Debonair performance?

[Brinks]

I've been out looking at the early Debonairs with the IO-470-J or -K in
them. The books I've looked at and the info in TAP say they cruise at 148
knots (I'm assuming at 75% power), and I was wondering if there was anyone
out there who had any "real" numbers on cruise speeds. Thanks!

Chris

[Roy Smith]

In article >,
"Brinks" > wrote:

> I've been out looking at the early Debonairs with the IO-470-J or -K in
> them. The books I've looked at and the info in TAP say they cruise at 148
> knots (I'm assuming at 75% power), and I was wondering if there was anyone
> out there who had any "real" numbers on cruise speeds. Thanks!
>
> Chris
>
>

That sounds about right. My club has a 1963 Debby. We've since
upgraded it to a bigger engine (IO-520, 285 HP), but we used to have the
(225 HP?) 470 in it. I used to flight plan 145 KTAS at 65% power. Now
I use 160 KTAS, which might be a tad faster than it really does.

I plan our 300 HP V-tail at 170 KTAS.

When we still had our 152, I used to flight plan that at 90 :-)

[Stu Gotts]

That's bull****!

On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:50:27 -0600, "Brinks"
> wrote:

>I've been out looking at the early Debonairs with the IO-470-J or -K in
>them. The books I've looked at and the info in TAP say they cruise at 148
>knots (I'm assuming at 75% power), and I was wondering if there was anyone
>out there who had any "real" numbers on cruise speeds. Thanks!
>
>Chris
>

[Jeff]

why is it BS?
just curious since I dont know **** about them.



Stu Gotts wrote:

> That's bull****!
>
> On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:50:27 -0600, "Brinks"
> > wrote:
>
> >I've been out looking at the early Debonairs with the IO-470-J or -K in
> >them. The books I've looked at and the info in TAP say they cruise at 148
> >knots (I'm assuming at 75% power), and I was wondering if there was anyone
> >out there who had any "real" numbers on cruise speeds. Thanks!
> >
> >Chris
> >

[Stu Gotts]

What's listed in books and what you can actually get are often two
different things, even when the aircraft is new. Now add 40 years of
mods, interior changes, repairs, etc. and you start off with more
weight than the factory model. Add wear and tear to the airframe and
control surfaces, along with the engine and you do not get an airplane
that will fly as good as a new plane. Plus, you should consider what
the aircraft will consistently do in smooth air, not a speed that it
can get up to for a while or what someone will use while flight
planning.

With that said, the Debbies are great planes that will be faster than
any of its similarly powered competitors other than it's big brother,
the real Bonanza. Way overpriced, but they don't look like they'll be
getting any cheaper. Remember they are the economy version of the
Bonanza.

On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:35:13 -0800, Jeff > wrote:

>why is it BS?
>just curious since I dont know **** about them.
>
>
>
>Stu Gotts wrote:
>
>> That's bull****!
>>
>> On Mon, 15 Mar 2004 17:50:27 -0600, "Brinks"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >I've been out looking at the early Debonairs with the IO-470-J or -K in
>> >them. The books I've looked at and the info in TAP say they cruise at 148
>> >knots (I'm assuming at 75% power), and I was wondering if there was anyone
>> >out there who had any "real" numbers on cruise speeds. Thanks!
>> >
>> >Chris
>> >

[Jim Carter]

Stu,

I'll immediately grant that I'm not an expert here, but your statements
got me to thinking. Since today's radios, starters, alternators, and myriad
other items are less heavy than they were 40 or 50 years ago, many aircraft
might actually be lighter than when they rolled out the factory door. Many
mods done over the years actually improved factory performance by cleaning
up air leaks with gap seals and such. Engine age is certainly a factor that
will decrease performance over the years, but that can often be remedied
with tops and majors as time goes on. The airframe is another issue that
probably takes constant attention to keep the ailerons, flaps, door seal,
and gear doors from hanging out in the windstream, but I've known a few
pilot/mechanics who really paid attention to these details.

My question, after taking all of this into account, is couldn't some
aircraft be faster today than they actually were coming off the factory
floor 40 or 50 years ago? I grant you there won't be many, but I suspect
many owners really do put this much effort into maintaining their bird. Of
course those are the ones that are never for sale...

--
Jim Carter
Seen on a bumper sticker:
If you can read this, thank a teacher
If you can read this in English, thank a soldier.


"Stu Gotts" > wrote in message
...
> What's listed in books and what you can actually get are often two
> different things, even when the aircraft is new. Now add 40 years of
> mods, interior changes, repairs, etc. and you start off with more
> weight than the factory model. Add wear and tear to the airframe and
> control surfaces, along with the engine and you do not get an airplane
> that will fly as good as a new plane. Plus, you should consider what
> the aircraft will consistently do in smooth air, not a speed that it
> can get up to for a while or what someone will use while flight
> planning.
>

[Stu Gotts]

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:15:54 GMT, "Jim Carter" >
wrote:

>Stu,
>
> I'll immediately grant that I'm not an expert here, but your statements
>got me to thinking. Since today's radios, starters, alternators, and myriad
>other items are less heavy than they were 40 or 50 years ago, many aircraft
>might actually be lighter than when they rolled out the factory door. Many
>mods done over the years actually improved factory performance by cleaning
>up air leaks with gap seals and such. Engine age is certainly a factor that
>will decrease performance over the years, but that can often be remedied
>with tops and majors as time goes on. The airframe is another issue that
>probably takes constant attention to keep the ailerons, flaps, door seal,
>and gear doors from hanging out in the windstream, but I've known a few
>pilot/mechanics who really paid attention to these details.
>
> My question, after taking all of this into account, is couldn't some
>aircraft be faster today than they actually were coming off the factory
>floor 40 or 50 years ago? I grant you there won't be many, but I suspect
>many owners really do put this much effort into maintaining their bird. Of
>course those are the ones that are never for sale...

That's a good bunch of points, but where weight is saved, usually it's
lost somewhere else. Plus let's not forget about drag from antennas
that are usually installed. I've never heard of an older plane being
faster than when it came from the factory unless a monster engine was
placed into it or someone took the time to tweak the rigging. For
instance a Debonair with an IO550 is surely a screamer.