Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 04:45 AM - Re: Can we talk 685's? (nico van niekerk)
2. 04:58 AM - Re: Can we talk 685's? (stratobee)
3. 07:01 AM - Re: Re: Can we talk 685's? (Keith S. Gordon)
4. 01:42 PM - Re: Re: Can we talk 685's? (Moe Mills)
5. 02:14 PM - Re: Re: Can we talk 685's? (Keith S. Gordon)
6. 04:11 PM - Re: Re: Can we talk 685's? (Moe Mills)
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: | Can we talk 685's? |
I reposted Keith's response on our Facebook page:
www.facebook.com/commanderflight
Thanks, Keith.
From: owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-commander-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Keith S.
Gordon
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2012 11:19 PM
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Can we talk 685's?
I'd like some more meat on the 685 and/or the 680FPL. I know all the
usual stuff - how it needs a lot of rwy fully loaded, how the engines
will ruin you etc, etc.
But what I would like to know more about is real world operation etc:
1.What's the certified ceiling?
2. What can you expect the burn at 20K plus and 55%, 45%, TAS?
3. Do they all come with 322gal tanks or is that an add on?
4. Are cylinders etc plentiful and easy to get hold of?
5. How terrible is the Skydrol system? Does it run the pressurisation as
well?
6. Any significant AD's?
7. They seem to have come with a few different engines ranging from
390hp to 450hp - any particular one to avoid?
8. What is the difference between the 685 and the 680FPL?
OK. Back from my trip and will offer what information I still remember
from the 685 and 680FLP days -- but my disclaimer is that it's been way
too long since I've been around either, so I'll hope Sir Barry, Bill
Leff and Milt Concanon will do some fact checking on this.
1. The service ceiling on the 685 is FL250. The 680 has a service
ceiling in excess of FL280 but that's not a fair comparison. For a Part
23 piston airplane the service ceiling is where a 50 foot per minute
climb can not be sustained. The 685, being the same airframe as the 690
Turbo Commander has its service ceiling set by Part 23 structural
requirements for turbine airplanes.
2. Don't remember for sure, but at about 65% power I remember 45 gph
block fuel flow. Can't tell you what the lower power settings would be.
3. 322 is standard fuel on the 685. The 680FLP will have 225. (223
useable)
4. Cylinders? Don't know. If you do everything exactly right on the
685, you'll only replace 3 cylinders a year.
5. Skydrol is very toxic, expensive and an excellent paint stripper.
Thank you for asking. It also has good fire retardancy and that's why
it's used in high pressure systems.
On the stock AC680-FLP the 3000 psi system runs the cabin supercharger;
the pressure is reduced to 1000 psi for the utilities (Gear, flaps,
brakes, nosewheel steering). The Achilles heel of the AC-680-FLP are
the 3000 psi hydraulic (Skydrol) pumps. They were hard to find 15
years ago. I can only imagine they're no less difficult to find now.
The 685 has the 1000 psi, Mil-H-5606 (red fluid) hydraulic system and
cabin pressurization is via bleed air from the turbochargers.
6. The 685, being the Turbo Commander airframe, is subject to the
recurring spar corrosion inspection unless one does the spar strap to
get rid of the AD. I don't know of any 685s that did that because the
spar mod is more expensive than the cost of the entire airplane -- maybe
2 entire airplanes.
7. The stock AC680-FLP has the Lycoming IGSO-540 engine. 380hp,
mechanical supercharging. This engine was only installed on the 680-F
series Aero Commanders. The MR. RPM conversion changes that engine to a
Lycoming IO-720 with after market turbochargers, producing 400 hp with
turbo normalizing. Some MR. RPM conversions included a switch to 5606
hydraulic fluid. Bleed air pressurization eliminates the cabin
supercharger on the RPMs.
The AC-685 comes with the Continental GTSIO-520-K producing 435 hp.
(Same engine that Cessna uses on the CE-421 and CE-404 but with the good
manners to only extract 375 hp from it; 435hp is a lot of power to pull
out of 520 cubic inches.) This is a turbo charged engine, not
supercharged by a mechanical supercharger as the AC-680 has.
8. Let's see ... how to do this:
AC-680-FLP
* Same airframe as the AC-680-FL -- a stretched version of the AC-500B,
really, but with some structural enhancements to allow it to weigh up to
8500 lbs.
* 3000 psi Skydrol hydraulic system
* pressurization via cabin supercharger
* Good runway performance; will generally allow full fuel and 4 seats
filled. Could be pressed into bush service.
AC-685
* Same airframe as the 690 Turbo Commanders
* 1000 psi 5606 hydraulic system
* pressurization via tapping bleed air off the turbo chargers
* Poor runway performance; full fuel will allow one or two seats filled
* Quiet. Comfortable for long duration flights. Belongs on civilized
airports with long runways.
* Being based on Part 23 certification requirements for a turbine
powered airplane, the flight manual is modern, very complete and
provides more performance information than any of the piston powered
Commanders.
If you're obsessed with range, the 685 is your airplane -- but only if
it's just you and one or two skinny super models. 1500 nm might be
possible if you're willing to pull it back to less than 190 to 200 KTAS.
I don't have any data to tell you what fuel burn would be at ultra long
range cruise speed. However, there are two things to consider:
To maintain pressurization at FL200 you may have to run more power than
what an ultra-long range power setting might be, and, too low a power
setting at initial weight at top of climb will cost in terms of TAS due
to the angle of attack you'll need to keep the plane in level flight.
I'd think initial cruising in the mid-to-high teens is more conducive to
ultra long range fuel flow.
Adam, I hope I answered most of your questions. I only wish I had fuel
flow data vs. TAS to give you, because that's the key to your choice of
airplanes.
Let us know what your thoughts are.
Keith S. Gordon
(aka Wing Commander Gordon)
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
KHND RNAV Lead
FAASTeam Lead Rep, Las Vegas
NBAA Access Committee
Las Vegas Airspace Users' Council, NBAA Rep
Las Vegas RNAV Optimization Work Group, NBAA Rep
Las Vegas Class B Redesign Committee, NBAA Rep
-----Original Message-----
From: CloudCraft / K.S.Gordon <cloudcraft@aol.com>
<commander-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Mon, Nov 5, 2012 6:09 pm
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Can we talk 685's?
Adam,
Too much to discuss via a smartphone that requires everything to be
retyped 5 times.
When I get home to a full sized keyboard I'll do my best to answer your
questions if nobody else has by then.
~KG~
Keith S. Gordon
on the fly
stratobee <adam@adamfrisch.com> wrote:
I'd like some more meat on the 685 and/or the 680FPL. I know all the
usual stuff - how it needs a lot of rwy fully loaded, how the engines
will ruin you etc, etc.
But what I would like to know more about is real world operation etc:
1.What's the certified ceiling?
2. What can you expect the burn at 20K plus and 55%, 45%, TAS?
3. Do they all come with 322gal tanks or is that an add on?
4. Are cylinders etc plentiful and easy to get hold of?
5. How terrible is the Skydrol system? Does it run the pressurisation as
well?
6. Any significant AD's?
7. They seem to have come with a few different engines ranging from
390hp to 450hp - any particular one to avoid?
8. What is the difference between the 685 and the 680FPL?
Any experiences greatly appreciated.
--------
Adam
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=386982#386982
Month --
Some AWESOME FREE Gifts!)
r> tric.com" target="_blank">www.aeroelectric.com
ww.buildersbooks.com" target="_blank">www.buildersbooks.com
lthelp.com" target="_blank">www.homebuilthelp.com
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
p; -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
-List Email Forum -
ander-List"
target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
p; - MATRONICS WEB FORUMS -
_blank">http://forums.matronics.com
=EF=BD=EF=BD=EF=BD~=EF=BD=EF=BD,=EF=BD=EF=BD=EF=BD
%=EF=BD=EF=BDM4=EF=BD=EF=BD=EF=BDx=EF=BD=EF=BD=EF
=BD=EF=BDw=EF=BDr=EF=BD=EF=BD=EF=BD=EF=BD
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: Can we talk 685's? |
Thanks Keith - really appreciate it!
--------
Adam
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=387357#387357
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: Can we talk 685's? |
At your service.
~KG~
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
KHND RNAV Lead
FAASTeam Lead Rep, Las Vegas
NBAA Access Committee
Las Vegas Airspace Users' Council, NBAA Rep
Las Vegas RNAV Optimization Work Group, NBAA Rep
Las Vegas Class B Redesign Committee, NBAA Rep
-----Original Message-----
From: stratobee <adam@adamfrisch.com>
Sent: Fri, Nov 9, 2012 4:58 am
Subject: Commander-List: Re: Can we talk 685's?
Thanks Keith - really appreciate it!
--------
Adam
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=387357#387357
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: Can we talk 685's? |
Hi Adam=2C
While I certainly do not profess to know nearly as much a Keith about the a
ircraft=2C here are a couple of observations based on flying about 1=2C000
hours in my 680F(p)=2C which is very similar to the 680FLP. The 680FLP is
longer than the 680F(p). The engines are the same (IGSO540). The New York
Air Brake skydrol pumps can be overhauled at a cost of about $ 4=2C000.00
each. If you purchase a plane which uses Skydrol try to find one which has
been painted with Jet Glow. Jet Glow is very skydrol resistant=2C and alt
hough I have experienced a couple of leaks since having it painted with Jet
Glow none of the paint came off=2C even after sitting for about a week whe
n it was wet. Every other paint comes off if you don't wash it down within
about 1/2 hour with alkey. Skydrol is much less toxic now than it was in
previous times=2C as they changed the formulation several times a few years
ago.
The useful service sealing on the 680F(p) is 22=2C000 feet as the plane mus
t be depressurized at that altitude. The plane likes 16=2C000 to 18=2C000
feet from a speed=2C handling=2C fuel consumption standpoint.
Regards=2CMe
> Subject: Commander-List: Re: Can we talk 685's?
> From: adam@adamfrisch.com
> Date: Fri=2C 9 Nov 2012 04:58:17 -0800
> To: commander-list@matronics.com
>
>
> Thanks Keith - really appreciate it!
>
> --------
> Adam
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=387357#387357
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
===========
===========
===========
===========
>
>
>
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: Can we talk 685's? |
The New York Air Brake skydrol pumps can be overhauled at a cost of about $
4,000.00 each. If you purchase a plane which uses Skydrol try to find one
which has been painted with Jet Glow. Jet Glow is very skydrol resistant,
and although I have experienced a couple of leaks since having it painted
with Jet Glow none of the paint came off, even after sitting for about a we
ek when it was wet. Every other paint comes off if you don't wash it down
within about 1/2 hour with alkey. Skydrol is much less toxic now than it w
as in previous times, as they changed the formulation several times a few y
ears ago.
Mo,
Thanks for posting your experience. Great stuff.
Question: Are you field overhauling your New York Airbrake hydraulic pumps
or sending them to an O/H shop. If rebuilding in the field, where do you
get the kits and if sending to a shop, who are you using?
I expect Morris Kernick is the most important resource on the subject.
Also glad to hear Jet Glow holds up to Skydrol. Last AC-680-FLP I visited
had its paint peeling on the right side due to a gear actuator leak and a
leak at the reservoir.
~KG~
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.
KHND RNAV Lead
FAASTeam Lead Rep, Las Vegas
NBAA Access Committee
Las Vegas Airspace Users' Council, NBAA Rep
Las Vegas RNAV Optimization Work Group, NBAA Rep
Las Vegas Class B Redesign Committee, NBAA Rep
-----Original Message-----
From: Moe Mills <moe-rosspistons@hotmail.com>
Sent: Fri, Nov 9, 2012 1:42 pm
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Re: Can we talk 685's?
Hi Adam,
While I certainly do not profess to know nearly as much a Keith about the a
ircraft, here are a couple of observations based on flying about 1,000 hour
s in my 680F(p), which is very similar to the 680FLP. The 680FLP is longe
r than the 680F(p). The engines are the same (IGSO540). The New York Air B
rake skydrol pumps can be overhauled at a cost of about $ 4,000.00 each. I
f you purchase a plane which uses Skydrol try to find one which has been pa
inted with Jet Glow. Jet Glow is very skydrol resistant, and although I ha
ve experienced a couple of leaks since having it painted with Jet Glow none
of the paint came off, even after sitting for about a week when it was wet
. Every other paint comes off if you don't wash it down within about 1/2 h
our with alkey. Skydrol is much less toxic now than it was in previous tim
es, as they changed the formulation several times a few years ago.
The useful service sealing on the 680F(p) is 22,000 feet as the plane must
be depressurized at that altitude. The plane likes 16,000 to 18,000 feet f
rom a speed, handling, fuel consumption standpoint.
Regards,
Me
> Subject: Commander-List: Re: Can we talk 685's?
> From: adam@adamfrisch.com
> Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2012 04:58:17 -0800
> To: commander-list@matronics.com
>
>
> Thanks Keith - really appreciate it!
>
> --------
> Adam
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=387357#387357
>
>
>
> >
>
>
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: Can we talk 685's? |
Keith=2C
Thanks for waking me up on this post as there was a mistake in it. The pum
ps were ONLY about $ 2=2C000.00 each ($ 4=2C000.00 for ship set). It has
been several years (thank goodness) since having these rebuilt. Once=2C I
used Thunder Airmotive=2C Sun Valley=2C CA. (818) 683-0050 and while the bi
rd was at Commander-Aero in OH. we did a spare. The guys at Thunder once d
id a repair and test for only $ 434.00=2C however that was nine years ago.
Also=2C since Solutia Technical Service took over Skydrol they are really g
reat to deal with=2C and once did a complimentary fluid check for me after
an overheating problem. They advised that we filter the fluid by placing a
new filter in my Skydrol mule and running it through the mule filter at le
ast twice. The overheating problem was due to the filter in the tank being
clogged (as diagnosed over the phone by Morris). We have been unable to l
ocate the supplier of parts for a field overhaul=2C but haven't searched in
several years.
Regards=2C
Moe
Subject: Re: Commander-List: Re: Can we talk 685's?
From: cloudcraft@aol.com
The New York Air Brake skydrol pumps can be overhauled at a cost of about $
4=2C000.00 each. If you purchase a plane which uses Skydrol try to find o
ne which has been painted with Jet Glow. Jet Glow is very skydrol resistan
t=2C and although I have experienced a couple of leaks since having it pain
ted with Jet Glow none of the paint came off=2C even after sitting for abou
t a week when it was wet. Every other paint comes off if you don't wash it
down within about 1/2 hour with alkey. Skydrol is much less toxic now tha
n it was in previous times=2C as they changed the formulation several times
a few years ago.
Mo=2C
Thanks for posting your experience. Great stuff.
Question: Are you field overhauling your New York Airbrake hydraulic pumps
or sending them to an O/H shop. If rebuilding in the field=2C where do yo
u get the kits and if sending to a shop=2C who are you using?
I expect Morris Kernick is the most important resource on the subject.
Also glad to hear Jet Glow holds up to Skydrol. Last AC-680-FLP I visited
had its paint peeling on the right side due to a gear actuator leak and a
leak at the reservoir.
~KG~
Life is not simple anywhere. Probably less so elsewhere.KHND RNAV Lead
FAASTeam Lead Rep=2C Las Vegas
NBAA Access Committee
Las Vegas Airspace Users' Council=2C NBAA Rep
Las Vegas RNAV Optimization Work Group=2C NBAA Rep
Las Vegas Class B Redesign Committee=2C NBAA Rep
-----Original Message-----
From: Moe Mills <moe-rosspistons@hotmail.com>
Sent: Fri=2C Nov 9=2C 2012 1:42 pm
Subject: RE: Commander-List: Re: Can we talk 685's?
Hi Adam=2C
While I certainly do not profess to know nearly as much a Keith about the a
ircraft=2C here are a couple of observations based on flying about 1=2C000
hours in my 680F(p)=2C which is very similar to the 680FLP. The 680FLP is
longer than the 680F(p). The engines are the same (IGSO540). The New York
Air Brake skydrol pumps can be overhauled at a cost of about $ 4=2C000.00
each. If you purchase a plane which uses Skydrol try to find one which has
been painted with Jet Glow. Jet Glow is very skydrol resistant=2C and alt
hough I have experienced a couple of leaks since having it painted with Jet
Glow none of the paint came off=2C even after sitting for about a week whe
n it was wet. Every other paint comes off if you don't wash it down within
about 1/2 hour with alkey. Skydrol is much less toxic now than it was in
previous times=2C as they changed the formulation several times a few years
ago.
The useful service sealing on the 680F(p) is 22=2C000 feet as the plane mus
t be depressurized at that altitude. The plane likes 16=2C000 to 18=2C000
feet from a speed=2C handling=2C fuel consumption standpoint.
Regards=2C
Me
> Subject: Commander-List: Re: Can we talk 685's?
> From: adam@adamfrisch.com
> Date: Fri=2C 9 Nov 2012 04:58:17 -0800
> To: commander-list@matronics.com
>
>
> Thanks Keith - really appreciate it!
>
> --------
> Adam
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=387357#387357
>
>
>
> >
>
>
ic.com">www.aeroelectric.com
.buildersbooks.com">www.buildersbooks.com
help.com">www.homebuilthelp.com
bution">http://www.matronics.com/contribution
tor?Commander-List">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List
tp://forums.matronics.com
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! --
|