Turbine P-Baron

Dave Siciliano

Dave Siciliano

Final Approach
Joined
Feb 27, 2005
Messages
6,434
Location
Dallas, Texas
Display Name
Display name:
Dave Siciliano
The folks at Rocket engineering have been working on converting a P-Baron to a twin turbine with -21 (PT-6s). Sent me some info and it looks impressive on paper. They claim a rate of climb as fast as 5,000 fpm and high speed cruise at FL250 over over 300 knots. If anyone would like to see what they sent me, send me a private message with your e-mail address and I'll forward a copy.

They are supposed to be test flying the first one in a couple weeks and I'm told the folks from Twin & Turbine will do a demo flight with them soon.

Best,

Dave
 
It sounds like a change you've been hoping for. But the price tag is probably still way up there not far short of a newer plane.

Out of curiosity, what are the upper V speeds for the Barron where cruise is concerned? Va, Vh, Vno
 
Dave Siciliano said:
The folks at Rocket engineering have been working on converting a P-Baron to a twin turbine with -21 (PT-6s). Sent me some info and it looks impressive on paper. They claim a rate of climb as fast as 5,000 fpm and high speed cruise at FL250 over over 300 knots. If anyone would like to see what they sent me, send me a private message with your e-mail address and I'll forward a copy.

They are supposed to be test flying the first one in a couple weeks and I'm told the folks from Twin & Turbine will do a demo flight with them soon.

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...

Me thinks our resident Twin & Turbine guy will be interested! Sounds like a great, fast way to get to Gastons or BBQ. :-)
 
KennyFlys said:
It sounds like a change you've been hoping for. But the price tag is probably still way up there not far short of a newer plane.

Out of curiosity, what are the upper V speeds for the Barron where cruise is concerned? Va, Vh, Vno
Click to expand...

I don't have all the nubers. On the phone, he said Vne will be 205 to 207. On the P-Baron, that is adjusted down from 220 above 16,000 feet. As many things, this sounds great; we'll see what actually happens.


Best,

Dave
 
Dave Siciliano said:
I don't have all the nubers. On the phone, he said Vne will be 205 to 207. On the P-Baron, that is adjusted down from 220 above 16,000 feet. As many things, this sounds great; we'll see what actually happens.


Best,

Dave
Click to expand...
Try those numbers again? Did you mean Vne of 405? Earlier, you said cruise at FL250 would be over 300.
 
KennyFlys said:
Try those numbers again? Did you mean Vne of 405? Earlier, you said cruise at FL250 would be over 300.
Click to expand...

Vne is given by Indicated Airspeed. In my P-Baron, it's 235 IAS adjusted down 5 knots per 1,000 feet above 16,000. The plane will true out at 300 plus according to them. Of course, flutter is a function of TAS, that's why indicated is adjusted down.

Best,

Dave
 
Dave Siciliano said:
Vne is given by Indicated Airspeed. In my P-Baron, it's 235 IAS adjusted down 5 knots per 1,000 feet above 16,000. The plane will true out at 300 plus according to them. Of course, flutter is a function of TAS, that's why indicated is adjusted down.

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...
Ahhh... ok, I was thinking strictly IAS. Ya don't tend to look for much change to TAS flying a Skyhawk around three to five thousand feet. :)
 
It'd be fun to blow by the King Airs:yes:
 
What kind of range are they claiming? IIRC, the turbine Bonanza is pretty short-legged.
 
yea that was my thought too. the PT-6 is quite a bit thirstier than the current engines on your P-Baron, so are they adding a bunch of fuel tanks to make up for the difference? then the useful load takes a dive if you want to take any amount of weight any distance.
 
Well, I'm just reporting what they've said. Like any paper plane, we don't have real numbers yet.
You can see the fuel burn is 45gph in the climb, but you get up very quickly. In cruise, it's 28 (per side) for high speed and 23 for long range. So, say 70 average for the first hour; then 46 per hour for the 270 knot long range cruise. That give between 1,000 and 1,100 NM in a no wind condition.

In my P-Baron, the way I extend the range is to do a LOP climb and cruise about 70% power. I would think one would put the nose as high as possible if there were tail winds to get up there; if head winds, a cruise climb and a fuel stop if going to the west coast from here. Pretty close to what my Baron does now.

Would I like more--of course. Could I live with that, maybe <g>

Best,

Dave
 
I don't remember the exact numbers for the P-Baron, but I think it's something like 210 kts at 35 gph; which is 6 NMPG. If their numbers are right at 270 kts and 46 gph; that's 5.9 NMPG. Not a bad comparison considering you're picking up over 50 kts.
 
Chip:

You're numbers on the P seem pretty close to my. Around FL180, I normally get between 210 and 220 at 33 gph. Don't know 'bout their numbers, but that's what they seem to be saying. Vne seems to be an issue to me. Mine is 235 less 5 knots for every 1,000 feet above 160. So, I don't know how he'll get 205 to 207 at FL250; that seems to be more than what the certified plane could to at that altitude. I also did a simple TAS calculation and in standard conditions, seemed 207 IAS would be 310 TAS; so, I don't know where he gets 320 which is what he told me on the phone.

Don't know where flutter becomes an issue. Perhaps someone with more technical knowledge than me will pipe in.

Best,

Dave
 
Here's the latest from Darwin at Rocket Engineering.

Best,

Dave

David, We are pleased to announce the first flight of the Turbine Cougar Baron.
The first flight was September 16,2008 and since then it has flown 4 more times.
The performance is better than expected and the flight and handling qualities are
very docile, much, much better than the original. Takeoff is awesome, power up to
500# torque, release brakes and in 6 seconds the aircraft is passing through 80 kias
with smooth rotation up to 140 kias and at full power (500 hp/side) the climb rate is
between 4000 to 5000 fpm. We have only been to 13,500’ so far and 200 kias is
achieved on only 24 gallons per side.

We will have more data to send you in the next few weeks but I though you would
appreciate this info. I have flight tested for the FAA many aircraft and this is by far
the highest performance aircraft I have ever flown, the Ferrari of aircraft.

Darwin Conrad
 
Same problems will arise as with other turbine conversions- very expensive and lack of fuel. On our field there is a turbine Duke (I think around 1.5M-2M to convert), and a close friend has a turbine Bonanza (around 800k). Yes they go fast and high, but were built to hold avgas, so even with tip tanks (in the Bonanza) their range is limited because of lack of fuel capacity, even up high.
 
Allisons?

Dave Siciliano said:
Here's the latest from Darwin at Rocket Engineering.

Best,

Dave

David, We are pleased to announce the first flight of the Turbine Cougar Baron.
The first flight was September 16,2008 and since then it has flown 4 more times.
The performance is better than expected and the flight and handling qualities are
very docile, much, much better than the original. Takeoff is awesome, power up to
500# torque, release brakes and in 6 seconds the aircraft is passing through 80 kias
with smooth rotation up to 140 kias and at full power (500 hp/side) the climb rate is
between 4000 to 5000 fpm. We have only been to 13,500’ so far and 200 kias is
achieved on only 24 gallons per side.

We will have more data to send you in the next few weeks but I though you would
appreciate this info. I have flight tested for the FAA many aircraft and this is by far
the highest performance aircraft I have ever flown, the Ferrari of aircraft.

Darwin Conrad
Click to expand...
 
Dave Siciliano said:
Oh! That thought had never occurred to me :goofy:

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...
What other twin turbine is out there? (All I can think of is the Piaggio Avanti, ie, not many.)

Dave, to me this is a timely thread...just the other day I was thinking about the dearth of twin turbines. Given the low range (on avg) of most business travel plus the price of fuel, I was thinking there is a niche for turbine...and of the past few years that niche has belonged to either the KA twin or PC-12 class.
 
tonycondon said:
yea that was my thought too. the PT-6 is quite a bit thirstier than the current engines on your P-Baron, so are they adding a bunch of fuel tanks to make up for the difference? then the useful load takes a dive if you want to take any amount of weight any distance.
Click to expand...
I noticed an ad in a recent AOPA Pilot magazine for an STC to extend the range on Citation I and IIs. Adds a fuel cell forward of the aft bulkhead.--taken out of cabin area. Missing was data on useful load of course.

Useful load Vs range...I think the corp flight dept has even further defined their mission. It seems to me getting a small team (2-4 persons) to the destination is more important than getting them clear across the country within 4 hours.

Find a niche, exploit it.
 
You mean like Cessna has been doing since ~74?
Richard said:
I noticed an ad in a recent AOPA Pilot magazine for an STC to extend the range on Citation I and IIs. Adds a fuel cell forward of the aft bulkhead.--taken out of cabin area. Missing was data on useful load of course.

Useful load Vs range...I think the corp flight dept has even further defined their mission. It seems to me getting a small team (2-4 persons) to the destination is more important than getting them clear across the country within 4 hours.

Find a niche, exploit it.
Click to expand...
 
Richard said:
What other twin turbine is out there? (All I can think of is the Piaggio Avanti, ie, not many.)

Dave, to me this is a timely thread...just the other day I was thinking about the dearth of twin turbines. Given the low range (on avg) of most business travel plus the price of fuel, I was thinking there is a niche for turbine...and of the past few years that niche has belonged to either the KA twin or PC-12 class.
Click to expand...

I agree with you when it comes to new turbines. Of course there are older twin turbines and conversions. The twin turbines seems to excel on shorter trips and into shorter/less improved facilities. The jet seems more suited for getting up high and flying longer: needs better facilities (in general).

Beech has a lot of twin turbine choices, but they are big aircraft compared to my P-Baron. For someone that just needs something the size of the Baron, there isn't a twin turbine choice that I can see. That's kind of what Eclipse was to me: a P-Baron with jets. Same size; comparable range and payload. No analogy is perfect: workman ship was different, all the manufacturing delays, price change etc. made it problematic, but, in essence, that's what it was to me. Kent Ibold was on that track in his last issue of T&T also.

Best,

Dave
 
"The death of the Turbine" articles have been an annual staple in the industry press forever. It never happens and they continue to prosper. For regional travel (up to ~500 nm radius) they are hard to beat.

Most King Air book prices are largely unchanged this year, in spite of fuel prices and economic woes. I just spent three months finding a couple of 350's for Dallas-based clients, not an easy job due to limited supply. One of the buyers is the prior owner of a PC-12 that went silent at FL 260 at night couple months ago with his wife and her friends aboard.

Re. advertised cruise speeds and King Air owners, they could care less whether somebody in a cobbled-up conversion (or anything else) "blows by" them. They weren't the fastest airplanes when they were built, and somebody (MU-2, Cheyenne, Conquest, Merlin, Avanti, various conversions) was trumpeting a faster, better mousetrap to compete. Beech is still producing the entire King Air line. Who else is still competing (and capable of providing significant production volume)? The King Air offers the best combination of speed, comfort, range, dependability, maintenance, simplicity and continued resale price. That's what people were buying in 1964, that's what they're still buying now. Not perfect, just better than the alternatives.

For a lot less money than the projected cost of a converted P-Baron (or any of the other twin conversions) a nice C-90 with all of the amenities can be had for a lot less money. Operating costs will be higher due to increased burn, but the owner gets the whole package (cabin, aisle, potty, pressure diff, environmental, ground air, fuel, range, altitude).

In spite of higher DOC's, the K-A's all-in after-tax annual budget will be much less due to capital cost calculation.








Richard said:
What other twin turbine is out there? (All I can think of is the Piaggio Avanti, ie, not many.)

Dave, to me this is a timely thread...just the other day I was thinking about the dearth of twin turbines. Given the low range (on avg) of most business travel plus the price of fuel, I was thinking there is a niche for turbine...and of the past few years that niche has belonged to either the KA twin or PC-12 class.
Click to expand...
 
There was a Turbine Duke with pt-6's (not sure which version guessing 500SHP) in Lincoln about 3 months ago....coolest thing I ever saw.excited to see this Baron
 
Richard said:
I noticed an ad in a recent AOPA Pilot magazine for an STC to extend the range on Citation I and IIs. Adds a fuel cell forward of the aft bulkhead.--taken out of cabin area. Missing was data on useful load of course.

Useful load Vs range...I think the corp flight dept has even further defined their mission. It seems to me getting a small team (2-4 persons) to the destination is more important than getting them clear across the country within 4 hours.

Find a niche, exploit it.
Click to expand...

The older Citations you mention have quite a fuel burn if you check that. If you upgrade to the Williams engines, you'll have a lot of money in an old airframe.

Beech has sold more King Airs than all other turbines combined and there's a reason. Some folks are now choosing the turbine single; that's a choice where some will argue one is giving up some safety margin for economy. The corporate user and for hire folks seem to prefer the twin turbine. I understand TBM is about to announce a twin turbine.

Best,

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top