The skinny on a Renaissance Commander?

[H.Agenda]

We are looking to expand our flight department...


On paper it looks like a great bang for the buck airplane to have for 100-400nm trips.

I do not have experience with Garretts, just PT6. Would love to hear personal accounts, rumors ok too


Thanks..

 

[81Horse]

I was a PT6 baby, but developed a grudging respect for the Garretts after flying Jetstreams for a few years.

More bells and whistles -- make sure you've got a good Garrett mechanic lined up. Somewhat more fuel efficient; obviously, they're noisy.

 

[Tgaug6300]

As a current Turbo Commander operator, perhaps I can help you out. We fly our Commander about 550-600 hours a year, all over the U.S. It is a wonderful airplane to fly!
Since you are looking at a G.R. version I would assume you are looking at either Eagle Creek or Byerly Aviation. Both are excellent service centers. This is No B.S. numbers you will see out of the airplane. We flightplane for 295kts ( some may see around 300-310, but this is what we regularly see). At FL270 we also see a fuel burn of 250Lbs a side. We will be doing a G.R. on our aircraft next year. but currently have the same engines as the G.R. They are the Garrett (Honeywell) TPE-331-10T they are rated at 1000Shp but derated down to 770Shp. We currently (summertime) see a climb of about 2000Ft/min up to FL240 after that it drops to about 1500ft/min up to FL270. We are not RVSM so that is as high as we go. After the G.R. conversion we will go up to 350.
We operate our aircraft at $514/hr ( that includes fixed and direct costs), we also put a $200 set-aside in, so that puts us up to $714/hr. The Commanders have a 150hr inspection schedual. Ours goes in about 4 times a year at the Servicenter at PWA (in Bethany, OK).
The TPE331-10T is an excellent engine! With a 5400 hour TBO, it is hard to beat! What is a P&W 3600 hrs (no thanks)? Plus there are no phase inspections. At the end of July we are having the first Hot Section done. Honeywell puts a price cap on the engines at 56K (per engine). No matter how bad the engine maybe trashed it will not cost more than 56K. Ask P&W if they will do that for you. Twin Commander also has excellent support! The starting proceedure is so easy too. Flip one switch and you have a start.
Single-engine performance is excellent too. We attend FlightSafety (at Houston Hobby) for our recurrent training. We will operate out of Toluca, Mex in the sim(i'm sorry but I don't remember the elevation there, but it is pretty high). On a 105 degree day at MGTW loose an engine at V1, and we still climb out at 1500/min. Our mission requires us to use short strips too. The Commander has excellent should field capabilites (that is why many of them operate out of Mexico and South America, drug runners love them too, hahaha)
The G.R. also does not have to do a wing spar inspection (the Commander 840 and up does not need it). The G.R. also has the wet wing (not the 22 different fuel bladders) as the older (690A and B )Commanders do. I have flown the King-Airs too (and they are fine airplanes), but I think that for the money the Commander is the way to go. the C-90 and 200 do not have the speed, fuel burn or TBO that we do. The 300 has the speed, but not the fuel burn. Plus try to get into one of those at the cost of a Commander.
The Commander has its draw backs too. We have a 4.5hr endurance, King-Airs beat us there. It is not as roomy a cabin at the King-air. Not many mechanics know how to work on a Garrett too. In the past six years we only got stranded one time (starter-generator went out), but is wasn't because of the engine itself.
Garretts are loud (outside the aircraft), that is true. But I can carry on a conversation inside without having to raise my voice. I don't know it may just be me but I think the exhaust of a turbine should be in the back, not up front and out the side. Plus when I push the Power Levers foward it is nice to have that power right there (no lag)!

Please let me know if you have any more questions!

TG

 

[WMUSIGPI]

Other than sounding like a vacuum on steroids.... the direct drive is nice in that push the levers up and you go now. No lag like any other turbine

 

[On Your Six]

As a current Turbo Commander operator, perhaps I can help you out. We fly our Commander about 550-600 hours a year, all over the U.S. It is a wonderful airplane to fly!
Since you are looking at a G.R. version I would assume you are looking at either Eagle Creek or Byerly Aviation. Both are excellent service centers. This is No B.S. numbers you will see out of the airplane. We flightplane for 295kts ( some may see around 300-310, but this is what we regularly see). At FL270 we also see a fuel burn of 250Lbs a side. We will be doing a G.R. on our aircraft next year. but currently have the same engines as the G.R. They are the Garrett (Honeywell) TPE-331-10T they are rated at 1000Shp but derated down to 770Shp. We currently (summertime) see a climb of about 2000Ft/min up to FL240 after that it drops to about 1500ft/min up to FL270. We are not RVSM so that is as high as we go. After the G.R. conversion we will go up to 350.
We operate our aircraft at $514/hr ( that includes fixed and direct costs), we also put a $200 set-aside in, so that puts us up to $714/hr. The Commanders have a 150hr inspection schedual. Ours goes in about 4 times a year at the Servicenter at PWA (in Bethany, OK).
The TPE331-10T is an excellent engine! With a 5400 hour TBO, it is hard to beat! What is a P&W 3600 hrs (no thanks)? Plus there are no phase inspections. At the end of July we are having the first Hot Section done. Honeywell puts a price cap on the engines at 56K (per engine). No matter how bad the engine maybe trashed it will not cost more than 56K. Ask P&W if they will do that for you. Twin Commander also has excellent support! The starting proceedure is so easy too. Flip one switch and you have a start.
Single-engine performance is excellent too. We attend FlightSafety (at Houston Hobby) for our recurrent training. We will operate out of Toluca, Mex in the sim(i'm sorry but I don't remember the elevation there, but it is pretty high). On a 105 degree day at MGTW loose an engine at V1, and we still climb out at 1500/min. Our mission requires us to use short strips too. The Commander has excellent should field capabilites (that is why many of them operate out of Mexico and South America, drug runners love them too, hahaha)
The G.R. also does not have to do a wing spar inspection (the Commander 840 and up does not need it). The G.R. also has the wet wing (not the 22 different fuel bladders) as the older (690A and B )Commanders do. I have flown the King-Airs too (and they are fine airplanes), but I think that for the money the Commander is the way to go. the C-90 and 200 do not have the speed, fuel burn or TBO that we do. The 300 has the speed, but not the fuel burn. Plus try to get into one of those at the cost of a Commander.
The Commander has its draw backs too. We have a 4.5hr endurance, King-Airs beat us there. It is not as roomy a cabin at the King-air. Not many mechanics know how to work on a Garrett too. In the past six years we only got stranded one time (starter-generator went out), but is wasn't because of the engine itself.
Garretts are loud (outside the aircraft), that is true. But I can carry on a conversation inside without having to raise my voice. I don't know it may just be me but I think the exhaust of a turbine should be in the back, not up front and out the side. Plus when I push the Power Levers foward it is nice to have that power right there (no lag)!

Please let me know if you have any more questions!

TG

Wow - that was a great review. I have always admired those aircraft. How tight is it up front for you guys - how long can you last before your legs begin to numb over? Is it common for the refurbished Commanders to be equipped with updated Garmin units, TCAS, etc.? I took a look at one a few months back and it looked like nothing had changed up front since the 70s...

Looks like a fun aircraft to fly with some real speed!

 

[Tgaug6300]

OY6,

The cockpit does get a little cramped after about 3 hours. There is not much room to strech out. What many people do is take out the cabinet that is directly behind the Pilots' seat. This allows you to slide the seat all the way back, and give you more leg room.
Our airplane is equipped with dual Garmin 530's, KMD880 (with moving map, weather radar, nextrad weather downlink, and TCAS) Ours is nicely epuipped. Sperry also offers a Meggitt Magic system that makes the panel all glass! It is a very nice set up and I think the base price for it is around 120K. There is a picture of one on Controller.com offered by Byerly Aviation that has the Meggitt System.

TG

 

[H.Agenda]

As a current Turbo Commander operator, perhaps I can help you out. We fly our Commander about 550-600 hours a year, all over the U.S. It is a wonderful airplane to fly!
Since you are looking at a G.R. version I would assume you are looking at either Eagle Creek or Byerly Aviation. Both are excellent service centers. This is No B.S. numbers you will see out of the airplane. We flightplane for 295kts ( some may see around 300-310, but this is what we regularly see). At FL270 we also see a fuel burn of 250Lbs a side. We will be doing a G.R. on our aircraft next year. but currently have the same engines as the G.R. They are the Garrett (Honeywell) TPE-331-10T they are rated at 1000Shp but derated down to 770Shp. We currently (summertime) see a climb of about 2000Ft/min up to FL240 after that it drops to about 1500ft/min up to FL270. We are not RVSM so that is as high as we go. After the G.R. conversion we will go up to 350.
We operate our aircraft at $514/hr ( that includes fixed and direct costs), we also put a $200 set-aside in, so that puts us up to $714/hr. The Commanders have a 150hr inspection schedual. Ours goes in about 4 times a year at the Servicenter at PWA (in Bethany, OK).
The TPE331-10T is an excellent engine! With a 5400 hour TBO, it is hard to beat! What is a P&W 3600 hrs (no thanks)? Plus there are no phase inspections. At the end of July we are having the first Hot Section done. Honeywell puts a price cap on the engines at 56K (per engine). No matter how bad the engine maybe trashed it will not cost more than 56K. Ask P&W if they will do that for you. Twin Commander also has excellent support! The starting proceedure is so easy too. Flip one switch and you have a start.
Single-engine performance is excellent too. We attend FlightSafety (at Houston Hobby) for our recurrent training. We will operate out of Toluca, Mex in the sim(i'm sorry but I don't remember the elevation there, but it is pretty high). On a 105 degree day at MGTW loose an engine at V1, and we still climb out at 1500/min. Our mission requires us to use short strips too. The Commander has excellent should field capabilites (that is why many of them operate out of Mexico and South America, drug runners love them too, hahaha)
The G.R. also does not have to do a wing spar inspection (the Commander 840 and up does not need it). The G.R. also has the wet wing (not the 22 different fuel bladders) as the older (690A and B )Commanders do. I have flown the King-Airs too (and they are fine airplanes), but I think that for the money the Commander is the way to go. the C-90 and 200 do not have the speed, fuel burn or TBO that we do. The 300 has the speed, but not the fuel burn. Plus try to get into one of those at the cost of a Commander.
The Commander has its draw backs too. We have a 4.5hr endurance, King-Airs beat us there. It is not as roomy a cabin at the King-air. Not many mechanics know how to work on a Garrett too. In the past six years we only got stranded one time (starter-generator went out), but is wasn't because of the engine itself.
Garretts are loud (outside the aircraft), that is true. But I can carry on a conversation inside without having to raise my voice. I don't know it may just be me but I think the exhaust of a turbine should be in the back, not up front and out the side. Plus when I push the Power Levers foward it is nice to have that power right there (no lag)!

Please let me know if you have any more questions!

TG

Thanks all for your input, TG that was an outstanding review much more than I ever expected to recieve. Like most of ya'll too much good news makes me nervous...it sounds too good to be true!!!

After all your input I hate to ask you more questions, but tell me some bad things if you can think of any about the plane/maintinence/quirks/design flaws/unfavorable characteristics.

What is the cost of a 0 time engine GR? 2500 hour engine GR?

It looks like a high end GR cost 2.2M... on the low end 1.5 is this accurate?

How well does the aircraft depreciate? How well does it fair against icing?

What is your max payload? What is the shortest rnwy/conditions you feel comfortable taking off/landing in?

That 200$ you "set aside" what exactly is that for..engine reserve?

We are based out of Chicago so Byerly would be our nearest center...Eagle Creek not too much further away.

PM if I can give you a call. Thanks again

H.A.

 

[Tgaug6300]

HA,

I sent you a PM, please let me know if you don't get it.

TG

 

[Corona]

Thanks all for your input, TG that was an outstanding review much more than I ever expected to recieve. Like most of ya'll too much good news makes me nervous...it sounds too good to be true!!!

After all your input I hate to ask you more questions, but tell me some bad things if you can think of any about the plane/maintinence/quirks/design flaws/unfavorable characteristics.

What is the cost of a 0 time engine GR? 2500 hour engine GR?

It looks like a high end GR cost 2.2M... on the low end 1.5 is this accurate?

How well does the aircraft depreciate? How well does it fair against icing?

What is your max payload? What is the shortest rnwy/conditions you feel comfortable taking off/landing in?

That 200$ you "set aside" what exactly is that for..engine reserve?

We are based out of Chicago so Byerly would be our nearest center...Eagle Creek not too much further away.

PM if I can give you a call. Thanks again

H.A.

TG loves his airplane; nothing wrong with that...

However, he is a bit misinformed on the GR Commander. You can take any model; 690A or above, and convert it, as I remember. The -10 conversion is the major sum there & is definitely worth it.

And yes, you hit the nail on the head; it is too good to be true. The 840 I flew for a few short weeks was sold by the owner because, in his words, "it cost more per-hour to operate than my Citation SII!" They haven't built Turbo Commanders for over 20 years now, and that is the major problem. Parts are getting scarce & rebuilds don't amount to much (no parts to rebuild the parts). One good cure for this is the Meggitt system previously mentioned. It does dispense with the engine gauges (they are all electronic on the Meggitt); which is a good thing.

The best ones are the 980s with the -10 conversions, or the 1000 series, my favorite (and sounds like that's what TG is flying). You could not go wrong with a 1000 GR Commander (probably 1.5-2.5 mil for a real good bird) with the Meggitt system.

C

 

[Tgaug6300]

HA and Corona,

That is correct you can GR any commander 690 and above, What the GR conversion does is replace several things on the aircraft (pulleys and cables, changes out the wing spar if it hasn't already been done, changes instrumentation, wire bundles and anything else that needs to be replaced). The -10 is not part of the GR conversion, the -10 is its own conversion. However, most elect to do it if they do the GR conversion.
I currently operate a 690A with -10Ts, well worth it (like corona said). True the airplane has been out of production for twenty years now, but Twin Commander is excellent in supporting the aircraft. We have never had a problem getting parts. The only problem we have had with support is it may take a few days to get the parts. Plus they are somewhat expensive (what airplane part isn't though), Twin Commander is working to reduce the cost thought. You can check out Twin Commander at TwinCommander.com.
Corona, when the owner told you that he could operate his Citation SII cheaper than his Commander, well, I would have to question that! If he can show me that the fuel burn is less, and all other expenses are less. Well, I tell you what I'll buy you lunch.

Fly safe,

TG

 

[Tgaug6300]

Corona, also I couldn't agree more with you. The 1000 GR is an excellent choice. Wet wing, more cabine area (sunken floor and sitting area with potty seat), no spar inspection. Great airplane.

TG

 

[Ultraman]

I do contract work in a 900 Commander for an owner/operator who bought it new in 1982. He's had the -10 conversion and the 35,000 ft. mod (it's not RVSM'd, so that's a moot point now).

It's a great airplane. Fast, fun to fly, stable.

I've flown King Air 300's and 350's and from a pilot's perspective, the Commander wins hands down.

U

 

[Corona]

HA and Corona,
Corona, when the owner told you that he could operate his Citation SII cheaper than his Commander, well, I would have to question that! If he can show me that the fuel burn is less, and all other expenses are less. Well, I tell you what I'll buy you lunch.

Fly safe,
TG

It wasn't the fuel burn; the Commander definitely has the edge over most turbine twins there. It was more the endless parade of parts he had to buy to keep the thing operational. After 18 months of owning the thing & it still not flying right, he did the cost analysis & found the total cost more per hour to operate than his SII.
To be fair, that probably had more to do with the company managing the airplane. They had a tendency to gouge customers with those planes, IMO.

HA and Corona,

I currently operate a 690A with -10Ts, well worth it (like corona said).
TG

One of the amazing things about the -10 conversion is that your fuel burn is exactly the same as the lesser engines, but your TAS is about 30 KTS faster (or more, depending on model). It's definitely the proper engine for the airframe.

C

 

[Corona]

BTW, TG's current estimate of $714/flt. hr. sounds about right on the money.

C

 

[G100driver]

I
I've flown King Air 300's and 350's and from a pilot's perspective, the Commander wins hands down.

U

 

[Crucianpilot]

Anyone know of Commander operators out of ORL. I see one flying everyday and would like to fly on the side if I could. Flew 690's for 6yrs and loved the airplane. Thanks.

 

[Ultraman]

G100 Driver,

Did you not understand my statement or did you disagree with it?


U

 

[G100driver]

G100 Driver,

Did you not understand my statement or did you disagree with it?


U

Both! I have flown them both and could never understand WTF the guy who designed the steering was thinking! My only thought is: "I am going to be weird for weird sake." Other than that ...why? We can talk the benefits of hydraulic steering blah blah, but it is really not at all necessary.

The other thing that I do not like is how the tails and wings have had a bad habit of falling off. I flat out refuse to fly one now. At least the old King-Airs are still in good shape.

I have got about 500 hours in the 690 series and about 300 hours in the KA-300 and I would take the 300 any day. But hey, that is just me!

 

[H.Agenda]

Both! I have flown them both and could never understand WTF the guy who designed the steering was thinking! My only thought is: "I am going to be weird for weird sake." Other than that ...why? We can talk the benefits of hydraulic steering blah blah, but it is really not at all necessary.

The other thing that I do not like is how the tails and wings have had a bad habit of falling off. I flat out refuse to fly one now. At least the old King-Airs are still in good shape.

I have got about 500 hours in the 690 series and about 300 hours in the KA-300 and I would take the 300 any day. But hey, that is just me!

What are the specific differences between a KA300 and KA200? I know the 300 is faster, bigger, larger engines and space, but #'s anyone?

Tell me if I'm wrong but comparing a KA300 to a GR 1000 is not comparing apples to apples!? Isnt it considerably bigger...with obviously more operating costs..
It looks still yet that all things considered in the used turbo-prop market, the R.C. has the some of the best speed, payload, operating cost (per performance), and one of the lowest aquisition cost. After some research and a few testimonials if we decide on a turbo-prop I still think this will be the one.

 

[G100driver]

What are the specific differences between a KA300 and KA200? I know the 300 is faster, bigger, larger engines and space, but #'s anyone?

Tell me if I'm wrong but comparing a KA300 to a GR 1000 is not comparing apples to apples!? Isnt it considerably bigger...with obviously more operating costs..
It looks still yet that all things considered in the used turbo-prop market, the R.C. has the some of the best speed, payload, operating cost (per performance), and one of the lowest aquisition cost. After some research and a few testimonials if we decide on a turbo-prop I still think this will be the one.

All true. Not apples to apples. I was basing my answer on Ultraman's comparison.

I never flew the KA-200 but boy they sold a lot of them ... probably for a reason. I think that the last Commander was built in mid-80's ....
Apples to Apples however I would at least look at an aircraft in production. Or at least a manufacturer that is still in business.