News: Added Links For Twin Commander and Facebook Pages

Login  |  Register

Author Topic: Aerostar?  (Read 35141 times)

Jeff Johnson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 192
Aerostar?
« on: September 18, 2017, 11:45:58 am »
Ok go to ask.

And Adam I hope your listening.

Love my commander
Would love a turbine even more minus the expense.

But what about an Aerostar?

I usually fly myself.  Or my wife and kids.
bend to LA is my typical mission.

Don't need to haul around 7-11 people.

And the cost is pretty reasonable for a well outfitted Aerostar

What's the pros and cons?

Thanks
Jeff

Adam Frisch

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1700
    • Adam Frisch FSF
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2017, 03:32:29 pm »
They're great aircraft. Built like tanks and have a lot of the clever Ted Smith stuff in them. They're not short field airplanes, they're fairly complex and they require mechanics who are familiar working on them. Bang for the buck, they're hard to beat. But you have to be prepared to maintain them preventively and keep them in good shape. The direct operating cost delta between an Aerostar and a Turbo Commander is probably not that big, so it depends on how much you value your investment. Not easy to sell them either, because people are afraid of them. Took me over a year to sell mine with brand new engines for a a very reduced price.
Slumming it in the turboprop world - so you don't have to.

donv

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3338
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #2 on: September 18, 2017, 05:36:31 pm »
Aerostars are great airplanes. I had one for several years. I would only consider getting one with the 350hp engines.

They are small, so for you and one or two people, it's okay-- more than that, it's pretty tight. Not a whole lot of baggage space, either.

Aerostars are also harder to fly than a Turbo Commander, in my opinion-- and less safe. Single engine performance, while pretty good for a piston, is not in the same league as a Commander, and the engines are less reliable. They also only have one engine driven hydraulic pump, plus an optional electric pump (although every one I've seen had the electric pump).

I would run some flight plans to see if they can make it from Bend to the LA area nonstop against a headwind. I found that HIO-PSP was marginal unless the winds were good.

The long and short of it is I'd get a Dash 5 690A before an Aerostar. The difference in price won't be that much, and the 690A is just a much better airplane for that mission.

Jeff Johnson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 192
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #3 on: September 18, 2017, 11:54:58 pm »
Thanks guys for all he input. 

Expertise is always greatly appreciated.

It's 658 miles enroute from bend to LA. 

I'd think that the Aerostar should make it even with the headwind...

It's funny how a certain airplane gets a reputation and it's done for. 

The duke is another of the evil stepchild aircraft.  That literally knowone will touch. 

But I think your correct in the 690a being a better aircraft.  It's just the constant inspections and timed out things.  Like hot sections and such that are putting a bit of a damper on my turbine purchase.



donv

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3338
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #4 on: September 19, 2017, 01:55:59 am »
Stay far away from a Duke... that has a reputation for a reason. Completely different than an Aerostar...

It's funny you mention hot sections. On a Dash 10, the hot section interval is a lot longer than the TBO on an Aerostar (2500 hours versus 1800, and the Dash 10 will make it to TBO with minimal maintenance along the way). It's even possible to get a Dash 10 up to a 3500 hour hot section/7000 hour TBO, which will probably be longer than you'll own the airplane. There are no calendar limits on the 331 engines at all.

Yes, you have to do gear and props on the Commander, but I think the Aerostar may have some calendar stuff as well-- I can't remember. I do know that on an Aerostar, I would do all the recommended maintenance, whether you are legally obligated to or not.

Jeff Johnson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 192
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #5 on: September 19, 2017, 09:17:04 am »
Don

Your aircraft specific knowledge is amazing and priceless!

I just found one of the gotchas in the Aerostar. 

5200 hours and you need to replace the windscreen
35k

Maintenance wise.  I will always and do always keep everything in tip top shape.  Otherwise I would not feel safe to fly.

150 hours would basically coincide with my annual
Gear every 3 years seems reasonable.  Especially if flown 150 hours a year. 
And if I can find a 690a with dash 10's... then it's forever between hot section and rebuild.

Just going through this all in my head and pocket book :)

ghancock

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1154
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #6 on: September 19, 2017, 10:05:23 am »
Funny you should mention Aerostars.  My neighbor here just purchased one and flies it off our 2900' grass strip.  He gets off a little longer than I do but not that much.  He doesn't sound near as good as I do but then he's rocking along at 220kts while I'm at 180kts.  My wife and son are all that fly with me most of the time but when she looked inside his plane she mentioned more than once how nice ours is for room.  I can carry more of a load than he can and have tons more room to move around but they aren't bad planes.

For the "you can get a 690A for about the same price as an Aerostar" . Boy do I wish :-)

I'm holding out for the Turbine myself as my wife is addicted to all the space now :-)

Glenn
--glenn
You can't win an argument with an ignorant person,  they'll just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

donv

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3338
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #7 on: September 19, 2017, 01:34:50 pm »
I wonder if you could take this airplane and put it on PI's 3500hour/7000hour engine program?

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/1422745/1976-commander-690a

Otherwise, it seems like a pretty good deal, unless I'm missing something.

donv

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3338
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #8 on: September 19, 2017, 01:36:34 pm »
And look at this one:

https://www.controller.com/listings/aircraft/for-sale/1425661/1972-commander-690a

500 hours to go on the engines, but that's 5 years at 100 hours/year. And you options beyond just overhauling them (although that's certainly one option).

drwho67

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #9 on: September 19, 2017, 07:15:41 pm »

donv

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3338
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #10 on: September 30, 2017, 11:13:17 pm »
That one looks pretty good. Nice cosmetics, Saunders Spar is a good thing (no spar inspections, as far as I know).

However, the engines are only about 170 hours out of hot section, and I'd probably overhaul them at that point, if it were me (my engines have a similar issue, except I have a bit more time to go). So as long as that's factored in to the price, and she makes power now, worth considering.

All those labels on the panel are kind of funny!
« Last Edit: September 30, 2017, 11:14:53 pm by donv »

Adam Frisch

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1700
    • Adam Frisch FSF
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #11 on: October 01, 2017, 02:46:36 am »
What calculation you need to do is, if dual engine overhauls down the line will equate purchase price + engine overhauls = make value?
Slumming it in the turboprop world - so you don't have to.

Jeff Johnson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 192
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #12 on: October 01, 2017, 10:11:36 am »
Adam,

Here's my reasoning. 

I can get into a low hour, recently repowered/overhauled 700 Aerostar for under 200k.  Which should give me years of quality service 1000+ hours at least before I have to do motors again. 

The turbine commander will be at least 250k purchase and very high time engines that will need rebuilds much much sooner.  So in 500 hours either rental engines, rebuilds, or mid time replacements. 

Plus, most of the time it's just me.  The turbine commander is a lot of metal to fly around for mostly 1 person.

But I haven't really decided which is the proper direction to go.  I'm leaning toward the Aerostar but dreaming still about the turbine Commander

donv

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3338
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #13 on: October 01, 2017, 12:10:17 pm »
An Aerostar is a lot of bang for the buck, for sure. I fly around by myself quite a bit as well, so I understand where you're coming from-- but it is nice to have the flexibility to bring others along as well.

donv

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3338
Re: Aerostar?
« Reply #14 on: October 01, 2017, 01:35:17 pm »
I have to tell you that, honestly, operating out of Bend you really need Dash 10s if you're going to get a Commander.

The Dash 5s are very sensitive to how they've been operated, and you often won't get to the scheduled hot section interval (note that the airplane above with Dash 5s was obviously hot sectioned early at least once). When I was doing air ambulance in a bunch of Dash 5 airplanes, we rarely made it to the scheduled hot section. You'd just start noticing that you have less and less power, especially hot and high.

So maybe an Aerostar is the best choice. In a Commander, your best bang for the buck is either an airplane with fresh engines, or one with 500-600 hours to go. Dash 10s will almost always make the scheduled interval.

The other way to think about it, though, is that while the Commander costs more up front, if you buy it right you'll get that differential back when you go to sell it.