Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:43 AM - Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. (stratobee)
2. 10:35 AM - Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. (n395v)
3. 11:10 AM - Re: Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. (Morris Kernick)
4. 12:05 PM - Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. (Cate Chagnot)
5. 12:25 PM - Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. (stratobee)
6. 12:36 PM - Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. (stratobee)
7. 07:52 PM - Re: Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. (cybersuperstore)
Message 1
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. |
Is it worth changing to an oil filter system? I've heard the screens don't clean
as well as an oil filter and are harder to get to.
Also, the 520 being so light and small - what would a reasonable take off distance
be full tanks, 2 persons on board, standard day, sea level? Ballpark figure.
I've heard some people operating out of 1400ft, but that seems close to the
bone. There's a guy at 15WA airfield in Washington who regularly flies his 500
out of that 2000ft grass strip, so I'm assuming a tarmac 1400ft field could
be OK.
Here's a link to his landings:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctf1ZycVag8
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=325659#325659
Message 2
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. |
> Here's a link to his landings:
That's Dave Pfeiffer, I believe he has a Colemill or some other conversion giving
him 310+HP per side soprobably not a good comparison.
What made you decide against the Skymaster?
--------
Milt
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=325680#325680
Message 3
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. |
Adam: Regarding your question about oil filters. I do not think
installing oil filter kits will make economic sense, as they are
expensive, labor intensive to install, & offer one more possibility
for engine oil leaks & starvation. We have maintained geared Lycoming
engines for years with screens, with no problems. Just regular oil
changes, cleaning screens, & good engine maintenance is adequate. As
for takeoff distance with your loading requirements, 1,400 feet will
be no problem. The aircraft in the video link you sent is one of our
customers. Dave Phifer has a 500B with Merlyn Products 320 hp engine
conversion, gross weight is 7,200 lbs. Geared engine airplanes tend to
accelerate better than direct drive, so takeoff distances are usually
better. Braking on landing will be more consideration on short
runways. I spoke to Vic & his mechanic Bob, today, they are sending me
some information that I requested. I have appointments on Friday &
Saturday, I could not reschedule, so will try for a reservation for
Sun. afternoon to Detroit. I will send you a copy of my schedule when
confirmed. Thanks, Morris
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 7:41 AM, stratobee <adam@adamfrisch.com> wrote:
>
> Is it worth changing to an oil filter system? I've heard the screens don't clean
as well as an oil filter and are harder to get to.
>
> Also, the 520 being so light and small - what would a reasonable take off distance
be full tanks, 2 persons on board, standard day, sea level? Ballpark figure.
I've heard some people operating out of 1400ft, but that seems close to the
bone. There's a guy at 15WA airfield in Washington who regularly flies his
500 out of that 2000ft grass strip, so I'm assuming a tarmac 1400ft field could
be OK.
>
> Here's a link to his landings:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctf1ZycVag8
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=325659#325659
>
>
Message 4
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. |
Adam,
1400 ft? Close to the bone? I'll say... If everything is working and an engine
doesn't sputter maybe after you've had a bunch of practice. I fly a C180 Skywagon
with a full Horton STOL and 1000' always seems short. I just got back from
flying a U206 Air Ambulance in South America for awhile and everything's got
to be right when you're operating in and out of short strips. 1400 feet is going
to look like a postage stamp in a Commander....
Before I'd try it I'd go out and mark out 1400 feet on a long runway and practice,
practice, practice. It seems to me that 1400 ft is probably beyond the accelerate/stop
distance, especially if you've got the goodyear brakes and not the
Clevelands. One of the first things I did after I got my 680E was to put Cleveland
brakes on it. Cut my accelerate/stop distance almost in half. Best money
I spent at $5,000 for the pair.
Cate
--------
Cate
N4278S 680E
Skywagon N180PK
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=325695#325695
Message 5
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. |
Thanks Morris. I will be going to Detroit myself probably mid next week if all
works out here in London in time. Maybe I'll see you there, or just miss you,
but we'll def speak on the phone.
Milt - well, for as long as I've flown and can remember, I've had four aircrafts
that I've obsessed about: Skymasters, Aero Commanders, Aerostars and Lake Amphibians
(two Ted Smith designs, so he must have done something right in my eyes!).
Internally they constantly change place in some kind of childish, twisted Top 4
list. I had a Skymaster obsessive period beginning of the year (when I almost
bought a 336 and inquired about a P337) and then it shifted to Lake Amphibians
more towards the autumn. I thought that would be a good choice for a first time
buyer, and it probably would have been. They're sturdy aircrafts and relatively
simple. The red thread here is I like utility and being able to get into
smaller, rougher fields. More bush than posh. OK, that doesn't explain Aerostars,
but they're just...hot.
So when N527P came along on Ebay, I pretty much just bid on it to see where the
reserve price was, giving myself $500 above the asking price to play with as
I was certain I was going to buy a Lake. Turns out the reserve was just right
there - I was the instant high bidder on my first bid. I thought someone would
come along during the week and outbid me, but then nobody did. So I kind of became
the owner by accident. It did freak me out a bit at first, but I've come
to terms with it now. Is it a good first buy for a rookie owner? Probably not,
a 500B would perhaps have been a better choice (and more than I could afford),
but hey, at least it will be an experience.
--------
Adam
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=325696#325696
Message 6
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. |
Cate Chagnot wrote:
> Adam,
>
> 1400 ft? Close to the bone? I'll say... If everything is working and an engine
doesn't sputter maybe after you've had a bunch of practice. I fly a C180 Skywagon
with a full Horton STOL and 1000' always seems short. I just got back from
flying a U206 Air Ambulance in South America for awhile and everything's got
to be right when you're operating in and out of short strips. 1400 feet is going
to look like a postage stamp in a Commander....
>
> Before I'd try it I'd go out and mark out 1400 feet on a long runway and practice,
practice, practice. It seems to me that 1400 ft is probably beyond the accelerate/stop
distance, especially if you've got the goodyear brakes and not
the Clevelands. One of the first things I did after I got my 680E was to put Cleveland
brakes on it. Cut my accelerate/stop distance almost in half. Best money
I spent at $5,000 for the pair.
>
> Cate
Hi Cate.
Unfortunately, apparently there is no brake upgrade on the 520 to anything newer,
so I'm stuck with the old ones.
Yeah, 1400ft isn't much. I started flying in Sweden many years ago, and then lived
7 years in England and flew there. England has rather few American style long
tarmac runways, so one has to contend with a lot of grass fields. I quite
regularly fly (or should say flew) into short grass fields, but that was obviously
smaller single Cessnas. The specified take off distance of the 520 (thank
you Barry!) is a published 950ft. I've been told it's the quickest of all the
Commanders to get off the ground. Still, going for smaller gravel or grass fields
is not something I will be doing until I feel comfortable in all aspects.
--------
Adam
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=325699#325699
Message 7
INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
Subject: | Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions. |
Once you go into a strip under 2500' you have to ignore stop-start
distances. When you open the taps on takeoff, you have no more than 10
seconds to decide to abandon. Otherwise, you fly. Period. If you lose an
engine after that, you have a single-engine heavy weight on your hands. With
proper energy management you would be slightly better off than a single that
lost an engine, but you aren't going anywhere far anyway. I think it was Bob
Hoover who said, fly the plane as far into the accident as you possibly can.
I liked what Cate said, practice, practice and when you are done, practice
again. (paraphrased). Going into the general flying area and setting up an
imaginary runway at a particular altitude can give one surprising insight
into problems close to the 'ground'.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of stratobee
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2011 7:41 AM
Subject: Commander-List: Re: Commander 520 from 1953 questions.
Is it worth changing to an oil filter system? I've heard the screens don't
clean as well as an oil filter and are harder to get to.
Also, the 520 being so light and small - what would a reasonable take off
distance be full tanks, 2 persons on board, standard day, sea level?
Ballpark figure. I've heard some people operating out of 1400ft, but that
seems close to the bone. There's a guy at 15WA airfield in Washington who
regularly flies his 500 out of that 2000ft grass strip, so I'm assuming a
tarmac 1400ft field could be OK.
Here's a link to his landings:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ctf1ZycVag8
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=325659#325659
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|