Cessna T310R Update...

R

RobertGerace

Guest
Thank you to all who welcomed me back, and to all who did not attack ;)

Several people asked for an update on the 310. Since I haven't posted here since 6/9, that is basically the summer's journey with one of the most incredible machines that man (and Cessna) ever built. What follows is, "What I did on my Summer Vacation."

Early on...I guess about Father's Day...I took my family to Virginia to see my wife's father. A quick stop in Charlotte for business, and a last minute trip home. It was wonderful, and I took delight in being the master of my destiny. No undignified fondling by TSA, no being herded like cattle. Just my family, me, and the level 2 that I flew into. Sigh.

Now, to be clear...it was a level 2 rain shower...there was no lightning...no hail...no thunder...but it was the closest I've come to being 'scared' in the 310.

I didn't fly for a couple of weeks while I thought about what happened. At first, I overreacted a little bit thinking that I had done something bad. Then I had a couple of CFII's make some trips with me and spent the entire time avoiding IMC.

Oh yeah...on the flight after the level 2 flight, my autopilot broke. I didn't rush to get it fixed, and in fact, it is still in the shop.

Then, the day came where I had a 'must make' meeting and 400 foot ceilings in Atlanta. There was no convective activity reported (and it was early in the morning). I grabbed a CFII and blasted off towards basically the same weather I encountered in Virginia. The same things started happening (noise, darkness, turbulence, increased airspeed, tendancy to climb, x-band radar attunating)...but with an experienced CFII to tell me that this is all normal, it wasn't scary at all.

I flew a few more flights with experienced weather pilots, and would launch into very low ceilings and be IMC most of the way...with no autopilot...and I didn't let them touch the controls. Finally, I regained confidence, and it was a good thing, because Atlanta has had the rainiest summer in its history this summer. I have hand-flown more IMC from 200' up to 14,000 without seeing a break in the clouds than I can count. Most of it solo.

I went through a period where I was flying so much that it was almost every day. (In fact, I'm doing it still). I've learned how to work things where I almost never have an overnight stay. The 310 is such an awesome travelling machine...200+knots groundspeed in many cases...at worst in the summer is about 180...flying between 10,000 and 16,000. I have yet to cancel a trip due to weather (delay...yes...divert...yes...but cancel...no).

In all of this flying, I've found it hard to find time to get to SimCom...which I promised myself I'd do every six months. I am now at 9 months, but going to Simcom in less than a week.

I know I need it. I haven't done any OEI practice in 9 months, and that is so important. I've also done some dumb things like land with the fuel pumps off, and one time I landed with the tanks on AUX. This explains my comment that some people (not Ben) would not take the time and expense to keep going back to SimCom...and those people are probably an accident waiting to happen.

Despite the above, I am now extremely comfortable in the 310...with almost 300 hours in it. It fits like a glove, and despite the occasional dumb mistake (above) I feel very safe in it.

As for expenses, well, sigh, it ain't cheap. But it hasn't been too bad. Here's the list since 6/9:

Right side alternator, left side condenser (shorted keeping the right mag closed even when the switch was open), autopilot...and that's it. All told, with oil changes...maintenance has cost about $5,000 over the summer...all in all...pretty cheap considering.

Annual is coming up in October...$4,000 just to inspect. I've noticed that my fuel pressures are not redline at takeoff (causing a lack of cooling on takoff..and therfore premature wear)...and also causing the right engine to die on the landing roll on hot days when running Lean Of Peak. That is my only squawk at the present time.

Insurance got cheaper; it now costs me a little over $400 per month to insure.

All-in-all, I'm in love with the 310. It is an awesome machine with a 100% dispatch rate and reasonable maintenance costs for what it gives me -- now that I'm over the 'getting it up to my standards' hurdle.

My one complaint is that it is too slow. My occasional trip out west takes all day long.

However, I've decided that I'm not going to work my way up...aircraft...by...aircraft...because I can't afford to dump that much money in each new (to me) machine.

So, I've worked out a deal to get time in a Cheyenne...and I'll keep building time in it, and saving my pennys...and some day, with God's help, I may buy a Conquest...or maybe even a Mustang.

Until then, when you see a pretty blue and white 310 on the ramp, know that I'm really enjoying the heck out of it, and I feel darn lucky to own and fly it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Great post Bob. As I've said in the past your posts are entertaining and educational. I'm glad your posting again.
Paul
 
Bob;

Thank you for your post. It is very informative. It is nice to read about your experience flying without the AP in some interesting IFR conditions. I still fly hands on for the planes I flew in my early IFR did not have a good APs or none at all. Interesting the one I have now does have a decent AP but I stiil do the approaches with the hands and feet.

Sounds like the 310 is a great business tool for you except for the long fights when yes a jet would be nice.

Thanks for sharing

John
 
RobertGerace said:
So, I've worked out a deal to get time in a Cheyenne...and I'll keep building time in it, and saving my pennys...and some day, with God's help, I may buy a Conquest...or maybe even a Mustang.

Until then, when you see a pretty blue and white 310 on the ramp, know that I'm really enjoying the heck out of it, and I feel darn lucky to own and fly it.
Hooked. Hooked. Hooked. Ain't it great...
 
Bob, thanks for that. A couple comments;

WRT IMC climb while hand flying. I don't use the autopilot in a climb but I also don't fly a twin. What techniques, beyond trim for pitch, do you use in the climb? What would happen to your climb if you lost one while handflying in IMC? What does SimCom advise for handflying in IMC?

Almost 300 hours? If I have it right, that's over 50 hours/month. Do I have it right?

If you're truing out to 200 +/- at alt in the 310 would the Cheyenne make sense? It seems to me the increase in speed would not be commensurate to the increase in costs if you stay with a piston. You now have the songbird where you want it and already you're thinking bigger, faster.
 
Thanks for coming back to report Bob, (and whoever cued you).
After a while you don't miss that autopilot, do you? Nice flying.
 
Bob good to see you back here. If you ever have business up in the Philly area drop me a line for a meal.
 
Richard said:
If you're truing out to 200 +/- at alt in the 310 would the Cheyenne make sense? It seems to me the increase in speed would not be commensurate to the increase in costs if you stay with a piston. You now have the songbird where you want it and already you're thinking bigger, faster.

I think the draw (for me, at least) would be the much larger cabin, and the pressurization. It should true about 30 knots faster, too.
 
No cabin pressure in the 310, Ben, need a C340 for that. I'd love to have it, but I'm already "enjoying" the relatively low cost of $8000 per year maintenance bills, only $3,500 in insurance, and don't want to see $20,000.
 
Bob:

Wonderful to have you back.

If I can point something out without being too pushy; in TNs and TCs the redline for fuel flow actually is used by many as a minimum line rather than red line. That is, going over redline (and being able to by a couple gallons per hourr) is the minimum I and many others require. One can always reduce mixture. If one needs more and it ain't there--that's not good. On my A-36, I had it set to be a max of 36 gph (well over readline for a NA IO-550. In the middle of summer, in a sustained climb to altitude, I used all of it. The rest of the year, I leaned to a TIT of 1280 on takeoff.

In the P-Baron, same thing. Just over 30 gph per engine (altitude compensating fuel pumps) in summer, 140 knot cruise climb and no CHT exceeds 380 (TIT not over 320).

Many folks have increased fuel flows over original factory settings. One can always lean if necessary.

Best,

Dave
 
Bob,

Thanks for the update. Missed you over the summer and it is nice to read your travel notes again. Hope the upgrade plan works out well.
 
Bob, welcome back! Very good to see you here again, and nice to read of the exploits in the 310. (I must have missed the other post where folks welcomed you back, woulda joined in there).

Looking forward to seeing more from you here. :cheerswine:
 
Welcome back, Bob.

Great post - thanks for the update. It's always good to hear that I'm not alone with ongoing maintenance stuff (I had to rebuild the gear actuators last week. The 20-something year old O-rings inside finally blew out).
 
bbchien said:
No cabin pressure in the 310, Ben, need a C340 for that. I'd love to have it, but I'm already "enjoying" the relatively low cost of $8000 per year maintenance bills, only $3,500 in insurance, and don't want to see $20,000.
Oh, I was referring to the Cheyenne. I'd LOVE to own a Seneca, and either that or the C310 would probably be the top of the heap for insurers to even look at me (for the time being, anyway).

Do you guys know how often I go to ASO and look at the Senecas, Barons, and C310s?
 
wangmyers said:
Oh, I was referring to the Cheyenne. I'd LOVE to own a Seneca, and either that or the C310 would probably be the top of the heap for insurers to even look at me (for the time being, anyway).

Do you guys know how often I go to ASO and look at the Senecas, Barons, and C310s?
Oh. Cheyenne. $120,000 per year in operating costs. Ugh.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
After a while you don't miss that autopilot, do you?

I'll tell you when I miss it (even though you didn't ask:D):

When I'm fiddling with the radar trying to measure the tops and/or find a gap to fly through.

When ATC gives me a re-route with five identifiers I've never heard of and cannot spell correctly.

When copying weather from Flight Watch.

Just to name a few. Flying the airplane without an autopilot isn't all that tough but managing a flight in weather sure can be.
 
T Bone said:
Bob, welcome back! Very good to see you here again, and nice to read of the exploits in the 310. (I must have missed the other post where folks welcomed you back, woulda joined in there).

Looking forward to seeing more from you here. :cheerswine:

Ditto. And if anyone gives you grief for expressing your opinions, just ignore em as I do (that is as I ignore people giving you grief:rolleyes:). As for the coast to coast stuff, sometimes you just gotta go with the airlines even though it sucks. I'm kinda lucky that I live near the center of the country as this means I can compete with the hub and spoke airlines on a travel time basis for most of the country. Going past the Rockies is about the only trips which they can beat me hand down. I keep thinking I need (read "want") something pressurized that goes a hundred knots faster, but as far as I can tell that want never dies no matter what you fly/own, it just gets costlier. And when you start with 180-200 KTAS an extra 30 doesn't really do much time wise, it just feels faster.
 
Bob,

Welcome back in the saddle, both in the 310 and on the board. Sure missed your posts around here!

Hey, and on the Cheyenne... Jet-A is cheaper than 100LL most places now! Lots of cost "savings" there :rofl: Will you get to solo it, or will you have a company / co-pilot alongwith you for those flights?

Cheers,

-Andrew
 
Hi Bob,

I'm headed to Sim Com for 3 days (we'll get it done in two) starting on the 19th of this month. Will you still be there?
 
I'm curious as to why this thread got moved, and why to this forum?
 
RobertGerace said:
I'm curious as to why this thread got moved, and why to this forum?
Good question.

I've moved it back to Hangar Talk. I don't think it was appropriate for Lessons Learned because that didn't seem to be your intent, Bob. Please let me know if otherwise.
 
Richard said:
Bob, thanks for that. A couple comments;

WRT IMC climb while hand flying. I don't use the autopilot in a climb but I also don't fly a twin. What techniques, beyond trim for pitch, do you use in the climb? What would happen to your climb if you lost one while handflying in IMC? What does SimCom advise for handflying in IMC?

Almost 300 hours? If I have it right, that's over 50 hours/month. Do I have it right?

If you're truing out to 200 +/- at alt in the 310 would the Cheyenne make sense? It seems to me the increase in speed would not be commensurate to the increase in costs if you stay with a piston. You now have the songbird where you want it and already you're thinking bigger, faster.

Richard,

I'm not sure I understand your question, but basically, engine loss in IMC is a huge part of the training at SimCom. For a normal takeoff, I hold it on until about Vmc+10 (twin Cessna's were designed for that)...rotate...liftoff...and immediately pitch for blueline with gear coming up asap. Blueline gives me a great chance of climbing on one.

If ceilings are low, I like to hold it on a little longer and create a little zoom to get to blueline under the ceiling and enter the ceiling at blueline. I hold it there until I'm at 1,000 until I relax a little pressure and climb at a more comfortable 5* pitch up (about 120 kias). If I lose one below 1,000 AGL, I'm already at blueline...everything is already forward, gear and flaps are already up...so I identify, verify, feather (pitch for blueline...bank into good engine). Feather is the most important thing for climb performance at this point. (Same thing if I lose one above 1,000...but not near the pressure to get it done). To you point...trim, trim, trim. The 310 is a 'by the numbers' airplane, and you live or die by that.

I don't use the AP in a climb either...unless in vmc, and busy airspace, with reroutes...to Lance's point.

I average about 35 hours per month...but some months (trips out west) make 50 easily. I've had the 310 for about a year...but have only been able to fly it that much for about 8 months of of the 12 due to the maintenance woes I wrote about last year.

Depending on the Cheyenne...It could be a little faster...or a lot faster (400LS!!!...I want one so bad!!!...they look so cool!!!!) ...but I do get your point. For practical purposes, I would expect a 10%-15% increase in speed.

Now, the Mustang...now we're talking. The difference being, cost analysis...and of course, the affordability issues. Either way, there is more than speed in the equation. Pressurization, cabin noise level and temperature, the possibility of a potty, the ability to go higher and top more weather...all of this figures in.

Right now, I'm asking key employees and clients to climb over a wing. That gives a 'little' airplane feel and I would prefer to give the 'big' airplane feel of an airstair door.

Airplane, I am in love; and thy name is:

http://www.risingup.com/planespecs/info/airplane363.shtml

http://www.aso.com/aircraft/86172/ext-2.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dave Siciliano said:
Bob:

Wonderful to have you back.

If I can point something out without being too pushy; in TNs and TCs the redline for fuel flow actually is used by many as a minimum line rather than red line. That is, going over redline (and being able to by a couple gallons per hourr) is the minimum I and many others require. One can always reduce mixture. If one needs more and it ain't there--that's not good. On my A-36, I had it set to be a max of 36 gph (well over readline for a NA IO-550. In the middle of summer, in a sustained climb to altitude, I used all of it. The rest of the year, I leaned to a TIT of 1280 on takeoff.

In the P-Baron, same thing. Just over 30 gph per engine (altitude compensating fuel pumps) in summer, 140 knot cruise climb and no CHT exceeds 380 (TIT not over 320).

Many folks have increased fuel flows over original factory settings. One can always lean if necessary.

Best,

Dave

Dave,

You're 100% correct. Following the new 'religion' of LOP I agree completely. I'll instruct Air Impressions to do that. I didn't post it that way because I figured that somebody would not understand. Thanks for bringing out that important point.
 
Everyone...

Thanks for the kind words. It feels good to be back. I'm ready to talk about some flying!
 
Back
Top