---------------------------------------------------------- Commander-List Digest Archive --- Total Messages Posted Fri 06/08/12: 5 ---------------------------------------------------------- Today's Message Index: ---------------------- 1. 07:36 AM - Re: Re: 680FP (Randy Dettmer, AIA) 2. 07:59 AM - Re: 680FP (stratobee) 3. 08:23 AM - Re: Re: 680FP (Keith S. Gordon) 4. 08:43 AM - Re: Re: 680FP (Tylor Hall) 5. 11:53 PM - Re: Re: 680FP (Moe Mills) ________________________________ Message 1 _____________________________________ Time: 07:36:43 AM PST US From: "Randy Dettmer, AIA" Subject: RE: Commander-List: Re: 680FP Good information from Moe. I get pretty much the same performance from my 680F (non-pressurized). Typically, I fly at between 10K and 12K with 52-55 gph and 190 kts true. Randy Dettmer 680F / N6253X Description: logoRED-126x38@72dpi Dettmer Architecture 663 Hill Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 805 541 4864 / fax 805 541 4865 www.dettmerarchitecture.com From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of cybersuperstore Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 10:11 PM Subject: RE: Commander-List: Re: 680FP Hi Moe, This is very valuable and interesting information. Would you be so kind and also post this on our facebook page? go to: www.facebook.com/commanderflight like the page and post it. That will be useful to all Commander fans. Thanks, Nico From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Moe Mills Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2012 11:37 PM Subject: RE: Commander-List: Re: 680FP Adam, Good to hear from you. The plane likes 16,000 to 18,000. I have never flown above 17999 feet as I never have high altitude charts on board. At 17,500 you should be able to keep about a 10,000 FT cabin. There is a placard which advises that you must depressurize at 21,000 (maybe 21,500 can't remember since I never go up there) I really like 17,000 eastbound and 16,000 westbound or 17.5 and 16.5 if VFR. This is a good altitude as the Cessna 150's and so fourth don't back into me and I don't back into the Lears. Most of the aircraft at this altitude will cruse at about the same Speed that I do. If you are thinking of getting one please consider, that since you seem to get out and travel quite a bit, a Stormsope (or weather radar) is almost a must. Also, since you seem to go to the east quite a bit, where the clouds start at about 500 feet AGL and go up to heaven, hot props, windshield alcohol, boots, heated fuel vents, and heated stall warning horn are almost a must. If properly equipped you are then certified known icing. Ironically, my worst icing horror story was when I was VFR and encountered freezing rain. All of these toys are pretty expensive to keep up. In the real world the storm scopes have probably saved my life only twice in the last 18 to 20 years, and the de-ice equipment has save me only a couple of times in the last 12 years, however, since I hold myself in high personal regard, and try to avoid personal injury and death at all cost the few extra thousand dollars has been well worth it. Fuel burn on a three hour trip will be almost 55 gallons per hour. Given the cost of fuel today that is most likely the biggest down side to a 680F(p). Keep in mind also that the IGSO540B1A (or C) engines are about the shortest TBO of anything that Lycoming makes (only 1,200 hours) and they are pretty expensive to overhaul. These geared engines will serve you well if you fly them correctly. The upside is that 380 HP per wing is a good thing. Several years ago I had an engine out at Night, 500 AGL on take off and it was a non event, with less power the outcome may have been very different. If you are considering buying one feel free to call me CELL # 310-350-4594. There is at least one on the market which has a pretty bad history of engine problems. Speed at the above altitudes and fuel burn is about 190 Knots. Regards, Moe N680RR > Subject: Commander-List: Re: 680FP > From: adam@adamfrisch.com > Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 09:48:47 -0700 > To: commander-list@matronics.com > > > Moe - can you give me some real life figures for the 680FP as a travel machine? > > Cruising speed up high? > > Fuel burn up high? > > What is a realistic cruising altitude with the pressurization? 20K or can you go higher? > > -------- > Adam > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=374862#374862 > > > > > > > &======== > > > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List http://forums.matronics.com http://www.matronics.com/contribution ________________________________ Message 2 _____________________________________ Time: 07:59:10 AM PST US Subject: Commander-List: Re: 680FP From: "stratobee" Thanks, Moe. 55gals?? Wow. Sounds like a lot. The Aerostar 702P at running at 250kts burns about that. I guess the engines here are bigger and it's a bigger airframe, but still... Anyway, good info. Yes, I would like to get something a bit faster and pressurized down the road. Every time I get groped and hassled by TSA agents on my travels, I think "I could be sitting in my own plane and not have to deal with all this c**p" listening to a podcast as I cruise along. Door to door travel times with a fast, pressurized all weather twin would be negligibly slower over most of the continental US (as long as weather cooperates). As an example, my work often takes me to Chicago, New York etc. Let's take Chicago as an example. My travel times look like this with the airlines: 1hr to get to airport. 1hr to check in before flight departs. 4hr flight 1hr to pick up luggage 1hr to get into town/destination. TOTAL: 8hours With a cabin class twin capable of 200kts, this is what it would take: 30min to get to airport 15min to preflight 8hrs flying 45min refueling/snack/bathroom stop 30min to get into town (as you're probably closer or on roads less traveled). TOTAL: 10hrs Not that big a difference in time. And in reality, because I have a paranoia about being late and hate stress, I will almost always be at the airport 2hrs before the flight leaves, so this brings the airline option to a realistic 9hrs of travel. In price, well, that's another matter - makes no sense :D -------- Adam Read this topic online here: http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=375011#375011 ________________________________ Message 3 _____________________________________ Time: 08:23:56 AM PST US Subject: Re: Commander-List: Re: 680FP From: "Keith S. Gordon" And let's not forget you'll never miss a flight when you take your own plane. Keith S Gordon via Samsung InfuseAT&T stratobee wrote: > >Thanks, Moe. > >55gals?? Wow. Sounds like a lot. The Aerostar 702P at running at 250kts burns about that. I guess the engines here are bigger and it's a bigger airframe, but still... > >Anyway, good info. Yes, I would like to get something a bit faster and pressurized down the road. Every time I get groped and hassled by TSA agents on my travels, I think "I could be sitting in my own plane and not have to deal with all this c**p" listening to a podcast as I cruise along. Door to door travel times with a fast, pressurized all weather twin would be negligibly slower over most of the continental US (as long as weather cooperates). > >As an example, my work often takes me to Chicago, New York etc. Let's take Chicago as an example. My travel times look like this with the airlines: > >1hr to get to airport. >1hr to check in before flight departs. >4hr flight >1hr to pick up luggage >1hr to get into town/destination. >TOTAL: 8hours > >With a cabin class twin capable of 200kts, this is what it would take: > >30min to get to airport >15min to preflight >8hrs flying >45min refueling/snack/bathroom stop >30min to get into town (as you're probably closer or on roads less traveled). >TOTAL: 10hrs > >Not that big a difference in time. And in reality, because I have a paranoia about being late and hate stress, I will almost always be at the airport 2hrs before the flight leaves, so this brings the airline option to a realistic 9hrs of travel. In price, well, that's another matter - makes no sense :D > >-------- >Adam > > >Read this topic online here: > >http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=375011#375011 > > ________________________________ Message 4 _____________________________________ Time: 08:43:30 AM PST US Subject: Re: Commander-List: Re: 680FP From: Tylor Hall The view is better, It is a lot more fun doing the flying and the seat is more comfortable. Tylor On Jun 8, 2012, at 9:23 AM, Keith S. Gordon wrote: > > And let's not forget you'll never miss a flight when you take your own plane. > > Keith S Gordon > via Samsung InfuseAT&T > > stratobee wrote: > >> >> Thanks, Moe. >> >> 55gals?? Wow. Sounds like a lot. The Aerostar 702P at running at 250kts burns about that. I guess the engines here are bigger and it's a bigger airframe, but still... >> >> Anyway, good info. Yes, I would like to get something a bit faster and pressurized down the road. Every time I get groped and hassled by TSA agents on my travels, I think "I could be sitting in my own plane and not have to deal with all this c**p" listening to a podcast as I cruise along. Door to door travel times with a fast, pressurized all weather twin would be negligibly slower over most of the continental US (as long as weather cooperates). >> >> As an example, my work often takes me to Chicago, New York etc. Let's take Chicago as an example. My travel times look like this with the airlines: >> >> 1hr to get to airport. >> 1hr to check in before flight departs. >> 4hr flight >> 1hr to pick up luggage >> 1hr to get into town/destination. >> TOTAL: 8hours >> >> With a cabin class twin capable of 200kts, this is what it would take: >> >> 30min to get to airport >> 15min to preflight >> 8hrs flying >> 45min refueling/snack/bathroom stop >> 30min to get into town (as you're probably closer or on roads less traveled). >> TOTAL: 10hrs >> >> Not that big a difference in time. And in reality, because I have a paranoia about being late and hate stress, I will almost always be at the airport 2hrs before the flight leaves, so this brings the airline option to a realistic 9hrs of travel. In price, well, that's another matter - makes no sense :D >> >> -------- >> Adam >> >> >> >> >> Read this topic online here: >> >> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=375011#375011 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > > ________________________________ Message 5 _____________________________________ Time: 11:53:21 PM PST US From: Moe Mills Subject: RE: Commander-List: Re: 680FP Hi Nico=2C It will show up there in a couple of days. Cheers! Moe From: nico@cybersuperstore.com Subject: RE: Commander-List: Re: 680FP Hi Moe=2C This is very valuable and interesting information. Would you be s o kind and also post this on our facebook page?go to:www.facebook.com/comma nderflight like the page and post it. That will be useful to all Commander fans. Thanks=2C Nico From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com [mail to:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Moe Mills Sent: Wednesday=2C June 06=2C 2012 11:37 PM Subject: RE: Commander-List: Re: 680FP Adam=2C Good to hear from you. The plane likes 16=2C000 to 18=2C000. I have never flown above 17999 feet as I never have high altitude charts on board. At 17=2C500 you should be a ble to keep about a 10=2C000 FT cabin. There is a placard which advises that you must depressurize at 21=2C000 (ma ybe 21=2C500 can't remember since I never go up there) I really like 17=2C 000 eastbound and 16=2C000 westbound or 17.5 and 16.5 if VFR. This is a g ood altitude as the Cessna 150's and so fourth don't back into me and I don 't back into the Lears. Most of the aircraft at this altitude will cruse a t about the same Speed that I do. If you are thinking of getting one please consider=2C that since you seem t o get out and travel quite a bit=2C a Stormsope (or weather radar) is almos t a must. Also=2C since you seem to go to the east quite a bit=2C where th e clouds start at about 500 feet AGL and go up to heaven=2C hot props=2C wi ndshield alcohol=2C boots=2C heated fuel vents=2C and heated stall warning horn are almost a must. If properly equipped you are then certified known icing. Ironically=2C my worst icing horror story was when I was VFR and en countered freezing rain. All of these toys are pretty expensive to keep up . In the real world the storm scopes have probably saved my life only twic e in the last 18 to 20 years=2C and the de-ice equipment has save me only a couple of times in the last 12 years=2C however=2C since I hold myself in high personal regard=2C and try to avoid personal injury and death at all c ost the few extra thousand dollars has been well worth it. Fuel burn on a three hour trip will be almost 55 gallons per hour. Given t he cost of fuel today that is most likely the biggest down side to a 680F(p ). Keep in mind also that the IGSO540B1A (or C) engines are about the shor test TBO of anything that Lycoming makes (only 1=2C200 hours) and they are pretty expensive to overhaul. These geared engines will serve you well if you fly them correctly. The upside is that 380 HP per wing is a good thin g. Several years ago I had an engine out at Night=2C 500 AGL on take off a nd it was a non event=2C with less power the outcome may have been very dif ferent. If you are considering buying one feel free to call me CELL # 310-350-4594. There is at least one on the market which has a pretty bad history of eng ine problems. Speed at the above altitudes and fuel burn is about 190 Knots. Regards=2C Moe N680RR > Subject: Commander-List: Re: 680FP > From: adam@adamfrisch.com > Date: Wed=2C 6 Jun 2012 09:48:47 -0700 > To: commander-list@matronics.com > > > Moe - can you give me some real life figures for the 680FP as a travel ma chine? > > Cruising speed up high? > > Fuel burn up high? > > What is a realistic cruising altitude with the pressurization? 20K or can you go higher? > > -------- > Adam > > > > > Read this topic online here: > > http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=374862#374862 > > > > > > > &======== > > > http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-Listhttp://forums.matronic s.comhttp://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Other Matronics Email List Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post A New Message commander-list@matronics.com UN/SUBSCRIBE http://www.matronics.com/subscription List FAQ http://www.matronics.com/FAQ/Commander-List.htm Web Forum Interface To Lists http://forums.matronics.com Matronics List Wiki http://wiki.matronics.com Full Archive Search Engine http://www.matronics.com/search 7-Day List Browse http://www.matronics.com/browse/commander-list Browse Digests http://www.matronics.com/digest/commander-list Browse Other Lists http://www.matronics.com/browse Live Online Chat! http://www.matronics.com/chat Archive Downloading http://www.matronics.com/archives Photo Share http://www.matronics.com/photoshare Other Email Lists http://www.matronics.com/emaillists Contributions http://www.matronics.com/contribution ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.