Seriously considering leaving Mooney behind....

[Davidv]

Just now, philiplane said:

He'll have to fly at FL250 to reach 210 knots. All the gain in the TAT setup occurs above 11,000 feet. Its the same setup as a TN Cirrus, which makes a 175 knot plane at 11,000 feet into a 214 knot plane at FL250. 

Yes, it sounded weird to me until I saw that avweb article I mentioned above.  Not sure that can be right...

[ragedracer1977]

1 hour ago, KLRDMD said:

My first twin was a Seneca III. They're good airplanes but there are a lot of good twins.

@N201MKTurbo said he couldn't be my friend anymore if I bought a Seneca.  I think he actually crossed himself when I suggested it.  

He's got me really looking at 310's.  With my Hangar, it would have to be a Q or older.  The longer nose of the R won't fit.  

They're well within my budget, seem to do most of what I want to do.  I think I might be sold 

[KLRDMD]

Just now, ragedracer1977 said:

@N201MKTurbo said he couldn't be my friend anymore if I bought a Seneca.  I think he actually crossed himself when I suggested it.  

He's got me really looking at 310's.  With my Hangar, it would have to be a Q or older.  The longer nose of the R won't fit.  

They're well within my budget, seem to do most of what I want to do.  I think I might be sold 

If you're looking at 310s, look at Barons too.

[EricJ]

49 minutes ago, ragedracer1977 said:

@N201MKTurbo said he couldn't be my friend anymore if I bought a Seneca.  I think he actually crossed himself when I suggested it.  

He's got me really looking at 310's.  With my Hangar, it would have to be a Q or older.  The longer nose of the R won't fit.  

They're well within my budget, seem to do most of what I want to do.  I think I might be sold 

My understanding is that the only 310s that fit in our hangars are the very old ones with straight tails.   Otherwise you're gonna have to upgrade to the big hangars.

Tom J was gonna get one before he got the Brazov, and that was the restriction: had to be a straight tail to fit in the hangar.    I've not seen a counterexample up there anywhere.   Twinkies (Twin Comanches), and Barons I've seen in our hangars, but no swept-tail 310s.   I think Senecas fit, too, but I'm not positive about that. 

 

Edited May 25, 2020 by EricJ

[ragedracer1977]

19 minutes ago, EricJ said:

My understanding is that the only 310s that fit in our hangars are the very old ones with straight tails.   Otherwise you're gonna have to upgrade to the big hangars.

Tom J was gonna get one before he got the Brazov, and that was the restriction: had to be a straight tail to fit in the hangar.    I've not seen a counterexample up there anywhere.   Twinkies (Twin Comanches), and Barons I've seen in our hangars, but no swept-tail 310s.   I think Senecas fit, too, but I'm not positive about that. 

 

I'd have to actually check it, but on paper a Q will, an R won't, 32" longer nose

[smccray]

3 hours ago, exM20K said:

No, he won’t.  Even the TAT people wouldn’t make such an ambitious claim.

I tried unsuccessfully to paste the chart from their website.  See for yourself.  202KTAS @17GPH FL180

https://taturbo.com/frames.html

What he should reasonably expect is 1.5 - 2 KTAS increase per thousand feet.  So if a NA A36 is a 170KTAS cruiser at 8,000, it should be a 190 at FL180.

My TN A36 runs 180 at 12k ft all day long. I saw 195 TAS at 17.5 on a long flight last summer (4 hrs). Plane runs great and it’s a fantastic setup.

1 hour ago, Davidv said:

If this is not accurate, my jealously level will go way down.  It hurts to have another plane carry so much more, go faster, and burn less fuel than my Mooney.

I’m not sure the operating recommendations are quite right but that’s okay.  I’ve been unable to push that much fuel through my engine without the temps running higher that I’m comfortable.  CHTs stay nice and cool at all times  

I wouldn’t say the Beech is faster on less fuel carrying more. That said, the A36 is a great setup. 1350 lbs of useful load (on paper) including a turbo and air conditioning. 
 

 

[EricJ]

4 minutes ago, ragedracer1977 said:

I'd have to actually check it, but on paper a Q will, an R won't, 32" longer nose

And a 310 is, imho, harder to get in and out of than a Mooney.   The step ladder is pretty inconvenient, imho.   I'd think if you want easy access for passengers either a Baron or a Seneca would be what you're looking for.  

[Niko182]

8 hours ago, Davidv said:

I say go for a NA A36 and when your budget allows (maybe it does now), put On a TN tornado alley system.  My friend is getting it installed as we speak and he will see 210+ at 15K on around 16-18GPH.  This system makes the A36 ultimate traveling machine for a high useful load piston single.

Either your friend is getting lied to or way too optimistic. That is a load of BS. The majority of A36 bonanzas seem to get right under 190 at 17,500, burning around 16 to 17gph.

[exM20K]

1 hour ago, Davidv said:

"Here are some specifics: We flew a 1980 TAT-converted A36 Bonanza. The airframe had some Smith speed mods so it wasnt typical, however. On takeoff from Ada on a 38-degree day, we easily achieved 1400 FPM in initial climb rate, settling to about 1200 FPM above 5000 feet.

Leveling off at 14,000 feet, we recorded 207 knots TAS at 17 to 18 GPH, with cylinder head temps in the 250 to 280-degree range. As per George Bralys recommendation, the engine was operated with wide open throttle, and lean of peak by leaning to a target fuel flow, not an EGT/TIT value. Climbing higher, we saw 214 knots TAS at 17,500, on about 18 GPH."

Demo pilot probably opened the alt static ;-)   Oldest trick in the book.  First plane I flew was the world’s fastest archer.  135-140 ktas on the airspeed indicator conversion ring.  Amazing!  There was something wrong with the static system. Sad trombones. This was before GPS, so the multi leg measurement wasn’t available.

Twins are fun to fly, but never lose sight of the fact that the purchase price is just the ante. And you’re now sitting at a high limit table.  Flew someone else’s 310Q for fuel only for a while.  That didn’t suck.

 

Conklin and dedecker have a good cost summary.

https://www.conklindd.com/CDALibrary/ACCostSummary.aspx

-dan

[KLRDMD]

34 minutes ago, EricJ said:

My understanding is that the only 310s that fit in our hangars are the very old ones with straight tails.   Otherwise you're gonna have to upgrade to the big hangars. Tom J was gonna get one before he got the Brazov, and that was the restriction: had to be a straight tail to fit in the hangar.    I've not seen a counterexample up there anywhere.   Twinkies (Twin Comanches), and Barons I've seen in our hangars, but no swept-tail 310s.   I think Senecas fit, too, but I'm not positive about that. 

Even a 310Q won't fit in my hangar. My actual dimensions, measured, are 40’6” wide 10’6” high, 33’ deep & 17’ wing depth. It is the wing depth that gets you on a 310. The tip tanks from their back edge to the front door of the hangar at the nose is what makes it not fit. Forget about an R model.

On the other hand, a Seneca fits, Barons fit, Twin Comanches fit and even my P337 fit (just barely). It had the same issue as the 310, from the back of the wing to the tip of the spinner is long but I had about 6" to divide between the back of the wing and the spinner.

The P337 is the most underrated twin out there. Turbocharged and pressurized (mine was air conditioned). It doesn't have two doors but it has a very nice air stair door. It has almost the same engines as the Mooney Encore. I got 182 KTAS on 11.5 GPH per engine at 17,500 ft with a 7,500 ft cabin. They love 15-18k cruise altitudes. They have five seats but the last one isn't very useful. Take it out and insure it as a four seat and you'll have plenty of baggage volume and weight available too. It is also very comfortable and in my opinion, very safe.

[Davidv]

13 minutes ago, exM20K said:

Demo pilot probably opened the alt static ;-)   Oldest trick in the book.  First plane I flew was the world’s fastest archer.  135-140 ktas on the airspeed indicator conversion ring.  Amazing!  There was something wrong with the static system. Sad trombones. This was before GPS, so the multi leg measurement wasn’t available.

Twins are fun to fly, but never lose sight of the fact that the purchase price is just the ante. And you’re now sitting at a high limit table.  Flew someone else’s 310Q for fuel only for a while.  That didn’t suck.

 

Conklin and dedecker have a good cost summary.

https://www.conklindd.com/CDALibrary/ACCostSummary.aspx

-dan

Yes, that was probably it.  I also could have been misquoting my friend while remembering that article at the same time.  He may have said he was hoping for 200 in the mid-teens.  It sounds like he's adding every engine and speed mod possible so who knows, he may get it.

[N201MKTurbo]

35 minutes ago, Niko182 said:

Either your friend is getting lied to or way too optimistic. That is a load of BS. The majority of A36 bonanzas seem to get right under 190 at 17,500, burning around 16 to 17gph.

My boss has a B36TC.

That is exactly what his does.

[carusoam]

flying higher into the FLs...

Erases the sins of draggy planes...

Climbing into the FLs takes time at high FFs...

Developing HP in the FLs is often limited by cooling capacity of the thinner air...

Controlling TIT is important for the health of the turbo...

Some turbos and intake systems are better at LOP than others...

The TNIO550 is probably the most refined recip Engine for this type of flying...

By the time you have gone twin TNIO550s... you have probably exceeded the costs of a single turbine... 
 

Single turbines aren’t very expensive when looked at over their years of operation... compared to a TNIO550...
 

If that statement sounds shocking...

Our engines cost too much, for only going half the distance, using more expensive 100LL...

Always check your insurance cost for the new ride... some additional training may be required to maintain safety...

 

This is like watching a friend move to Europe for work... with technology, they haven’t gone away... 

 

PP summary only...

Go MS!

Best regards,

-a-

[KLRDMD]

Just now, philip_g said:

insurance wanted me to have 100 hours in type for a p337, I can't remember a NA, it was like 5 or 10

My insurance required a 5 hour checkout when I bought my P337.

[carusoam]

How does one acquire 100hrs in type?

At $50/hr for a CFI.... 5amu And several weeks...?

Best regards,

-a-

[KLRDMD]

Just now, philip_g said:

that was the only thing I could think of, but finding a CFI with p337 time would have been a challenge, and it wouldn't have been $50. I don't know many $50 CFI's anymore

There are some of us CFIs (CFII, MEI) around with P337 time.

[ragedracer1977]

2 hours ago, EricJ said:

My understanding is that the only 310s that fit in our hangars are the very old ones with straight tails.   Otherwise you're gonna have to upgrade to the big hangars.

Tom J was gonna get one before he got the Brazov, and that was the restriction: had to be a straight tail to fit in the hangar.    I've not seen a counterexample up there anywhere.   Twinkies (Twin Comanches), and Barons I've seen in our hangars, but no swept-tail 310s.   I think Senecas fit, too, but I'm not positive about that. 

 

It looks like a Q will.  This is to scale.

Not a lot of room to spare, but it fits

 

[N9201A]

[mention=7464]N201MKTurbo[/mention] said he couldn't be my friend anymore if I bought a Seneca.  I think he actually crossed himself when I suggested it.  
He's got me really looking at 310's.  With my Hangar, it would have to be a Q or older.  The longer nose of the R won't fit.  
They're well within my budget, seem to do most of what I want to do.  I think I might be sold 

310 is a very sweet bird, lots of ramp appeal and utility. I got my multi in one many years ago. If l could rationalize spending 3X to go 15% faster, it’s what l would have in the hangar. Barons are great too.

[ragedracer1977]

Just now, N9201A said:

310 is a very sweet bird, lots of ramp appeal and utility. I got my multi in one many years ago. If l could rationalize spending 3X to go 15% faster, it’s what l would have in the hangar. Barons are great too.

At this point, it's not really even about the speed or money.  I mean, money always matters, but if I can't get the family in the plane, it has no utility at all.  We all fit in the C, but it's 10lbs of s*it in a 5 lb bag

[philiplane]

8 minutes ago, ragedracer1977 said:

It looks like a Q will.  This is to scale.

Not a lot of room to spare, but it fits

 

A Seneca or Aztec will fit in the standard 40' wide tee hangar. They will give you the best value and most utility in light twins too, without eating your lunch like a 310 or Baron will. 

People mistakenly obsess over the cruise speed, when the fact is, the difference in time on an 800 mile max range trip between a 185 knot 310 and a 170 knot Seneca or Aztec is measured in minutes. 30 minutes to be exact. Of the three, the Aztec has the biggest cabin, the most comfortable seating for everyone (not just the pilot), the most baggage space, the lowest total cost of ownership, and the most reliable engines. And it only needs 2000 feet of runway, opening up a lot of unique destinations that a 310 can't safely manage due to its' split flap design.

Given today's market values, many piston twins cost the same (or less) to own and operate over a ten year span due to the lower acquisition cost compared to a high performance big single. You can buy a really nice Seneca II for half the cost of a Saratoga. In return you get more useful load, more baggage space, and an extra engine for overwater, night, and instrument conditions. 

That's why I've been flying light twins for the last 20 years. The value proposition is hard to beat.

Edited May 25, 2020 by philiplane

[ragedracer1977]

1 minute ago, philip_g said:

You don't have to be very crooked to whack that tail.

True, but would you believe the wingspan on my C with J wingtips is only 6" less than the 310....

[ragedracer1977]

1 minute ago, philiplane said:

A Seneca or Aztec will fit in the standard 40' wide tee hangar. They will give you the best value and most utility in light twins too, without eating your lunch like a 310 or Baron will. 

People mistakenly obsess over the cruise speed, when the fact is, the difference in time on an 800 mile max range trip between a 185 knot 310 and a 170 knot Seneca or Aztec is measured in minutes. 30 minutes to be exact. Of the three, the Aztec has the biggest cabin, the most comfortable seating for everyone (not just the pilot), the most baggage space, the lowest total cost of ownership, and the most reliable engines. And it only needs 2000 feet of runway, opening up a lot of unique destinations that a 310 can't safely manage due to its' split flap design.

I haven't seen an Aztec, but I did go look at a Seneca today.  There's a 310 and a Seneca right next to each other on the field.  The Seneca looks like a toy.  The nacelles are massive looking on the Seneca.  It looks really not the same in person as I thought it would.

[carusoam]

Somebody was asking to trade a Mooney for his Aztec the other day...  (Around here somewhere)

 

speaking of the 5# bag...
Looks like guides and stops, bolted to the floor of the hangar will be a good idea...

Plenty of Aztec experience around here...

https://mooneyspace.com/search/?&q=Aztruck Aztec &page=2&search_and_or=or&sortby=relevancy

 

there are things that get called Mooney twins... Aerostars, Commanders, and MU2s...

https://mooneyspace.com/search/?q="Twin Mooney"&updated_after=any&sortby=relevancy

Have we answered the question about Pressurization vs. O2..?

Who thought building Mitsubishi’s in the same plant that was building mini four seat P51s was a good idea?

Best regards,

-a-

[gsxrpilot]

You might just need a bigger hangar 

There are three of these at KBJC where I own one of the three. The one next to me has a Beech 18 in it and the other one has a PA-42 Cheyenne in it. The Mooney looks pretty small in mine. 

[Niko182]

Im gonna go ahead and add 2 options. 

Number one being a twinkie. If you look on beachtalk, theres a whole debate on how the twin commanche is one of the only twins that has the same maint costs as a single. 170 knots around 14 to 16gph. Great useful loadgood range, decent cabin. My instructor used to have a TN'd one and he loved his. And bulletproof engines.

Number 2 being an eagle. Ive flown mine with 4 full grown people multiple times. I think its quite comfortable and it still has an amazing range and and useful load. Mine has 1216 lbs useful load which isnt the the norm but most of them will have a plus 1100lbs useful load easy.  Id guess a family of 4 with 2 yound kids comes in around 550 to 600 lbs. Thats 75 gallons of fuel for a range 4.5 hours at 13 gph doing around 175 to 180knots.