Stan...thanks for the super fast response! I will try those power settings on my next flight and see what I get with the low compression pistons. At 11 gph that would be about 44% power for my engines. Been running @ 29"/2100, 12.5-13.0 a side, FL230 for 206-208 KTAS...and similar results at 26"/2200...be interesting to see what 24"/2300 produces. Definitely can run the 350 hp/low compression pistons LOP at 50% or below and the engines just purrrrrr. But as you stated at higher power settings LOP is a challenge...but nice to have a choice...fly at Baron (and I have loved my time flying Barons and still get to fly a Colemill 55 occasionally) fuel burns and similar NMPG or fly faster and burn more fuel. I love flying so I don't mind flying an additional 45" or so on a 1,000 mile trip and enjoy a more efficient fuel burn.

Best regards,

Tom

Tom,

Thanks so much for the detailed overview of your experience with your Aerostar. We're planning to make a trip to Talladega, Al. this weekend, and Dothan is close enough that I'm considering making a side trip to Aerostar World to do some more hands-on research.

Bryan...glad my post was helpful. Don Smith @ Aerostar World is who I will be doing my recurrent training with on Dec. 2. As other Aerostar owners told me during my plane search, you gotta fly one to experience and appreciate the flying qualities whether you buy one or not.

Say hi to Don and hope you report back on your experience.

Tom

Stan,
Have u posted any pics yet??? Waiting to see your bird!

Tom,

Thank you for your report! It is interesting to see the comparison between the fuel burns in the NA Baron and Superstar 700.

Tony, the Aerostar (flown @ 45-50% power/LOP) vs. the 58 Baron (wide open throttle, LOP 23 gph, 175KTAS) fuel flows was an eye opener for me. Stan's Aerostar posts on airspeed/fuel burns got me thinking about considering an Aerostar to replace my 58 Baron that was unfortunately totaled by an accident when in the hands of the mechanic (no one hurt fortunately). Nice to have the option to fly almost as economically as the 58 Baron or be able to fly faster than early model King Airs and not quite as fast as the King Air F90, 200, etc. with the Aerostar burning about 50 gph at 261 KTAS at FL250 at max cruise power settings. The Aerostar certainly does not have the cabin room of the King Air nor does it have the ability to use BETA, but if you do not need the room of the King Air or the reliability/expense of the turbine engines along with all the calendar/time component expense (maybe 3-5+ times the annual cost of the Aerostar...a Merlin IIIA I have some hours in with the efficient Garrett engines cost about $800-$900 an hour to fly based upon 600 hours a year so guessing around $1,200 -$1,400 an hour for flying just 100 hours per year vs. the Aerostar estimated at about $400 an hour...about $200 per hour flown at 50% power and 32 gph block to block) elements of a turbine aircraft, the Aerostar is certainly worthy of consideration as a non turbine option if 100LL is not a factor...and can be purchased for about the same price as a Baron or a Cessna twin. My friend with a beautiful Duke tells me if he pulls back power, he can expect about 210-215KTAS @ FL230 burning about 34-36 gph ROP whereas the 350 hp, low compression engine Aerostar can produce the same 210-215 KTAS on about 28-30 gph for a savings of about 6+ gph and believe Stan can better these figures in his high compression Aerostar (I haven't flow his Duke so I cannot verify these numbers but the speeds/fuel burns seem to be in this category based upon other Duke owners posts I have seen)...and certain those owners can give us more specifics.

Best regards,

Tom

Well I spent a few minutes crawling around a couple of Aerostars today. No opportunity to fly it, but im not too worried about that yet. Ive read its similar or better than a Baron, so thats good. There are some things I like about it, but I'm having a tough time figuring out how five, let alone six, people can comfortably sit in it. With five seats installed, I'd have to have some pretty short passengers sitting in the aisle with three seats. I assume turning the middle seat 90 degrees would help with that?

I don't think I'd really need to haul six adults for an hour and a half, but after seeing the length of the passenger compartment, I'm concerned about four adults and a child. Another six or eight inches longer in the cabin would have made a huge difference. I assume the aft seat was all the way back...I didn't think to confirm that.

It seems loading four adults and a child would be a lot like putting a jig-saw puzzle together. Would that be a reasonable analogy? I'm struggling to remember the days when I'd load four adult men in the back of a Baron 58, but I don't remember having significant legroom issues back there.

The aft baggage was generous. My wife was drooling over that, and the cabin width, but she's also concerned abouth the cabin length.

Any thoughts, Aerostar gurus?

Load back to front. No problems, yes the middle seat normally is turned sideways in flight. once the co-pilot seat moves up there is a suprizing amount of room. If it is hot out, and the co-pilot is an actual pilot, I have loaded the co-pilot , started the right engine and turned on the A/C then continued loading.

In terms of the Baron, I am a wide guy and I cannot fit in the back seats. Especially with another adult, not only is my head in the ceiling, my sholder is in the wall. For the Aerostar, it has the same width and height all the way back. This allows a couple of adults to sit in the back without trouble.

As for flying like a baron, only if you think the Baron is a Chevy trailblazer and the Aerostar is a Porsche Cayane.

You do learn fairly quickly how to load the plane, it has not been a big deal for me. Although I do have the sixth seat and for grins I had a mechanic install it to see the spacing. I would only use it I have to carry kids in the back. You are correct, there is not enough
room (between the seats and legth wise).
So for me, while the plane is technically a six seater from a practical perspective it is a five seater.

Tim

Hi Byran,

I think that most Aerostars fly with only 5 seats in them. Mine did not even come with the 6th seat.

Two issues (warnings?), 1) not Aerostar middle seats can rotate, I believe that it was a factory option (I just bought a swivel seat on e-bay last month). 2) Keep in mind that if you add the Auxiliary fuel tank, it takes up the front 1/3 of the baggage compartment.

All aircraft have their compromises. I would say that loading an Aerostar is one of them, but its not that difficult. At a 4.25 PSI pressure differential a 10"x10" area represents 425 pounds...lets see how many 10"x10" squares it would take to cover the door . I guess that's why the door isn't bigger.

Glenn

What Tim and Glenn have said is correct. Most Aerostar owners take out the seat behind the pilot. Loading, put people in the back, then the person in the copilot seat, move them forward, then the person in the seat behind the copilot. IME there is more legroom than in a 58 Baron. LIke Tim, when I rode in the back of the 58 Baron, I found that I didn’t fit either height or width wise when another person was in the back with me. Tom G and I have flown together some in Barons, Bonanzae, and Aerostars. We are both, shall we say, “big boned”....in a Baron or Bonanza, we have to sit at a slight angle to keep from interfering with whomever is working the controls. In the Aerostar, we don’t touch shoulders. For pilots that are a bit larger than average, it is well worth sitting in/flying an Aerostar and a Baron “side by side” to see the difference.


Like many (most? all?) nominal 6 seaters, it is a much better 4-5 place plane. The only plane I’ve personally owned that was comfortable for 6 was the Navajo. It was very comfortable for 6, and very workable for 7. My 340 and 414 weren’t as nice as the Navajo for 6. Compared to the Aerostar, it used more gas for less speed (175 KTAS on 34 gph...but back then no one that I knew was running LOP, so maybe could be improved on...), and it wasn’t pressurized. For my missions, giving up a bit of cabin room to get pressurization, better speed, and less fuel burn was a good tradeoff.


I think it always comes down to a close personal analysis of your own mission. For example, if hauling 6 full size people is key, then pick accordingly. Ultimately, in my opinion, all planes are compromises between:
-purchase price
-operating expense
-hangar size
-pilot qualifications
-insurance expense/availability
-payload
-cabin size
-speed
-fuel burn
-recurrency training



If I didn’t have to consider the first two, I’d be flying a King Air 300. Of all the planes I ever flew PIC on, that was the finest in terms of capability, comfort, speed, and class. I honestly believe that a KA 300, with a good copilot (hey, we’re dreaming here, right???), with both you and the copilot going to good recurrent training every 6 months, gives the ultimate personal plane. However, for me, I’m back to those first ones....purchase price, operating cost.....


stan

Here is a video of an Aerostar 601p / 700 SSII departing KCXL. I hear the Superstar II's are the fastest of all Aerostar models.

[youtube]http://youtu.be/BcklVtGksOs[/youtube]

Bryan...long post but here is what I do for loading when I travel with just my wife (80% of all trips) and went I go hunting/fishing/golfing with 3 friends (so 4 guys averaging 200 lbs. in the cabin plus 50 lbs. of gear...4 each "Cabelas" 36-40" gear bags...4 each 24" Cabelas gear bags...6 18 packs of beer...2 each 12"X12" boxes of food...4 fishing rod cases (one case is 52" long)...portable tie down equipment for plane...cabin cover that covers the entire cabin/windshield/baggage area (fits into a 5" high X 18" long stuff bag...emergency gear bag (size of a small back pack)...3 sets of wheel chocks...extra 24 volt battery (48 lbs...was fishing in the Manitoba wilderness and wanted the extra "insurance" with me as plane would be parked for 11 days)...plus each guy had a "child's size" backpack for reading material/etc. as a carry on and 3" wide briefcase for my charts/manuals/etc.

When just flying with Jody (non-pilot): remove bench seat from plane and middle seat behind the co-pilot so just flying with 3 seats in the plane with her seat behind the pilot. Her seat is positioned about 18"-20" from the aft cabin bulkhead (a lot of the plane's electrical equipment is behind that aft panel...voltage regulators, etc.). This leaves room for my golf clubs standing up behind her seat along with room for a soft sided bag as well...to her right and behind her on the "co-pilot" side of the plane goes a wheeled carryon standing upright...on top of that carryon I put a 24" Cabelas gear/clothes bag. Don't forget the space on top of the shelf at the rear of the plane...great spot of soft sided bags/coats/etc....I have arranged a cargo net to hold all baggage in place in case of turbulence. I position the co-pilot far enough aft that she can initially ride in the co-pilot seat (for weight and balance considerations if I have put fuel in the aft auxiliary tank) leaving enough space that she can easily slide her feet between the console and the seat front to gain entry to this seat. After reaching cruise she can easily move to "her preferred seat" behind the pilot as she loves the legroom...to check her leg room, I have sat in this seat and with the pilot seat positioned in the "flying position" I cannot reach the back of the pilot seat with my legs fully extended...no wonder she loves that seat position! Another "feature" she loves, on long flights I carry a "port a potty" (a chemical toilet without using the chemical part...just line with a couple of small trash bags...toss in a couple of diapers...she gets relief and simply ties off the trash bags to toss out at our next stop) that is positioned sideways behind the copilot seat allowing easy access...next to the potty seat goes a 36" Cabelas bag. Next to her seat she can place a bag for her reading material which allows the area in front of her seat free for leg room (also small items can be placed under her seat and under the copilot seat. From owning an A36 a B58 and a P58 where she always chose to ride in the back row of seats allowing her to stretch her legs out by using the aft facing middle row of seats as a foot rest...she tells me she much prefers the cabin seating of the Aerostar because she can move between the co-pilot seat and the seat behind the pilot in flight (best "forward" view from the pilot/co-pilot seats as no wing in the way, and she also loves the huge windows along with the ease of using the mini air stair door. Another configuration we use if there is not much baggage to be carried when traveling with another couple (remember to put cosmetics/fluids on the shelf behind the seat in the pressurized cabin) is to remove both middle row seats and place the bench seat (or two middle seats) at the aft bulkhead and the folks that sit in this position will rave about the "more than first class" leg room...in fact in this configuration my wife had sat on the floor and had enough room to do some stretches on long flights.

When I fly with 3 guys plus me (everyone is 6' tall with the tallest @ 6'2" and 240lbs) on our fishing a trips along with all the gear described above:

Load all the gear the day before as it is a bit of a jigzaw puzzle...the aft bench seat is taken out of the plane and the two middle row seats are positioned about 2' from the aft bulkhead wall. Three of the four 24" Cabelas gear bags can go on top of the aft shelf along with the small backpacks I described...food boxes, spare battery and the 6-18 packs of beer go on the floor behind the middle row seats (one seat back folds forward to help allow lifting the items over the seat back...fishing rod cases also go on the back shelf (the short cases) with the long 52" rod case on the floor between the seats which is out of the middle seat guys' leg room area...on top of the beer/food go 3 of the 4 36" cabela gear bags with the 4th 36" cabelas bag going into the baggage area...the emergency bag goes on the back shelf and all the plane gear (cabin cover, chocks, tie downs etc.) go in the baggage area as well. When loading the passengers, load the co-pilot position first. The co-pilot seat has enough room behind the seat to slide it back allowing the co-pilot passenger to slide each foot between the center console and the front of the seat, then help him slide the seat forward and lock in place. Sliding the co-pilot seat up to the "flying position" (but a few inches back to keep their feet off the pedals) creates adequate leg room for the middle row passenger...I would say a few more inches of leg room than sitting in middle row of a B55 or a B58 with the middle row of seats facing forward) and load the passenger behind the co-pilot...then load the passenger behind the pilot...this seat has the most leg room when the pilot seat is in the flying position although even the 6'2" guy sitting behind the co-pilot said this was a very comfortable seat and much preferred it to riding in my previous planes over the years. Of course the pilot loads last (I hand my "flying charts/ipad bag" to the co-pilot to hold on his lap until I load and then I place it between the pilot/co-pilot seats after I am seated) and the passenger behind the pilot only has to move his feet aft a bit to allow the pilot seat to slide back so pilot can enter and then slide the pilot seat to the flying position...door easy to close from the flying position. We made several stops on this fishing trip and I was amazed how quickly we all were able to get in/out of the plane. The guys really loved flying in the aerostar and told me how much more they enjoyed the Aerostar even though they enjoyed riding in the A36 and the Barons as well...this one was so much easier to get into (yes we are all getting older with one guy with a hip replacement) because of the mini air stair door.

For a hunting trip with just 3 total guys on board, same seating arrangement as the "fishing trip" but I removed the seat behind the co-pilot and was able to put a medium size dog kennel behind the co-pilot seat with plenty of room to slide the co-pilot seat back for the "co-pilot" to enter his seat and enough room for the kennel door to swing open to load the dog (used a kennel that you could take apart outside the plane and put back together inside the plane as the kennel is too wide to fit through the door in one piece)...then loaded a hunter in the seat behind the pilot, then load his dog to ride on the floor at his feet...then slide the pilot seat back for the pilot to enter. Once everyone was loaded, the dogs and hunters had plenty of room and everyone but me fell asleep. The shotguns in soft cases go in the aisle on the floor with gear bags loaded as described above.

Golf trip work well using the "fishing loading" described above but the foursome must agree to use small golf bags (similar to a "junior" golf bag size and the bags can go behind the middle row seats with the bench seat out of the plane.

...and yes, I do have signed off weight and balances for all the seating configurations I have described. Because of the completely flat floor design in the cabin, you have many loading options available. I have the 601P/Super 700 with the Aux. tank taking up part of the baggage area.

Hope this helps Bryan.

Tom

Tom, nice descriptions. You point out one of the nicest things about the Aerostar.....flexibility with the flat floor. As you inferred, it takes very little time to remove/install seats, so you have the ability to use whatever combination works easiest. I find it is literally a 5 minute job to install/remove one of the middle seats. I’ve not removed the rear bench for travel (I have for maintenance) but I like your idea of pulling it out, and then moving one of the seats back and having a “staggered” seating. Nice.



Tom, keep on writing....




stan

Thanks Stan (dangerous thing, asking me to "keep writing")...my "Aerostar Adventure" continues...plan on flying to Coeur d'Alene at the end of the month to have Aerostar Corporation install the new bleed air heat system (am guessing similar to the 58P's system) as flying in the flight levels in the northern part of the country is darn cold (perhaps I should consider moving to warmer spot like your neck of the woods?). Love the idea of having a heat system that is not dependent on only the janitrol heater even though my heater works well...well most of the time). Jim Christy (president of Aerostar Corp.) tells me they are getting about 220 degrees bleed air to the cabin at 30" MP and about 200 degrees at 26" MP and 150 degrees @ 20" MP. In their testing they found that they only needed to fire up the janitrol on the coldest days when taxing...once airborne they turned off the janitrol and turned on the bleed air heat. I have frozen my fanny off in two different Barons (don't anyone get me wrong as I love Barons and still fly one occasionally) when the janitrol failed to "stay on/cycle back on" and of course unable to reset it in flight (although I have heard some creative folks have found a way around the "unable to reset in flight" issue by replacing the fuse with a resettable circuit breaker to at least allow one attempt to reset the heater but not sure Beech would approve). No fun to be flying IMC with feet so cold that it is painful to push on the rudders and so much frost on the inside of the windshield that it is IMC "inside" the airplane...hard to tell when you break out of the clouds!). Just before my 58 Baron was destroyed during a maintenance mishap, I worked about 60 hours with my mechanic installing the Aerocrafters Aux. heat system (installs two heater muffs on the right engine and have to route ducting through the wings/landing gear to get just one small outlet into the cabin (a real pain in the fanny to install)...a common installation on Navajos flying 135 in Canada) so I think what Aerostar charges for this new bleed air system is a bargain with an estimated two day install. I am truly impressed that Aerostar Corporation keeps investing the funds to develop new STCs for the Aerostar. The STC list is impressive...no need to keep changing planes (very expensive, the buying/selling/upgrading the panel/fix the squawks process) to get desired features. So nice to have a choice when deciding "which twin" fits your needs the best and in this market an Aerostar can be purchased for a similar amount as a Beech/Cessna twin.

After the bleed air install will be flying "over your home" (or close by) on my way to Florida which is only about 7 hours flying time from Sheridan, WY (about 1500+ NM) burning about 25 gph in pressurized/air conditioned comfort (or about 6 hours if I want to burn around 40 gph...or about 5.5 hours if I want to burn about 50 gph and fly at King Air speeds). What a fun way to travel!

So glad you made the decision to try an Aerostar and then posted about its performance. That original post got me investigating Aerostars (a plane I knew nothing about other than the old wives tales) and to take an Aerostar transition course so I could fly one home after buying one. Do not know the reason why, but the Aerostar appears to be an "undiscovered" gem vs. the common knowledge available about the Beech/Cessna twins. The more I learn (and I have a lot to learn/discover) the more I like. For anyone considering a twin I believe a pilot/owner would be well served to learn about the Aerostar before making their final purchase decision on which twin serves their mission best and which compromises are acceptable as someone wiser than me said on this forum: all planes are compromises.


Tom

Nice post (again) Tom. Please let me know how the aux heat works out. I was considering installing it, but for where I live, not sure it’s worth it, but I sure like the idea. Conceptually it’s great...essentially “free” heat...(yes, I know, not including install cost....)


I agree, the AEST is a great plane. Actually, I’ve flown a lot of great planes...Barons, Bonanzae, Navajo...all were great for the missions they were designed for. Even though it gets a lot of grief on here, I have had two different Twin Comanches, and they were great planes...for the mission at the time. Still say that’s the key...figuring out what the mission is, and what compromises work best for each individual.


Tom, any time you come near here, I would welcome the chance to have you stop and we can visit.



stan