Turbo Commander Operators, Please Step Inside

[RoyBoy]

seriously, Commanders ARE GREAT AIRPLANES!!!!! But you need to look at a cessna 441 conquest II

 

[twinbeech]

+1 on the Conquest II. It is one bad-ass machine with the Dash-10s. 2k ft/min all the way up. 290kts on 500/hr. Lower if you are RVSM'd.

 

[dustrpilot]

+1 on the Conquest II. It is one bad-ass machine with the Dash-10s. 2k ft/min all the way up. 290kts on 500/hr. Lower if you are RVSM'd.

Yeah but will it easily take off and land on 2500' ? Not being a smart aleck, asking because I haven't flown a Conquest.

 

[lear31pilot]

Yes it will, pretty easily

 

[gern_blanston]

+1 on the Conquest II. It is one bad-ass machine with the Dash-10s. 2k ft/min all the way up. 290kts on 500/hr.

Just like a Dash-10 Turbo Commander.

 

[G100driver]

I dunno ... I would not get an airplane that has a habbit of shedding its tail and or wings

 

[pilotyip]

I dunno ... I would not get an airplane that has a habbit of shedding its tail and or wings

didn't know that was a problem with the TC.

 

[G100driver]

Been more than one fatality ... mostly on older 690's. There is an STC out for both the tail and wing, however.

690 was a great airplane in 70's.

 

[TAG2]

Let me broaden this topic a little. What would you say is the most reliable, economical cabin class piston twin or turbo-prop?

Of the airplanes I flew, the Gulfstreams had the absolute best dispatch rate. As long as they are flown regularly, very few mx problems. Even the old GII I flew with it's millions of relays, as long as it was exercised regularly, it just ran. But, that is about a million miles out of my financial category.

Beechjets weren't real bad, but they had their issues, mostly avionics or computers. C500 and 550 had several pre-takeoff failures.

I flew an older C-414 that usually ran well. Even though I put that in my question, piston twins can get very expensive to operate (Continentals) and not very good single engine performance.

The Turbo-Commanders are sexy looking airplanes and pilots seem to love them, but they are loaded with AD's and SB's. A few inflight break-ups.

The MU-2 is a tank, but if you search NTSB records, too many of them have met their demise. Even two pilot operations. But again, MU-2 pilots seem to love them.

I want something that I am comfortable loading my family or employees into.

King Airs seem to be just friendly airplanes that won't break any speed records, but the acquisition prices push on jet prices.

 

[340drvr]

Let me broaden this topic a little. What would you say is the most reliable, economical cabin class piston twin or turbo-prop?

...................

I want something that I am comfortable loading my family or employees into.

......................

King Airs seem to be just friendly airplanes that won't break any speed records, but the acquisition prices push on jet prices.

You've answered that one already. King Air has to top that list, not the sexiest or fastest on the block, but, there's a reason they still sell lots of King Airs. Reliability, comfort, relative economy.