For Bonanza owners.

Challenged

Challenged

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Apr 4, 2011
Messages
1,901
Location
Louisiana
Display Name
Display name:
Challenged
There have been several reports of turnbuckle failure in Bonanzas, which can lead to a loss of control event. Some of these have been caught during maintenance, but one gentleman posted on BT that this happened to him during flight: "About halfway thru the left turn the yoke suddenly displaced from about 1/3rd displacement to full left. At that time the airplane began a fairly rapid roll to the right. It took me a few seconds of “What the hell is going on” to realize the yoke wasn’t connected to the roll axis anymore. I applied FULL left rudder to arrest the now descending right turn."

From ABS: "...we have seen six cases of aileron cable turnbuckle failure and one of rudder turnbuckle failure. All seven occurred where the turnbuckle is positioned beneath a heater duct or, in the case of the rudder cable, the overheat inlet air duct. This leads our ABS Technical Advisors to believe the failures MAY be related to condensation off those ducts--we don't know that yet for certain. That said, in one if the aileron cable turnbuckle failures there was no sign of corrosion. It simply broke apart in mid-shaft."

My V35 is just about finished with the annual, but my A&P called me to tell me he is going to pull things back off to make sure the turnbuckles are okay before he signs off on it.

References:
https://www.beechtalk.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=162906
https://www.bonanza.org/community/m...ts/jan-2019/control-cable-turnbuckles-update/
 
I am on the fence. I am definitely getting mine checked, but with the sheer amount of Bo's made, you would think this would be more widespread. I know we will know more as people find out more. The only 2 things that stand out to me, if you have an AP, you need to check the turnbuckle in the tail and not just under the seats. And the cables are quoted to be $2k and needs 40 to 60 hours to replace. yeesh, is anything cheap on a plane?
 
A lot of the Bonanza owners I feel always want to talk about how "strong and solid" the Bo is made and how its built to MIL spec... I feel like issues like this are a lot too common as well as its extensive AD list on critical components. Am I wrong? Only asking because I'm kind of in between in my search for a Cirrus or a 33/35 Bonanza. What are the honest thoughts of some of you Bonanza owners. I know posting this comment on BT would get me crucified.
 
AnthonyS1 said:
A lot of the Bonanza owners I feel always want to talk about how "strong and solid" the Bo is made and how its built to MIL spec... I feel like issues like this are a lot too common as well as its extensive AD list on critical components. Am I wrong? Only asking because I'm kind of in between in my search for a Cirrus or a 33/35 Bonanza. What are the honest thoughts of some of you Bonanza owners. I know posting this comment on BT would get me crucified.
Click to expand...

Simmer down, Francis.

This particular issue applies to only older Bonanzas, and the number of known failures is still very low.

More to the point, this is a simple, straight-up maintenance issue. These are standard turnbuckles, and they absolutely, positively, must be properly inspected with reasonable regularity. This is the case for every single plane with cables (which is most of them).

You can bet I'll be pulling the safety wires from mine and inspecting at the next annual. So far as I know, my cables and turnbuckles are exactly fifty years old. I bet they're rock solid, but if the turnbuckles show any issues, I'll buy the cables and install them.

It ain't a Beechcraft thing.

As for the big picture, Beech is not unusually affected by ADs, but they're definitely there. And I believe the Beech is built to a superior standard, but I'm completely comfortable flying in most any, WELL-MAINTAINED, certificates airplane (and well-designed, built and maintained experimental, as well).

If I believed the plane was not safe, I'd never fly in it.
 
AnthonyS1 said:
A lot of the Bonanza owners I feel always want to talk about how "strong and solid" the Bo is made and how its built to MIL spec... I feel like issues like this are a lot too common as well as its extensive AD list on critical components. Am I wrong? Only asking because I'm kind of in between in my search for a Cirrus or a 33/35 Bonanza. What are the honest thoughts of some of you Bonanza owners. I know posting this comment on BT would get me crucified.
Click to expand...

Aircraft and AD's are like fingerprints - they're all different. My previous E33A had 4 recurring AD's that were applicable to my specific airframe (two 100 hr inspections and two 500 hour inspections), while my current Travel Air has 3 and two of them are the same as my previous Bo. Every aircraft will have a unique list based on what is on the individual airplane. You'll need to do some homework before buying so you know what you're looking at. The FAA AD webpage shows 23 AD's for the E33A (airframe only) of which a majority are one time inspections (and completed on my birds). The SR22 shows 13, of which I'm sure most are also one time inspections as well.

If you don't want to worry about wire cables and pulleys, buy an aircraft that uses steel tubes for the flight controls (i.e. any model Mooney). ;)

Cheers,
Brian
 
flight2000 said:
Aircraft and AD's are like fingerprints - they're all different.
Click to expand...

Are there any aircraft that have been certified for an appreciable amount of time that don't have ADs. People like to bag on the Comanche for the ADs on it as well, but there are only a few. No aircraft I've ever flown has been free of ADs.
 
midwestpa24 said:
Are there any aircraft that have been certified for an appreciable amount of time that don't have ADs. People like to bag on the Comanche for the ADs on it as well, but there are only a few. No aircraft I've ever flown has been free of ADs.
Click to expand...
Heck, the new HondaJet has a couple. Most ADs are nothing; our Skyhawk had quite a few, mostly minor.
 
Saw this info on Beechtalk just in time for the annual... They checked, and all looks good! 1967 V35.
 
AnthonyS1 said:
A lot of the Bonanza owners I feel always want to talk about how "strong and solid" the Bo is made and how its built to MIL spec... I feel like issues like this are a lot too common as well as its extensive AD list on critical components. Am I wrong? Only asking because I'm kind of in between in my search for a Cirrus or a 33/35 Bonanza. What are the honest thoughts of some of you Bonanza owners. I know posting this comment on BT would get me crucified.
Click to expand...
I don't believe that anyone, even on BT, thinks that Bonanzas are perfect. They are very good, but I don't know of many people that can afford perfect. Heck, even an excellent pilot can bust a TFR on occasion. Right?
By the way, what is the price differential for a Cirrus and a Bonanza of comparable age?
 
JOhnH said:
I don't believe that anyone, even on BT, thinks that Bonanzas are perfect. They are very good, but I don't know of many people that can afford perfect. Heck, even an excellent pilot can bust a TFR on occasion. Right?
By the way, what is the price differential for a Cirrus and a Bonanza of comparable age?
Click to expand...

It seems that bonanzas fetch a bit of a premium based on year. If you looked at a 2005 SR22 vs a 2005 A36, the bonanza would defintely be more. I think part of it has to do with the huge amount of Cirrus aircraft of that vintage on the market.

Also I wasn't trying to take a dig at the bonanza airframe in anyway. Think it's a fine aircraft. I'm actually looking to buy one! Just looking to see what some owners thought.
 
AnthonyS1 said:
It seems that bonanzas fetch a bit of a premium based on year. If you looked at a 2005 SR22 vs a 2005 A36, the bonanza would defintely be more. I think part of it has to do with the huge amount of Cirrus aircraft of that vintage on the market.

Also I wasn't trying to take a dig at the bonanza airframe in anyway. Think it's a fine aircraft. I'm actually looking to buy one! Just looking to see what some owners thought.
Click to expand...

If you’re going to get a bo, I’d get a V tail with a larger engine. I mean if you’re going to bo, don’t half bo
 
midwestpa24 said:
Are there any aircraft that have been certified for an appreciable amount of time that don't have ADs. People like to bag on the Comanche for the ADs on it as well, but there are only a few. No aircraft I've ever flown has been free of ADs.
Click to expand...

The Diamond DA-20C1 has no airframe ADs. I think there might be a few other airframes that are similar.

Conversely, even brand new Piper Archers have ADs that must be complied with.
 
James331 said:
If you’re going to get a bo, I’d get a V tail with a larger engine. I mean if you’re going to bo, don’t half bo
Click to expand...
good advice....mine is a 285HP with a turbo. One thing you can get spoiled with...more power....and quickly you'll never have enough. :D

I'd love me a 310HP V-tail....a 350HP would be phenomenal lol :D
 
You know, considering how frothy the market it, I've found S/V pricing on the -35 side of the house quite palatable. Can't find a comparable -33 (even piddly 225HP debbies for christ sake) for under six figures. If my mission wasn't so family centric (tail wag is a non-starter for the back seaters, I've seen my wife sick inflight, not doing that again), I'd jump on a S/V right yesterday even in this market.

I guess the ruddervator re-skinning cost is what keeps these speedsters cheaper than the 33s. Otherwise, I don't get the market price difference. Even the CG is generally better on the the V-tails compared to the 33s (early C33As perhaps being the exception). :dunno:
 
with a decent autopilot (yaw damper) the wag thingy is a non-issue. Mine has the STec 60-2 with yaw damper and it doesn't wag....till I turn it off.
 
hindsight2020 said:
You know, considering how frothy the market it, I've found S/V pricing on the -35 side of the house quite palatable. Can't find a comparable -33 (even piddly 225HP debbies for christ sake) for under six figures. If my mission wasn't so family centric (tail wag is a non-starter for the back seaters, I've seen my wife sick inflight, not doing that again), I'd jump on a S/V right yesterday even in this market.

I guess the ruddervator re-skinning cost is what keeps these speedsters cheaper than the 33s. Otherwise, I don't get the market price difference. Even the CG is generally better on the the V-tails compared to the 33s (early C33As perhaps being the exception). :dunno:
Click to expand...

Can those magnesium sheeted ruddavators be re-skinned?? I thought if they corroded or were damaged, finding used ones was the only option. :confused2:
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
with a decent autopilot (yaw damper) the wag thingy is a non-issue. Mine has the STec 60-2 with yaw damper and it doesn't wag....till I turn it off.
Click to expand...

But that's dependent on the AP right? Meaning a stand alone installation is a non-starter if there's a two axis AP already installed? Would a roll-only AP be needed in order to allow a YD servo installation back there?

How much does a stand alone YD cost installed?

GRG55 said:
Can those magnesium sheeted ruddavators be re-skinned?? I thought if they corroded or were damaged, finding used ones was the only option. :confused2:
Click to expand...

Reading on BT I thought they could skin them, but it's a stupid cost like 11K+ or some such. Haven't done too much digging as I tried to limit my search to C33As the last time I gave up on the search...again. :D
 
hindsight2020 said:
...Reading on BT I thought they could skin them, but it's a stupid cost like 11K+ or some such. Haven't done too much digging as I tried to limit my search to C33As the last time I gave up on the search...again. :D
Click to expand...

The C33 is a mid-60s vintage straight tail, and the 'A' is a 520 powered version?
So what does a good example of a C33A go for these days (understand there could be a potentially wide bracket)?
 
GRG55 said:
The C33 is a mid-60s vintage straight tail, and the 'A' is a 520 powered version?
So what does a good example of a C33A go for these days (understand there could be a potentially wide bracket)?
Click to expand...
Correct. C model are stretched bulkheads, a suffix is the 520 designation for Cs and newer 33s.
Prices? Who knows, you gotta find them first. Tough nut to crack in this market. The ones I've seen are out to lunch. Basically Henning 310 pricing strategy lol. A year ago I saw several in the 70s with chit avionics. This will all settle down in 9 months, mark my words.
 
charheep said:
I am on the fence. I am definitely getting mine checked, but with the sheer amount of Bo's made, you would think this would be more widespread. I know we will know more as people find out more. The only 2 things that stand out to me, if you have an AP, you need to check the turnbuckle in the tail and not just under the seats. And the cables are quoted to be $2k and needs 40 to 60 hours to replace. yeesh, is anything cheap on a plane?
Click to expand...
Only the pilot .
 
hindsight2020 said:
But that's dependent on the AP right? Meaning a stand alone installation is a non-starter if there's a two axis AP already installed? Would a roll-only AP be needed in order to allow a YD servo installation back there?
How much does a stand alone YD cost installed?
Reading on BT I thought they could skin them, but it's a stupid cost like 11K+ or some such. Haven't done too much digging as I tried to limit my search to C33As the last time I gave up on the search...again. :D
Click to expand...
Yes...it is AP dependent. A typical complete installation is $20-35K and $6-10K yaw damper addition....which is a non-starter without.
 
AnthonyS1 said:
A lot of the Bonanza owners I feel always want to talk about how "strong and solid" the Bo is made and how its built to MIL spec... I feel like issues like this are a lot too common as well as its extensive AD list on critical components. Am I wrong? Only asking because I'm kind of in between in my search for a Cirrus or a 33/35 Bonanza. What are the honest thoughts of some of you Bonanza owners. I know posting this comment on BT would get me crucified.
Click to expand...

I'd say some of "those bonanza owners" are naïve. They contain a lot of the dumb/cheapness that all airplanes share.

In this case wire ropes with terminals swaged on them are the same from one airplane to the next, the Beechcraft brand doesn't make them any superior to another.
 
To try to answer some of the numerous questions posted here in no particular order:

Turnbuckles in Bo's are no different than in most other planes. Over 10,000 Bonanzas built. Six have found issues. I'm having mine looked at anyway.

The magnesium skins on the ruddervator can be re-skinned. Not cheap. (V-tail only)

I've flown my V35b with and without yaw damper. It's nicer with the damper but it wasn't bad without it either. Worse for back seat passengers than front.

I just installed the Garmin GFC500 with twin G5's, electric trim and yaw damper. All in was about 27K. Previous a/p was a Century 2000 which has been trying to kill me for two years. Good riddance. The Garmin stuff is awesome.

Real Bo's have v-tails. :)
 
GRG55 said:
and yaw dampeners. :D
Click to expand...
...and before we head south with the wag thingy.....it's the dihedral in the main wing that causes the Dutch roll, or wag. All Beech's with this wing do this (33, 35, 36, 55, 56, 58...)....the V-tail has it more due to the lack of rudder authority.
 
flight2000 said:
Aircraft and AD's are like fingerprints - they're all different. My previous E33A had 4 recurring AD's that were applicable to my specific airframe (two 100 hr inspections and two 500 hour inspections), while my current Travel Air has 3 and two of them are the same as my previous Bo. Every aircraft will have a unique list based on what is on the individual airplane. You'll need to do some homework before buying so you know what you're looking at. The FAA AD webpage shows 23 AD's for the E33A (airframe only) of which a majority are one time inspections (and completed on my birds). The SR22 shows 13, of which I'm sure most are also one time inspections as well.

If you don't want to worry about wire cables and pulleys, buy an aircraft that uses steel tubes for the flight controls (i.e. any model Mooney). ;)

Cheers,
Brian
Click to expand...
Even a mooney with push rods instead of cables doesn't escape the possibility of an AD http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_G...DBBEE7C238E15EF986256A64005942F3?OpenDocument
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
...and before we head south with the wag thingy.....it's the dihedral in the main wing that causes the Dutch roll, or wag. All Beech's with this wing do this (33, 35, 36, 55, 56, 58...)....the V-tail has it more due to the lack of rudder authority.
Click to expand...

Right, all these spam cans have dihedral that induces that coupling to varying degrees. The stability response is what the issue is. We call it directional stability, and the lower cross sectional area of the V tail as a vertical stabilizer precludes the quicker dampening, which results on issues for occupants the further they are removed from the center of gravity. That response is better dampened by conventional vertical stabilizer, whether it be a bo or a piper. It's just part of the design compromise; clearly V-tail owners don't consider it a non-starter. Others do, and that's ok too.
 
No... it has nothing to do with being non conventional. It has everything to do with the moments about the z axis during flight. The v tail surface area is less...hence the speed advantage.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
No... it has nothing to do with being non conventional. It has everything to do with the moments about the z axis during flight. The v tail surface area is less...hence the speed advantage.
Click to expand...

I assume you're referencing my post, if not my apologies. At any rate, we agree, as that's exactly what I said. A vertical stabilizer will have a higher effective area per wetted area than a V-tail of the same wetted area. If one don't like calling a single vertical stabilizer a "conventional" tail then fine, call it straight tail or whatever. The surface area for a V-tail of equal wetted area is less in that axis, the perturbation dampening is less as a result (less inertia back there as well), hence a more prolonged wag. We're in agreement.

And yes, there's a speed advantage to a smaller area tail, which the V-tail can afford to be. Why did you bring that up? Seems like a non-sequitur on this topic, unless I missed a prior post arguing about speed differences. My post certainly had nothing to do with speed discussions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top