiting for engines to cool down, no dry motoring.

Uhh, maybe I was asleep during that segment in initial training but is there some problem with short turns and a PT6? I've never heard that.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 27 Mar 2017, 06:59

Scott,

Quick turn isn't hard but depending on OAT you might want to make some adjustment in how you park, into wind, open engine door (checking oil anyway). Note engine temp when done refueling if higher than 150c motor down to 150 before adding fuel. No problems. I've done turn when OAT 90-100f and it's easy.

There are other options to help too. Net result as long as you are paying attention when starting there isn't an issue with PT6 in TBM. Fly safe

Care and Feeding of Legacy Citations