28 Apr 2024, 11:53 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: The Piper Aztec/Apache thread Posted: 16 Feb 2024, 09:37 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/31/17 Posts: 1595 Post Likes: +627
Aircraft: C180
|
|
I’m one. It’s this plane or turbine for me. Turbine is increasingly unlikely.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: The Piper Aztec/Apache thread Posted: 15 Apr 2024, 15:38 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/27/12 Posts: 134 Post Likes: +8
Aircraft: Bonanza H35
|
|
What a bummer, he was a great contributor to our passion. Blue Skies, John!!
_________________ *** Fly Navy ***
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: The Piper Aztec/Apache thread Posted: Today, 09:06 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 09/18/21 Posts: 199 Post Likes: +152
|
|
Been looking at Aztecs for a while. Mostly later model ones Probably their biggest claim to fame is the useful load. I see some advertised with 2000lbs useful, but I also see some with 1800, and some as low as the high 1500's. I can understand a couple hundred pound discrepancy, but what do you put into an Aztec to explain a 400+ pound difference in useful load?
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: The Piper Aztec/Apache thread Posted: 14 minutes ago |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/10/07 Posts: 30860 Post Likes: +10801 Location: Minneapolis, MN (KFCM)
Aircraft: 1970 Baron B55
|
|
Username Protected wrote: Been looking at Aztecs for a while. Mostly later model ones Probably their biggest claim to fame is the useful load. I see some advertised with 2000lbs useful, but I also see some with 1800, and some as low as the high 1500's. I can understand a couple hundred pound discrepancy, but what do you put into an Aztec to explain a 400+ pound difference in useful load? 14 layers of paint?
_________________ -lance
It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.
|
|
Top |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: The Piper Aztec/Apache thread Posted: 7 minutes ago |
|
|
|
|
Joined: 08/31/17 Posts: 1595 Post Likes: +627
Aircraft: C180
|
|
There’s a zero fuel limit 4400 lbs in my E. I’m 3333 lbs empty according to the W&B. 140 gallons means I can haul 1000 lbs with full fuel, or 1060 lbs if I left 10 gallons behind.
The old avionics and iron gyros are for sure heavy up in the nose/avionics bay. I have radar as well. That makes mine nose heavy, I often need ballast when loaded below gross.
Flying within CG ensures performance both cruise and one engine inoperative.
|
|
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
|
|
|
|