prporter: Check this site out. It will make your decisions faster in an emergency. Should be required reading for all twin pilots. avhf.com/htlm/library/leave_yourself_an_out.pdf
Did run is the operable word, but that is why is was a Olympic t&f junkie. I did remember your name. That's why I posted you. Thanks for representing this great country. Most people do not realize the commitment that is required. I remember you won almost everything in c/x in the 80's in the United States. I ran in the c/x in the late 50"s. I was pretty good, but torn cartilage in right knee ending it. I could run for hours, but you could time me with a sundial in the 100 yard dash. Thanks again
I flew a Duke in 1972. It was a 1969 model. I believe the orginal Lycomings had a TBO of 1000. Later raised to 1200 hours. Most did not make it to TBO. Lycoming make great engines but the 541 was not one of them. On a hot day the Duke was a ground loving SOB. Climb was good, but going to altitude took a long time. They were fast at altitude. Hanger Queen. Lot of Mainenance aircraft and engines. Owner could not take any more. Sold it. Gat a Cessna 421B Golden Eagle. 421B was a great airplane.
@navajopa31 I have a '80 B60 Duke right now. It's T O roll was only 30' more than a 414, but the important number was it's A/S runway length- almost 700' less than the 414, and 0ver 1000' at 5000' alt. I am able to get 1100 FPM. My neighbors 414 costs way much on each annual than mine ever has.. I guess it depends on the ability of the pilot...
@prporter1 You are correct about the skill and knowledge of the pilot. I went to TBO on light case Cessna 421 engines GTSIO 520H and then overhauled them and went to TBO a second time. The Continental rep said he had never heard of any engines lasting that long. You really cannot compare a 414 to a Duke. The 414 was a sick chicken. I think the useful load on a 414 was 535 pounds when full of fuel. Thats 2 people + clubs. Try your Duke at gross wt., 105 degress @ 2000 ft above sea level. I did.
@navajopa31 Well, when you say that the Duke is a "ground loving SOB", my question to you is, what piston powered twin isn't? I think it is unfair to tie that name to the Duke. Mine performs as well or better than any other piston twin out there.
@prporter1 To finish my last post. Multi engine aircraft are certified to fly on one engine based on the following: aircraft at gross weight, sea level, standard day and 59 degrees. Check you charts in the owners manual it might scare you. You might have a chance at altitude if there are no mountains around. At five hundred feet after take off with gear and flaps up you probably are going to crash. Over gross and aft CG and you don't have a chance. Most piston powered twins are like this.
@navajopa31 Well, that's why the post the data in the POH, and provide A/S info for temp and alt. so the pilot can either manage it or "no-go". Check your charts in the owners manual to verify this.
@prporter1 I did not make it up. Back in the day it is what pilots express about the Duke. Some aircraft were labeled hanger queens or constant maintenance. Right or wrong it was just brought up in general conversations. It did seem to me that it took longer on hot days than other aircraft. Pressurized Navajo, turbo's Cessna 337's were not liked along with early geared engined aircraft. My expierence with the Duke was S/N69. I am sure they made some improvements by 1982.
@navajopa31 I guess it goes to show that what they say is true- that some pilots are incapable of flying the Duke well. I did not make that up, it was brought up in general conversations.
@prporter1 I assume you know the early model Dukes had an undersized turbo charger that was rated as ineffecient and upgraded to the one you have on your airplane.
@prporter1 It was certified with those engines and any thing else is just dreaming. I have seen where they put turbine engine on them. From a corporate stand point, just buy a turbo prop aircraft. At least you can sell it since it is not a hybrid aircraft and insurance companies know what it is. Early P51 pilots wished it had the Merlin on it, but you flew what you had.
@dmimcg When you have an aircraft that goes fast at altitude there is a trade off. The wing that goes fast at altitude does not perform at low levels especially on take off. It has enough HP at altitude the speed proves it. Because of the wing it does not have enough HP on take off. I will post my comments in another post.
Wow. Absolutely loved the sound!
Treetop64 10 months ago
Address should read: avhf.com/html/library/leave_yourself_an_out.pdf
navajopa31 1 year ago
prporter: Check this site out. It will make your decisions faster in an emergency. Should be required reading for all twin pilots. avhf.com/htlm/library/leave_yourself_an_out.pdf
navajopa31 1 year ago
Did run is the operable word, but that is why is was a Olympic t&f junkie. I did remember your name. That's why I posted you. Thanks for representing this great country. Most people do not realize the commitment that is required. I remember you won almost everything in c/x in the 80's in the United States. I ran in the c/x in the late 50"s. I was pretty good, but torn cartilage in right knee ending it. I could run for hours, but you could time me with a sundial in the 100 yard dash. Thanks again
navajopa31 1 year ago
I flew a Duke in 1972. It was a 1969 model. I believe the orginal Lycomings had a TBO of 1000. Later raised to 1200 hours. Most did not make it to TBO. Lycoming make great engines but the 541 was not one of them. On a hot day the Duke was a ground loving SOB. Climb was good, but going to altitude took a long time. They were fast at altitude. Hanger Queen. Lot of Mainenance aircraft and engines. Owner could not take any more. Sold it. Gat a Cessna 421B Golden Eagle. 421B was a great airplane.
navajopa31 1 year ago
@navajopa31 I have a '80 B60 Duke right now. It's T O roll was only 30' more than a 414, but the important number was it's A/S runway length- almost 700' less than the 414, and 0ver 1000' at 5000' alt. I am able to get 1100 FPM. My neighbors 414 costs way much on each annual than mine ever has.. I guess it depends on the ability of the pilot...
prporter1 1 year ago
@prporter1 You are correct about the skill and knowledge of the pilot. I went to TBO on light case Cessna 421 engines GTSIO 520H and then overhauled them and went to TBO a second time. The Continental rep said he had never heard of any engines lasting that long. You really cannot compare a 414 to a Duke. The 414 was a sick chicken. I think the useful load on a 414 was 535 pounds when full of fuel. Thats 2 people + clubs. Try your Duke at gross wt., 105 degress @ 2000 ft above sea level. I did.
navajopa31 1 year ago
@navajopa31 Well, when you say that the Duke is a "ground loving SOB", my question to you is, what piston powered twin isn't? I think it is unfair to tie that name to the Duke. Mine performs as well or better than any other piston twin out there.
prporter1 1 year ago
@prporter1 To finish my last post. Multi engine aircraft are certified to fly on one engine based on the following: aircraft at gross weight, sea level, standard day and 59 degrees. Check you charts in the owners manual it might scare you. You might have a chance at altitude if there are no mountains around. At five hundred feet after take off with gear and flaps up you probably are going to crash. Over gross and aft CG and you don't have a chance. Most piston powered twins are like this.
navajopa31 1 year ago
@navajopa31 Well, that's why the post the data in the POH, and provide A/S info for temp and alt. so the pilot can either manage it or "no-go". Check your charts in the owners manual to verify this.
prporter1 1 year ago
@prporter1 I did not make it up. Back in the day it is what pilots express about the Duke. Some aircraft were labeled hanger queens or constant maintenance. Right or wrong it was just brought up in general conversations. It did seem to me that it took longer on hot days than other aircraft. Pressurized Navajo, turbo's Cessna 337's were not liked along with early geared engined aircraft. My expierence with the Duke was S/N69. I am sure they made some improvements by 1982.
navajopa31 1 year ago
@navajopa31 I guess it goes to show that what they say is true- that some pilots are incapable of flying the Duke well. I did not make that up, it was brought up in general conversations.
prporter1 1 year ago
@prporter1 I assume you know the early model Dukes had an undersized turbo charger that was rated as ineffecient and upgraded to the one you have on your airplane.
navajopa31 1 year ago
@prporter1 I just read your profile. Are you really the Olympic runner from the 80's?
navajopa31 1 year ago
@navajopa31 A little grayer, a few pounds heavier, but yes, that;s me. Do/did you run?
prporter1 1 year ago
@navajopa31 That would be me. Traded in my track spikes for TIO 541's.
prporter1 10 months ago
Nice plane, but it could use bigger engines.
dmimcg 1 year ago
@dmimcg Really? What size engines does it have?
prporter1 1 year ago
@prporter1 Lycoming TIO 541E 380 HP
navajopa31 1 year ago
@navajopa31 That's what I thought.. So, what size should it have?
prporter1 1 year ago
@prporter1 It was certified with those engines and any thing else is just dreaming. I have seen where they put turbine engine on them. From a corporate stand point, just buy a turbo prop aircraft. At least you can sell it since it is not a hybrid aircraft and insurance companies know what it is. Early P51 pilots wished it had the Merlin on it, but you flew what you had.
navajopa31 1 year ago
@dmimcg When you have an aircraft that goes fast at altitude there is a trade off. The wing that goes fast at altitude does not perform at low levels especially on take off. It has enough HP at altitude the speed proves it. Because of the wing it does not have enough HP on take off. I will post my comments in another post.
navajopa31 1 year ago
It takes a lot to airborne... An hard aircraft to fly. Great IKEA building on the right side of the runway :-)
sundek88 2 years ago
@sundek88 Why do you say it is hard to fly?
prporter1 1 year ago
@prporter1 I have a friend who flies one. He said that he's quite tricky in some situations, but great aircraft as well!
sundek88 1 year ago
@sundek88 It is actually an easy aircraft to fly. When you have an engine out, you have to be on your toes, but that is the same for all twins.
prporter1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@sundek88 It is actually an easy aircraft to fly. When you have an engine out, you have to be on your toes, but that is the same for all twins.
prporter1 1 year ago