A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

A36 Bonanza turbo prop



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 24th 03, 06:29 PM
Jeff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default A36 Bonanza turbo prop

Anyone else read the article in the new private pilot mag ( think it was
pvt pilot) that had the A36 Bonanza turbo prop modification.
They listed is as almost a half a million dollar modification.

Ads
  #2  
Old December 24th 03, 06:52 PM
Orval Fairbairn
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Jeff wrote:

Anyone else read the article in the new private pilot mag ( think it was
pvt pilot) that had the A36 Bonanza turbo prop modification.
They listed is as almost a half a million dollar modification.


A friend of mine here had one -- he got a Piper Meridian because the
Meridian is pressurized.
  #3  
Old December 24th 03, 08:16 PM
Scott Skylane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jeff wrote:

Anyone else read the article in the new private pilot mag ( think it was
pvt pilot) that had the A36 Bonanza turbo prop modification.
They listed is as almost a half a million dollar modification.


Jeff,
These have been around for quite a while, and they are nothing but an
exercise in compromises. First, there is no "yellow arc" allowed on the
airspeed indicator, so redline becomes top of the green. This restricts
you to pretty low true airspeeds at breathable altitudes. Stay down
low, go slow and burn A LOT of gas. Go up high, go fast, and suck on a
nose bag. Not to mention that Jet fuel weighs 10% more than av gas, and
to carry enough to go anywhere, you have to install tip tanks.
Unfortunately, gross takeoff weight does not get an appreciable
increase, so cabin payload for anything but touch and go's drops into
the pathetic range. Etc., etc...

They are little more than a fun toy for those that can afford them. If
I were playing with that much money, I'd look into a light pressurized twin.

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane

  #4  
Old December 24th 03, 08:41 PM
Roy Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Scott Skylane wrote:
These have been around for quite a while, and they are nothing but an
exercise in compromises.


All airplanes are an exercise in compromises.

First, there is no "yellow arc" allowed on the
airspeed indicator, so redline becomes top of the green.


I know turbines don't have a yellow arc, but I never understood the
logic behind that. Vno (bottom of the yellow arc) is determined by
airframe factors -- IIRC, the ability of the wings to handle the
stresses from vertical gusts. How does taking out pistons and putting
in fan blades change how the airframe reacts to stresses?

This restricts you to pretty low true airspeeds at breathable
altitudes. Stay down low, go slow and burn A LOT of gas. Go up
high, go fast, and suck on a nose bag.


But oh man, think of the climb rates you must get!
  #5  
Old December 24th 03, 09:12 PM
Jeff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

this is the first time I heard of them having this conversion for the A36
bonanza, seems kinda like over kill for that plane. I have seen it for other
planes before.

the article said they also had to add tip tanks for the extra gas that thing
burns

Scott Skylane wrote:

Jeff wrote:

Anyone else read the article in the new private pilot mag ( think it was
pvt pilot) that had the A36 Bonanza turbo prop modification.
They listed is as almost a half a million dollar modification.


Jeff,
These have been around for quite a while, and they are nothing but an
exercise in compromises. First, there is no "yellow arc" allowed on the
airspeed indicator, so redline becomes top of the green. This restricts
you to pretty low true airspeeds at breathable altitudes. Stay down
low, go slow and burn A LOT of gas. Go up high, go fast, and suck on a
nose bag. Not to mention that Jet fuel weighs 10% more than av gas, and
to carry enough to go anywhere, you have to install tip tanks.
Unfortunately, gross takeoff weight does not get an appreciable
increase, so cabin payload for anything but touch and go's drops into
the pathetic range. Etc., etc...

They are little more than a fun toy for those that can afford them. If
I were playing with that much money, I'd look into a light pressurized twin.

Happy Flying!
Scott Skylane


  #6  
Old December 24th 03, 09:16 PM
Jeff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I think the article said it gets 1700 fpm climb, TAS at 15000 is around 210
kts.

Roy Smith wrote:



But oh man, think of the climb rates you must get!


  #7  
Old December 24th 03, 10:56 PM
Bruce Gray
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

And KTAS for a Glasair III at 8,000 is 230.

Bruce
www.glasair.org

"Jeff" wrote in message
...
I think the article said it gets 1700 fpm climb, TAS at 15000 is around

210
kts.

Roy Smith wrote:



But oh man, think of the climb rates you must get!




  #8  
Old December 24th 03, 11:18 PM
Mike Rapoport
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Roy Smith" wrote in message
...
Scott Skylane wrote:
These have been around for quite a while, and they are nothing but an
exercise in compromises.


All airplanes are an exercise in compromises.

First, there is no "yellow arc" allowed on the
airspeed indicator, so redline becomes top of the green.


I know turbines don't have a yellow arc, but I never understood the
logic behind that. Vno (bottom of the yellow arc) is determined by
airframe factors -- IIRC, the ability of the wings to handle the
stresses from vertical gusts. How does taking out pistons and putting
in fan blades change how the airframe reacts to stresses?


It doesn't, turbines are just rated more conservatively. There is nothing
magic about these numbers. Vne is simply 90% of Vd (maximium demonstrated
dive speed), and Vno (Vmo in turbines) is simply 80%. Barry Schiff has a
discussion of V speeds in one of his books.

Mike
MU-2


This restricts you to pretty low true airspeeds at breathable
altitudes. Stay down low, go slow and burn A LOT of gas. Go up
high, go fast, and suck on a nose bag.


But oh man, think of the climb rates you must get!



  #9  
Old December 25th 03, 04:01 AM
Viperdoc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

One of the theoretical advantages of the conversions is that it remains and
flies like a Bonanza, with excellent handling. The quality of Beech
workmanship far exceeds that of a Piper. A single turbine will likely be
more reliable regarding engine failures compared to a twin, without the
inherent difficulties of managing two engines, or one when the other quits.

Light pressurized twins require a lot more maintenance than a turbine
Bonanza- two of everything to break, and lots of moving parts contained with
an aging airframe and pressure vessel. Hourly operating expenses will likely
be lower, while dispatch rates will be higher with the turbine Bonanza.
Plus, the turbine Bonanza can be flown into significantly shorter and less
improved fields than a cabin class piston twin.

Yes, all airplanes are compromises in some respects, but most people would
agree that the performance of a turbine Bonanza probably exceeds that of a
lot of cabin class twins, and likely will be more reliable.


  #10  
Old December 25th 03, 09:44 PM
Ron Natalie
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Jeff" wrote in message ...
Anyone else read the article in the new private pilot mag ( think it was
pvt pilot) that had the A36 Bonanza turbo prop modification.
They listed is as almost a half a million dollar modification.


Yep, that's where I got the engine for my Navion. I have IO-550-B Platinum
edition, prop, engine instruments, etc... everything that came off some guy's
Bonanza when it went in for the turbine mod. Nine hours since factor new.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Right prop, wrong prop? Wood prop, metal prop? Gus Rasch Aerobatics 1 February 14th 08 10:18 PM
Ivo Prop on O-320 Dave S Home Built 14 October 15th 04 03:04 AM
Turbo prop AT-6/SNJ? frank may Military Aviation 11 September 5th 04 02:51 PM
IVO props... comments.. Dave S Home Built 16 December 6th 03 11:43 PM
Early Bonanza or Apache? Brinks Owning 11 July 16th 03 06:01 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.