BONANZA VS. CENTURION according to AOPA a clean sweep?

Ya. It it’s just a paper increase. Nothing magical about aerodynamics that makes that happen....and it comes with more take off roll and less climb performance but lots of folks like em. ;)

Not aerodynamic but there is an obvious structural strength advantage in better span loading of the wing. I’m not knowledgeable enough to explain it clearly but I do understand it. All aircraft with wing tanks can benefit from it, those with tip tanks even more so. Though it seems counterintuitive that spreading weight along the wing span can allow it to carry more total weight , it’s true.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Not aerodynamic but there is an obvious structural strength advantage in better span loading of the wing. I’m not knowledgeable enough to explain it clearly but I do understand it. All aircraft with wing tanks can benefit from it, those with tip tanks even more so. Though it seems counterintuitive that spreading weight along the wing span can allow it to carry more total weight , it’s true.

Adding the additional fuel at the wing tips does not contribute to the bending moment at the wing root. At least from a structural aspect, carrying the extra fuel at the tips is therefore 'free'. So the STC approvals allow for a bump in useful load that equals the amount needed for the tip tanks (also applies to some Flint tips for Cessnas). Now, oddly enough, the useful load bump is not required to be stored in the tips. So you can leave the tips empty and stick another 150lbs in the cabin. The tradeoff in the Bo is that installation of the tips drops the plane from utility to standard category (some DPEs won't allow you to fly the commercial maneuvers in a tip tank equipped plane). The other tradeoff is that the tanks don't do anything to the planes ability to lift the load. So while you are allowed to take off at 4020lbs, you still have the same 300hp available to lift the thing. Not a problem if you have plenty of runway available, but the performance definitely suffers once your gross goes beyond the originally certified weight.
 
Not aerodynamic but there is an obvious structural strength advantage in better span loading of the wing. I’m not knowledgeable enough to explain it clearly but I do understand it. All aircraft with wing tanks can benefit from it, those with tip tanks even more so. Though it seems counterintuitive that spreading weight along the wing span can allow it to carry more total weight , it’s true.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
yup....it effectively increases the span of the wings....like winglets. I get that, but there isn't a real "net" performance affect. The additional lift from the STC is 90% paper. Your aircraft can lift that additional amount prior to adding the tip tanks.
 
In any GA plane, real-world seating is N-2.

I went from a Cessna Skylane 182 which I LOVED!!! Awesome Hunting Truck of the Sky. Confidence landing and departing almost any runway. My good friend loves his 210 which he has had for years.

I sold it and purchased a G36 Bonanza because I have four kids. We have been able to take family trips to Pensacola (from Houston), hunting and fishing trips to Arkansas and elsewhere and it has been a joy. As the kids get older (and my son LARGER!!! now 6 feet and approaching 200 pounds) that is no longer an option (6 people).

However, for the years when our kids were younger, the BO was a great mission aircraft. I still fly it every week. Very capable and excellent dispatch reliability!
 
I went from a Cessna Skylane 182 which I LOVED!!! Awesome Hunting Truck of the Sky. Confidence landing and departing almost any runway. My good friend loves his 210 which he has had for years.

I sold it and purchased a G36 Bonanza because I have four kids. We have been able to take family trips to Pensacola (from Houston), hunting and fishing trips to Arkansas and elsewhere and it has been a joy. As the kids get older (and my son LARGER!!! now 6 feet and approaching 200 pounds) that is no longer an option (6 people).

However, for the years when our kids were younger, the BO was a great mission aircraft. I still fly it every week. Very capable and excellent dispatch reliability!
No doubt a Bo is a real nice XC machine.

Note that N is (FAA Persons).
 
The Bo is not a 6 adults + luggage airplane. But neither is the 210 (you need an early Cherokee Six for that).
 
Back
Top