What comes after a DA40?

[Antoine]

Tommy this looks stunning. Congrats and many safe flight hours. Some questions in PM.

The Aerostar airframe is remarkably timeless and your paint job makes it absolutely contemporary. Bravo!
What effect do the winglets have on flying characteristics?
Can you share some more pics (curious about how you redid the upholstery) and also tell us (again) about the performance of this monster?
In any case you have my deep respect for having done not one but TWO of these!
Mr Smith must be praying for you from the heavens above.

Break break

I was supposed to fly to EDKB to test fly the Extra 400 after the latest fixes.
Also finally installed the GAMIjectors (GAMi spread was 1.8 GPH)
Will go there on tuesday. Cross your fingers.

A fellow owner/buddy with the old prop found out about my posts re performance and is now jealous and wanting to buy the scimitar prop.

Another owner (in the US) just bought a newly refurbished Extra 400 including a new engine from Conti and the improved prop. His seller told him the plane would do 220 KTAS at FL220 on 22 GPH.

I have not been to FL220 yet, but that would make his plane much faster than mine on less fuel (on an ISA day mine did 205 KTAS at FL180, burning 24 GPH at 75% power. Calculates to 212 KTAS or so at FL220). Very lucky that I got conditions so close to ISA so that gives a precious data point to extrapolate from

Curious to see if the plane is still as fast after the sale.

After my recent experience, I am looking for a way to install a coolant pressure sensor and alerter and the same for hydraulic pressure. Found some certified stuff at UMA, but their gauges are so primitive compared to what you get in car racing. Very frustrating... Any ideas?

[Tommy]

The glare shield and side panels have yet to be recovered.

[Tommy]

[rwtucker]

Magnificent! I love that last picture. Looks like a sleek 2017 production model.

I will be interested in hearing about performance differences attributable to the winglets.

[Antoine]

This is fantastic Tommy. Again: CONGRATULATIONS and fly safe!

[Tommy]

[rwtucker]

Beautiful winglets Tommy. Are they G2 or G3 design? The 600's wings are short enough that you should get a bunch of benefit from reduced ID and increased of lift area. Do they provide any numbers on the benefits? Do they change POH values for payload, climb, fuel burn, or speed?

[Tommy]

Winglet Patent .pdf

(159.19 KiB) Downloaded 131 times

I don't know if the Aerostar winglets are G2 or G3's, however, here is the Steve Speer, Aerostar patent on the winglets.

[Tommy]

Beautiful winglets Tommy. Are they G2 or G3 design? The 600's wings are short enough that you should get a bunch of benefit from reduced ID and increased of lift area. Do they provide any numbers on the benefits? Do they change POH values for payload, climb, fuel burn, or speed?

What may not be known to all is that the 600/601 wing span is over two feet shorter than the P models, or approximately eight square feet less in wing area. In order for the 600/601 models to have winglets installed they also have to have the wings extended identical to the P models. I do not have data that shows the performance difference in winglets alone before and after installation or for the extensions alone before and after installation. Neither does Aerostar. Essentially, Aerostar did not believe it necessary to spend the monies required to publish numbers to support the increase in performance gained. That being said, there is plenty of none published testing including Aerostar's that indicate what one can expect in performance increase with winglets and wing extensions installed.
What is published is that the wing extensions alone on the 600/601 models does increase the gross weight from 5,500 lbs. to 5,200 lbs. or a net increase in useful load of 170 lbs. One can easily extrapolate what the performance increase expected would be with the wing extensions alone throughout the entire flight envelope from takeoff to landing. Keep in mind, it is only the 600/601 NA Aerostar's that can benefit from this stc, a benefit that once installed literally requires no maintenance, ever. In addition to the extensions the winglets will provide additional performance gain to all Aerostar models properly fitted out. In the case of the 600/601 models, once fitted out with both extensions and winglets you can only imagine what the impact in performance gain is.
What I can tell you is what I have experienced before and after the performance mods have been installed. To be continued.

[Tommy]

A small correction in my write up above, the wing extensions alone increase gross weight from 5,500 lbs. to 5,700 lbs. with a net increase of 170 lbs.

As I have mentioned in my previous writing, there are no published performance numbers for wing extensions and winglets after installation. What I can tell you is what I have experienced before and after installation based on the numbers I have gathered.
On my first flight immediately after installation I really did not have any preconceived ideas on what to expect and when. What I did immediately experience rolling down the runway at lift off was "wow, did this thing ever get off the ground quick." It was very noticeable. On my first flight I really did not concern myself with numbers, I just wanted to feel how the plane changed and this was my first experience after the change. Immediately following lift off was another "wow," "man does this thing climb." Again, I did not concern myself with numbers, I just wanted to see and feel how the plane performed. It was physically noticeable. Compared to before, after extensions and winglets, the plane jumped off the runway. It was climbing considerably better. It made sense and I was happy.
At cruising altitude (6,000' and 8,000' msl) I really did not notice any increase in speed, however, I did not notice any decrease either. The addition of extensions and winglets did not slow the plane down or increase speed at the initial cruise altitude. What I did notice is a degree of lateral stability that I did not have before. Nothing earth shaking like the take off and climb out, just something I noticed that I didn't expect.
Finally, the landing. This is where the biggest change occurred. Normally, with the Aerostar's short wings, you pretty much had to nail the approach numbers. If not, you either floated down the runway until you bled off speed or you dropped out of the sky once you stopped flying which happens very quick if you are not paying attention.
Upon approach, I couldn't get over how stable the airplane felt. It tracked straight as an arrow with very little power adjustment required to maintain a stabilized approach. Not you typical short wing Aerostar 600 approach. The first thing that passed through my mind is, again, "wow, this thing lands like my old DA 40." Yes, it felt like I was landing a Diamond.
As far as any numbers go, the trend suggests that I am getting a better than 200' pm increase in climb performance. At 500' msl I'm climbing out at 1,800' fpm and 1,000' fpm at 10,000'msl.
Speed wise I am not really seeing any increase in speed or loss of speed through 8,000' msl. I'm pretty consistently getting 200 kts. tas plus or minus 2 kts. through 10,000' msl at full throttle ROP 2,200 to 2,300 rpm. Fuel flow will average any where from 17 gph at the lower altitudes to 13 gph a side at the higher altitudes. Above 10,000' msl the speed drops off about 1 knt. per 1,000', however, it maintains better than book. An improvement from before never the less.
I know some of my "V" speeds have changed for the better, I just don't know to what extent. I haven't gotten that far yet and don't know if I really will. All I know is the extensions an winglets along with some weight reduction via all new avionics and a new paint job, have pretty much transformed a 1969 Aerostar 600 into a much more capable and better performing airplane than what was ever envisioned by Ted Smith and company. I'm a happy camper.