I am an average competent mechanic. (A&P/IA) Maintenance on any twin doesn't scare me in the least.

To be clear, the reason I want a twin is for the load hauling capability, weather capability, and the ability to get up and over the Great Lakes that surround where I live. I also enjoy the challenge of flying them, and learning and growing as a pilot. If I just wanted to look down, I'd keep my Cardinal RG, which has fantastic visibility. But my family is outgrowing it, it can't fly IFR in the winter, it goes into automatic rough over the middle of Lake Michigan, and I'm bored flying it.

When I look at the light piston twin cohort, Barons/310's/Aztecs/Commanders/Aerostars/Etc.. all haul a good load, all can be had deiced, all will get me over the lakes, and all can be bought within my budget. I can work on all of them, and all will cost about the same to own or run. So all that being equal, I'm looking for more specific differentiators. Aztecs are easy to fly, which would be nice given my low time. 310's are some of the most beautiful planes ever built. I'm familiar with Barons. And Commanders and Aerostars tick my visibility box.

The Aerostar isn't my first choice, but it's worth a look.[/quote]

I am curious, what is your first choice for a light twin?

I recently moved into an Aerostar 601P, but have kept my Baron for a while to “make sure”. I can haul approximately 650 lb payload with full fuel, if I don’t fill the aux fuel tank. So that’s 165 gallon burning north of 32 GPH, but certainly not burning it all in one place. Up higher and going MUCH faster, I am burning closer to 38 GPH. I also have a 700 Super Star project that I hope to have in the air in the next six to nine months.

If you have a serious interest in an Aerostar, I know where there is a 601B that has been converted to automatic waste gates (many years ago) that is a very nice low time airplane, with 300 hour engines and props on both sides, that can be bought for practically nothing. He has a hangar full and now wants a V35B so something has to go to make room for it and he has chosen the twin because he flys it the least. It is currently in annual and being flown by its owner, who is a 40,000 hour professional pilot, and it lives in a climate controlled hangar. I may also be willing to sell my low time B55 as well, if that’s the route you want to go.

Thanks, Frank

Frank, there are no cheap Aerostars. They are fast and fun but there is no free lunch.[/quote]

I get you and I guess “Cheap” might not be the correct word, maybe “more affordable” is a better choice of words. If you are an A&P / IA, or in my situation have some of each employed, you can often do a project cheaper than buying a flying airplane. There again, that is if you don’t put any value on your “sweat equity”. For me, it is “typically” a labor of love, so I don’t value my time as much, it’s my hobby.

(Turbocharger & scavenge pump) being done remotely in the field. What a fun day! For me it was more enjoyable than fishing or golf.

Thanks, Frank

Frank, Dennis,

Glad there are people like you in this world. This is what will help keep these planes flying.

Dennis, as for a differentiator. Unless you can get acrobatic aircraft, pretty much no other twin or even piston single flies as well as an Aerostar. Push tubes for controls, no slop like you get with cables, very "honest" feedback from the controls/plane. The plane always tells you what it is going to do.

Not sure about currently, but one of the anecdotes I though telling about how the Aerostar flies, was the number of former fighter pilots that selected an Aerostar over the other popular twins. It just flies so much nicer.

Tim

I went out last night to do my 3 night every 90....

No wind slow day at KCRQ... had to fly the full pattern for the first circuit..
after that tower let me do turnarounds and teardrops...
It was a short flight, but I am once again reminded just how sweet of a flying machine the aerostar is.... smooth well balanced, no bad habits....

There is something that amazes me about the Aerostar every time I fly it :

It NEVER needs to be trimmed (pitch)

Nobody ever talks about this amazing feet, yet it is truly unique .

Right after TO & clean-up, during initial climb, I can immediately feel if the balance has changed significantly since the last flight (usually not ) and just a very brief "bleep" on the electric pitch trim takes care of that for the entire flight.

That's right, no matter what the flight regime is, climb, fast cruise, slow cruise, gear up or down, ditto flaps, approach, short final, etc., etc; , NO PITCH COMPENSATION REQUIRED

How Ted Smith accomplished this just blows my mind.

Good work Frank. Keep it flying. Btw - I could always count on 28 gph chock to chock if I wanted range at 24” and 2200 rpm cruise. Same as Shrike but the Aerostar is 35+ knots faster and in the Flight levels.

I have to work on getting my GPH in check. I have been leaning it to 1475 - 1500 TIT and am still in the 34 to 38 GPH range.

Thanks,
Frank

https://youtu.be/Kp0dzTM2518?feature=shared

https://youtu.be/-aIVXKy81E4?feature=shared

A couple videos of N601PE taking off.

I have to work on getting my GPH in check. I have been leaning it to 1475 - 1500 TIT and am still in the 34 to 38 GPH range.

Thanks,
Frank

Good work Frank. Keep it flying. Btw - I could always count on 28 gph chock to chock if I wanted range at 24” and 2200 rpm cruise. Same as Shrike but the Aerostar is 35+ knots faster and in the Flight levels.[/quote]

I have to work on getting my GPH in check. I have been leaning it to 1475 - 1500 TIT and am still in the 34 to 38 GPH range.

Thanks,
Frank[/quote]

If you can’t lean to published fuel flows, I would edit: not want to fly it. Something, or many things, are wrong.[/quote]

I am not certain that I am getting real accurate fuel flow readings or TIT readings. I am sending my G4 out to get a new screen / redone here shortly and also will be cleaning the injectors soon, but I, by choice, have chosen to not run my TIT’s over 1475-1500 until I get better acquainted with these engines and turbos. It looks like 1550 is the max TIT I believe according to the POH. My CHT’s and EGT’s are all in line, actually lower than published, is why I think my TIT’s may be reading higher than they actually are. I have only done one trip thus far where on four legs of the trip I got up into the mid teens for altitude. 100% of the rest of my flights since I got the plane have been training flights, all fairly local.
Coming from almost 40 years of big bore Continentals these turbo charged Lycomings are a learning curve for me which is why I am being very cautious with the TIT’s. Changing out turbochargers and scavenge pumps can get a little on the expensive side!

Ya gotta love a girl, I mean an airplane, with a nice tail !


Thanks, Frank

1650 is max EGT for a 601P but I see it doesn’t appear to have intercoolers so scratch all that.

N601NT
No intercoolers and a water rudder.

N601PE used to have a water rudder, it was removed and the VGs were put on back when I had it painted.

I don’t remember the specifics (Adam F should remember) for a non-intercooled 601P, but the bottom line is they have (higher) fuel flow numbers to keep engines out of detonation risk (think sudden traumatic cylinder failure).

The non-intercooled, turbo normalized IO-540 engines on the 601P were the reason Piper went to low compression IO540s on the 602 and factory 700s.

Make sure you are using the correct numbers for YOUR Aerostar.

My POH says 1550 max, that’s why I am keeping a 50° margin and the 1,500 TIT.

Give me a few months and I will have the 700 in the air. It will have the S1A5-MM engines.
We hope to get started on it around July 8th.
I plan to update the panel in it at the same time. I am currently trying to decide if it’s going to get a new S-tec or if I am keeping the KFC-200. I haven’t heard a lot of good about the S-tec. I wish that Garmin would approve / STC the GFC-600 for the Aerostar, but that’s obviously never going to happen.

Frank

My POH says 1550 max, that’s why I am keeping a 50° margin and the 1,500 TIT.

Give me a few months and I will have the 700 in the air. It will have the S1A5-MM engines.
We hope to get started on it around July 8th.
I plan to update the panel in it at the same time. I am currently trying to decide if it’s going to get a new S-tec or if I am keeping the KFC-200. I haven’t heard a lot of good about the S-tec. I wish that Garmin would approve / STC the GFC-600 for the Aerostar, but that’s obviously never going to happen.

Frank

The KFC 200 is a very capable autopilot-especially with the yaw damper option. If yours doesn’t have one better buy the one Trey just advertised.

Like you, Frank, I wish Garmin had added the Aerostar to their AML. With an all-Garmin panel, what's the sense of installing a non-Garmin autopilot? But they didn't and I wanted to be rid of the King 200.

The difference between a KFC 200 and the Genesys 3100 is night and day. I'm glad I dumped King.

I don't know what bad stuff you've heard about the 3100. Most of the complaints I've seen have been about delivery delays and difficulty getting older units upgraded with the VNAV bezel. I've only seen a pitch oscillation once in two years flying with the 3100 and it was extinguished by disconnecting the autopilot and then re-engaging. There has been an update issued to the AEST config file on the 3100 since then. It's such a non-problem I haven't even bothered flying to the shop to have the file loaded. Why make a special trip just for that and waste an hour of the shop's time.