BeechTalk - BT - NA T-Bone vs Commander 500

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2016, 07:12

This one is right up my alley... someday, maybe, if my wife still puts up with my fits of insanity...

http://www.controller.com/listings/airc ... ander-500b

Mid time engines with recent overhauls, all the typical mods, higher TT than most guys are willing to tolerate. For a plane like this, is there anything to really "look out for" other than your typical basics that hold true for any 60's era complex airplane?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2016, 11:37

Username Protected wrote:

This one is right up my alley... someday, maybe, if my wife still puts up with my fits of insanity...

http://www.controller.com/listings/airc ... ander-500b

Mid time engines with recent overhauls, all the typical mods, higher TT than most guys are willing to tolerate. For a plane like this, is there anything to really "look out for" other than your typical basics that hold true for any 60's era complex airplane?

That's probably one of John Towners (Central Air's) old freight planes. Normally they have TKS weeping wings (he owns the STC), but maybe this one was sold off before they started converting most. They fly a lot and are well kept after normally, so if you're comfortable with the high times, this is probably a decent bird. Caveat emptor, of course - do a thorough inspection.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2016, 11:44

Username Protected wrote:

This one is right up my alley... someday, maybe, if my wife still puts up with my fits of insanity...

http://www.controller.com/listings/airc ... ander-500b

Mid time engines with recent overhauls, all the typical mods, higher TT than most guys are willing to tolerate. For a plane like this, is there anything to really "look out for" other than your typical basics that hold true for any 60's era complex airplane?

That's probably one of John Towners (Central Air's) old freight planes. Normally they have TKS weeping wings (he owns the STC), but maybe this one was sold off before they started converting most. They fly a lot and are well kept after normally, so if you're comfortable with the high times, this is probably a decent bird. Caveat emptor, of course - do a thorough inspection.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2016, 12:56

Username Protected wrote:

Nice looking plane, but no autopilot would be a deal-breaker for me. I've been casually looking for a TBone, but many out there don't have an a/p, and there is no STC'd autopilot for the pre-50D. Greg C. has a beautiful 50B for sale, but there's no remotely easy way to get an a/p into it. Just yesterday I asked an FAA buddy, who has worked as a maintenance inspector and now works on the certification side, about a field approval for an autopilot. He just chuckled...

Exactly, that is one big drawback on the older T-bones. I am hopeful that the future may hold some regulatory relief for the new crop of digital autopilots. Even then, you may need the 5990 gross weight reduction paperwork to make it legal for a NA T-Bone.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2016, 13:02

Username Protected wrote:

Nice looking plane, but no autopilot would be a deal-breaker for me. I've been casually looking for a TBone, but many out there don't have an a/p, and there is no STC'd autopilot for the pre-50D. Greg C. has a beautiful 50B for sale, but there's no remotely easy way to get an a/p into it. Just yesterday I asked an FAA buddy, who has worked as a maintenance inspector and now works on the certification side, about a field approval for an autopilot. He just chuckled...

Exactly, that is one big drawback on the older T-bones. I am hopeful that the future may hold some regulatory relief for the new crop of digital autopilots. Even then, you may need the 5990 gross weight reduction paperwork to make it legal for a NA T-Bone.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Aug 2016, 13:18

I saw on Avweb trutack is bring a autopilot to the certified market. I think under the new policy.....

Username Protected · **Posted:** 05 Aug 2016, 07:24

Username Protected wrote:

Nice looking plane, but no autopilot would be a deal-breaker for me. I've been casually looking for a TBone, but many out there don't have an a/p, and there is no STC'd autopilot for the pre-50D. Greg C. has a beautiful 50B for sale, but there's no remotely easy way to get an a/p into it. Just yesterday I asked an FAA buddy, who has worked as a maintenance inspector and now works on the certification side, about a field approval for an autopilot. He just chuckled...

Exactly, that is one big drawback on the older T-bones. I am hopeful that the future may hold some regulatory relief for the new crop of digital autopilots. Even then, you may need the 5990 gross weight reduction paperwork to make it legal for a NA T-Bone.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 05 Aug 2016, 10:34

Username Protected wrote:

Exactly, that is one big drawback on the older T-bones. I am hopeful that the future may hold some regulatory relief for the new crop of digital autopilots. Even then, you may need the 5990 gross weight reduction paperwork to make it legal for a NA T-Bone.

How much hand flying fatigue can a newcomer expect on a 4hr flight from either of these behemoths? I assume that they are both rock solid and stable in cruise... is that correct?

As I continue to fly more complex/high performance airplanes, I cannot help but notice that they are all "easier" to fly than the Citabria and Tomahawk I started in. My real x/c missions haven't changed since I got started, but the comfort and seating requirements have! I'm still a VFR guy, but once the Bonanza is ready, I'll start my IFR training, so maybe I don't even know what I don't know...

Username Protected · **Posted:** 05 Aug 2016, 10:51

Username Protected wrote:

Well, if you intend to use it for single pilot IFR in or around busy airspace, you can expect plenty of opportunities for very high workload without a good autopilot. If, on the other hand, you would like to use such a ship for $200 hamburger runs then an autopilot is an unnecessary expense that you are better off without.

FWIW, a little research on my part revealed that one CAN get an autopilot for an older TBone, and at a fairly reasonable price. With a bit of lead time, Brittain will sell you a wing leveler approved for use in the B and C model TBones for around $1500. They can add nav tracking and heading hold for another couple thousand, though the lead time on the upgrades is more like 1.5 to 2 years (parts). Still, wing leveler alone is far better than nothing at all and still allows for some hands-off.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 05 Aug 2016, 17:56

Username Protected wrote:

Well, if you intend to use it for single pilot IFR in or around busy airspace, you can expect plenty of opportunities for very high workload without a good autopilot. If, on the other hand, you would like to use such a ship for $200 hamburger runs then an autopilot is an unnecessary expense that you are better off without.

FWIW, a little research on my part revealed that one CAN get an autopilot for an older TBone, and at a fairly reasonable price. With a bit of lead time, Brittain will sell you a wing leveler approved for use in the B and C model TBones for around $1500. They can add nav tracking and heading hold for another couple thousand, though the lead time on the upgrades is more like 1.5 to 2 years (parts). Still, wing leveler alone is far better than nothing at all and still allows for some hands-off.