Any piston engines that fly above FL250?

kicktireslightfires

kicktireslightfires

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jun 11, 2020
Messages
354
Display Name
Display name:
kicktireslightfires
Is anywhere aware of a turbocharged piston airplane with a certified ceiling greater than 25,000 MSL? Just curious if any exist or if FL250 is the absolute max for any piston aircraft. (I'm excluding military aircraft as I know some of those go higher.)
 
Tantalum said:
The Baron 56TC can, thing gets up over 32,000 ft! However I'm not sure how realistic that is given RVSM rules now.. the 56TC however is an absolute beast of a machine and I'm pretty sure there are a few members on here that have, or had, own(ed) them: https://planephd.com/wizard/details...ications-performance-operating-cost-valuation
Click to expand...

Well, at least you can still take it up to 28,000 if it doesn't have the RVSM equipment requirements! I wonder how much it would cost to install the RVSM required equipment in something like that.
 
Tantalum said:
The Baron 56TC can, thing gets up over 32,000 ft! However I'm not sure how realistic that is given RVSM rules now.. the 56TC however is an absolute beast of a machine and I'm pretty sure there are a few members on here that have, or had, own(ed) them: https://planephd.com/wizard/details...ications-performance-operating-cost-valuation
Click to expand...

Sounds like the bad news with that plane is the 40GPH fuel burn. But still, 32,000 ft celing and 257 knot cruise at FL250 and 2,000 FPM climb is mighty impressive. Especially for just $250k!
 
You're going to replace a lot of mag blocks and harnesses, unless you have pressurized mags. Just not worth the expense.
 
Oldmanb777 said:
You're going to replace a lot of mag blocks and harnesses, unless you have pressurized mags. Just not worth the expense.
Click to expand...
Interesting. At what altitude does the pressure start adversely affecting non-pressurized mags?
 
kicktireslightfires said:
Why can't we have nice NEW things?
Click to expand...
welcome to piston GA. imho the 'nicest' 'new' planes you can buy today are going to be SR22 / DA-62 / DA-50. With my money going towards Diamond (sorry Cirrus) since they burn Jet A. Sorry, but for what a similarly priced Bonanza or Baron brings you there's just no competition, especially once you look at a Baron or DA-62 brand new side by side for price and capabilities. It's only a matter of time anyway before Cessna closes the Bonanza/Baron line.. then you'll really only have Cirri/Diamond for nice new piston GA. Mind you, neither the Cirri or the Diamond are pressurized or particularly fast per se

But you are right, gone are the days of a myriad options out there for 'new' planes that are capable, fast, go places cross country machines. All you have left are 50 year old relics, trainers, and a handful of $1M+ planes
 
kicktireslightfires said:
At what altitude does the pressure start adversely affecting non-pressurized mags?
Click to expand...
Its my understanding it depends on the engine and mag type. However, there is a second method to keep the spark going that involves using a low voltage/tension system for the ignition that is/was found on a number of round engines. This system basically doesn't boost the ignition voltage until at the spark plug similar to the coil on plug systems on some of todays vehicles. In general, there's also reduced issues/mx requirements involved with this type system vs a pressurized mag system.
 
Tantalum said:
welcome to piston GA. imho the 'nicest' 'new' planes you can buy today are going to be SR22 / DA-62 / DA-50. With my money going towards Diamond (sorry Cirrus) since they burn Jet A. Sorry, but for what a similarly priced Bonanza or Baron brings you there's just no competition, especially once you look at a Baron or DA-62 brand new side by side for price and capabilities. It's only a matter of time anyway before Cessna closes the Bonanza/Baron line.. then you'll really only have Cirri/Diamond for nice new piston GA. Mind you, neither the Cirri or the Diamond are pressurized or particularly fast per se

But you are right, gone are the days of a myriad options out there for 'new' planes that are capable, fast, go places cross country machines. All you have left are 50 year old relics, trainers, and a handful of $1M+ planes
Click to expand...

That seems to be the case! SR22T / DA-62 / DA-50 but you forgot the TTx. Can't get the TTx brand new anymore, but still can pickup a 2017 model. The problem with the DA-50 is the price. $1.35mm for a single-engine just seems bonkers to me. If someone is going to spend $1.35mm, why not just spend $1.5mm and get a DA-62 to have an extra engine and much more useful load and baggage space plus the ability to haul 7 instead of 5 people. If I had the money (and a 60 ft wide hangar to support the DA-62's enormous 48 foot wingspan), I'd go DA-62.

Would be nice if Textron restarted the TTx production line. It's superior to the SR22T in many ways. At moment, does seem, even with a crazy $1mm price tag, that the SR22T is the best brand NEW single engine airplane you can currently buy for the money.
 
kicktireslightfires said:
Well, at least you can still take it up to 28,000 if it doesn't have the RVSM equipment requirements! I wonder how much it would cost to install the RVSM required equipment in something like that.
Click to expand...

The RVSM certification requirements would be juuuuuuust a bit on the expensive side. RVSM isn't just about the equipment, you have to deal with the installed performance certification.
 
kicktireslightfires said:
Textron
Click to expand...
Textron has no aviation passion, they gobbled up the competition, killed their products, and focused on their highest margin areas and developed that. You can't blame them from a corporate $$ perspective, but, their investment in piston GA is a joke and exists today solely for the flight schools. Piper still has a 'step up' pipeline in their planes and if you visit both tents at OSH the difference in passion is evident. The Piper guys love their product and will happily showcase their PA-28

The Textron booth has an unattended locked up Bonanza out front and a bunch of sales guys in a tent standing next to their PC-12 knock-off, I mean Denali mock up. Which got rebranded as a 'beechcraft' product but doesn't have any of the characteristic beechcraft lines or design elements, it's purely a badge.

Textron even does it with the higher end stuff killing the Mustang light jet, the Citation X, etc.

Again, you can't blame them from a corporate perspective, but they don't actually care about GA, aviation, or any of the romance behind it. They're purely after the money.
 
Tantalum said:
welcome to piston GA. imho the 'nicest' 'new' planes you can buy today are going to be SR22 / DA-62 / DA-50. With my money going towards Diamond (sorry Cirrus) since they burn Jet A. Sorry, but for what a similarly priced Bonanza or Baron brings you there's just no competition, especially once you look at a Baron or DA-62 brand new side by side for price and capabilities. It's only a matter of time anyway before Cessna closes the Bonanza/Baron line.. then you'll really only have Cirri/Diamond for nice new piston GA. Mind you, neither the Cirri or the Diamond are pressurized or particularly fast per se

But you are right, gone are the days of a myriad options out there for 'new' planes that are capable, fast, go places cross country machines. All you have left are 50 year old relics, trainers, and a handful of $1M+ planes
Click to expand...
Don't forget EAB's. Vans and Velocity specifically. Would probably be excluded from the fl250 idea, but without pressurization I dont want to go up there anyway. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
 
Racerx said:
Don't forget EAB's. Vans and Velocity specifically. Would probably be excluded from the fl250 idea, but without pressurization I dont want to go up there anyway. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Click to expand...
Right on! I didn't include the EA world.. but you're absolutely right
 
Racerx said:
Don't forget EAB's. Vans and Velocity specifically. Would probably be excluded from the fl250 idea, but without pressurization I dont want to go up there anyway. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Click to expand...

Even going up into the upper-teens and low-20's would be miserable without pressurization, imo. You'd likely feel pretty drained after flying up that high for any significant length of time without pressurization. Not to mention the much greater consequences of hypoxia if your oxygen supply dropped without you noticing it quickly.
 
The 414 I used to fly had a published service ceiling of 31,000 ft as I recall. I considered that somewhat laughable, but apparently Cessna got a brand new one up there.

At some point, the certification rules changed and I believe it got a lot more strict to certify above 25,000 ft, even in the pre-RVSM days. The MU-2 I flew (and most of them) were only certified to FL250 as well. Although I never took it above that altitude, I have no doubts it could've gone higher and I would've used that extra altitude if it was certified. The later models were certified into altitudes that are now RVSM.
 
At the other end of the Spectrum, the Turbo Lance is certified to 20,000, and after you take one up to the limit, you understand why Piper threw-in the towel at 20,000. From 18,000 up is rather slow. About 300 ft/min.
 
Rgbeard said:
At the other end of the Spectrum, the Turbo Lance is certified to 20,000, and after you take one up to the limit, you understand why Piper threw-in the towel at 20,000. From 18,000 up is rather slow. About 300 ft/min.
Click to expand...

and that Hershey bar wing gets really mushy at that altitude.
 
I’m surprised to see that it took until post 22 to mention the twin cessnas. I would guess those are the most commonly flown piston airplanes that regularly see the flight levels which aren’t capped at 25,000.
 
Comanche’s absolute ceiling shows FL290 @ 2200 lbs, however max approved altitude is FL220. FWIW :rolleyes:
 
kicktireslightfires said:
Interesting. At what altitude does the pressure start adversely affecting non-pressurized mags?
Click to expand...

I’ve done 17000’ with my NA Lycoming 360 and non pressurized mags, no problem, its service ceiling is 23000’ if not carrying passengers (weight), but you start losing TAS fast so no real advantage unless you need to fly over something.
 
Tantalum said:
The Baron 56TC can, thing gets up over 32,000 ft! However I'm not sure how realistic that is given RVSM rules now.. the 56TC however is an absolute beast of a machine and I'm pretty sure there are a few members on here that have, or had, own(ed) them: https://planephd.com/wizard/details...ications-performance-operating-cost-valuation
Click to expand...

Go that high sucking oxygen, big no for me, but nice plane. I like the Piper Malibu line, slower but pressurized. You can get some hot rod twins for pretty cheap that are pressurized, but you need to be up to the task.
 
SoonerAviator said:
Even going up into the upper-teens and low-20's would be miserable without pressurization, imo. You'd likely feel pretty drained after flying up that high for any significant length of time without pressurization. Not to mention the much greater consequences of hypoxia if your oxygen supply dropped without you noticing it quickly.
Click to expand...

Forgive my ignorance please, but why would you feel drained? So long as you had adequate oxygen supply from say a constant flow Mountain High system and constantly keeping an eye on your blood oxygen level, and were frequently hydrating and drinking plenty of water (and peeing into a bottle), is there any reason you would feel drained? I suppose your skin might get dry, but if you're drinking plenty of water and getting plenty of O2, then wouldn't your insides still feel right as rain?
 
Pilawt said:
Walt Cable set a record in 1966 when he took a stock Cessna T210F to 39,334 feet. In 1951 a stock 125 hp Piper Super Cub went up to 30,203 feet. Took a while, though ...
Click to expand...
According to the National Air & Space Museum's website, he actually took the T210 up to 42,344 feet!!! My question is HOW. And what kind of oxygen system was he using. How does that engine even produce any power at all at that altitude? This confuses me!!

https://airandspace.si.edu/support/wall-of-honor/walter-d-cable
 
PaulS said:
I like the Piper Malibu line, slower but pressurized
Click to expand...
Yeah the Malibu / Meridian aren't bad little machines.. you get the weather radar on there and with pressurization and known ice you have a very capable little airliner without paying TBM prices

PaulS said:
You can get some hot rod twins for pretty cheap that are pressurized
Click to expand...
The Aerostar is my siren song. These guys https://texasaviationlaw.com/ have the world's most beautiful plane..
upload_2022-1-18_17-30-56.png
 
Rgbeard said:
At the other end of the Spectrum, the Turbo Lance is certified to 20,000, and after you take one up to the limit, you understand why Piper threw-in the towel at 20,000. From 18,000 up is rather slow. About 300 ft/min.
Click to expand...

I can't imagine how slow the 414 would've been up there.

mondtster said:
I’m surprised to see that it took until post 22 to mention the twin cessnas. I would guess those are the most commonly flown piston airplanes that regularly see the flight levels which aren’t capped at 25,000.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but it's pretty rare for you to see Twin Cessnas flying above FL250. A RAM VII 340 or 414A might hit it more often, but the only picture I recall of a Twin Cessna flying that high that got posted to the forum was of a 421, and I'm pretty sure that was a 421C which has the long straight wings. Of course, it's been done, just not something that you do much. I only took the 414 to FL230 once, and even with the MT props, it wasn't super happy.

For a stock 340 or 414, FL180-200 is really the sweet spot. My preferred altitudes were FL180 and 190, and I'd take FL200 when FL180 wasn't available most of the time. When you get a RAM VI or especially RAM VII 340, that's when you start to see use of FL230-250 more often, but the low pressurization differential of the plane makes those altitudes sub ideal from a cabin altitude perspective.

MooneyDriver78 said:
I’ve done 17000’ with my NA Lycoming 360 and non pressurized mags, no problem, its service ceiling is 23000’ if not carrying passengers (weight), but you start losing TAS fast so no real advantage unless you need to fly over something.
Click to expand...

One thing on pressurized mags, that's only a thing on turbocharged aircraft, and even then that's only (to my knowledge) with Slick mags. Bendix mags don't need the pressurization, it essentially has to do with distance between the contacts for each cylinder, and that gap is bigger for Bendix than for Slick. So, slicks have more of a propensity to arcing at higher altitudes.

When I was running the 414 it had Bendix mags, and they ran fine at altitude. It was nice to not have those pressurization lines to worry about or replace.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top