What about Brand "X"?

On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 10:15:32 -0500, Stu Gotts
wrote:

snip

Tom, it sounds like you've made up your mind, so good luck with it.

snip

I'm just curious how many different makes/models of singles he's flown
around in, and how much time he's spent in the Commander.

Pretty much has the highest specific fuel consumption of any
comparable single, seems under-powered from the driver's seat, and
personally, I don't like the way they handle.

Different strokes for different folks, but I wouldn't think about
buying a relatively expensive, complex, everyday flyer that wasn't
either in current production or very well-supported concerning parts.

BTW have bopped around in a couple of 112's also, they seemed like a
totally different (hard to quantify "better") handling airplane.

YMMV

TC

wrote in message
news
On Sun, 07 Sep 2003 10:15:32 -0500, Stu Gotts
wrote:

snip

Tom, it sounds like you've made up your mind, so good luck with it.

snip

I'm just curious how many different makes/models of singles he's flown
around in, and how much time he's spent in the Commander.

I have 90 hours in the 112TC, and 230 in the 182RG. I have no PIC time in
the 114B, but I've got about 20 hours with an associate and his 114B. I
am/was also considering a 114TC.

Pretty much has the highest specific fuel consumption of any
comparable single, seems under-powered from the driver's seat, and
personally, I don't like the way they handle.

How much time do you have in the 112/112TC/114B ?

Different strokes for different folks, but I wouldn't think about
buying a relatively expensive, complex, everyday flyer that wasn't
either in current production or very well-supported concerning parts.

And that's why I asked to ascertain anyone's experience or objective
knowledge of theri maintenance. As it is, I am pretty much eleiminating them
from my perspective list.


BTW have bopped around in a couple of 112's also, they seemed like a
totally different (hard to quantify "better") handling airplane.

How many hours? 112 or 112TC?

BTW, My take on the 114B vs 182RG is that the 114 was MUCH more comfortable
(I'm 6'1" and very wide in the shoulders), the 182RG seemingly more like a
Chevy in terms of fit and finish and a feeling of being _solid_, where the
114's seem more like my Acura. I find the 114 much more comfortable in
turbulence.

On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 18:44:54 -0700, "Tom S." wrote:


wrote in message
news
snip

I'm just curious how many different makes/models of singles he's flown
around in, and how much time he's spent in the Commander.

I have 90 hours in the 112TC, and 230 in the 182RG. I have no PIC time in
the 114B, but I've got about 20 hours with an associate and his 114B. I
am/was also considering a 114TC.

Never had the opportunity to drive a TC of any variety. However, have
an associate that has ferried a couple new ones (114TC) across the
Atlantic. To paraphrase, he'd never taken a GA ship across that used
as much gas to go as slow.

How much time do you have in the 112/112TC/114B ?

All VFR (cain't legally fly with my head in the clouds), about as much
time as I've gotten in about every variety of PA28 and PA32 (turbo
included, ditto straight/T-tail and/or retracts), PA46-350P (no 310P),
35you-name-it, V35A, A36 (no F33), 201, 231, 172 & SP (? normally
aspirated IO-360 TCM six-banger), 182 (but no RG) plus a few other
odd-ball singles-Stearman, Husky, etc. Solo'd in a 7AC and finished up
a Traumahawk FWIW.

Useta be able to wring 'em out before & after performing annual/100 hr
inspections/maintenance on them, plus occasionally some time ferrying
them in for maintenance/inspection and back home again. Always took
somebody along in the Stearman, other times depended what was going on
and who wanted to ride along. Occasional "fun" flights also, although
most were work-related.

About the last one I flew was a nearly new 114B with about half tanks
and three extra souls onboard (being a professional aircraft mechanic,
feel free to consider me soul-less). Actually did a W & B for a
change. Didn't care for the acceleration/climb gradient, dropped like
a constant-chord PA32 (at a considerably higher airspeed) plus ran out
of rudder on final. Actually looked down at my feet on short final to
make sure I was pushing the rudder in the proper direction.

Discussed this flight with the ferry dude, he indicated that his
experiences pretty much matched mine. That was when he clued me in on
the TC trips across the pond.

Different strokes for different folks, but I wouldn't think about
buying a relatively expensive, complex, everyday flyer that wasn't
either in current production or very well-supported concerning parts.

And that's why I asked to ascertain anyone's experience or objective
knowledge of theri maintenance. As it is, I am pretty much eleiminating them
from my perspective list.

Bum some left seat time in an A36 some time. Prepare to be spoiled
thereafter. Only problem in one is headroom in some cases.


BTW have bopped around in a couple of 112's also, they seemed like a
totally different (hard to quantify "better") handling airplane.

How many hours? 112 or 112TC?

Honestly, probly about 2.5 on three occasions. Two solo, once a long
lunch trip with 4 on board. Didn't get a chance to work on the 112 (or
drive it around much), this was a low-time cherry trade-in that left
soon after-Commander ended up with it back when they were doing some
kind of "certified" used airplane deal. Enjoyed it more than any 114
I'd been up in.

BTW, My take on the 114B vs 182RG is that the 114 was MUCH more comfortable
(I'm 6'1" and very wide in the shoulders), the 182RG seemingly more like a
Chevy in terms of fit and finish and a feeling of being _solid_, where the
114's seem more like my Acura. I find the 114 much more comfortable in
turbulence.

6' 2" 205lbs, ditto. Ain't gonna argue about whether or not a
Commander looks and feels solid, I agree.

They just aren't one of my favorites to fly-my opinion, worth exactly
what it cost you.

Regards;

TC

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003 18:44:54 -0700, "Tom S." wrote:


wrote in message
news
snip
snip

Bum some left seat time in an A36 some time. Prepare to be spoiled
thereafter. Only problem in one is headroom in some cases.

I've got some time in an F33 and while it flew well, the cockpit was VERY
uncomfortable.


BTW have bopped around in a couple of 112's also, they seemed like a
totally different (hard to quantify "better") handling airplane.

How many hours? 112 or 112TC?

Honestly, probly about 2.5 on three occasions. Two solo, once a long
lunch trip with 4 on board. Didn't get a chance to work on the 112 (or
drive it around much), this was a low-time cherry trade-in that left
soon after-Commander ended up with it back when they were doing some
kind of "certified" used airplane deal. Enjoyed it more than any 114
I'd been up in.

BTW, My take on the 114B vs 182RG is that the 114 was MUCH more
comfortable
(I'm 6'1" and very wide in the shoulders), the 182RG seemingly more like
a
Chevy in terms of fit and finish and a feeling of being _solid_, where
the
114's seem more like my Acura. I find the 114 much more comfortable in
turbulence.

6' 2" 205lbs, ditto. Ain't gonna argue about whether or not a
Commander looks and feels solid, I agree.

And that was (one of) my main points, and the main reason I just don't like
a Mooney if there's more than just myself in the front seats. They fly like
s dream, but the seats are like coach seats on a 737 with a fat dude/dudess
next to you (been there...Oh god, have I been THERE).

They just aren't one of my favorites to fly-my opinion, worth exactly
what it cost you.

The whole POINT of design in the Commander series was CABIN WIDTH and
HEIGHT. That is going to spoil the speed/fuel burn aerodynamics. It's much
of the reason a Mercedes doesn't get the same gas mileage as a Honda Accord.

Diff'rent strokes fer different folks! :~)

"Tom S." wrote in message ...

Different strokes for different folks, but I wouldn't think about
buying a relatively expensive, complex, everyday flyer that wasn't
either in current production or very well-supported concerning parts.

And that's why I asked to ascertain anyone's experience or objective
knowledge of theri maintenance. As it is, I am pretty much eleiminating them
from my perspective list.

Tom,

Perhaps you have received additional information you're not sharing
here, but personally I wouldn't eliminate a plane I liked because some
folks on the net raised concerns about parts.

The real issue is: what do A&Ps with expertise and owners in the
type club say about parts? If those folks say there are problems,
there are problems. But I've heard the same "ding" re Grummans,
and typically it was either pilots speaking on general principles
(small production run, out of production at the time), or mechanics
who lacked experience w/ Grummans and didn't know who to call.

Don't get me wrong, I have zippo experience with Commanders. I
just wouldn't eliminate a plane you have time in and like unless
I'd talked to the type club, or to a mechanic acknowledged as
knowledgeable in the type (he maintains more than 1 or 2).

Regards,
Sydney

"Snowbird" wrote in message
om...
"Tom S." wrote in message
...

Different strokes for different folks, but I wouldn't think about
buying a relatively expensive, complex, everyday flyer that wasn't
either in current production or very well-supported concerning parts.

And that's why I asked to ascertain anyone's experience or objective
knowledge of their maintenance. As it is, I am pretty much eliminating
them
from my perspective list.

Tom,

Perhaps you have received additional information you're not sharing
here, but personally I wouldn't eliminate a plane I liked because some
folks on the net raised concerns about parts.

No, I have not other infor, but I did talk to my FBO's A&P, but he doesn't
work on them enough to form an opinion.

The real issue is: what do A&Ps with expertise and owners in the
type club say about parts? If those folks say there are problems,
there are problems. But I've heard the same "ding" re Grummans,
and typically it was either pilots speaking on general principles
(small production run, out of production at the time), or mechanics
who lacked experience w/ Grummans and didn't know who to call.

Good point. My partner has had 114B for the past 8 months, but has not had a
single problem with it, so that doens't help on the parts "issue".

Don't get me wrong, I have zippo experience with Commanders. I
just wouldn't eliminate a plane you have time in and like unless
I'd talked to the type club, or to a mechanic acknowledged as
knowledgeable in the type (he maintains more than 1 or 2).

The problem I foresee (as someone pointed out) is that with them in Chapter
11, even a previously good parts supply may suddenly vanish.

I do like the plane, and find it supurbly comfortable for my build (big in
the shoulders). No, it's not the fastest, but if I merely wanted _fast_, I'd
go with a Mooney. Unfortunately, though I love the feel and handling of a
Mooney, it's low/narrow cabin (hence, it's speed) just gives me a cramp. :~)

Could anyone point out where the Commanders Club :~) is to be found?


Regards,
Sydney

"Tom S." wrote in message ...



Could anyone point out where the Commanders Club :~) is to be found?



Try : www.commander.org

Craig C.

(Snowbird) wrote in message . com...


The real issue is: what do A&Ps with expertise and owners in the
type club say about parts? If those folks say there are problems,
there are problems. But I've heard the same "ding" re Grummans,
and typically it was either pilots speaking on general principles
(small production run, out of production at the time), or mechanics
who lacked experience w/ Grummans and didn't know who to call.

The problem with parts avialbilty on a particular a/c should be looked
at from two different points of view when we ding it. By far, the
average pilot wants to be able to go out and get into the bird and go
any day of the week and at any time. When it breaks, he wants his
mechanic to walk over to the parts room and get the part or call the
supplier and have it fed-exed in and the a/c back in the air as soon
as possible. This type owner is going to consider the ding on parts a
major problem.

Now flip over to guys like me that build and restore airplanes for a
living. All our restoration work is on a/c that are over 50 years
old. We expect to have problems finding parts or plan on fabricating
our own. For us it doesn't matter too much if it takes us a week or a
couple of months to find parts. To us and the owners that we work
with, the ding means that parts availibility is not as easy as most
newer a/c and might require some effort and time to find and get them,
but there is a solution.

Then you filp to guys like me personally. I have a restoration project
where a pair of rudders are the only known spare parts in exsistance
for the airframe. Everthing else, I get to either rebuild the parts
that I have or fabricate new ones. That's part of the reason that this
restoration is taking many years to get done.

I look at it this way: If someone likes a particular a/c enough, we,
as mechanics and restorers, can find some way to safely keep it in the
air. It might not be the least expensive a/c to maintain or have the
fastest turn around when it needs attention, but we can keep it
flying.

Craig C.