Hello and Thanks for this video... I grew up in 310's (1964 i Model N8006M) as My Father was a 30K ATP Rated TWA Pilot! Looking forward to your next video! "Happy Thanksgiving" Mike~ConquestN98858
One point of clarification. In the video I mentioned the power of the IO550's to go over mountains on the east coast of the USA, but I forgot to mention that I was referring to the single engine service ceiling. In a standard non-turbo 310Q, the single engine ceiling is a little over 6000 ft, which doesn't provide much margin over the mountains where I live. The Colemill Bearcat II conversion, on the other hand, with IO550's @ 300HP, has a single engine ceiling of over 10,000 ft, which provides a lot more clearance over the Appalachians should I need it.
Thanks @frankbodenschatz173. Ha, no way could I do this myself (I'm just a 310 pilot). But the dissected aircraft fascinates me, and it provides very helpful info to pilots, particularly when it comes to understanding systems and how they interrelate.
Another note of clarification. For some reason I kept calling the Cessna 400A Navomatic Autopilot a "450B", which was incorrect. I probably had the PS Engineering PMA 450B audio controller on my brain, so I misidentified the 400A autopilot. Anyway, whenever you hear me say "450B autopilot" just pretend you heard 400A. The entire unit (servos, controller, etc.) still works, so this unit is for sale if someone is interested. I'll probably post it on Trade-a-plane or Ebay.
Have the Cessna Wing SID inspections been done in the past ? I did several Cessna SIDs programs on 300 and 400 series Cessna aircraft and we always found something worth fixing . Maybe not catastrophic in the next 24 or 36 months but major structural defects that simply cant be found during normal maintenance checks and often it was the best loved immaculate examples that had worst defects .Since you already have disturbed the engines and wing harnesses it would be an excellent time to look at the wing fittings in detail . We replaced many witth pitting that cant be seen without disasembly.
@brendon408. You are correct, it's also getting annualed out during these upgrades (a few months before necessary) because they have access to everything. It went through an $86K annual at TAS aviation last year (yes, may wallet was screaming!) and they abated some spar corrosion of the upper right wing cap (~$15K just for that wing cap). TAS also replaced fuel bladders and was able to do some additional inspecting during that process, but we'll dig deeper with the engines off. I'll pass along your advice on the wing fittings even if I suspect they will already look (can't be too sure). I really appreciate the heads up. I'm very fortunate in that one of the folks working on my aircraft is an encyclopedia of 300/400 series Cessnas (he discovered several important things that TAS missed).
That's great to hear. That's going to be a great example of a C310 when you are done. I looked after a fleet of 5 C310Rs in the late 90s early 2000s used for Airline pilot training which were flying over 1000 hrs per year each. Great Personal and charter aircraft but very manpower intensive compared to a Piper Seminole that replaced them. For those who are considering a 310 major areas to have inspected are the engine beams and spar structure behind engines, wing fittings, tip tank rear attach structure. The torque tube in the wheel well that lifts the gear during retraction gets a sprial crack. And reinforcement doublet installation on wing rib in wheel bay. The vertical stab rear spar extruded angles where the trim actuator bolts through often gets exfoiliation corrosion. If all the various Services Bulletins kits have been installed a lot of these issues will have been mitigated.
If the structure is still STRONG AND SOUND. And money is no object? Well, the 310 can be restored into a magnificent personal plane !!!! But, it's going to cost you. Big time!
Yes, for sure. It's all relative. My mission requires long hauls, often over water (Canada and US), with people, pets, and cargo, so a twin Cessna is perfect for me, assuming I'm willing to put in the time for routine training (which I do religiously). $500K in the grand scheme of things, is 1/4 of the cost of a comparable performing Diamond DA-62 (and a fraction of the insurance cost when compared to a DA-62), but it's still very pricy for a Cessna 310, more than I will ever recover when I sell it. At the same time, I value my people, pets, and cargo, so for me its a good investment to have the advanced avionics, engines, etc. But I recognize that its not for everyone. In an ideal world, I'd step up to a turboprop, but this is a much better option for my budget. In other words, money is an object. This project is expensive but not unlimited. The cheapest option, of course, is to go online and purchase commercial flights, but what's the fun in that. ;) All this is to say that I agree with you, it costs a lot, but it's fits within my mission and overall budget compared to other options.
I notice your engines do not use the overhead intake manifolds. Would those fit under the engine covers? Or maybe would not be beneficial to have those?
You are correct, Colemill Bearcat II STC uses IO550A engines with intake manifolds on the bottom, otherwise there isn't enough room for the engine in the nacelle. If you look at the new engine at ua-cam.com/video/aAyLnJOVdMM/v-deo.html, you'll see the breather tube across the front underneath that connects both sides of the manifold. Manifold gets attached when the engine is mounted, so its not in the video.
Hello @marykelly3108. Good question. Before all of these changes, the empty weight (no fuel, no people, no cargo), was 3,581 lbs. It will probably be lighter when all of the new avionics are installed. The max gross weight is 5,500 lbs, so that leaves about 1,919 lbs for loading. It carries 978 lbs of fuel (163 gallons @ roughly 6 lbs per gallon), so it will carry 941 lbs, depending on how you load it. I rarely carry more than 4 people, including me, so weight is rarely an issue. If I carry a 5th or 6th person, depending on how much they weigh, I can leave fuel off to meet my loading requirements. There are lots of calculations before every flight to determine weight and balance, takeoff distance, stop distance, and so forth, that help me determine how much fuel to carry and where to put people/cargo in the aircraft.
Hello and Thanks for this video... I grew up in 310's (1964 i Model N8006M) as My Father was a 30K ATP Rated TWA Pilot! Looking forward to your next video! "Happy Thanksgiving" Mike~ConquestN98858
Wow…nice to see what the inside of the plane looks like. Excellent video. You definitely keep a well organized hanger. Love the plane.
@maryo9627, actually that isn't my hanger (well, it is temporarily). My permanent hanger is much smaller.
Truly an interesting and informative video. Your wealth of knowledge is very impressive. Looking forward to future videos.
One point of clarification. In the video I mentioned the power of the IO550's to go over mountains on the east coast of the USA, but I forgot to mention that I was referring to the single engine service ceiling. In a standard non-turbo 310Q, the single engine ceiling is a little over 6000 ft, which doesn't provide much margin over the mountains where I live. The Colemill Bearcat II conversion, on the other hand, with IO550's @ 300HP, has a single engine ceiling of over 10,000 ft, which provides a lot more clearance over the Appalachians should I need it.
Truly a daunting project, I thought you were doing it yourself! Interesting to see the total build on it as they progress.
Thanks @frankbodenschatz173. Ha, no way could I do this myself (I'm just a 310 pilot). But the dissected aircraft fascinates me, and it provides very helpful info to pilots, particularly when it comes to understanding systems and how they interrelate.
Cant wait to see the updates!@thunderingbuzzard
Another note of clarification. For some reason I kept calling the Cessna 400A Navomatic Autopilot a "450B", which was incorrect. I probably had the PS Engineering PMA 450B audio controller on my brain, so I misidentified the 400A autopilot. Anyway, whenever you hear me say "450B autopilot" just pretend you heard 400A. The entire unit (servos, controller, etc.) still works, so this unit is for sale if someone is interested. I'll probably post it on Trade-a-plane or Ebay.
Have the Cessna Wing SID inspections been done in the past ? I did several Cessna SIDs programs on 300 and 400 series Cessna aircraft and we always found something worth fixing . Maybe not catastrophic in the next 24 or 36 months but major structural defects that simply cant be found during normal maintenance checks and often it was the best loved immaculate examples that had worst defects .Since you already have disturbed the engines and wing harnesses it would be an excellent time to look at the wing fittings in detail . We replaced many witth pitting that cant be seen without disasembly.
@brendon408. You are correct, it's also getting annualed out during these upgrades (a few months before necessary) because they have access to everything. It went through an $86K annual at TAS aviation last year (yes, may wallet was screaming!) and they abated some spar corrosion of the upper right wing cap (~$15K just for that wing cap). TAS also replaced fuel bladders and was able to do some additional inspecting during that process, but we'll dig deeper with the engines off. I'll pass along your advice on the wing fittings even if I suspect they will already look (can't be too sure). I really appreciate the heads up. I'm very fortunate in that one of the folks working on my aircraft is an encyclopedia of 300/400 series Cessnas (he discovered several important things that TAS missed).
That's great to hear. That's going to be a great example of a C310 when you are done. I looked after a fleet of 5 C310Rs in the late 90s early 2000s used for Airline pilot training which were flying over 1000 hrs per year each. Great Personal and charter aircraft but very manpower intensive compared to a Piper Seminole that replaced them.
For those who are considering a 310 major areas to have inspected are the engine beams and spar structure behind engines, wing fittings, tip tank rear attach structure. The torque tube in the wheel well that lifts the gear during retraction gets a sprial crack. And reinforcement doublet installation on wing rib in wheel bay. The vertical stab rear spar extruded angles where the trim actuator bolts through often gets exfoiliation corrosion. If all the various Services Bulletins kits have been installed a lot of these issues will have been mitigated.
If the structure is still STRONG AND SOUND. And money is no object? Well, the 310 can be restored into a magnificent personal plane !!!!
But, it's going to cost you. Big time!
Yes, for sure. It's all relative. My mission requires long hauls, often over water (Canada and US), with people, pets, and cargo, so a twin Cessna is perfect for me, assuming I'm willing to put in the time for routine training (which I do religiously). $500K in the grand scheme of things, is 1/4 of the cost of a comparable performing Diamond DA-62 (and a fraction of the insurance cost when compared to a DA-62), but it's still very pricy for a Cessna 310, more than I will ever recover when I sell it. At the same time, I value my people, pets, and cargo, so for me its a good investment to have the advanced avionics, engines, etc. But I recognize that its not for everyone. In an ideal world, I'd step up to a turboprop, but this is a much better option for my budget. In other words, money is an object. This project is expensive but not unlimited. The cheapest option, of course, is to go online and purchase commercial flights, but what's the fun in that. ;) All this is to say that I agree with you, it costs a lot, but it's fits within my mission and overall budget compared to other options.
I notice your engines do not use the overhead intake manifolds. Would those fit under the engine covers? Or maybe would not be beneficial to have those?
You are correct, Colemill Bearcat II STC uses IO550A engines with intake manifolds on the bottom, otherwise there isn't enough room for the engine in the nacelle. If you look at the new engine at ua-cam.com/video/aAyLnJOVdMM/v-deo.html, you'll see the breather tube across the front underneath that connects both sides of the manifold. Manifold gets attached when the engine is mounted, so its not in the video.
do you know what the weight of the plane is when it is all together?
Hello @marykelly3108. Good question. Before all of these changes, the empty weight (no fuel, no people, no cargo), was 3,581 lbs. It will probably be lighter when all of the new avionics are installed. The max gross weight is 5,500 lbs, so that leaves about 1,919 lbs for loading. It carries 978 lbs of fuel (163 gallons @ roughly 6 lbs per gallon), so it will carry 941 lbs, depending on how you load it. I rarely carry more than 4 people, including me, so weight is rarely an issue. If I carry a 5th or 6th person, depending on how much they weigh, I can leave fuel off to meet my loading requirements. There are lots of calculations before every flight to determine weight and balance, takeoff distance, stop distance, and so forth, that help me determine how much fuel to carry and where to put people/cargo in the aircraft.