Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Beech B-60 Duke...

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web


Well-known member
Nov 26, 2001
Anyone ever fly one? Likes? Dislikes? Have been researching various aircraft values, etc., for a friend of mine, came across it and have become curious about the aircraft. I see them on ramps from time to time and I cannot recall seeing one that didn't look just about perfect. From the TTAF I see on www.aso.com, it appears they are more "personal" transport rather than "corporate?"

It appears to be a 6 seater (four pax in back) and appears to be a bit bigger than the Baron and, I assume, faster. It "looks" fast, too.

I don't recall that Raytheon Beechcraft builds them anymore. Anyone know why?

Thanks in advance.
The Duke is my favorite piston twin. Never flown one, but in my interest I've talked to several people that have owned them over the years. I think it's a sexy, sexy plane. I can't think of any piston twin that looks better. :D

I was told that 230 knots on about 40gph is what to expect. It's not a cheap plane to maintain. The huge engines require a lot of attention, and from what I hear a Duke will spend a lot of time in the shop.

But hell, if I had the money - I'd own two. That way I have one to fly while the other is getting fixed!

I could not not agree with you more. The best looking "light" twin
ever! Needs lots of runway and I would not want to fly one with only one turning, but a hell of great looking bird.
THe Baron is a far superior airplane to the Duke, but ur right, the Duke does look cool!
Last edited:
I'm curious - what about the Baron is superior to the Duke? I'm not arguing - I haven't flown either one, but I just would have figured the Duke to be a more capable plane. Or are you talking a price/performance type thing, in which case I can see that already...
Beech B-60 Duke

I have about 250 hours of Duke time. Here is what I have noticed:

1) 230 kts GS is about right

2) 40 gals/hr is about right. I tend to baby the engines and keep the TIT around 850 instead of 900. I would rather pay for fuel than metal.

3) The Duke that I fly has been in peices for 6 months. The rebuilt engines (at 35K ea) lasted only 230 hours before the lobes on the camshaft were worn down. The FAA is about to approve a fix for this. This airplane will be the POC (proof of concept) for the fix. The camshaft lobe problem is a known problem with these engines.

4) 4 folks in the back is somewhat cramped, but doable.

5) There is more cabin space in the Duke vs. the Baron. The Baron that I fly (Be-56 TC) is faster than the Duke. This Baron does have the same engines as the Duke which is why. I don't care for the ergonomics of the Baron cockpit.

6) The vortex generators really improve the low speed characteristics. I touch down at 80-85 kts IAS. However, the advantages of the winglets are canceled by the drag of the vortex generators.

7) The cokpit layout is very comfortable.

8) There seems to be adequate baggage storage space.

9) I really do like the "lines" of the airplane.
a related question....

Dukes are not pressurized, are they (or are some)? If so, is there an STC for putting a turbine on them (or, I guess, why would/wouldn't you want to)?

Thanks for the thoughts thus far (even the opinion on it being ugly), it's always interesting to learn more about different aircraft that intrigue me.

Andy MSN

Latest resources