Baron 58 vs Cessna 310R 5-6 Adults?

[Cavorter]

Putting six adults into either a baron or a cessna 310 would qualify for "cruel and unusual punishment". Both are four person planes with luggage.

 

[James331]

I put that poor airplane through more abuse than any airplane should have to take, and she always held together! No matter what equipment I'm flying, I'll always be a sled driver at heart! Best airplane Cessna ever made!

Agreed, well minus the 185

 

[denverpilot]

I flew a turbo-pig up here that was no better than a glorified single at the weights we used for takeoff. I simply accepted it, but it also left me with a cynical view of light twins on one engine.

I'm a believer in the cynicism!

I can't believe two schools at APA regularly accept Runway 10 for departure in their normally aspirated light twins on hot days. Seems like saving five minutes for no particularly good reason.

No thanks.

I don't think I have the reaction time to match the Piper test pilots to hit that Accelerate/Stop number they publish and not go through the fence or off the runway.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Sounds like you need a Twin Bonanza to me

That's actually a good contender, if you can find someone with a nice one who wants to sell.

 

[Pilawt]

Aztruck would get my vote, too. Kinda surprised no one has mentioned the C-320 -- cabin like a 310, but a skosh more headroom in coach class.

 

[Ted]

Aztruck would get my vote, too. Kinda surprised no one has mentioned the C-320 -- cabin like a 310, but a skosh more headroom in coach class.

The Aztec is definitely better than the 310 in that regard, although a bit slow for the distances.

 

[labbadabba]

Maybe a Seneca?

 

[Doggtyred]

For #2, when you say return fuel from the engines, what do you mean by that?

So, let me get this straight, you burn off the tips for an hour to make room for the aux tanks to flow into the tips? So Why would you switch to the aux if the aux just flows into the tips?

When you burn fuel from ANY tank, the fuel pump supplies more fuel flow than the engine needs. (Referring to these particular fuel injected engines). So there is fuel being drawn from the tank, fed to the fuel system and the excess is returned "SOMEWHERE".

Some planes have a complex fuel selector switch that sends return fuel to the tank from which it came. Some do not. In this, and many older fuel injected, multi-tank planes, ALL excess fuel goes back to the main tank.

So no matter where the fuel is being drawn from - tip, locker, aux, mains, crossfed from opposite wing.... the excess normally goes back to the main (or main on that side if multiengine).

If you start with ALL tanks full, and start the mission on any tank other than mains, you will send excess return fuel to a full main tank, and overboard out the vent... Hence why you burn off the mains for a while before starting to burn any of the aux tanks.

 

[Ted]

When you burn fuel from ANY tank, the fuel pump supplies more fuel flow than the engine needs. (Referring to these particular fuel injected engines). So there is fuel being drawn from the tank, fed to the fuel system and the excess is returned "SOMEWHERE".

To clarify, this is the way the Continental fuel injection system works.

The Lycoming fuel injection system does NOT require a return, with the exception of a few particular aircraft installations where a "vent return" was installedat the request of the OEM. However that is not the norm, and the return fuel flow is pretty miniscule from that, unlike the Continental where the fuel return rate is high.