Going up next week to look at a couple of Turbo Commanders. I know very little about these aircraft, however they appear to be fast, roomy and reasonable priced. Can any of the BT community who may have some personal experience with the Turbo Commander fleet, offer any input as to speeds, fuel burns, altitudes, maintenance issues or any other information that maybe helpful to us as we evaluate the purchase of one of these. Thanks in advance for your input.

Reach out to Adam Frisch and Bruce Byerly (I think I spelled both of those right...)

Recently took delivery of a Commander 980. We moved up to it from a Meridian earlier this summer and it went directly to the shop for new avionics, interior, and engine work. We're getting the five-bladed props put on early next year. Can't wait.

I have limited experience, but have nothing but positive things to say about it. 450 pph, 290 KTAS at FL280 is what I've experienced thus far. Handles 1200nm (one of my routine trips) into winter winds with aplomb. The cabin is great, the luggage compartment is gargantuan, and I love not having to crawl over pax to get into the cockpit. The picture window is incredible. It's fun to fly and has great flying qualities: forgiving but also maneuverable and stable in IFR.

More expensive than an MU-2 but cheaper than a King Air is the rough guide I've heard regarding operating costs, specifically maintenance.

Bruce Byerly, Jim Worell and Barry Lane are all knowledgeable TC experts. Highly recommend speaking with all of them.

I operate a 690B turbo commander with 331-10T engines.
It is still factory supported if that is important to you. New parts can be pricy of course, but it’s not an orphan.
I called the factory and obtained the original wiring diagram for my KFC300 autopilot same day.
The dash 10’s are the fastest, more desirable of the 690’s and I see around 300 TAS in the cruising altitudes most of the time. Like anything else, it has its good and not so good.
Mostly good for me.

It is actually a fun airplane to hand fly, and it’s really straightforward.
Research the history: it’s a Ted Smith marvel with reliable big airplane roots, given the designers war bird experience.

Takeoff: no flaps, just raise the gear. Rotate is 87
Vmc = 83. That’s pretty low.
Blue line= 112 which is much slower than you would normally get on takeoff.
Cruise climb = 150-160 kts.
Fuel management = None. Only switch is emergency off.
Emergency gear = slow down and drop the handle. No cranks or pumping.
Gear status? Look out the window. (Nose gear reflection on the shiney spinner.)
Pressurization = 5.2, 9,000 ft at FL270
Payload = very good, 1000 lbs of stuff 1000 nm.
Geared prop to turbine, so power changes are immediately converted the thrust. No delays, very responsive with great beta / reverse.
331-10T = great power, 770 hp. No ice doors, no real fod concerns, no blade sulfidation worries, no compressor washes, really nothing much the pilot need to do.
5000 or 7000 TBO. I have a 7000 TBO. Not sure why. The logs say so. No programs for me. Ask Byerly, he may know.
Accellerate-go numbers are good, and always shorter than accel-stop.
Useable Potty
Garmin glass upgradeable.
Maintenance = 150 hr. Cycle, plus a few hourly / calendar items.

The not so good: big airframe, should be in a hangar.
Not great on a tie down because the airframe can be leaky when on the ground. Parts can be a challenge if you like to save on as-removed parts, although I have not had much difficulty.
Garmin does not have an A/P solution, but I hear the STEC 3100 is great.
Some 690’s don’t have a permanent spar, so you need an inspection—3 years, that most likely can be extended to 5 at the FSDO level. Not a deal breaker by any means.
Fuel bladders have an undeserved rep. for leaks. Properly maintained they don’t leak any more than a metal wing tank.

Overall been satisfied. The 300 kts speed and low fuel burn separates the Commanders from the Cheyenne’s and King-Airs in the same price range.

I have owned a 690A and a 690C (840). The 840 Is a wet wing. No bladders. Fast to fill and with long range fuel it will go forever. Amazing airplanes. The only real comparison is the Conquest II (441).

Bruce B is your man.

This is tied to burner can status and revision from what I have been told.

441s have similar TBOs for the same reason.

To achieve it, you need to be diligent with nozzle maintenance, cool down on landing, and prop spin after shutdown.

Mike C.

Mark, very basic rundown:

690, A, B models - 270kts on -5 engines. Often been upgraded to -10's, in which case you can see 300kts. But only have 380gal, so not as long legged as the later. Bulletproof environmental system in the Fairchild. Needs a spar inspection unless it's been eliminated with an STC. 5.4psi.

840 and 980 Jetprop models: Long wing aircraft. New partial wet wing that does not need inspection. Came from factory with -5's, but very commonly upgraded to -10's. 5.4psi. Can tanker up to 484gal in LR config and all the Jeprop's will nose up on 2000-2200nm with no reserves.

900 and 1000 Jetprop models. Last iteration of these changed the pressure hull, so that you now have 6.7psi diff (and hence, smaller passenger windows). These models are RSVMable and will fly to FL350. The 900 came with -5's (but most have ben converted) and the 1000 came from factory with -10's. The 1000 model also has the highest MTOW.

Which one you should get is slightly depending on your mission and budget. If you want the best, a 900/1000 is hard to beat. Flies forever and with lower cabin it is less tiring. The SRL computers makes the TPE's in those for all intents and purposes a full fadec aircraft (nota bene: PT6 aircraft still doesn't have fadec today).

If you're on a budget and don't need the full LR, a 690A/B is a good choice. Simple environmental system, lots of parts, shorter wingspan.

If you're in between, then a 840 with -5's is a good choice. Very long range, benefit of the newer wing, but still priced with -5 in mind. Yeah, it's only a 270-275kts aircraft, but if you're not in a hurry, that's a good tradeoff.

If you want a real hauler, the 980 with -10's is the one. Insane useful load.

Drawbacks are:

1. The heated windshields are damn expensive. If they crack, you're looking at $55k per side.

2. On the later models, the Sundstrand environmental system got a really bad rap for many years. But of you're diligent about changing oil in it every 25hrs, they seem to do a lot better and reliability improves. The later Enviro system developed by Eagle Creek is often seen as the best system out there, but they're expensive to install, so expect to pay a premium if it's already installed. The old Fairchild system in the 690A/B is bulletproof, but can barely keep up.

3. Gear overhaul every 5 years. It's not that bad, but expect to pay $15-20k to do it. A King Air is $35K, so a bargain compared.

4. Jury is out on wet vs dry wings. You're only one hard landing away from a fuel leak in a wet wing, and they can be tricky to seal. Dry wings are labor intensive to inspect and repair, of course, but at least they're less susceptible to mechanical interference. BTW, as far as I know, none of the newer Commanders are pure wet wings - they're always combination of wet and dry to some degree. Bruce might be able to correct me on this.

What is the current sim options for the 840 with -10s

Not sure, I do know SimCom has a 840/980 course. It all takes place in the 690B sim with differences training.

The 1000 is one of the best flying airplanes I’ve ever flown. If I could ever afford to own a turboprop it would be on the short list of airplanes I would consider.

A bird told me that PPG now is charging 108.000$ for the windshield!
Same price of a G550 windshield! Unbeliveable