What a sacrilege to fly an Aerostar this slow!

That's because it wasn't a Piper. They bought the line late 70's. Before that it was Ted Smiths brain and name that built them right here in Santa Maria, CA. They got bought by American Cement Corporation who made a mess out of it, then Butler Aviation, who made a mess of it, and finally sold to Piper, who also made a mess out of it. Although the last model Piper produced, the 700P, is arguably a fantastic plane. But by then they'd had enough, sales were dropping and it was an expensive plane to build. So they axed it. Same happened to another Ted Smith design, the Aero Commander line. Rockwell and then Gulfstream finally did that in too.

Both Aerostars and Turbo Commanders now live on only because some guys had the tenacity and funds to buy the TC and tooling away from Piper and Gulfstream. People who know and care about their product. Jim Christy (who posts here) from AAC and Twin Commander Aircraft LLC for the Commanders.

Certain aircraft types are just much better off this way.

Hey Adam I remember when Ted Smith was building them at Van Nuys - his first assembly location - it was on the northeast side of the field as I recall.

Hi Sven - that's correct! Should have been clearer. Think they only moved to Santa Maria when Ted Smith bought company back from Butler.

Hopefully this doesn't bring out another drive-by thread hijacking, but the reason you can't get more of a load increase is because a multi-engine airplane has to obey a stricter set of rules for certification. Singles are not required to have any one-engine-inoperative sustained flight capability. A multi engine is designed around being able to deliver positive climb and sustained flight after losing an engine. This along with the redundancy of electric and pneumatic systems is the point of a twin. Think dark night, hostile terrain...

Structurally they probably could hold a good bit more than certified but wouldn't be able to have a single engine service ceiling above the ground.

Similar to how piston twins are not required to have continued take-off ability after losing an engine, but jets are. Why aren't piston twins required to do this? Because it's impossible in practical terms for them to be able to.

Steve, I'm not recommending you do this, but at gross a 700SS at sea level on an ISA day will climb away with gear down and a windmilling prop at takeoff flaps. It won't do a great job, and it feels like a marshmallow, but you'll eak out a couple hundred feet a minute. Your bird is more capable than you realize. I bet if Jim wanted to deal with all the FAA bullshitery he could publish a V2 speed and that speed wouldn't be very high. Pull of the pavement at 95, climb to 1000' at 117, you're golden.

Shameless plug from a guy who doesn't own one anymore and has no dog in the fight- the winglets sharpen the hell out of the handling characteristics during that critical time. Climbs a little better, more importantly (to me, anyway) makes slow flight rock solid. Steve Spears knows what he's doing too, it's not just Mr. Smith into this thing anymore.

Marvelous airplane.

Well, if one was to obtain a nice Aerostar (P and some 700 type version) with runout engines, what would be the cost estimates to replace with 1. factory remans or 2. Overhauls from reputable shops? All in $100k? More? Less?

Thanks.

factoryengines.com says for TIO-540-U2A, $97K for new, $59K for rebuilt, $53K for overhauled.

Figure $10K/side for R&R, exhaust, accessories, etc. So rebuilt total bill about $140K. Props would be on top of that if done at the same time.

I'm sure there are cheaper alternatives, but getting under $100K seems unlikely without significant compromises in quality of outcome.

Mike C.

Thanks Mike. A budget of $150K sounds safe then.
Appreciate the quick followup!

Jim

The answer is it depends.
I replaced one engine, no accessories or turbo work done that year. Total cost for the reman and RR work was just over $60K.
Now, if you have to deal with the turbos, props.... you can drop as much as 15K to have all the other items overhauled (5K accessories and 10K prop).
This was all from three years ago.

Tim

All in all, you'll pay twice as much as the overhaul quote. If you can't stomach that thought or think there's a cheaper way, well, you're just like me…..

My S1A5's were quoted at $23,665. Kinda not too bad, right? That was with case attached accessories. But here's the reality:

1. Then you add turbo overhaul. $1600 each. There's 4 of them.
2. Wastegate overhaul. $1500 each. Again, there's 4 of them. And expect at least one or two to get rejected and then you're looking at $3600 each new from AAC.
3. Harnesses.
4. Hoses ($7K alone).
5. Plugs.
6. NDT of engine mounts.
7. Other accessories. Scavenge pumps, wastegate actuators etc. Not part of the engine overhaul quote.
8. R&R.

I myself did what everyone else has done before me - underestimate it grossly. Mine ended up just north of $120K in total. It's all the little inconsequential stuff that adds up. Yeah, there is a cheaper way - you could put your old harnesses, plugs and hoses in, but in real life, you won't because you don't want to give your brand new engines a bad start in life and risk it with old cr*p…

Well put, don't want old stuff on new, high $ engines! Besides, once you spend $100k+, whats another few $1000 anyway......... It's just more card points!

'Nuther question tho - Do the U2A engines have 2 turbos per engine as well?

Yes.

Tim

[quote][/quote]Well put, don't want old stuff on new, high $ engines! Besides, once you spend $100k+, whats another few $1000 anyway......... It's just more card points!

'Nuther question tho - Do the U2A engines have 2 turbos per engine as well?



Captain Starnes, its just points, as you indicate. I believe I remember you...you wear big shoes. Aerostar little bit of a tight squeeze getting in cockpit, iirc. Thought you were a B-60 feller.

I'm a B55 feller as of now. Just doin lots of research in case I wanna haul more, go faster, and ........ Burn more gas!!!!!!