For those sim pilots sitting on the fence, here is the intro to a well-researched review/comparison of one of the Bonanza's competitors. It makes for some good background reading. 

The PA-24-250 Comanche was Piper’s shot at the high performance, retractable (landing gear), piston single (single piston engine) market. It was also the only light civil aircraft to come with four, six, and eight-cylinder options from the factory. It’s an important airplane, in its own way, and today we’re going to review it.

The Comanche’s Backstory

In the late 1950s through the 1960s, while the Big Three automakers were busy competing with higher-performance cars to sell to public, the Big Three of general aviation were dreaming up faster and more powerful planes to dominate the skies.

Beechcraft, Cessna, and Piper had each been enjoying successes since the end of World War II, but the demand for faster personal aircraft and availability of cheap leaded fuel in the ensuing decades drove each of them to develop four-seat airplanes with larger engines and retractable landing gear.

Beechcraft was the first out of the gate, originally selling the 180 horsepower Bonanza in 1947. It had a sexy low-wing design and ruddervators. By 1956, Beech’s fork-tailed sensation had 225 HP and a claimed cruise speed of over 180 mph. Like a sports car for the skies, it was known for its nimble and satisfying handling, build quality, and propensity to kill pilots that overstepped their (or the airplane’s) limits.

 

At the time, Piper’s most successful aircraft was the Cub, a wood and fabric taildragger with 65 HP and a blazing maximum cruise of 85 mph. To compete, Piper would need to break out the drawing paper and start over. What design elements did they use? Laminar flow wing (just like the P-51 Mustang!) and retractable landing gear. It also had a spacious and aerodynamic four-seat cabin... and a weak 180 HP four-cylinder engine. Oops.

While it was faster than fixed gear airplanes, Piper realized it had brought sticks to a gunfight with the Comanche 180, and it just couldn’t compete with the Bonanza.

In 1958 it released the Comanche 250. Powered by a 540 cubic-inch Lycoming flat-six, the 250 HP version of the Comanche finally gave performance that could rival the Beech, and at a lower price. The better climb rate, cruise speed, and useful load of the 250 made it much more popular than the 180 and pushed Piper to go even further.

Using the deeply scientific formula of more engine = more better, Piper followed the muscle car trend and threw eight cylinders under the hood. In this case, a 720 cubic-inch fuel injected flat-eight with 400 HP at 2,650 RPM. With a 1,600 FPM rate of climb and cruise speed over 210 mph, the massive engine gave good performance, but was also the airplane’s biggest flaw.

Fuel burns of 20-23 gallons per hour scared off many aspiring owners, and like a cheap AMG Mercedes, engine work could easily cost more than the value of the plane itself after a few years. Piper dropped the 400 after 2 years and, just like Hal and Lois Wilkerson, focused on making improvements to the better balanced middle child of the family.

Adding fuel injection bumped power to 260, and adding a window plus removing a cabin wall allowed fifth and sixth child-size seats on the 260B and 260C variants. Sales never did catch the Bonanza, and the Comanche was proving expensive to build. In 1972, the Lock Haven factory where the Comanche was built flooded, and Piper decided to focus on the slower and cheaper to build Cherokee line.

 

The Comanche Today

Walking up to the Comanche 250 today, one of the first things you notice is that it sits low to the ground with a nose-up attitude. The low, smooth wing and all moving stabilator give the impression of low drag, but the open front cowling and non-filleted wing to fuselage transition give the aircraft away as an older design. Entry into the cabin is via one door on the passenger side, requiring a quick step up on the wing and then climbing over the seat to get into the left or the back.

Once in the pilot seat, you notice that nose-up attitude and long cowl restricts your forward field of view somewhat while on the ground. It’s no worse than in some comparable singles, but requires you to scoot your seat uphill to reach the controls.

Speaking of controls, I found the pedals closer than I’d like when I got the yoke where I wanted, but the seat and cabin width let me splay my legs where it wasn’t too uncomfortable. Other than the heat.

It was a balmy 92 degrees the day of my flight, and while the Comanche has smaller windows than many other aircraft, the single door opening and credit card-sized vent window on my side did little to diminish the EZ Bake Oven experience. Naturally each side has a beautiful chrome ashtray.

A few pumps of the primer, throttle in slightly, key to start, and the carbureted flat six comes to life with a lightly muffled, big bore growl. The fan up front cools the cabin some, as long as you accept the noise of the open door. During taxi, the pedals feel initially stiff, but the nose steering is responsive, and all but the tightest turns can be accomplished without using brakes.

On the takeoff roll, pushing in the throttle to max power provides a decent shove, but far from heart-stopping acceleration. Minimal right rudder is needed to keep centerline, and the plane requires a light pull to rotate at 85 mph. Book numbers put takeoff distance at 750 feet on a standard day, but the takeoff roll was closer to 1,300 feet on our hot and humid afternoon.

Initial climb was right around 1,000 feet per minute with the gear up. Not a rocket by any means, but not bad for the conditions. Best rate climb speed is 105 mph and provides a decent aircraft attitude and view forward. As expected, climb diminished with altitude, giving 870 FPM at 3,000 feet, and 790 FPM at 4,000.

Still, 790 FPM is better than a lot of planes can do at sea level on a cold day. Since one of the main selling points of the Comanche was cruise speed, I decided to see what she could do at 6,000 feet. Using 24 squared (24 inches of manifold pressure and 2m400 rpm on the propeller) I got a two-way GPS average of 150 knots, or 173 mph.

Not bad, especially considering the hot day and the condition of my test bird, rented and kept outside for the past 15 years or more. Many owners have reported cruise of 155 knots true, and around 13 gallons per hour of fuel burn, which seems believable.

At cruise, the plane feels smooth with a good balance of stability and responsiveness. Light turbulence settles quickly and causes no noticeable lateral motions, plus the flat attitude gives a good forward field of view, and even a decent view of the ground in front of the wing.

Roll and pitch controls have good harmony, with a moderate force, and almost no rudder needed to coordinate turns. Roll response is moderately quick – nothing like an Extra 300, but still fun and about as fast as you’d want in a non-aerobatic aircraft, lest you get excited and your passengers involuntarily redecorate the interior.

Think sports sedan, not track toy. The net effect is a sense of speed (helped by an airspeed indicator in MPH vice knots) that you never really get in something like a Cessna 182. You even get enough airflow through the circular cabin vents to finally cool off.

Leaving the power up in a shallow dive gets you 200 mph quickly, and even pulling the power to idle, you don’t want to plan on going down and slowing down simultaneously. Bringing the speed all the way back to a clean stall, you’ll get the stall horn first, then some definitely noticeable buffet, then the nose drop around 80 mph. Plenty of warning and nothing scary on the drop.

Once back in the landing pattern, the airspeed and gear and flap changes turn something that was a minor annoyance into a real issue: The pitch trim is a horizontal window crank above your head, like an old Volvo sunroof.

Whoever’s decision it was to make up-down changes a left-right crank must have either thought it was a great prank, or had almost no experience with airplanes. Or humans. This turns flying the pattern into an exercise in rubbing your head and patting your stomach simultaneously, and takes way too much mental energy, to the point where I just flew portions of the pattern out of trim.

Later versions had a more traditional up-down wheel located right below the throttle, but how the roof crank ever made it out of the factory is a mystery to me. Maybe focusing too heavily on which shade of chrome for the ash trays.

While you’re busy fighting one snake in the cockpit, you notice the nice airflow from earlier has nearly died off, and the smallish windows mean you lose sight of the runway turning downwind. The good news is the well-balanced controls are still there and the flaps and gear give enough drag to correct from moderately high or fast. Also, the landing gear is built tough.

Why is that last one particularly important today? Remember that nose-high attitude from the ground? Yeah, it didn’t go away while flying. Years of not flaring to land in the military may have eroded my ability to be particularly delicate while landing light airplanes, but I’ve got enough recent experience in them to usually avoid any major bouncing or negative comments from the other seats.

Not today. What I thought was a normal flare attitude resulted in bouncing the nosewheel, then the mains on the first try. Add power, go around, try again. Lower to the ground this time, flare a little too nose high, slightly overcorrect, hit the nose and mains simultaneously with a bit of a bounce.

“You may be slightly out of trim.” Thanks. The last two landings I managed to grease the main wheels down, but still got a bit of a bounce on the nose. Whatever. I’m sure there’s a way to get it right, but there’s a reason many owners pump up the main struts or install a smaller nosewheel to get a flatter attitude on the ground.

Read the full review of the PA-24-250 here. Piper PA-24-250 Comanche: The Jalopnik Airplane Review 

I wrote the Avsim review of the A2a Commanche for FSX way back when. REVIEW - Comanche250 by A2A for FSX/P3D - Aircraft - The AVSIM Community (so old the screenshots are no longer available, but the text is still there.)

Maybe someone will step up and put some words in a pdf for this new/old school Bonanza. hint. hint.

The YT videos are quick and easy and informative but for the same reason we are excited about have an Analog panel a good read of written word would also be exciting.

Regards,

RayM

 

43 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

Yes indeed.  I'm very excited for what A2A will bring as well.  The Bo and the PA24 are similar.  Well maybe the 260B or C vs the Bo.

Finished converting another third party paint (again not mine!)

Crankpin did a seriously beautiful job on this paint!

N953HB2 by Ryan Butterworth, on Flickr

Can I grab this from you on discord ? 

2 hours ago, Matchstick said:

I think I've found the single best reason to replace the default G36 with this - you can't accidentally set the fuel switch to cut-off when changing tanks - you need to press the white button before you can turn the fuel off.

Considering the number of times I've rolled the mouse the wrong way and switched the fuel off in the original plane I'd buy this for that feature alone.

Just had that in the DC3!

56 minutes ago, hangar said:

good question, and how well does it hold a side slip in a 15kt cross wind landing, would be another good test?

I finally did about 1.5 hours of continuous flight.  I shot a few IAPs, did some cruise legs, played with the EDM a little (need to find a manual to really understand it better), I did some pattern work into a headwind and a direct 14 kt crosswind, also did short approaches, T+Gs/S+Gs, stalls.  Haven't tried spinning it yet.  Also flew at daytime, sunset, and nighttime.

And I did all of this in VR.  I mostly played around in the New Haven, Hartford, CT area but also flew an RNAV 02 into 4B8.  I hand flew most of it but also used the AP here and there.

In short - this aircraft is my new favorite easily... and I wasn't sure it would beat the king air, 310, and 414.  Wow I love it!  I'm using the TDS GTN 750Xi / GNS430 combo with mine - and I'm using the turbo normalized/tip tanks version.  As for the crosswind handling - very good.  It's one of the few planes where I can correctly input aileron and rudder and grease the landings.  It gives me Realair vibes.  On takeoff I seemed to have just enough authority to depart but I think much more wind and my pedals at least wouldn't be enough to stay on the runway.  I just have cheap Saitek Combat pedals and I've not adjust curves so that could be why.  I also use my trusty MS FFB2 sidewinder stick (2 decades old this year!!) along with an ancient CH throttle.  Someday I'll get a GA setup hehe.

Everything is just phenomenal.  The panel lighting is all variable both gauges/instrument and flood lighting.  Of minor note I couldn't find the OAT gauge light...  I think it should be tied to instruments.  I had to use the red flashlight mod at night to see it (highly recommended btw:  https://flightsim.to/file/918/red-flashlight-night-mod )

The sounds are excellent inside and out (though it's mostly default in the exterior) but you do get that ever so slight turbo purrrrr - lovely.  I loved blasting out of KHVN - initial climb nearly 3000 ft per minute for Vy.... and then she settles down to about 1800 fpm with proper climb power.

Visually the interior is incredible.  The gauges have depth - in VR it easily felt like I was there.  Oh forgot to mention you can fly solely using FD should you choose.  The ADI is super smooth - I've got a poor vernacular - everything is amazing!!  Black Square really nailed this plane!

I know a few people are griping about the price.  I spent about 35 bucks on the Carenado Mooney when it was first released (actually I think 39.99 but they later dropped the price).  This is even less for WAY more features.  The two don't even compare in terms of quality.  I highly recommend everyone support this developer.  I didn't even sample the failure features yet... there's a bunch of things I've yet to discover.  Wow just wow.

12 minutes ago, ryanbatc said:

Black Square really nailed this plane!

Hi Ryan,

Have you figured out a way to change the G36 on the nose to A36?

Agree.. really nice to fly.

Small thing.. the ADI looks slightly taller than it is wide, but the real unit is 3.55"W x 3.37"H..

Am I just imagining things?

 

4 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

Oh, if anyone knows where that little white strip (on the tip tanks) is located in the texture files let me know!  I can't seem to find it on the tip tanks texture DDS

Can't you just create a file that is half red half blue and see what color the white strip turns, then rinse and repeat focusing on the relevant half until you track it down ?

Edited March 9, 20233 yr by Glenn Fitzpatrick

1 hour ago, Sticky said:

Fabulous panel. I keep staring at that lovely ADI. Best flight director ever done.

does black square have a forum or discord? How can I contact them?

You can't really direct at the moment. You can drop me a direct message here and I can pass it on or post in the JF forums and I'll make sure he gets the message/question.

10 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

Hi Ryan,

Have you figured out a way to change the G36 on the nose to A36?

Agree.. really nice to fly.

That will have to be per repaint.  I've talked to the guy who made the blue one and he plans to purchase the product and update his liveries!  Which is great news because he's clearly very talented and maybe he can make designs on the tip tanks and change G36 to A36.

15 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

Small thing.. the ADI looks slightly taller than it is wide, but the real unit is 3.55"W x 3.37"H..

Am I just imagining things?

 

 

Cropping that image back to a square covering just the ADI it actually seems wider than it is tall. 

Possibly the way most ADI hide the bottom 10 % of the circular section is creating an illusion of being tall ?

Just one more conversion I swear haha.  I may try a design on these tips at some point as long as I get permission from the OG author.

N136HB by Ryan Butterworth, on Flickr

2 hours ago, Bert Pieke said:

 

Have you figured out a way to change the G36 on the nose to A36?

 

Just a small WIP

A36nose by Ryan Butterworth, on Flickr

A36tail by Ryan Butterworth, on Flickr

Edited March 10, 20233 yr by ryanbatc

2 hours ago, ryanbatc said:

I finally did about 1.5 hours of continuous flight.  I shot a few IAPs, did some cruise legs, played with the EDM a little (need to find a manual to really understand it better), I did some pattern work into a headwind and a direct 14 kt crosswind, also did short approaches, T+Gs/S+Gs, stalls.  Haven't tried spinning it yet.  Also flew at daytime, sunset, and nighttime.

And I did all of this in VR.  I mostly played around in the New Haven, Hartford, CT area but also flew an RNAV 02 into 4B8.  I hand flew most of it but also used the AP here and there.

In short - this aircraft is my new favorite easily... and I wasn't sure it would beat the king air, 310, and 414.  Wow I love it!  I'm using the TDS GTN 750Xi / GNS430 combo with mine - and I'm using the turbo normalized/tip tanks version.  As for the crosswind handling - very good.  It's one of the few planes where I can correctly input aileron and rudder and grease the landings.  It gives me Realair vibes.  On takeoff I seemed to have just enough authority to depart but I think much more wind and my pedals at least wouldn't be enough to stay on the runway.  I just have cheap Saitek Combat pedals and I've not adjust curves so that could be why.  I also use my trusty MS FFB2 sidewinder stick (2 decades old this year!!) along with an ancient CH throttle.  Someday I'll get a GA setup hehe.

Everything is just phenomenal.  The panel lighting is all variable both gauges/instrument and flood lighting.  Of minor note I couldn't find the OAT gauge light...  I think it should be tied to instruments.  I had to use the red flashlight mod at night to see it (highly recommended btw:  https://flightsim.to/file/918/red-flashlight-night-mod )

The sounds are excellent inside and out (though it's mostly default in the exterior) but you do get that ever so slight turbo purrrrr - lovely.  I loved blasting out of KHVN - initial climb nearly 3000 ft per minute for Vy.... and then she settles down to about 1800 fpm with proper climb power.

Visually the interior is incredible.  The gauges have depth - in VR it easily felt like I was there.  Oh forgot to mention you can fly solely using FD should you choose.  The ADI is super smooth - I've got a poor vernacular - everything is amazing!!  Black Square really nailed this plane!

I know a few people are griping about the price.  I spent about 35 bucks on the Carenado Mooney when it was first released (actually I think 39.99 but they later dropped the price).  This is even less for WAY more features.  The two don't even compare in terms of quality.  I highly recommend everyone support this developer.  I didn't even sample the failure features yet... there's a bunch of things I've yet to discover.  Wow just wow.

Wow, really appreciate all the points you mentioned as many of them are important things for me as well. I didn't know that plane was such a stellar climber...I mean 1800fpm? Holy cow I'd never have guessed that sort of performance from a non turbo prop.

28 minutes ago, hangar said:

Wow, really appreciate all the points you mentioned as many of them are important things for me as well. I didn't know that plane was such a stellar climber...I mean 1800fpm? Holy cow I'd never have guessed that sort of performance from a non turbo prop.

I remember reading that anything more than 1000fpm in an unpressurized plane could be uncomfortable to passengers due to pressure changes...is that true?

24 minutes ago, regis9 said:

I remember reading that anything more than 1000fpm in an unpressurized plane could be uncomfortable to passengers due to pressure changes...is that true?

Well, sure...same as when you take a commercial flight on the initial climbouts which happen at more than 2000fps...your ears pop.

But that 3,000fpm initial down to 1,800fpm sounds like it's going to need a bit of taming...like it might be a departure from reality 🙂

 

Edited March 10, 20233 yr by hangar