Piper Aerostar

Let'sgoflying!

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
20,772
Location
west Texas
Display Name

Display name:
Dave Taylor
Give me some good reasons why I don't want to buy one.
They are old is not one.
The engine is no longer available/supported is one.
 
Most of them were built with variations of the Lyc 540 so I don't think engines are an issue?
Or was that simply an example reason you were putting forward?
 
maintenance cost. I had a friend that had a couple of them, he said to keep them up properly his bills were running 30k - 50k a year each. non-pressurized ones are cheaper, but sucking on o2 all day is not fun.
 
maintenance cost. I had a friend that had a couple of them, he said to keep them up properly his bills were running 30k - 50k a year each. non-pressurized ones are cheaper, but sucking on o2 all day is not fun.
Typical for ALL pressurized twins.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ted
They are fast because they are tight. Tight to fit in to (I don't). Tight to work on. The opposite of my Aztec (or a 414). But they sure go!

Was at Abbotsford on the weekend for the airshow. With B.C. burning up this summer lots of tanker movements. I noticed Conair has a pair of Aerostars they are using alongside their Citations/M2 as rapid response spotters.
 
Last edited:
The primary negative I can think of is that they seem to have some nuances that certain mechanics aren't aware of. Like many specialized/complex aircraft, you want a mechanic familiar with the systems. Those mechanics are often more expensive.

If it fits your mission, go for it.
 
Known for high maintenance. Probably looking at over 50K per year for total operating costs.
 
Give me some good reasons why I don't want to buy one.
They are old is not one.
The engine is no longer available/supported is one.
Friggin love that plane. In the other thread I almost put the Aerostar instead of the TBM. I think @tspear had one, and my instructor here just did some training for a student who just bought one

Have you seen the Jetstar? Apparently the Aerostar was originally slated to be a jet one day, hence it's "overbuilt" design of the time

 
Give me some good reasons why I don't want to buy one.
They are old is not one.
The engine is no longer available/supported is one.

You are smoking crack. Engines supported. In fact I replaced one with a new engine from Lycoming, the guy who I sold the plane did the other one. Again NEW, not reman, not overhaul, but NEW.
And this was four years ago for me, and last year for the new owner (I sold it with one engine nearing TBO).

There are only two reasons to not own one of these planes. 1. Budget. 2. No local mechanic willing to work with one of the specialty shops.

The main things that break are the usual run of the mill engine, alternators... standard stuff on any piston plane.
For everything else, go to one of the specialists. It will save you a lot of time and money.

As for flying the plane; it has super honest feedback. It always tells you exactly what is going to happen, the plane is fast, it carries a huge load, has a Vne of 244 KIAS. I have come down at over 6K FPM practicing emergency descents.
It by far is my favorite plane. But I had two kids in college, so I had to sell.

Tim
 
They're ugly. Good enough reason?
 
I worked with a guy who owned one. He said his annuals were running around 20k. He also said it liked fuel. If not for the feeding and maintenance costs I would own one.
 
Because a king air, conquest, or Mu-2 would be cheaper to operate.
 
You read it wrong.
The engine comment was an example.
Ie "IF the engines are an issue, that would be a good reason"
"IF the only aircraft available are 25 years old, that is not a good reason"
 
I worked with a guy who owned one. He said his annuals were running around 20k. He also said it liked fuel. If not for the feeding and maintenance costs I would own one.

Like fuel, yeah they can be thirsty. I am going on memory, I sold 602P upgraded to a Superstar/700 about 3 years ago.
The Superstar/700 (low compression engines) versions can run 75% power continuous ROP burning about 26 GPH per engine and fly around 260 KTAS un the upper 20s. Or you can pull back to 45% and run LOP at 200 KTAS and burn 13 GPH per engine. At takeoff, full power you burn about 45 GPH per engine :D
The 600/601/602 (higher compression engines) can run LOP at 75% power. If memory serves, they run about 220 KTAS in the mid 20s burning 13 HPH per engine.

Multiple times, I took off from a Knoxville TN to Tetorboro NJ or Leesburg VA and beat the KA-90s (older ones).

Tim
 

I actually know a fair number of the owners for the planes that pop up. Good group.
A lot of them belong to http://aerostar-forum.com/
Where you can find out more....
Just never go fly with Jim Christy at AAC. A great guy, like any engineer he knows the plane backwards and forwards. He really is a great ambassador for the plane, but it is such an awesome plane and Jim makes it shine that you will be cutting a check to buy one before you know what hit you.

Tim
 
Apparently the Aerostar was originally slated to be a jet one day, hence it's "overbuilt" design of the time
Yup, that concept was Ted Smith's dream. Unfortunately, it's never made it past the prototype stage.
 
Friggin love that plane. In the other thread I almost put the Aerostar instead of the TBM. I think @tspear had one, and my instructor here just did some training for a student who just bought one

Have you seen the Jetstar? Apparently the Aerostar was originally slated to be a jet one day, hence it's "overbuilt" design of the time


This is a Jetstar! :)

lockheed-jetstar-09.jpg
 
I thought the JetStar was no longer legal in the states for noise reasons?

Tim
 
I remember when it was up for sale, I think there was a thread about it on here. Unfortunately it was in rather rough shape.. too bad
 
They are fast because they are tight. Tight to fit in to (I don't). Tight to work on. The opposite of my Aztec (or a 414). But they sure go!

Was at Abbotsford on the weekend for the airshow. With B.C. burning up this summer lots of tanker movements. I noticed Conair has a pair of Aerostars they are using alongside their Citations/M2 as rapid response spotters.

I grew up there and did my initial training there before moving. This was mid 90's. Conair had at least six Aerostars at the time. Glad to hear they still have some. Love them!!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
Every reason! What do you want to know?

1. They need to be worked on by people that know Aerostars. You don't want mechanics with no experience working on them, as you'll be paying them to learn - and it's a steep curve. Good thing is there's quite a lot of experienced Aerostar shops spread around the country.

2. Airplane is built like tank (nothing structurally really compares). It' like a jet.

3. Plane is not expensive to own if you compare it to 414's ort 421's or turboprops, but can be more than a Baron and certainly Aztec's, Twin Comanches etc. You have two turbos on each side, and they'll need overhauling every 1000hrs on average. Same goes for waste gates. Not terribly expensive, but it adds a little extra compared to simpler twins.

4. The pressurization system won't add much, it's very reliable. The extra costs come from seals - if they have pinhole leak they'll make vacuum pump cycle a lot, which will fail it prematurely. Many do a mod that replaces the door seal with a dedicated electric pump, that saves the vacuum pump.

5. My annuals, were $7K for first (but that was probably pencil-whipped by seller), second was part of engine overhauls so hard to tell, and last one I did was $13K. If you plan on $20K annuals, you'll be in pretty good shape as it will cover a bigger item like a turbo or cylinder that might pop up.

6. They tend to eat MLG tires, so make sure they're tracking straight.

7. My 601P was very reliable overall, but part of that was that I overhauled engines midway. But even on the old ones (300hrs over TBO when I bought her!), she never let me down. In 200hrs I had one vacuum pump fail, a sticking wastegate and one set of MLG tires exchanged - that was it.

8. Fuel economy is great on the 601P (less so on the 700P), because it's so slippery and narrow. I could fly mine for 25gal/hr at 190-200kts up high LOP.

Finally, the reward for all this is the best flying twin in the world with it's push-pull rods. It flies like a dream - tight, like a little fighter jet (not that I've flow that). It's also a very honest plane that will tell you when it's not happy. It was certified without a stall warner just because it gives such ample warning when it's about to stall and buffets like crazy. But you have to fly it by numbers, can't be sloppy or get slow in a base to final turn. Need to stay on the speeds. If you do that, she'll never bite.

I loved my Aerostar. The lure of turbine just got too big, or else I'd still own it. And bang for buck, they're great buys. Just can't get anymore airplane for the money.

Here is the one I owned.

46996_1414339248.jpg
 
Last edited:
Ask Craigo - he's an expert (owned one for years). Says he loved it...
 
Back
Top