I’m 69. A year ago I bought a 1947 straight 35 bonanza-the 819th built v tail. In 1976 at age 23, I flew 2 models of 60’s v tails and a brand new 1976 A36. I also flew 55 and 58 barons. Total of 1,000 hours in the above bonanzas and barons. I got to the airlines at age 25, starting out in DC-9’s. Progressed to the B767. Flew it for 28 years/18,000 hours, with a total of 40 years as major airline pilot, with 28,000 total hours. So, my take on v tails; for a seasoned or low time very sharp pilot, they are as safe as a Cessna 172. If you know your airplane, fly it properly and within your own personal limitations, you won’t crash and burn! Bonanzas don’t kill pilots; bonanza pilots kill themselves.
Former Model 36 owner here. First, there was another all-metal general aviation airplane produced postwar, and it looked much more "like a sleek WW2 fighter" than the Bonanza: the Navion, built by North American Aviation and intended from the very beginning to look like an "Everyman's Mustang." North American, of course, built the real Mustang so they ought to know. The Bonanza trounced the Navion in the marketplace because it was both cheaper to build and 15-20 knots faster on the same horsepower. The Bonanza wing was derived from a slick and speedy racing aircraft. The Navion wing came from a slow, safe (and aborted) Army Air Corps trainer. The results were inevitable. Second, all Bonanzas, from the original Model 35 right up to current versions of the 36 share one critical flight characteristic: when you let go the yoke, they tend to fall off on a wing and enter a spiral. This can be subtle, or dramatic. Either way, in a descending spiral the aircraft's nose drops and speed rapidly builds up beyond where the pilot trimmed. In clear air the pilot naturally levels the wings. With a functioning autopilot, the plane rights itself. But in the hands of an inexperienced pilot, or with an autopilot that's misbehaving (or not turned on), things get dicey fast. Remember, the wing design came from a racer, and the Bonanza gathers speed quickly. It is very easy to exceed speed limits. When the airplane pops out of the clouds into clear air and the pilot sees the ground rushing up, instinct can command a sharp pull up on the yoke. At above VNE, this leads to structural failure, and is responsible for the 35's somewhat shadowed reputation as a "doctor killer." But really it was that tendency to enter a spiral, and the pilot's inappropriate response to an uncommanded dive that seals the deal. Flown properly, the Bonanza is quite safe. Flown poorly, it - like any aircraft - can bite, and kill.
My dad had a 35. We were flying low and slow over our home while dad had my SLR camera with zoom lens stuck out the tiny window trying to take a shot of mom waving at us. I was 13-14 and doing the flying. I nearly stalled it. When dad brought his attention back to the instruments...I heard an expletive and watched my neighborhood getting bigger. Everything you say is spot on. I pursued a career on tugboats after that. ;-)
I might add that the Bonanza is by far one of the most beautiful designs ever created. Proven by the fact that it iis the longest running aircraft in production (1947 to now) and rarely disputed when you ask people who admire airplanes. The Navion is down right ugly! Hahaha.....comment from a Bonanza owner of course.
@@greggstrasser5791 I am so confused! Is killing Bonanzas an art or a science? You just exceed Vne, and kinetic energy does the rest? Where is the art in that? So dark! 🤫
I've flown with a friend who owned a V35B twice to Oshkosh, 1500 mile round trip. His had all the structural upgrades, individual cylinder head temp gauges, and flying lean of peak did an honest 11 gal/hr and 175 kt cruise. With tip tanks, we made it from central NC to central Wisconsin unrefueled. I'd love to own one.
I've never understood why people always exaggerate the economical fuel burn of their aircraft. Fuel burn of any recip is never far from 5% of HP if flown at 75% rated power. I'm sure they tell people the book answer to the aircraft's cruise speed at 75% but brag about the fuel burn they get when pulling the power back to 60 or 65% to save money.
Unfortunately, I learned to fly in a Bonanza when I was 14. My father was a test pilot who flew high performance jets and considered the Bonanza nothing more than a beginner plane. It even had a newer larger engine and variable prop which could cruise up to 200 mph at 10,000 ft. Back in the early 1960s, it was much, much faster than a regular Bonanza. His plan to make me a pilot didn't work. I found the plane so stressful to fly that I refused to get a license or continue to fly. He was disappointed that I didn't follow in his footsteps but I can tell you, test pilots aren't normal men. He considered recreational pilots to be kite flyers and commercial pilots were bus drivers. He was the only one of his original team of nine test pilots that died of old age at 78. The rest of them crashed and didn't make it to 40. Strangely enough, if my father hadn't been a pilot, I probably would have been.
Totally get that! My dad loved doing aerobatics and because of that I wouldn’t learn to fly especially if he was the instructor. He was qualified to instruct single and multi engine. He was a former military pilot in WW2.
@Nabor Simbor Back in the early 1950s my dad and his fellow test pilots mostly flew six engined B47s which were the predecessors to the eight engined B52. The B47 was the last bomber where the crew cross trained and rotated positions. The B47 was swept wing, flew over 500mph at 50,000 feet and had a range of several thousand miles. Back then, high speed, high altitude bail outs were usually fatal. It took several years before they found out why the copilot ALWAYS died in a bail out. They finally got a video. When they blew the canopy, it kicked down and hit him in the head. They had minimum protection from the extreme cold, high speed air stream and the navigator had an unreliable bottom ejection seat. My dad and his fellow pilots always joked that they would land a plane on fire before they would bail out. The strangest crash involved one of the test pilots trying to save a T33 trainer from a flat spin. He rode it all the way down while trying to regain control. The T33 had wing tip fuel tanks and a tiny tail. Although it was a trainer, it was almost impossible to pull out of a flat spin. Too much spinning weight in the wing tips and not enough tail control surface.
I flew a V35B occasionally, when I worked for the Australian Civil Aviation Authority. it was a very satisfying "pilot's aircraft"; I also flew the conventional-tail Beech 33 Debonair. They both exhibited what is commonly called "Dutch roll" or "Snaking" - far more pronounced on the V-tail version. The pilot could stop this by a little tap-dancing on the rudder pedals, if his reactions were very fast; if he had slow reactions, it only made the effect worse - and whilst it was of little consequence for the front-seat occupants, it was very unpleasant for the rear seat occupants. The usual cause of "Dutch roll" in a straight-wing aircraft is too much dihedral on the wing, but I don't think that was the cause on the Bonanza, because the frequency of the oscillation was too high; I think it was due to the aerodynamic balance of the tail surfaces. It is a requirement that aircraft must be longitudinally stable both "stick-free" and "stick fixed", and to achieve that for a high-performance aircraft requires careful aerodynamic balance of the elevators. The problem was that the aerodynamic balance needed for the "elevator" function of the V-tail was not appropriate for the "rudder" function. The V-tail also cannot give "full rudder" and "full elevator" at the same time; and this meant that cross-wind landings required a rather different technique with the V-tail version. The saving grace of the Bonanza in this regard was that you could always feel when it was about to quit flying - I could always do shorter landings in the V-35 than I could in my PA28 - and the technique was to crab the aircraft, wings level, until it was right on the point of quitting, then use a bootful of rudder to get it straight, at the same time rolling in full aileron into wind; it would just plop onto the runway and roll straight if you got that right. Speed over the fence on landing was 78 knots. If you knew these tricks, it was a pussy cat - but you had to respect the flight manual limits, as you must in any aircraft. But Beech made a fundamental error in the design of the aircraft, in that the centre of gravity of the disposable load was not coincident with the middle of the centre of gravity range of the aircraft, so you could not put much in the baggage compartment if you had occupants in the rear seats. The Beech 36 largely corrected that.
@@robh4671 If, by "forward slip" you mean that you keep the aircraft aligned with the runway by crossed-controls (a common technique with tail-draggers, known as the "wun wing lo" technique), I think you can do this with a V-tail in a light crosswind; but the crosswind component in which you can do this will be limited, because you will run out of up-elevator. Else you will have to put the aircraft on the ground at a considerably higher speed than its stall speed, which risks "wheelbarrowing" (touch-down nosewheel first, which can cause a groundloop). There is no risk of this with a taildragger, you can fly it onto the ground on one wheel. I used this technique with my PA28; you don't run out of elevator prematurely with a conventional tail, so the landing speed does not need to be excessive.
@@robh4671 V-tail Bonanza flies just fine in a slip. Best technique is to land with the fuel on the left tank and slip left wing high to avoid unporting the fuel pickup. The 12 foot wide gear on the Bonanza makes X wind landings very easy. With aftermarket disk brakes, six feet from the centerline, brake is very effective in lateral control.
My Dad bought a brand new V-tail in 1976, the plane still flies today N2132L. I was only a kid, but we flew that plane all over the country. My Dad even taught me to fly and many times my hands were on the controls. It was fast, we used to cruise at 10K feet doing about 220mph. Teterboro to Ft. Lauderdale in under 5 hours.
My grandpa owned and died in one of these years ago, he got caught in a storm over the great salt plains in Utah and went down. Not sure if the plane contributed to this happening, but I do know he loved his plane, he has a sticker on his car that said "My other car is a Beechcraft Bonanza!"
It's hard to guess why he went down but Bonanzas' were notorious for easily exceeding their VNE(never exceed speed) if you were nose down in low visibility, you could rip the wings off before you knew it. But any plane can be damaged in a storm.
I don't know if it was mentioned in the comments, but the early Bonanzas had a steel tube center section where the wings were bolted on. Those center sections were subject to cracking and then failing under high stresses such as sharp pull-ups and other high "G" maneuvers.. The fix was a beefy aluminum replacement center section. Back in the early 1970's, I installed one when a crack was detected in the original steel tube center section per an FFA Airworthiness Directive during an annual inspection. If I remember correctly, there was a time limit when those steel tube center sections had to be replaced whether a crack was detected or not. Woody
That is true. Many new and/or modern airplanes end up with AD notes as well. When Taylor Craft started its resurgence back in the late Seventies, I found a serious problem with the electrical system. The airplane had a 30 amp alternator but only had something like(delving deep into memory here!) a number 10 wire connecting it to the buss. The number 10 wire was sufficient to power the limited electronics in the aircraft, but with a dead or near dead battery, the alternator would have pumped out its 30 amps and melted the wire and likely caused a fire. I sent in a Malfunction/Defect Report and within a week the AD came out to replace the wire with a number 6 wire. Woody
My dad taught me to fly in a C-35 model. We never brought the flaps up after landing until we were off the runway and taxiing at low speed because of the flap/gear switch setup. He knew a guy who had hit the gear instead of flaps while still rolling down the runway fast enough that the gearlock switches weren't engaged, and the gear came up... Couple small facts, the V-Tail design was due to the Bonanza's design for speed, and having only 2 instead of 3 tail surfaces gave it some extra mph. Likewise, there is a step to get up to the wing so you can enter/exit the plane. The earlier models retracted the step when the gear went up, sliding the strut into the fuselage until only the step itself (which was teardrop shaped) was still outside the aircraft. I think I read that gave it an extra 3mph airspeed...
As far as I remember just stalls, which were pretty forgiving. No spins or anything like that. The only real issue I ever had was when 16 year old me somehow skipped over "Set pitch trim to 0" on *both* the post-landing and pre-takeoff checklists during my long crosscountry. During takeoff roll found myself having to push harder and harder against the yoke to keep the nose down, failed, rotated and immediately had stall warning go off. Shoulder straps were tight (not standard in the C-35, dad had a retrofit system), still not sure how I slipped out to reach the trim wheel, but somehow managed to and then built up enough speed to climb out, I presume ground effect is the only thing that kept me from pancaking. 100% pilot error (mine), and was very lucky to get out of it ;)
I am surprised the gear didn't have a limit switch that was in contact when the thing was on the ground (from the plane's weight on the gear) so that if the gear switch was toggled to the "up" position they would not go up and turn the thing into a snake sliding on its belly.
@@karlmadsen3179 It did, my understanding was that this guy went to bring the flaps up after touching down, hit the gear switch by accident, and was rolling fast enough that the wings were generating enough lift to keep the lockout switch from being preventing the gear from coming up. That's why we never brought the flaps up until after we had turned off the runway and were only moving a few mph.
The V tail was borrowed and used on the air refueling booms for the Air Force. It worked so well on the prototype, it became the standard, and still in use today.
Engineering nerd here... 1.V Tail Advantages a. Aesthetics b. Simpler (2 vs 3 surfaces) c. Less interference drag d. Good spin recovery because, unlike a conventional fin-rudder tail, the V’s surfaces are not blanked off e. According to NACA, V tails contribute 1deg of dihedral 2. V tail disadvantages a. Greater trim drag. b. Tail wagging (though is not uncommon in this plane class) c. Not theoretically, but practically, the CG range is reduced 3. Structurally there is no difference in V or conventional tails. The Bonanza was designed to FARs, but in practice a hard back stick would peal up the leading edge. The FAA later revised the FARs on all planes as a result. Beech introduced a strengthening kit. 4. The Bonanza (as well as many WW2 fighters and other Beech products) used a 23015 family airfoil. This airfoil at high angles of attack has a separation bubble. When the wing stalls, the bubble collapses, and the plane has to pitch down 8 dog or so and speed up to recover. From the pilots seat, the Bonanza has a sharp stall and needs altitude for recovery. This airfoil and icing go ill together. 5. I have flown V33’s and they are fine solid planes. It, is however, easy to get behind it. So pilot proficiency is critical. I suggest this is where it’s troubles source.
"Structurally there is no difference between conventional tails and V-tails." So all that other "engineering nerd" bullshit you're cutting and pasting from Wikipedia is bullshit? Or your statement is without a doubt the best example of "paradoxical thinking" ever. Or you're incapable of actual thought. Show me TWO "surfaces" on those "structures" that interchange between the two "tail types".
@@deeremeyer1749 All prop driven all metal planes fixed tail surface structures are two spar stressed skin structures. All prop driven all metal airplanes’ movable tail surfaces are single spar stressed skin. (Metal Stabilators are two spar stress skin, but the rear spar’s contribution to bending stress is negligible.) Structurally there is no difference in the design of fixed tail surfaces. Structurally there is no difference in the design design of the moveable surfaces. To the intelligent person, this does not convey that surfaces are interchangeable. To the intelligent person it does convey that Vee tail surfaces are structurally no different than their conventional peers. Cheers and good luck with your meds
@@deeremeyer1749 Pretty sure he means that the overall structural strength is equal between the two designs. He never said the parts were interchangeable.
@@ryancappo Correct. For the rearmost CG, The engineers calculate the “neutral point” where the plane is aerodynamically balanced in pitch for given flight configuration. The rearmost CG is ahead of the NP. Thus if hit by an up gust, the plane - which seesaws about its CG - pitches nose down to stably counter. The forward CG is determined by “elevator power” for a given configuration. For instance at landing you want to pull the plane to near stall; too forward a CG, the plane wheelbarrows. More forward the CG is, the more stable, but less efficient the plane flies (because the wing lifts the extra download of the tail). The CG range is the difference between the foremost and rearmost CG, expressed as a percentage of the mean wing chord. In Pilots airplane operating manuals, this CG range is converted to a more useful loading chart. Cheers
I had started my career at Cessna working with a stress engineer who occasionally worked as an expert witness in trials working in 210 crashes. He believed that the problem with many high performance singles whas that they were demanding to fly and expensive. The high price meant that the people who could afford to buy one were so involved with their careers that they often couldn't find the time to remain proficient with their high performance airplane. They would then take their plane on a long vacation trip, get in over their heads and crash, this was a particularly huge problem with IFR flight conditions.
Also with the V-tails the some of the rudders are made out of magnesium so when painted need to be carful with you paint shop going to make sure they know what they are doing Bc it will cause corrosion under the paint and once those rudders don’t pass inspection they are super rare to find since textron does not manufacture these parts so if you see like an orange peel on the pain of your rudders it’s a sign of corrosion starting taking care of it before it to late. Always take your Beechcraft to Beechcraft mechanics also not all A&Ps know all the tips of these planes especially the landing gear I see a lot of planes with messed up landing gear tensions, gearbox’s incorrectly rigged, worn bushings and bearings there’s a lot always go to the ABS website and look for an ABS shop. I work at Waypoint Aviation Services in Riverside California we specialize in beechcraft and if any questions I would love to answer them.
The ruddervators can typically be re-skinned, and re-painted. They must be carefully balanced with tiny counterweights after paint. They must also be installed carefully as the long hinge pin is easy to put in wrong.
I had a V35B for 8 years. One of the last ones off the assembly line. Lovely aircraft. A right bugger in a crosswind take off though. Solid as a rock cruse at 165kts at 13 gal us and often had me up to 15000 ft.
Very interesting! My father bought his new H35 Bonanza in 1957 and used it for air charter service. We also flew in it for our vacations when I was a kid. The airplane is still flying today and will be in the Osh Kosh Bonanza fly in this summer. So excited that I tracked it down and my husband and I are driving 500 miles to go and see it and the latest owner.
Good video and many good comments from people who have Bonanza experience. Having owned a V tail and flown several different models of the V tail, 33 series, and the A36 I consider them to be excellent handling cross country single engine aircraft, both VFR and IFR. Also took several owners through instrument rating in V tail and straight tail. One fact often overlooked is the Bonanza is a low drag airplane but is certainly a safe airplane for a proficient pilot. I could write a book about the virtues of the Beech but others have already done so.
There is a striking difference between the safety records of the V tail and conventional tail Bonanzas. The typical accident profile of a V tail mishap is a low hour pilot (doctors were able to afford them) in IMC conditions for which the pilot had little experience. Because of the clean design the aircraft would pop through V never exceed with structural failure of the tail. The conventional tail version does not seem to have this problem to the same degree.
Flew a B35 (50’) and fuel management was biggest factor for me. They used a pressurized carburetor and pumped more gas than it burned returning unused fuel to the left tank. So you took off on left tank flew for 45-60 minutes switched to right tank for another 45-60 minutes and the Auxiliary tank all the while watching your fuel level in left tank go back up. Landing on tank with most fuel should be left tank at least that’s the way I was taught. Shorter flights I landed with right tank. Very stable airplane and took me awhile to adjust to increased rate of climb and cockpit controls in the pattern over a Cherokee 140. Things happened much faster but within a few hours you get used to the gear, cowl flaps and constant speed prop. Burned more fuel than the Cherokee per hour but you got there faster and quieter so it was a push on fuel and a quieter smoother ride.
@@bobgould7665 If it does, you're doing something wrong. There are two ports to the fuel bladder. The end port flows to the underside of wing, about 3/4 back and out into the air. Some pilots/owners didn't maintain the overflow drain tube and fuel would flow down the inside of the wing and to the fuselage. The second drain is inside the fuel filler covered panel. It is to acccommodate expansion of fuel with temperature. It flows out the bottom of the wing as well. But again, if the pilot/owner doesn't maintain the system it will drain into the wing, and then to the fuselage. The solution is to use a large dia piece of safety wire, and push it through the tube during annual to insure they are clear, then blow out gently with air or Varsol.
@@dieselscience He was flying over the sierra nevadas in some weather (he was instrument rated, so he had done this many times) and the weather got worse to the point where something failed on his plane.
I worked for an airplane mechanic the summer I was 18. We had a Bonanza owner come in with his V-tail, and the entire tail cone looked like paper that someone had crumpled up then smoother out again. He asked how much it would cost and my boss said it was not possible to fix, and the airplane was not airworthy any more and the owner was extremely lucky. The owner didn't really like this but my boss wouldn't let him leave with the plane. My boss showed him a tape (this was in 1988, so no DVDs) of a NASA test where the tail started to flutter then it separated. Really scary to look at. There is a reason they say "Never exceed speed." As to the plane being a doctor killer, that can be applied to any airplane that is complex. A lawyer or doctor goes from a Cessna 172 right into a Bonanza and doesn't take enough lessons to fly the more complex aircraft safely can get into real trouble. You see the same problem with light twins. The pilot gets just enough lessons to get the cert, then they fly into IMC and become disoriented or one engine goes out on their twin, then they let the airspeed drop below maneuvering speed, the rudder can no longer counter the asymmetric thrust and the plane stalls and spins. The Bonanza is just as safe as any complex aircraft (RG, CS prop) but because of it's reputation and higher price, it is more of a status symbol than a Cessna 182RG, so more doctors and lawyers are flying them.
In the early '80s, when I was working as an avionics tech in General Aviation, I had a conversation with one of the two plots who survived a torque box failure in a V-tail Bonanza. He had been on final and hit a medium size bump. Instantly the airplane started shaking like a wet dog. The instruments were a blur, the radios were shaking out of their racks. He dropped the landing gear immediately, dropped full flaps, and hoped for the best. At 100 kts it stopped shaking (I doubt he did) and he completed his landing. As he taxied out the controller said there was something wrong with the tail. What was wrong was that it was badly twisted and sitting sideways... his plane had an L tail. According to the pilot the NTSB estimated that if the oscillation had continued one more second it would have parted.
I owned an early Bonanza and loved it. Two comments. 1] coming down final in any kind of wind conditions it would dance a little bit which was uncomfortable for back seat passengers and 2] the "piano keys" that controlled gear, flaps, and accessories were very confusing, I was coming home tired after a long business day and inadvertently hit the flaps instead of the gear and she got real squirrily until I picked them up.
The proper nickname for the plane was fork tailed doctor killer. :-) My brother had a charter operation in western Alaska for many years. The standard plane used in that area was a Cessna 207, which is sort of like a pickup truck with wings.... On a wild hair, my brother bought a S35 bonanza. He then painted it gloss black, with gold trim. It looked like a million dollars. He then put it in his charter fleet, which no one had ever done. Suddenly all the passengers in the area wanted to charter " the black plane". It had leather seats, and was like riding in a mercedes benz , while riding in a 207 was like an old noisy truck. He made a fortune with the plane. The plane of course was very well made, and it had no problems standing up to all the dirt airstrips. My brother had 25,000 hours of bush time which is unheard of, as nobody flies that many hours in arctic conditions and lives to tell about it. He swore the Bonanza was the finest plane ever made for flying in rough conditions......
Bonanza was designed as a rough field plane from the start. 12 foot wide gear stance, triangle truss main gear with 16" oleo struts, triangle truss nose gear. Weak spots were the main gear outer doors which could be removed or swapped in 15 min. Also the orig expander brakes were crap. Swap to disks is easy. Takes 6.50x8 wheels and tires just like the Baron. It's a tough plane, and takes dirt fields just fine.
Excellent video, concise and straight to the point. You have a talent for this and I hope you have continued. For Bonanza buffs there is also a great comment thread on blancolirio's channel N47WT V-35 Bonanza Inflight Structural failure. Sounds like a hell of a plane but dangerous in the wrong hands.
I own a 1954 E35 model. The 35 series is a four seater, the 36 is a 6 seater. Not sure how anyone can mix up the switches for the gear. The landing gear has a wheel on it. The flaps have a flap on it. When I was getting my signoff for the aircraft the instructor said that the #1 reason why guys were getting killed is they would get too slow on final. So he said always watch your speed turning to final. It almost happened to me though I could hear the plane getting slow. Pitched over and I was fine (Pitch, power, flaps). I learned IFR on this aircraft. It's a very good IFR platform. As with any other airplane, stay within the limits of the aircraft.
Your gear switch was modified from the original design. Original piano key switches were all identical in appearance. The only difference between gear and flap switch is that flaps are on the left and gear is on the right, and the gear requires to fingers to raise (one finger to move a secondary safety switch and another to lift the gear switch) vs one finger to raise flaps. The simple solution I have found is to verbalize “flaps up, one finger” when raising flaps after clear of active. So far I haven’t accidentally reached for the right switch, but even if I did, my one finger technique will prevent the gear switch from being inadvertently lifted.
The model 35 is the greatest single engine GA aircraft ever built. Check out Larry Ball’s books and you’ll see why. Also, the V-tail is safe, but unforgiving of incompetence.
I liked the video. For everyone, if you haven't been to the Beechcraft Heritage Museum at Tullahoma Airport in Tullahoma, TN, you're in for a treat. Not far away is the Arnold AFB Center, which is very much worth a tour. As a bonus, Tullahoma is also close to the Jack Daniels and George Dickel distilleries.
Back in the late 70s - early 80s, I flew a V-tail for a local businessman I knew. Not sure but I think it was 1967 model. It had a turbocharged Continental IO520, 285HP and a 3 blade prop. The owner had a private but no instrument, I had an instrument so about the only time I flew it was when actual IMC was likely. I had about 200 hours in it, quite a bit IMC. At the same time, I owned and flew Comanche 250. Lycoming O-540, carbureted and no turbo. The Bonanza was easy to land, the Comanche was a bit more of a challenge. The Bonanza would go about 15 knots faster (depending on who was buying the fuel......lol) but it tended to fishtail a bit. Not as bad as a twin but you could feel it. Both planes, gear up, were pretty slick, easy to overspeed if you weren't paying attention. Most of my flying was mountains, I lived in Central Oregon at the time. Typical IFR cruise was 12,000' or so. If you're IMC around there, you're picking up ice. This is the main difference between the two planes, the Comanche handled ice well, the Bonanza didn't. With just a trace of ice on the Bonanza, it's start flying like a brick. Seriously, if it were not turbo, I doubt if it would maintain 6000' with 1/8" of ice. The Comanche, on the other hand, did well in ice. Once, I was at 16,000', in and out of clouds, picking up ice and had about 3/4". Even without a turbo, it still flew pretty much as it did with no ice. A bit slower but it still handled just fine. If the Bonanza had any ice at all, I'd add about 15 knots to the approach speed, about 5 for the Comanche. The Bonanza was quieter and more comfortable than the Comanche, a bit faster but both would burn about the same fuel under the same flight conditions. About the Doctor killer stuff; a Bonanza is more of a status symbol then any other retractable single so a lot of them were flown by Doctors and Businessmen. A lot of these pilots are part-time and don't keep their skills up.......rusty is the term......lol. Any plane takes a certain amount to piloting but I'd say the Bonanza would get out of hand quicker than most other types.
enjoyed your post. I took a ride in a Bonanza back in '71 with a owner/pilot that liked to put it through it's paces...even at age 13 I could tell that was a different class of plane than our (yawn) 1956 C-172.
I worked at an airport where a V tailed bonanza throw a prop blade on final. The blade struck the left side elevator/rudder which twisted the entire tail causing wrinkles in the fuselage but it stayed intact. Which allowed the pilot to dead stick the aircraft to a safe landing.
Like the man says before me, excessive air speed, will teat your wings off. That being said, over stress any other airplane, and see what happens ! I owned and flew my Bonanza 35 (1948) for almost twenty years,. The Bonanza is so quiet, if you don't pay attention, and have the nose down a little, the airspeed runs up pretty quickly towards red line. If you put too much back pressure on the yoke, the wings could come off, or other metal failure. The 35's had the tubular spar in them, that was not as strong as the aluminum box type spar, so would break easier than the box type. Again, any plane that is over stressed will break! I put a spar kit in mine, that took up to 80% of the wing loading, so it was stronger than the box type. A very easy airplane to fly and land, and if I didn't get married, I'd still have it! Bob U.
Prices are way up for both V tail and conventional tail versions. Both are great handling aircraft. Great performance and easier to land than a 172 (I’ve owned both)
I have wanted a 35 bonanza for a while now because of the price, performance, and looks, but unfortunately that V-tail seems to be more trouble than it’s worth. Low rudder authority, questionable spin recovery, and structural weakness are the main issues with that tail. Makes me sad.
700+ hours in the 1949 Bonanza A35 N8595A. I loved it. E225 upgrade and Hartzell oil constant speed. Plan ahead. I refused several vectors to final on non precision approaches to SAN back course, “Unable. I can’t get down from here”. Saddle tank. I loved this aircraft. It was honest, predictable.
I owned a K35 for 10 years, had all mods. It is a very safe airplane. Please stop using doctor killer. As with any aircraft it most important that a person stays current in the performance of the airplane.
Much misinformation in the comments below, and some in the video. The v-tail structural weakness was due to insufficient support of the leading edge. This was fixed years ago by adding a cuff. The v-tail and equivalent straight tail versions fly nearly identically. The difference in Dutch roll (tail wag) are minimal, and a yaw damper autopilot eliminates it. Also, cross wind landings in a v-tail are not difficult. I owned a 35 for 10 years, and currently own a 33 that I’ve had for 14 years. I’m not a doctor.
What you neglect to mention is that Beech, for many years, insisted that ALL crashes were due to pilot error. They NEVER analysed the data from the wreckage, and the fact that V tails were having tail failures at a rate far in excess of those of the straight tail aircraft was ignored. When a small company in Texas came up with a mod that consisted of a pair of 'cuffs' around the base of the leading edge of the tail, and got it certificated, Beech reacted by SUING THEM to try to drive them out of business ! Then came ' THE CRASH ' - a lawyer was flying cross country in CAVU weather, and the tail came off his aircraft. The wreckage landed in some farmer's back 40, and while the farmer and his family were staring at the pillar of smoke, the lawyer walked up to them, dressed in a rumpled business suit, carrying his PARACHUTE, and asked if he could use their telephone........ The rest is history. His lawsuit caused the FAA to decertify the aircraft for high speed flight ( anything over 110 mph ! ) unless the tail had been strengthened. Beech immediately copied the design of the Texas Tail Cuffs, and a massive program to upgrade older Bonanzas began. But it cost the lives of at least two hundred people before Beech was willing to accept responsibility for their mistake. And Beech NEVER apologized to the Texas company they sued.
@@paulrward Wow, that is dark, the fact that Beechcraft ignored pilots and their customers, and sued a smaller company for making a structural safety device. Like with most large corporations, it takes a lawyer or a large situation to get them to change. Even then, corporations will still ignore their customers. :(
Good video... For clarification, the Models 35 and 33 have four seats. The A36 has six. All Bonanzas have delightfully light controls, and is my favorite general aviation airplane to fly. A downside of the excellent controllability is less lateral (roll) stability than, say a Cessna 210 Centurion. In visual conditions reduced stability is not an issue, but in instrument conditions, the pilot's instrument scan must be effective and timely. A minimally qualified or non-recent pilot (often a professional with the disposable income for the airplane) can find themselves overloaded quickly in instrument conditions, and left unattended the airplane will bank into a descending graveyard spiral if upset. A common accident scenario on both the V and straight tail airplanes is that an overloaded pilot in busy airspace may not notice the beginning of the spiral. Often the increasing airstream noise (often above its safe structural maneuvering airspeed) catches the pilot's attention, who pulls abruptly on the controls to stop the descent, overstressing the tail, causing it and then the wings to fail. IIRC the V tail model was eliminated as their sales were declining and it was competing in the same market as the straight tail 33.
Both later 35(V tail) and 33(std tail) offered a 5th seat, however it was a kiddie seat in the baggage bay. There was a full six seat prototype of the V tail but the loading graph near full gross became a serious problem as elevator forces became very limited. It was easy to load out of CG near full gross and would lead to PIO and pitch-poling by the pilot. Hence - the model 36 was born, with either 4 or 6 seats, and then the A36 after that.
@@OnerousEthic When I instructed in Bonanzas, in addition to the "standard" unusual attitude recoveries, the briefing included the graveyard spiral issue, including causes and clues of its developing. In flight I'd set up a graveyard spiral in simulated instrument conditions (student wearing an outside view limiting device with head down, obscuring the instruments) by initiating a 1g spiral, and after the bank angle reached 30 degrees and nose was pitched down 10 degrees, instruct the student to recover. The main clue was the increased noise level as airspeed rose.
@@docmirror8009 Good stuff! A similar problem was evident with the aux fuel tank installed in the baggage compartment in the earlier models. Careful load planning was required with the tank filled to ensure the airplane remained in CG limits. Since it was an aux tank, its fuel could not be used for takeoff or landing, so the pilot had to remember to select it after takeoff and deselect it before landing to keep the CG in limits. I routinely made aux fuel selection as a part of the cruise checklist. IIRC it was a 10 gallon tank, providing about an hour of cruise flight, at which selecting a main tank was required.
@@jimmbbo Very interesting! Secondary clues being two spinning compasses, and Turn and Bank in agreement? And the standard recovery is: nose down and opposite rudder? Thank you Jim!
I met a Plastic Surgeon last weekend at the local airport. He said he was working on repairing one of his six Beach Bonanza’s Jugs. …I guess dealing with two jugs at a time during the weekday, isn’t enough for him. 😳
Like any airplane, it *IS 'SAFE'* however, it is NOT FORGIVING OF STUPIDITY. Bonanza is better suited for engineers than doctors since the learned mindset is much more respecting of the limits of physics.
very informative and well done, ( also, additional thanks to the comment section here ) i am studying the history for any prospects in new design, the V-tail being generally a lower drag solution design alternative, along with canard type approaches; and i am seeing the V-tail as holding some new design promise, alongside advances in fly by wire given by modern electronics design and manufacturing techniques. linear actuators are really very reliable, and an interpretive system can be programmed to negotiate pilot errors ...still subject to maintenance, but i feel it would tend to be more reliable.
My friend and instructor was killed in a 35B that distincive tail fell off in flight. There were 3 model 35s that crashed in northwest Wisconsin in a period of about 5 years. One crash was a doctor flying in to Shell Lake WI. In a snow storm.
A friend of mine, a corporate pilot and professor of astrophysics (I know, that's a pretty unique CV which narrows down his identity considerably:^) ) is perhaps the only person to have survived a V-tail Bonanza in-flight breakup. Bringing his considerable maths skills to bear on all the NTSB data he claims to have found the key to whole problem. I keep telling him to make a video but he really does have better things to do :^D
Here's a news flash 📸 for ya..... Any aircraft is safe when you operate it according to it's flight manual/POH . Follow the checklists, and verify each step. Happy flying 🛩️
I have had one for years love it will mix with jet traffic on approach speeds but is unforgiving with gear up very slick,but let the gear down just like a 182
There was an AD (Airworthiness Directive) on the V-tail that strengthen the tail. This corrected the Vne problem. The other problem was pilots getting to slow on approach for landings.we had one at our airport several years ago where the plane literally spun in on landing. That's not a tail problem but a stall-spin at low altitude and no one wins in that problem. I think the V-tail is just fine and personally I'd own the earlier model.
It didn’t correct the Vne problem. All it did was cause the wings to fail before the tail. Exceeding Vne still resulted in breakup-hence the establishment of a Vne…
Beechcraft Bonanzas (including variants and derivatives) are exceptional aircraft. Well constructed and well documented (besides myriad performance charts, the POH even has part numbers for bulbs). Excellent engineering and manufacture have one trap: Pilots/owner-operators must resist complacency and overconfidence created by operating such well crafted machines. Load within limits, fly within performance envelopes and limits, CONSTANTLY train to expand your abilities, upgrade the avionics, know and adhere to your personal minimums derived with your instructor and maintain your craft. Through your proper stewardship, will enjoy your bird, enhance your life and the life of those around you, and pass your lovely aircraft down through the generations.
Very nice Pilot Mike ! I always wanted to fly a Bonaza V tail shape. Flew King Air from Beechcraft , and its a wonderful aircraft , as well ! Cheers, Mate ! Greetings from Brazil.
First airplane I ever got to ride in was one of these. I was 4 and could *Not* pronounce "Bonanza", so this plane is forever known to me as "The Beechcraft Banana"
All metal is a bit of a stretch. The first 54 production planes had fabric ailerons and flaps. After that, they were changed to mag. The early props were also made from wood. The Beech controllable pitch prop has never had an AD written against it. With 88" blades, the prop attained an aerodynamic Q factor of 0.915 which was the best rating up until Q tip props were introduced in the late 80s. 80% of the plane is flush riveted. It is one of the only GA planes designed with a double tapered wing. The wing changes chord line from root to tip, it also changes thickness. Modern plastic planes all have double taper wings. Early Bonanza with E series engine are dry sump, and have an oil tank behind the cooling tin with an air duct to cool the oil. The E series engine is a pre-cursor to the legendary O-470 family. The 'carb' on the E series engine is actually a throttle body fuel injector. It has no venturi throat, and fuel is atomized into the air stream under low pressure(9PSI). In 1949, Bonanza introduced 'air conditioning', however, it was actually a swamp cooler. There is a canister up at the rear of the baggage bay that contains fiber wicks. The pilot would pour one gallon of water down into the intake duct on the roof, and leave it open. As air flowed through and over the fiber wicks, the water would evaporate and cool the cabin. The type certificate for the early Bonanza is the only 4 seat plane certified in utility category up to max gross weight(rather than normal). Topping that, Beech made an E33 model 4 seat that was fully aerobatic, including the main door with an emergency jettison handle, and removable seat cushions to accommodate parachutes.
Comment on Fact 3 : There were actually 3 post-war all metal light aircraft; the 3rd of which is the North American (later Ryan) Navion. It first flew in 1946, and earned it's type certification January 28, 1947. Initially, it used the same Continental E-185 engine as the Bonanza, and also featured a low wing, retractable tricycle gear, and all aluminum construction. It's appearance and shape drew inspiration from the famous P-51 Mustang, and this was not a coincidence, as the very same team of engineers that had produced the P-51 designed the Navion. In many ways it was very similar to the Bonanza, but the differences are what limited it's success in the marketplace (a couple thousand being manufactured is by no means a failure, but the Bonanza is the clear winner in this statistic) : 1. The Navion's aerodynamics were optimized for benign flying characteristics and low speed handling. It had a "fat wing", which meant that you could land it at 54mph, but the trade off is that the top end speed was noticeably less than the Bonanza's. A Navion with the E-185 would be lucky to hit the claimed 150mph cruise speed, while a V35 Bonanza of the same vintage, using the same engine cruises at around 170mph (150kts). 2. The Navion had a very stylish looking, although somewhat awkward to use sliding canopy, reminiscent of it's fighter plane heritage, while the Bonanza had the far more practical (and common) door for entrance and egress. North American engineers debated this feature at length, aware of what the folks over at Beech were doing, but in the end chose the sliding canopy. It turns out practicality and ease of use won out over the somewhat awkward hop down into a Navion cockpit.
The Navion lived on after the end of the sliding canopy in a plane called the 'rangemaster'. By the mid 1960s it had a 285HP engine with refined tail, tapered fuselage gear doors and blistering fast speed up to 190MPH.
Beautiful plane and I've flown them many times. From a performance and handling standpoint, pretty solid. A little "dutch rolly" in weather, but lovely handling. The reason for the doctor killer moniker (proverb?) is demographics. It's like this: A) Doctors, by and large, are in the target demo of people who can own one of these planes. B) Doctors are the smartest people and already come to any occasion knowing everything (just ask any doctor...then get comfortable, because it will take awhile). C) As a result of A+B, you get an overpaid, overconfident target demo. By the same token (and for the same reasons) in all fairness: airline pilots are the worst investors, in front of NBA players. Add lawyers to each of those.
Bullshit. I know 12 or more real doctors (no Ph.Ds) personally. Zero pilots. I know 12 or more real pilots. Zero doctors. MOST are/were farmers/ranchers with some sort of "town job". There are at least 100 M.Ds. per Bonanza ever built in the U.S. alone. The notion that doctors are big "aviation enthusiasts" in general is f'ing hilarious. That those that are pilots fly for "pleasure" rather than "business" and out of NECESSITY and/or waste time/money/talent/risk/skill/reputation on antiquated pieces of shit like that and a "six seater" for "solo commuting" is even more f'ing hilarious. "Commuting" doctors that do it via "light aircraft" are damn few and far between and few if any ever make a "career" out of it anywhere BUT "flyover country" where hospitals besides in "big cities" are 30-50 miles apart minimum because it doesn't take too many "rescheduled" appointments with/for/by an "aviation enthusiast" medical doctor "specialist" that "commutes" to/from a large "regional" hospital out to surrounding "local" hospitals/clinics/ORs or vice versa due to "inclement weather" - most common being blue sky sunny day 70-degree Spring/Fall days where the only "inclement weather" is a little "breeze" up to 40-50 mph "sustained" with gusts to 70+ dead-nuts across and/or along every runway in REAL "flyover country" before Air Doc is going to be persona non grata and the hospital/clinic "system" will pull his privileges and/or "practice" and hire a replacement that knows you sure as fuck don't rely on ANY airplane to get you exactly where you NEED to go when you HAVE to get there least of all "light aircraft" operating in uncontrolled airspace and VFR or controlled airspace and IFR ANYWHERE IN "AMERICA".
They're the smartest people and paid to save lives and fix broken people and bring new ones into the world. And basically spend the first 35 years (in a REAL "western democracy") of their lives "learning a trade" and at best then get to "practice" it the second half of their working lives but are "overconfident" and "overpaid". Yeah. And NBA players that make hundreds of thousands of dollars per year minimum just "playing ball" are REAL POOR "INVESTORS". SMART PEOPLE EARN MONEY AND SAVE IT WHEN THEY HAVE A JOB/PROFESSION/CAREER/TRADE THAT PROVIDES THEM WITH "DISPOSABLE INCOME" THEY COULD "INVEST". THEY DON'T "INVEST" MONEY IN SOMEONE ELSE'S "PROFESSION". GO START COUNTING DOCTORS, LAWYERS, AIRLINE PILOTS AND NBA PLAYERS WITH "STUDENT LOAN DEBT" AND/OR "CREDIT CARD DEBT" AND ACTUAL "MORTGAGES" INSTEAD OF "HOME LOANS" AND WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE YOU DON'T ACTUALLY PERSONALLY KNOW ENOUGH TO ASK THEM, CAN'T COUNT ANY HIGHER WITHOUT TAKING OFF YOUR SHOES AND SOCKS OR GOT TO GET BACK TO "INVESTING" ONLINE IN MOM'S BASEMENT TO MAKE THIS WEEK'S PLAYSTATION "MORTGAGE PAYMENT", YOU WON'T FIND 10 THAT DO FOR EVERY 100 THAT DO NOT. A "TARGET DEMO" THAT HAS ONLY SOLD 17,000ISH UNITS IN 74+ YEARS. 229 PLANES A YEAR "ON AVERAGE". NOT FACTORING IN "ATTRITION". MEDICAL DOCTORS. YOU BET. HUGE F'ING "MARKET" FOR "LIGHT AIRCRAFT". WEIRD THERE ARE NO "PRIVATE HELIPADS" FOR "DOCTORS" AND THEIR R-44S... THEY'RE AS CHEAP AS BONANZAS AND ONE HELL OF A LOT "SAFER".
@@deeremeyer1749 some are smart, the leading edge docs who usually have engineering undergrad degrees. There are tons of average doctors who just do what the insurance and the hospitals tell them to do. This variant has been exposed by the plandemic. Being a GP just takes a lot of memorization and I wouldn’t call them rocket scientists. But there’s lots of doctors who got into it for the money and THINK they’re brilliant. These are the guys who get their license then the instrument rating quickly then move to some high performance platform too quick then kill them selves. Same thing in the Porsche world the GT2 is the doctor killer. Too much performance for the average driver.
Good video. I'd just like to point out that aircraft specs from Tiger Moths to the X-15 always give cruise speeds and top speeds, but the first thing I'd want to know is the stall speed. That hardly ever gets a mention.
Owner's, usually of high-dollar toys will often contribute failures to gear and structural failures that would be caught on an Annual Inspect. I would be curious to see how many of those aircraft experiencing a full-blown failure been a result of poor judgement on the pilots behalf. Really enjoyed the clip. Thanks.
I did a BFR with a doctor one time in his nice A-36. He was a very nice guy and pretty competent, just needed to brush up on a few things. He asked if I would fly with a doctor friend of his in his airplane for a BFR. That guy was the total opposite of the first, arrogant, impatient, and wanted to question each of the things I asked on the oral. A real tiring bastard. I gave him a very complex flight plan to figure out involving lots of weight and balance recalculating. Had him get all the takeoff and landing distances with weight changes at each stop. He came back out of the briefing room in about three hours with sweat on his brow… But he had gentled down quite a bit.
I flew one at Moorabbin airport in the mid 60s but they were effectively replaced by the conventional Debonair and 36 Bonanza which we used for freight runs. A beautiful aircraft.
We are a professional aviation family. Years ago I was a CFII at a flight school and just before I hired on, another CFI who was flying a V tail for a small Company ran into bad turbulence in the Owens Valley. The V-tail was found 1/4 mile from the rest of the wreckage. He was dating my future wife who was an instrument rated club member. In fact he had gotten her her instrument rating. Of course she was devastated by his death. We got to know each other, and months later, casually dated. Then three years later we got married. She left flying, started a career in Commercial design,and went on to finish 3rd in the U.S. Nationals pairs figure skating! Flight instructing, freight, the airlines (American), then on to Part 121 Gulfstreams, Part 135 and finally, 15,000 hours later, I retired. Now, 35 years later, we are still together. But when I think of the V tail I am *always* taken back to that horrible accident that changed the lives of so many of us.
Hi. Mike Some of the things you didn’t mention about the bonanza the model 35 bonanza have a skin that was 16 thousands inch thick pretty light for a high-performance airplane it also had clothe covered control surfaces that didn’t seem to matter it Performed quite well. later on I think it was in the late 70s there was an AD for the V tail to have the spar (that’s what I call it I don’t remember the proper name )to have it inspected and replaced. This is Two prevent some of the ruddervader problems that caused some crashes. Some of the nice things about Bonanzas if you have an old one they are upgradable two newer models. Are’s was an A model that was upgraded to an M model. Some of the upgrades we did was a one pice windshield, a Continental I O 225, Cleveland brakes, the lager rear side windows and M stile wingtips. We wanted to install tip tanks oh well. After all that we ended up with a very nice plane and it would cruise at about 175 knots at 10 to 12 gal per Hr.
You asked, "Is it really a Doctor Killer". My experience was in an A-36, but I can attest that it was a "Doctor Killer". I had two partners in the airplane, both Doctors. I am a former USAF pilot. One of them also owned an F-35 Bonanza. The other one crashed and died. Now, his crash and death (he was alone, fortunately) had nothing to do with the fact that he was in a Bonanza. He had "get home itis", and attempted a flight VFR into IMC, at night, without an instrument rating. He didn't make it. Our Bonanza was very well equipped for a 1984 model, with full IFR instruments, autopilot, storm scope, etc. His problem was lack of flying experience which resulted in poor judgement and a situation beyond his capabilities. It can happen in any airplane.
You hit the nail on the head when you said that the aircraft gained a reputation for killing wealthy amateur pilots. That the profession of medical doctor held an abundance of wealthy people led them to be cleverly used in the ditty "Forked (or V) tailed Doctor killer". In truth, these were just pilots who could afford more airplane than they had time to remain proficient in. Also I have found over my many years in professional aviation that successful people who take up aviation are often cocky and think they can do anything better than anyone else which leads them to take chances others might not take. There is nothing wrong with the Bonanza. You see today that the slick Cirrus is taking the place as the rich guy killer and for the same reason. Get good instruction. Stay proficient. Stay near the middle of the envelope. Fighter pilots aren't magical beings. They just follow these rules. Of course the Military makes them.
The V tail is a handful in gusty crosswinds, not ideal. Sit in the pilot’s seat, put in some aft stick and a lot of rudder, highlights the problem, one ruddervader does nothing and the other has to influence pitch and yaw by itself. Also the weird Beechcraft throw over yoke, all the other manufacturers give you two wheels standard, pay more only get one wheel. I got to ferry a Piper Comanche 250, now that was a fun airplane.
Completely wrong. The Bonanza with the V tail has plenty of rudder authority on both sides. In fact, more authority that the standard tail later on. Go look at the cockpit on a C-195 which was the competitor. Guess what? Throw over yoke. Dual yokes were an option on both planes. Few Bonanzas were ordered with dual yokes, which is a training thing. The Bonanza with 240HP would leave the Comanche 250 and 260 in the dust every time. Better roll control, and certainly easier to land over the Comanche.
Some airplanes fail - the torque box in the pre-AD V tail Bonanzas did that. The AD was not to fix the pilot but to fix the plane. That said, lots of planes of all sorts go down due to pilot error. When I worked in General Aviation an average of more than one of our customers a year went that route. I remember Wes Winter and William Penn Patrick; I never met Patrick's F86 pilot but a few months later he caused the infamous inferno in the ice cream parlor in Sacramento. Patrick was the most arrogant and profane man I had ever met, Winter one of the nicest. Physics does not care.
The V tail has had a failure rate 26 times greater than the straight tail A&B models. Beechcraft engineers knew it. Granted, a great deal of these failures occurred by exceeding Vne (which is very easy to do if not completely focused) or weather related scenarios.
In 1962-2007: there were 148 reports of in-flight structural failure in Beech models 33, 35 and 36 airplanes. of those, 136 were in Model 35 ("V-tail") aircraft and 12 were in Model 36 Bonanzas. There were no reports of in-flight break-ups in Model 33 Debonairs or Bonanzas. (per Mastery Flight Training) Nothing to see here... move along.
The "A" and "B" models were both V-tails, as were all 35 model Bonanzas. And your data is flawed: structural failure rates were nowhere near that, especially after the "cuff" was mandated to add strength to the airframe.
@@johnrltr The comparison was the difference between the all V-35 vs all the 36 series. The V tail vs straight tail. These were pre-cuff mod. Granted, this does not compare total hours flown between each group vs accident/strucrural incidents.
I’m 69. A year ago I bought a 1947 straight 35 bonanza-the 819th built v tail. In 1976 at age 23, I flew 2 models of 60’s v tails and a brand new 1976 A36. I also flew 55 and 58 barons. Total of 1,000 hours in the above bonanzas and barons. I got to the airlines at age 25, starting out in DC-9’s. Progressed to the B767. Flew it for 28 years/18,000 hours, with a total of 40 years as major airline pilot, with 28,000 total hours. So, my take on v tails; for a seasoned or low time very sharp pilot, they are as safe as a Cessna 172. If you know your airplane, fly it properly and within your own personal limitations, you won’t crash and burn! Bonanzas don’t kill pilots; bonanza pilots kill themselves.
Former Model 36 owner here.
First, there was another all-metal general aviation airplane produced postwar, and it looked much more "like a sleek WW2 fighter" than the Bonanza: the Navion, built by North American Aviation and intended from the very beginning to look like an "Everyman's Mustang." North American, of course, built the real Mustang so they ought to know.
The Bonanza trounced the Navion in the marketplace because it was both cheaper to build and 15-20 knots faster on the same horsepower. The Bonanza wing was derived from a slick and speedy racing aircraft. The Navion wing came from a slow, safe (and aborted) Army Air Corps trainer. The results were inevitable.
Second, all Bonanzas, from the original Model 35 right up to current versions of the 36 share one critical flight characteristic: when you let go the yoke, they tend to fall off on a wing and enter a spiral. This can be subtle, or dramatic. Either way, in a descending spiral the aircraft's nose drops and speed rapidly builds up beyond where the pilot trimmed.
In clear air the pilot naturally levels the wings. With a functioning autopilot, the plane rights itself. But in the hands of an inexperienced pilot, or with an autopilot that's misbehaving (or not turned on), things get dicey fast. Remember, the wing design came from a racer, and the Bonanza gathers speed quickly. It is very easy to exceed speed limits.
When the airplane pops out of the clouds into clear air and the pilot sees the ground rushing up, instinct can command a sharp pull up on the yoke. At above VNE, this leads to structural failure, and is responsible for the 35's somewhat shadowed reputation as a "doctor killer." But really it was that tendency to enter a spiral, and the pilot's inappropriate response to an uncommanded dive that seals the deal.
Flown properly, the Bonanza is quite safe. Flown poorly, it - like any aircraft - can bite, and kill.
My dad had a 35. We were flying low and slow over our home while dad had my SLR camera with zoom lens stuck out the tiny window trying to take a shot of mom waving at us. I was 13-14 and doing the flying. I nearly stalled it. When dad brought his attention back to the instruments...I heard an expletive and watched my neighborhood getting bigger.
Everything you say is spot on. I pursued a career on tugboats after that. ;-)
I might add that the Bonanza is by far one of the most beautiful designs ever created. Proven by the fact that it iis the longest running aircraft in production (1947 to now) and rarely disputed when you ask people who admire airplanes. The Navion is down right ugly! Hahaha.....comment from a Bonanza owner of course.
@@Navigator777777why the spiraling tendency? The slick aerodynamics of the wing?
It is also said that "Doctors are the Bonanza killers". hehehe
Too dark for me 🤭
Comment of the year!
@@OnerousEthic
It’s just science.
Lol
@@greggstrasser5791 I am so confused! Is killing Bonanzas an art or a science? You just exceed Vne, and kinetic energy does the rest? Where is the art in that? So dark! 🤫
Nothing is safe when you exceed your TALENT LEVEL.
Be careful; V-tail Bonanza breakups have NOTHING to do with talent! The aircraft has a hidden flaw.
You tube is putting things all over the place again. Dope must be pretty good over there. Sorry David> This isn't my fault.
I've flown with a friend who owned a V35B twice to Oshkosh, 1500 mile round trip. His had all the structural upgrades, individual cylinder head temp gauges, and flying lean of peak did an honest 11 gal/hr and 175 kt cruise. With tip tanks, we made it from central NC to central Wisconsin unrefueled. I'd love to own one.
Wow! Thanks for sharing!
I've never understood why people always exaggerate the economical fuel burn of their aircraft. Fuel burn of any recip is never far from 5% of HP if flown at 75% rated power. I'm sure they tell people the book answer to the aircraft's cruise speed at 75% but brag about the fuel burn they get when pulling the power back to 60 or 65% to save money.
Unfortunately, I learned to fly in a Bonanza when I was 14. My father was a test pilot who flew high performance jets and considered the Bonanza nothing more than a beginner plane. It even had a newer larger engine and variable prop which could cruise up to 200 mph at 10,000 ft. Back in the early 1960s, it was much, much faster than a regular Bonanza. His plan to make me a pilot didn't work. I found the plane so stressful to fly that I refused to get a license or continue to fly. He was disappointed that I didn't follow in his footsteps but I can tell you, test pilots aren't normal men. He considered recreational pilots to be kite flyers and commercial pilots were bus drivers. He was the only one of his original team of nine test pilots that died of old age at 78. The rest of them crashed and didn't make it to 40. Strangely enough, if my father hadn't been a pilot, I probably would have been.
@Galileo7of9 I know. Just stating that it was a handful for a beginner to learn to fly.
Totally get that! My dad loved doing aerobatics and because of that I wouldn’t learn to fly especially if he was the instructor. He was qualified to instruct single and multi engine. He was a former military pilot in WW2.
@Nabor Simbor Back in the early 1950s my dad and his fellow test pilots mostly flew six engined B47s which were the predecessors to the eight engined B52. The B47 was the last bomber where the crew cross trained and rotated positions. The B47 was swept wing, flew over 500mph at 50,000 feet and had a range of several thousand miles. Back then, high speed, high altitude bail outs were usually fatal. It took several years before they found out why the copilot ALWAYS died in a bail out. They finally got a video. When they blew the canopy, it kicked down and hit him in the head. They had minimum protection from the extreme cold, high speed air stream and the navigator had an unreliable bottom ejection seat. My dad and his fellow pilots always joked that they would land a plane on fire before they would bail out. The strangest crash involved one of the test pilots trying to save a T33 trainer from a flat spin. He rode it all the way down while trying to regain control. The T33 had wing tip fuel tanks and a tiny tail. Although it was a trainer, it was almost impossible to pull out of a flat spin. Too much spinning weight in the wing tips and not enough tail control surface.
comercial pilots are bus drivers that love to make tons of paperwork.
Your dad was ALL wrong
It's funny at 4:20 you show a standard tail crash and say that it's a v-tail crash! You might want to check the video!
I flew a V35B occasionally, when I worked for the Australian Civil Aviation Authority. it was a very satisfying "pilot's aircraft"; I also flew the conventional-tail Beech 33 Debonair. They both exhibited what is commonly called "Dutch roll" or "Snaking" - far more pronounced on the V-tail version. The pilot could stop this by a little tap-dancing on the rudder pedals, if his reactions were very fast; if he had slow reactions, it only made the effect worse - and whilst it was of little consequence for the front-seat occupants, it was very unpleasant for the rear seat occupants. The usual cause of "Dutch roll" in a straight-wing aircraft is too much dihedral on the wing, but I don't think that was the cause on the Bonanza, because the frequency of the oscillation was too high; I think it was due to the aerodynamic balance of the tail surfaces. It is a requirement that aircraft must be longitudinally stable both "stick-free" and "stick fixed", and to achieve that for a high-performance aircraft requires careful aerodynamic balance of the elevators. The problem was that the aerodynamic balance needed for the "elevator" function of the V-tail was not appropriate for the "rudder" function. The V-tail also cannot give "full rudder" and "full elevator" at the same time; and this meant that cross-wind landings required a rather different technique with the V-tail version. The saving grace of the Bonanza in this regard was that you could always feel when it was about to quit flying - I could always do shorter landings in the V-35 than I could in my PA28 - and the technique was to crab the aircraft, wings level, until it was right on the point of quitting, then use a bootful of rudder to get it straight, at the same time rolling in full aileron into wind; it would just plop onto the runway and roll straight if you got that right. Speed over the fence on landing was 78 knots. If you knew these tricks, it was a pussy cat - but you had to respect the flight manual limits, as you must in any aircraft. But Beech made a fundamental error in the design of the aircraft, in that the centre of gravity of the disposable load was not coincident with the middle of the centre of gravity range of the aircraft, so you could not put much in the baggage compartment if you had occupants in the rear seats. The Beech 36 largely corrected that.
I have mostly flown the PA28,my favourite landing technique in crosswind landings was the forward slip, can you do this in the Vtail bonanza ?
@@robh4671 If, by "forward slip" you mean that you keep the aircraft aligned with the runway by crossed-controls (a common technique with tail-draggers, known as the "wun wing lo" technique), I think you can do this with a V-tail in a light crosswind; but the crosswind component in which you can do this will be limited, because you will run out of up-elevator. Else you will have to put the aircraft on the ground at a considerably higher speed than its stall speed, which risks "wheelbarrowing" (touch-down nosewheel first, which can cause a groundloop). There is no risk of this with a taildragger, you can fly it onto the ground on one wheel. I used this technique with my PA28; you don't run out of elevator prematurely with a conventional tail, so the landing speed does not need to be excessive.
@@robh4671 V-tail Bonanza flies just fine in a slip. Best technique is to land with the fuel on the left tank and slip left wing high to avoid unporting the fuel pickup. The 12 foot wide gear on the Bonanza makes X wind landings very easy. With aftermarket disk brakes, six feet from the centerline, brake is very effective in lateral control.
My Dad bought a brand new V-tail in 1976, the plane still flies today N2132L. I was only a kid, but we flew that plane all over the country. My Dad even taught me to fly and many times my hands were on the controls. It was fast, we used to cruise at 10K feet doing about 220mph. Teterboro to Ft. Lauderdale in under 5 hours.
My grandpa owned and died in one of these years ago, he got caught in a storm over the great salt plains in Utah and went down. Not sure if the plane contributed to this happening, but I do know he loved his plane, he has a sticker on his car that said "My other car is a Beechcraft Bonanza!"
It's hard to guess why he went down but Bonanzas' were notorious for easily exceeding their VNE(never exceed speed) if you were nose down in low visibility, you could rip the wings off before you knew it. But any plane can be damaged in a storm.
I've always loved the v tail. Thoroughly enjoyed flying it, although it was only briefly. Very sweet airplane.
I don't know if it was mentioned in the comments, but the early Bonanzas had a steel tube center section where the wings were bolted on. Those center sections were subject to cracking and then failing under high stresses such as sharp pull-ups and other high "G" maneuvers.. The fix was a beefy aluminum replacement center section. Back in the early 1970's, I installed one when a crack was detected in the original steel tube center section per an FFA Airworthiness Directive during an annual inspection. If I remember correctly, there was a time limit when those steel tube center sections had to be replaced whether a crack was detected or not.
Woody
A lot of older aircraft end up with ADs regarding cracks at stress points. The Bonanza is no different.
That is true. Many new and/or modern airplanes end up with AD notes as well. When Taylor Craft started its resurgence back in the late Seventies, I found a serious problem with the electrical system. The airplane had a 30 amp alternator but only had something like(delving deep into memory here!) a number 10 wire connecting it to the buss. The number 10 wire was sufficient to power the limited electronics in the aircraft, but with a dead or near dead battery, the alternator would have pumped out its 30 amps and melted the wire and likely caused a fire. I sent in a Malfunction/Defect Report and within a week the AD came out to replace the wire with a number 6 wire.
Woody
The kill factor for docs is about the same in a Debbie, and then we have the new doctor killer the Malibu which seems to attack lawyers also
The Malibu isn't all bad, then.
Didn't the Cirrus with the "Do Over" handle have a bad record at first?
Pilots exceeding the flight envelope because they think they can is the issue.
Debbie?
@@OnerousEthic It's old pilot speak for Debonair from a guy that was around when they were NEW! long before beech called them a Straight tail Bonanza
@@OnerousEthic Beechcraft Debonair
My dad taught me to fly in a C-35 model. We never brought the flaps up after landing until we were off the runway and taxiing at low speed because of the flap/gear switch setup. He knew a guy who had hit the gear instead of flaps while still rolling down the runway fast enough that the gearlock switches weren't engaged, and the gear came up...
Couple small facts, the V-Tail design was due to the Bonanza's design for speed, and having only 2 instead of 3 tail surfaces gave it some extra mph. Likewise, there is a step to get up to the wing so you can enter/exit the plane. The earlier models retracted the step when the gear went up, sliding the strut into the fuselage until only the step itself (which was teardrop shaped) was still outside the aircraft. I think I read that gave it an extra 3mph airspeed...
Did your acquired mastery of the type lead you to exploring the entry conditions of hazardous performance boundaries with simulated recoveries?
As far as I remember just stalls, which were pretty forgiving. No spins or anything like that. The only real issue I ever had was when 16 year old me somehow skipped over "Set pitch trim to 0" on *both* the post-landing and pre-takeoff checklists during my long crosscountry. During takeoff roll found myself having to push harder and harder against the yoke to keep the nose down, failed, rotated and immediately had stall warning go off. Shoulder straps were tight (not standard in the C-35, dad had a retrofit system), still not sure how I slipped out to reach the trim wheel, but somehow managed to and then built up enough speed to climb out, I presume ground effect is the only thing that kept me from pancaking. 100% pilot error (mine), and was very lucky to get out of it ;)
I am surprised the gear didn't have a limit switch that was in contact when the thing was on the ground (from the plane's weight on the gear) so that if the gear switch was toggled to the "up" position they would not go up and turn the thing into a snake sliding on its belly.
@@karlmadsen3179 It did, my understanding was that this guy went to bring the flaps up after touching down, hit the gear switch by accident, and was rolling fast enough that the wings were generating enough lift to keep the lockout switch from being preventing the gear from coming up. That's why we never brought the flaps up until after we had turned off the runway and were only moving a few mph.
I own a 1949 A35 Bonanza, and would not give it up. I love it.
The V tail was borrowed and used on the air refueling booms for the Air Force. It worked so well on the prototype, it became the standard, and still in use today.
Engineering nerd here...
1.V Tail Advantages
a. Aesthetics
b. Simpler (2 vs 3 surfaces)
c. Less interference drag
d. Good spin recovery because, unlike a conventional fin-rudder tail, the V’s surfaces are not blanked off
e. According to NACA, V tails contribute 1deg of dihedral
2. V tail disadvantages
a. Greater trim drag.
b. Tail wagging (though is not uncommon in this plane class)
c. Not theoretically, but practically, the CG range is reduced
3. Structurally there is no difference in V or conventional tails. The Bonanza was designed to FARs, but in practice a hard back stick would peal up the leading edge. The FAA later revised the FARs on all planes as a result. Beech introduced a strengthening kit.
4. The Bonanza (as well as many WW2 fighters and other Beech products) used a 23015 family airfoil. This airfoil at high angles of attack has a separation bubble. When the wing stalls, the bubble collapses, and the plane has to pitch down 8 dog or so and speed up to recover. From the pilots seat, the Bonanza has a sharp stall and needs altitude for recovery.
This airfoil and icing go ill together.
5. I have flown V33’s and they are fine solid planes. It, is however, easy to get behind it. So pilot proficiency is critical. I suggest this is where it’s troubles source.
"Structurally there is no difference between conventional tails and V-tails."
So all that other "engineering nerd" bullshit you're cutting and pasting from Wikipedia is bullshit? Or your statement is without a doubt the best example of "paradoxical thinking" ever. Or you're incapable of actual thought.
Show me TWO "surfaces" on those "structures" that interchange between the two "tail types".
@@deeremeyer1749 All prop driven all metal planes fixed tail surface structures are two spar stressed skin structures. All prop driven all metal airplanes’ movable tail surfaces are single spar stressed skin. (Metal Stabilators are two spar stress skin, but the rear spar’s contribution to bending stress is negligible.) Structurally there is no difference in the design of fixed tail surfaces. Structurally there is no difference in the design design of the moveable surfaces. To the intelligent person, this does not convey that surfaces are interchangeable. To the intelligent person it does convey that Vee tail surfaces are structurally no different than their conventional peers.
Cheers and good luck with your meds
@@deeremeyer1749 Pretty sure he means that the overall structural strength is equal between the two designs. He never said the parts were interchangeable.
What is CG range? Is that the stability of the airplane value?
@@ryancappo Correct. For the rearmost CG, The engineers calculate the “neutral point” where the plane is aerodynamically balanced in pitch for given flight configuration. The rearmost CG is ahead of the NP. Thus if hit by an up gust, the plane - which seesaws about its CG - pitches nose down to stably counter.
The forward CG is determined by “elevator power” for a given configuration. For instance at landing you want to pull the plane to near stall; too forward a CG, the plane wheelbarrows. More forward the CG is, the more stable, but less efficient the plane flies (because the wing lifts the extra download of the tail).
The CG range is the difference between the foremost and rearmost CG, expressed as a percentage of the mean wing chord. In Pilots airplane operating manuals, this CG range is converted to a more useful loading chart. Cheers
I had started my career at Cessna working with a stress engineer who occasionally worked as an expert witness in trials working in 210 crashes. He believed that the problem with many high performance singles whas that they were demanding to fly and expensive. The high price meant that the people who could afford to buy one were so involved with their careers that they often couldn't find the time to remain proficient with their high performance airplane. They would then take their plane on a long vacation trip, get in over their heads and crash, this was a particularly huge problem with IFR flight conditions.
now THIS IS A GOOD VIDEO !! Excellent work man, big props !
My Uncle had a Model 35, loved flying in that. I got a few rides in it as well, it was fast and responsive.
Also with the V-tails the some of the rudders are made out of magnesium so when painted need to be carful with you paint shop going to make sure they know what they are doing Bc it will cause corrosion under the paint and once those rudders don’t pass inspection they are super rare to find since textron does not manufacture these parts so if you see like an orange peel on the pain of your rudders it’s a sign of corrosion starting taking care of it before it to late. Always take your Beechcraft to Beechcraft mechanics also not all A&Ps know all the tips of these planes especially the landing gear I see a lot of planes with messed up landing gear tensions, gearbox’s incorrectly rigged, worn bushings and bearings there’s a lot always go to the ABS website and look for an ABS shop. I work at Waypoint Aviation Services in Riverside California we specialize in beechcraft and if any questions I would love to answer them.
ALL V-tail ruddervators are made of magnesium
@@rhark25 Is it just the skin, or the structural elements as well? How exotic and cool!
The ruddervators can typically be re-skinned, and re-painted. They must be carefully balanced with tiny counterweights after paint. They must also be installed carefully as the long hinge pin is easy to put in wrong.
They don't make them like they used to! Love that tail, a real head turner
Thank god!
I loved our old V35, and would love to get another one at some point.
I had a V35B for 8 years. One of the last ones off the assembly line. Lovely aircraft. A right bugger in a crosswind take off though. Solid as a rock cruse at 165kts at 13 gal us and often had me up to 15000 ft.
Very interesting! My father bought his new H35 Bonanza in 1957 and used it for air charter service. We also flew in it for our vacations when I was a kid. The airplane is still flying today and will be in the Osh Kosh Bonanza fly in this summer. So excited that I tracked it down and my husband and I are driving 500 miles to go and see it and the latest owner.
Good video and many good comments from people who have Bonanza experience. Having owned a V tail and flown several different models of the V tail, 33 series, and the A36 I consider them to be excellent handling cross country single engine aircraft, both VFR and IFR. Also took several owners through instrument rating in V tail and straight tail. One fact often overlooked is the Bonanza is a low drag airplane but is certainly a safe airplane for a proficient pilot. I could write a book about the virtues of the Beech but others have already done so.
There is a striking difference between the safety records of the V tail and conventional tail Bonanzas. The typical accident profile of a V tail mishap is a low hour pilot (doctors were able to afford them) in IMC conditions for which the pilot had little experience. Because of the clean design the aircraft would pop through V never exceed with structural failure of the tail. The conventional tail version does not seem to have this problem to the same degree.
So, which one do you prefer?
Flew a B35 (50’) and fuel management was biggest factor for me. They used a pressurized carburetor and pumped more gas than it burned returning unused fuel to the left tank. So you took off on left tank flew for 45-60 minutes switched to right tank for another 45-60 minutes and the Auxiliary tank all the while watching your fuel level in left tank go back up. Landing on tank with most fuel should be left tank at least that’s the way I was taught. Shorter flights I landed with right tank. Very stable airplane and took me awhile to adjust to increased rate of climb and cockpit controls in the pattern over a Cherokee 140. Things happened much faster but within a few hours you get used to the gear, cowl flaps and constant speed prop. Burned more fuel than the Cherokee per hour but you got there faster and quieter so it was a push on fuel and a quieter smoother ride.
Until the left tank is full, then it overflows into the belly.
@@bobgould7665 If it does, you're doing something wrong. There are two ports to the fuel bladder. The end port flows to the underside of wing, about 3/4 back and out into the air. Some pilots/owners didn't maintain the overflow drain tube and fuel would flow down the inside of the wing and to the fuselage. The second drain is inside the fuel filler covered panel. It is to acccommodate expansion of fuel with temperature. It flows out the bottom of the wing as well. But again, if the pilot/owner doesn't maintain the system it will drain into the wing, and then to the fuselage. The solution is to use a large dia piece of safety wire, and push it through the tube during annual to insure they are clear, then blow out gently with air or Varsol.
If you're not a physician, you'll be fine.
😂
My grandpa was a lawyer but it doesn't seem to have helped him much when his split tail bonanza broke up on his way back from a ski trip
@@profanitymanatee4039 What did he do to it?
@@dieselscience He was flying over the sierra nevadas in some weather (he was instrument rated, so he had done this many times) and the weather got worse to the point where something failed on his plane.
I worked for an airplane mechanic the summer I was 18. We had a Bonanza owner come in with his V-tail, and the entire tail cone looked like paper that someone had crumpled up then smoother out again.
He asked how much it would cost and my boss said it was not possible to fix, and the airplane was not airworthy any more and the owner was extremely lucky.
The owner didn't really like this but my boss wouldn't let him leave with the plane. My boss showed him a tape (this was in 1988, so no DVDs) of a NASA test where the tail started to flutter then it separated.
Really scary to look at. There is a reason they say "Never exceed speed."
As to the plane being a doctor killer, that can be applied to any airplane that is complex. A lawyer or doctor goes from a Cessna 172 right into a Bonanza and doesn't take enough lessons to fly the more complex aircraft safely can get into real trouble. You see the same problem with light twins. The pilot gets just enough lessons to get the cert, then they fly into IMC and become disoriented or one engine goes out on their twin, then they let the airspeed drop below maneuvering speed, the rudder can no longer counter the asymmetric thrust and the plane stalls and spins.
The Bonanza is just as safe as any complex aircraft (RG, CS prop) but because of it's reputation and higher price, it is more of a status symbol than a Cessna 182RG, so more doctors and lawyers are flying them.
In the early '80s, when I was working as an avionics tech in General Aviation, I had a conversation with one of the two plots who survived a torque box failure in a V-tail Bonanza. He had been on final and hit a medium size bump. Instantly the airplane started shaking like a wet dog. The instruments were a blur, the radios were shaking out of their racks. He dropped the landing gear immediately, dropped full flaps, and hoped for the best. At 100 kts it stopped shaking (I doubt he did) and he completed his landing. As he taxied out the controller said there was something wrong with the tail. What was wrong was that it was badly twisted and sitting sideways... his plane had an L tail. According to the pilot the NTSB estimated that if the oscillation had continued one more second it would have parted.
I bet the investigators showed up and were like "well there's your problem," pointing at the tail. Fastest investigation in history.
@@MJKarkoska that’s.. not how the NTSB works?
I owned an early Bonanza and loved it. Two comments. 1] coming down final in any kind of wind conditions it would dance a little bit which was uncomfortable for back seat passengers and 2] the "piano keys" that controlled gear, flaps, and accessories were very confusing, I was coming home tired after a long business day and inadvertently hit the flaps instead of the gear and she got real squirrily until I picked them up.
Did your acquired mastery of the type lead you to exploring the entry conditions of hazardous performance boundaries with simulated recoveries?
The proper nickname for the plane was fork tailed doctor killer. :-) My brother had a charter operation in western Alaska for many years. The standard plane used in that area was a Cessna 207, which is sort of like a pickup truck with wings.... On a wild hair, my brother bought a S35 bonanza. He then painted it gloss black, with gold trim. It looked like a million dollars.
He then put it in his charter fleet, which no one had ever done. Suddenly all the passengers in the area wanted to charter " the black plane". It had leather seats, and was like riding in a mercedes benz , while riding in a 207 was like an old noisy truck. He made a fortune with the plane. The plane of course was very well made, and it had no problems standing up to all the dirt airstrips. My brother had 25,000 hours of bush time which is unheard of, as nobody flies that many hours in arctic conditions and lives to tell about it. He swore the Bonanza was the finest plane ever made for flying in rough conditions......
The 35`s off field performance is under appreciated
Bonanza was designed as a rough field plane from the start. 12 foot wide gear stance, triangle truss main gear with 16" oleo struts, triangle truss nose gear. Weak spots were the main gear outer doors which could be removed or swapped in 15 min. Also the orig expander brakes were crap. Swap to disks is easy. Takes 6.50x8 wheels and tires just like the Baron. It's a tough plane, and takes dirt fields just fine.
Excellent video, concise and straight to the point. You have a talent for this and I hope you have continued. For Bonanza buffs there is also a great comment thread on blancolirio's channel N47WT V-35 Bonanza Inflight Structural failure. Sounds like a hell of a plane but dangerous in the wrong hands.
I own a 1954 E35 model. The 35 series is a four seater, the 36 is a 6 seater.
Not sure how anyone can mix up the switches for the gear. The landing gear has a wheel on it. The flaps have a flap on it. When I was getting my signoff for the aircraft the instructor said that the #1 reason why guys were getting killed is they would get too slow on final. So he said always watch your speed turning to final. It almost happened to me though I could hear the plane getting slow. Pitched over and I was fine (Pitch, power, flaps). I learned IFR on this aircraft. It's a very good IFR platform. As with any other airplane, stay within the limits of the aircraft.
Your gear switch was modified from the original design. Original piano key switches were all identical in appearance. The only difference between gear and flap switch is that flaps are on the left and gear is on the right, and the gear requires to fingers to raise (one finger to move a secondary safety switch and another to lift the gear switch) vs one finger to raise flaps. The simple solution I have found is to verbalize “flaps up, one finger” when raising flaps after clear of active. So far I haven’t accidentally reached for the right switch, but even if I did, my one finger technique will prevent the gear switch from being inadvertently lifted.
The model 35 is the greatest single engine GA aircraft ever built. Check out Larry Ball’s books and you’ll see why. Also, the V-tail is safe, but unforgiving of incompetence.
I liked the video. For everyone, if you haven't been to the Beechcraft Heritage Museum at Tullahoma Airport in Tullahoma, TN, you're in for a treat. Not far away is the Arnold AFB Center, which is very much worth a tour. As a bonus, Tullahoma is also close to the Jack Daniels and George Dickel distilleries.
Back in the late 70s - early 80s, I flew a V-tail for a local businessman I knew. Not sure but I think it was 1967 model. It had a turbocharged Continental IO520, 285HP and a 3 blade prop.
The owner had a private but no instrument, I had an instrument so about the only time I flew it was when actual IMC was likely. I had about 200 hours in it, quite a bit IMC.
At the same time, I owned and flew Comanche 250. Lycoming O-540, carbureted and no turbo.
The Bonanza was easy to land, the Comanche was a bit more of a challenge. The Bonanza would go about 15 knots faster (depending on who was buying the fuel......lol) but it tended to fishtail a bit. Not as bad as a twin but you could feel it.
Both planes, gear up, were pretty slick, easy to overspeed if you weren't paying attention.
Most of my flying was mountains, I lived in Central Oregon at the time. Typical IFR cruise was 12,000' or so. If you're IMC around there, you're picking up ice. This is the main difference between the two planes, the Comanche handled ice well, the Bonanza didn't.
With just a trace of ice on the Bonanza, it's start flying like a brick. Seriously, if it were not turbo, I doubt if it would maintain 6000' with 1/8" of ice.
The Comanche, on the other hand, did well in ice. Once, I was at 16,000', in and out of clouds, picking up ice and had about 3/4". Even without a turbo, it still flew pretty much as it did with no ice. A bit slower but it still handled just fine.
If the Bonanza had any ice at all, I'd add about 15 knots to the approach speed, about 5 for the Comanche.
The Bonanza was quieter and more comfortable than the Comanche, a bit faster but both would burn about the same fuel under the same flight conditions.
About the Doctor killer stuff; a Bonanza is more of a status symbol then any other retractable single so a lot of them were flown by Doctors and Businessmen. A lot of these pilots are part-time and don't keep their skills up.......rusty is the term......lol. Any plane takes a certain amount to piloting but I'd say the Bonanza would get out of hand quicker than most other types.
enjoyed your post. I took a ride in a Bonanza back in '71 with a owner/pilot that liked to put it through it's paces...even at age 13 I could tell that was a different class of plane than our (yawn) 1956 C-172.
A beautiful airplane. I've had the privilege of flying in one a couple of times with a friend who owned one.
You always need to double check the nut between the yoke and seat on Bonanza's - that is the cause of most accidents.
What's an "in-flight break-up?" Is that when the Dr and Mrs get into a big fight?
Woo keep them coming Mike
I worked at an airport where a V tailed bonanza throw a prop blade on final. The blade struck the left side elevator/rudder which twisted the entire tail causing wrinkles in the fuselage but it stayed intact. Which allowed the pilot to dead stick the aircraft to a safe landing.
The plane in the accident at 4:18 is not a V-tail 35 model.
I own an A36. Love it. Stable, reliable platform.
I remember the V tail could make very fast decent to runways which made landings exciting to passengers.
Very nice review!
Fantastic aircraft did 460 hrs in mine ZS FLZ no problems
Like the man says before me, excessive air speed, will teat your wings off. That being said, over stress any other airplane, and see what happens ! I owned and flew my Bonanza 35 (1948) for almost twenty years,. The Bonanza is so quiet, if you don't pay attention, and have the nose down a little, the airspeed runs up pretty quickly towards red line. If you put too much back pressure on the yoke, the wings could come off, or other metal failure. The 35's had the tubular spar in them, that was not as strong as the aluminum box type spar, so would break easier than the box type. Again, any plane that is over stressed will break! I put a spar kit in mine, that took up to 80% of the wing loading, so it was stronger than the box type. A very easy airplane to fly and land, and if I didn't get married, I'd still have it! Bob U.
Prices are way up for both V tail and conventional tail versions. Both are great handling aircraft. Great performance and easier to land than a 172 (I’ve owned both)
I have wanted a 35 bonanza for a while now because of the price, performance, and looks, but unfortunately that V-tail seems to be more trouble than it’s worth. Low rudder authority, questionable spin recovery, and structural weakness are the main issues with that tail. Makes me sad.
I would love to see a new version of the 35 - using the new Bonanza body length and engine.
700+ hours in the 1949 Bonanza A35 N8595A. I loved it. E225 upgrade and Hartzell oil constant speed. Plan ahead. I refused several vectors to final on non precision approaches to SAN back course, “Unable. I can’t get down from here”. Saddle tank. I loved this aircraft. It was honest, predictable.
I owned a K35 for 10 years, had all mods. It is a very safe airplane. Please stop using doctor killer. As with any aircraft it most important that a person stays current in the performance of the airplane.
We'll call it the Buddy Hollie killer instead
I've always taken this type of nickname as an indictment against doctors flying the plane, not the plane being flown. Doctors are Bonanza killers.
Much misinformation in the comments below, and some in the video. The v-tail structural weakness was due to insufficient support of the leading edge. This was fixed years ago by adding a cuff.
The v-tail and equivalent straight tail versions fly nearly identically. The difference in Dutch roll (tail wag) are minimal, and a yaw damper autopilot eliminates it. Also, cross wind landings in a v-tail are not difficult.
I owned a 35 for 10 years, and currently own a 33 that I’ve had for 14 years. I’m not a doctor.
What you neglect to mention is that Beech, for many years, insisted that ALL crashes were
due to pilot error. They NEVER analysed the data from the wreckage, and the fact that V tails
were having tail failures at a rate far in excess of those of the straight tail aircraft was ignored.
When a small company in Texas came up with a mod that consisted of a pair of 'cuffs' around
the base of the leading edge of the tail, and got it certificated, Beech reacted by SUING THEM
to try to drive them out of business ! Then came ' THE CRASH ' - a lawyer was flying cross
country in CAVU weather, and the tail came off his aircraft. The wreckage landed in some
farmer's back 40, and while the farmer and his family were staring at the pillar of smoke, the
lawyer walked up to them, dressed in a rumpled business suit, carrying his PARACHUTE, and
asked if he could use their telephone........ The rest is history. His lawsuit caused the FAA
to decertify the aircraft for high speed flight ( anything over 110 mph ! ) unless the tail had
been strengthened.
Beech immediately copied the design of the Texas Tail Cuffs, and a massive program to upgrade
older Bonanzas began. But it cost the lives of at least two hundred people before Beech was
willing to accept responsibility for their mistake.
And Beech NEVER apologized to the Texas company they sued.
@@paulrward Wow, that is dark, the fact that Beechcraft ignored pilots and their customers, and sued a smaller company for making a structural safety device. Like with most large corporations, it takes a lawyer or a large situation to get them to change.
Even then, corporations will still ignore their customers. :(
1st time viewer.
New subscriber.
Good video... For clarification, the Models 35 and 33 have four seats. The A36 has six.
All Bonanzas have delightfully light controls, and is my favorite general aviation airplane to fly. A downside of the excellent controllability is less lateral (roll) stability than, say a Cessna 210 Centurion.
In visual conditions reduced stability is not an issue, but in instrument conditions, the pilot's instrument scan must be effective and timely. A minimally qualified or non-recent pilot (often a professional with the disposable income for the airplane) can find themselves overloaded quickly in instrument conditions, and left unattended the airplane will bank into a descending graveyard spiral if upset.
A common accident scenario on both the V and straight tail airplanes is that an overloaded pilot in busy airspace may not notice the beginning of the spiral. Often the increasing airstream noise (often above its safe structural maneuvering airspeed) catches the pilot's attention, who pulls abruptly on the controls to stop the descent, overstressing the tail, causing it and then the wings to fail.
IIRC the V tail model was eliminated as their sales were declining and it was competing in the same market as the straight tail 33.
Did your acquired mastery of the type lead you to exploring the entry conditions of hazardous performance boundaries with simulated recoveries?
Both later 35(V tail) and 33(std tail) offered a 5th seat, however it was a kiddie seat in the baggage bay. There was a full six seat prototype of the V tail but the loading graph near full gross became a serious problem as elevator forces became very limited. It was easy to load out of CG near full gross and would lead to PIO and pitch-poling by the pilot. Hence - the model 36 was born, with either 4 or 6 seats, and then the A36 after that.
@@OnerousEthic When I instructed in Bonanzas, in addition to the "standard" unusual attitude recoveries, the briefing included the graveyard spiral issue, including causes and clues of its developing. In flight I'd set up a graveyard spiral in simulated instrument conditions (student wearing an outside view limiting device with head down, obscuring the instruments) by initiating a 1g spiral, and after the bank angle reached 30 degrees and nose was pitched down 10 degrees, instruct the student to recover. The main clue was the increased noise level as airspeed rose.
@@docmirror8009 Good stuff! A similar problem was evident with the aux fuel tank installed in the baggage compartment in the earlier models. Careful load planning was required with the tank filled to ensure the airplane remained in CG limits.
Since it was an aux tank, its fuel could not be used for takeoff or landing, so the pilot had to remember to select it after takeoff and deselect it before landing to keep the CG in limits. I routinely made aux fuel selection as a part of the cruise checklist. IIRC it was a 10 gallon tank, providing about an hour of cruise flight, at which selecting a main tank was required.
@@jimmbbo Very interesting! Secondary clues being two spinning compasses, and Turn and Bank in agreement?
And the standard recovery is: nose down and opposite rudder?
Thank you Jim!
Very informative, I have always loved this airplane including flight simulators on the computer.
I met a Plastic Surgeon last weekend at the local airport. He said he was working on repairing one of his six Beach Bonanza’s Jugs.
…I guess dealing with two jugs at a time during the weekday, isn’t enough for him. 😳
haha
Like any airplane, it *IS 'SAFE'* however, it is NOT FORGIVING OF STUPIDITY. Bonanza is better suited for engineers than doctors since the learned mindset is much more respecting of the limits of physics.
very informative and well done, ( also, additional thanks to the comment section here )
i am studying the history for any prospects in new design, the V-tail being generally a lower drag solution design alternative, along with canard type approaches;
and i am seeing the V-tail as holding some new design promise, alongside advances in fly by wire given by modern electronics design and manufacturing techniques.
linear actuators are really very reliable, and an interpretive system can be programmed to negotiate pilot errors ...still subject to maintenance, but i feel it would tend to be more reliable.
My friend and instructor was killed in a 35B that distincive tail fell off in flight. There were 3 model 35s that crashed in northwest Wisconsin in a period of about 5 years. One crash was a doctor flying in to Shell Lake WI. In a snow storm.
A friend of mine, a corporate pilot and professor of astrophysics (I know, that's a pretty unique CV which narrows down his identity considerably:^) ) is perhaps the only person to have survived a V-tail Bonanza in-flight breakup. Bringing his considerable maths skills to bear on all the NTSB data he claims to have found the key to whole problem. I keep telling him to make a video but he really does have better things to do :^D
…and the net net is that the V-tail is clearly superior once the true flight dynamics are understood? Please tell me that’s what you were saying!
So what is the key to the whole problem?
Here's a news flash 📸 for ya..... Any aircraft is safe when you operate it according to it's flight manual/POH . Follow the checklists, and verify each step. Happy flying 🛩️
Great video!
I have had one for years love it will mix with jet traffic on approach speeds but is unforgiving with gear up very slick,but let the gear down just like a 182
Thanks for the valuable information.
Very interesting history lesson!
Great video, you’ve done all the research for us! Thank you for sharing.
There was an AD (Airworthiness Directive) on the V-tail that strengthen the tail. This corrected the Vne problem. The other problem was pilots getting to slow on approach for landings.we had one at our airport several years ago where the plane literally spun in on landing. That's not a tail problem but a stall-spin at low altitude and no one wins in that problem. I think the V-tail is just fine and personally I'd own the earlier model.
It didn’t correct the Vne problem. All it did was cause the wings to fail before the tail. Exceeding Vne still resulted in breakup-hence the establishment of a Vne…
The AD mod greatly increased the torsional rigidity of the tail, preventing oscillation.
Did my commercial in an A 36....Loved that airplane. Cruised at 177 knots at 8,000 ft sipping 12 GPH.
Got to do a few hours in a v-tail long ago, had the throw over yoke. Nice flying plane, very enjoyable.
Beechcraft Bonanzas (including variants and derivatives) are exceptional aircraft. Well constructed and well documented (besides myriad performance charts, the POH even has part numbers for bulbs). Excellent engineering and manufacture have one trap:
Pilots/owner-operators must resist complacency and overconfidence created by operating such well crafted machines.
Load within limits, fly within performance envelopes and limits, CONSTANTLY train to expand your abilities, upgrade the avionics, know and adhere to your personal minimums derived with your instructor and maintain your craft. Through your proper stewardship, will enjoy your bird, enhance your life and the life of those around you, and pass your lovely aircraft down through the generations.
Very nice Pilot Mike ! I always wanted to fly a Bonaza V tail shape. Flew King Air from Beechcraft , and its a wonderful aircraft , as well ! Cheers, Mate ! Greetings from Brazil.
Kingairs - best GA aircraft ever!
Derr! All aircraft are “relatively safe” if you stay within the envelope. Conversely, no aeroplane is “ safe” if you venture outside this.
some envelopes are smaller then others
First airplane I ever got to ride in was one of these. I was 4 and could *Not* pronounce "Bonanza", so this plane is forever known to me as "The Beechcraft Banana"
Interesting, good job.
Love your voice and your enthusiasm ❤. Have fun and success always. I'm here to learn.
Cessna 172 has had over 44,000 units produced. GA's most successful plane model.
All metal is a bit of a stretch. The first 54 production planes had fabric ailerons and flaps. After that, they were changed to mag. The early props were also made from wood. The Beech controllable pitch prop has never had an AD written against it. With 88" blades, the prop attained an aerodynamic Q factor of 0.915 which was the best rating up until Q tip props were introduced in the late 80s. 80% of the plane is flush riveted. It is one of the only GA planes designed with a double tapered wing. The wing changes chord line from root to tip, it also changes thickness. Modern plastic planes all have double taper wings. Early Bonanza with E series engine are dry sump, and have an oil tank behind the cooling tin with an air duct to cool the oil. The E series engine is a pre-cursor to the legendary O-470 family. The 'carb' on the E series engine is actually a throttle body fuel injector. It has no venturi throat, and fuel is atomized into the air stream under low pressure(9PSI). In 1949, Bonanza introduced 'air conditioning', however, it was actually a swamp cooler. There is a canister up at the rear of the baggage bay that contains fiber wicks. The pilot would pour one gallon of water down into the intake duct on the roof, and leave it open. As air flowed through and over the fiber wicks, the water would evaporate and cool the cabin. The type certificate for the early Bonanza is the only 4 seat plane certified in utility category up to max gross weight(rather than normal). Topping that, Beech made an E33 model 4 seat that was fully aerobatic, including the main door with an emergency jettison handle, and removable seat cushions to accommodate parachutes.
Comment on Fact 3 : There were actually 3 post-war all metal light aircraft; the 3rd of which is the North American (later Ryan) Navion. It first flew in 1946, and earned it's type certification January 28, 1947. Initially, it used the same Continental E-185 engine as the Bonanza, and also featured a low wing, retractable tricycle gear, and all aluminum construction. It's appearance and shape drew inspiration from the famous P-51 Mustang, and this was not a coincidence, as the very same team of engineers that had produced the P-51 designed the Navion. In many ways it was very similar to the Bonanza, but the differences are what limited it's success in the marketplace (a couple thousand being manufactured is by no means a failure, but the Bonanza is the clear winner in this statistic) : 1. The Navion's aerodynamics were optimized for benign flying characteristics and low speed handling. It had a "fat wing", which meant that you could land it at 54mph, but the trade off is that the top end speed was noticeably less than the Bonanza's. A Navion with the E-185 would be lucky to hit the claimed 150mph cruise speed, while a V35 Bonanza of the same vintage, using the same engine cruises at around 170mph (150kts). 2. The Navion had a very stylish looking, although somewhat awkward to use sliding canopy, reminiscent of it's fighter plane heritage, while the Bonanza had the far more practical (and common) door for entrance and egress. North American engineers debated this feature at length, aware of what the folks over at Beech were doing, but in the end chose the sliding canopy. It turns out practicality and ease of use won out over the somewhat awkward hop down into a Navion cockpit.
The Navion lived on after the end of the sliding canopy in a plane called the 'rangemaster'. By the mid 1960s it had a 285HP engine with refined tail, tapered fuselage gear doors and blistering fast speed up to 190MPH.
Beautiful plane and I've flown them many times. From a performance and handling standpoint, pretty solid. A little "dutch rolly" in weather, but lovely handling. The reason for the doctor killer moniker (proverb?) is demographics. It's like this: A) Doctors, by and large, are in the target demo of people who can own one of these planes. B) Doctors are the smartest people and already come to any occasion knowing everything (just ask any doctor...then get comfortable, because it will take awhile). C) As a result of A+B, you get an overpaid, overconfident target demo. By the same token (and for the same reasons) in all fairness: airline pilots are the worst investors, in front of NBA players. Add lawyers to each of those.
Bullshit. I know 12 or more real doctors (no Ph.Ds) personally. Zero pilots. I know 12 or more real pilots. Zero doctors. MOST are/were farmers/ranchers with some sort of "town job".
There are at least 100 M.Ds. per Bonanza ever built in the U.S. alone. The notion that doctors are big "aviation enthusiasts" in general is f'ing hilarious. That those that are pilots fly for "pleasure" rather than "business" and out of NECESSITY and/or waste time/money/talent/risk/skill/reputation on antiquated pieces of shit like that and a "six seater" for "solo commuting" is even more f'ing hilarious.
"Commuting" doctors that do it via "light aircraft" are damn few and far between and few if any ever make a "career" out of it anywhere BUT "flyover country" where hospitals besides in "big cities" are 30-50 miles apart minimum because it doesn't take too many "rescheduled" appointments with/for/by an "aviation enthusiast" medical doctor "specialist" that "commutes" to/from a large "regional" hospital out to surrounding "local" hospitals/clinics/ORs or vice versa due to "inclement weather" - most common being blue sky sunny day 70-degree Spring/Fall days where the only "inclement weather" is a little "breeze" up to 40-50 mph "sustained" with gusts to 70+ dead-nuts across and/or along every runway in REAL "flyover country" before Air Doc is going to be persona non grata and the hospital/clinic "system" will pull his privileges and/or "practice" and hire a replacement that knows you sure as fuck don't rely on ANY airplane to get you exactly where you NEED to go when you HAVE to get there least of all "light aircraft" operating in uncontrolled airspace and VFR or controlled airspace and IFR ANYWHERE IN "AMERICA".
They're the smartest people and paid to save lives and fix broken people and bring new ones into the world. And basically spend the first 35 years (in a REAL "western democracy") of their lives "learning a trade" and at best then get to "practice" it the second half of their working lives but are "overconfident" and "overpaid". Yeah. And NBA players that make hundreds of thousands of dollars per year minimum just "playing ball" are REAL POOR "INVESTORS".
SMART PEOPLE EARN MONEY AND SAVE IT WHEN THEY HAVE A JOB/PROFESSION/CAREER/TRADE THAT PROVIDES THEM WITH "DISPOSABLE INCOME" THEY COULD "INVEST". THEY DON'T "INVEST" MONEY IN SOMEONE ELSE'S "PROFESSION".
GO START COUNTING DOCTORS, LAWYERS, AIRLINE PILOTS AND NBA PLAYERS WITH "STUDENT LOAN DEBT" AND/OR "CREDIT CARD DEBT" AND ACTUAL "MORTGAGES" INSTEAD OF "HOME LOANS" AND WHETHER IT'S BECAUSE YOU DON'T ACTUALLY PERSONALLY KNOW ENOUGH TO ASK THEM, CAN'T COUNT ANY HIGHER WITHOUT TAKING OFF YOUR SHOES AND SOCKS OR GOT TO GET BACK TO "INVESTING" ONLINE IN MOM'S BASEMENT TO MAKE THIS WEEK'S PLAYSTATION "MORTGAGE PAYMENT", YOU WON'T FIND 10 THAT DO FOR EVERY 100 THAT DO NOT.
A "TARGET DEMO" THAT HAS ONLY SOLD 17,000ISH UNITS IN 74+ YEARS. 229 PLANES A YEAR "ON AVERAGE". NOT FACTORING IN "ATTRITION". MEDICAL DOCTORS. YOU BET. HUGE F'ING "MARKET" FOR "LIGHT AIRCRAFT".
WEIRD THERE ARE NO "PRIVATE HELIPADS" FOR "DOCTORS" AND THEIR R-44S... THEY'RE AS CHEAP AS BONANZAS AND ONE HELL OF A LOT "SAFER".
@@deeremeyer1749 Your case is well stated, but one demerit for the cold, rough start ☺️
Couldn’t quite read the all-caps…
Did your acquired mastery of the type lead you to exploring the entry conditions of hazardous performance boundaries with simulated recoveries?
@@deeremeyer1749 some are smart, the leading edge docs who usually have engineering undergrad degrees. There are tons of average doctors who just do what the insurance and the hospitals tell them to do. This variant has been exposed by the plandemic. Being a GP just takes a lot of memorization and I wouldn’t call them rocket scientists. But there’s lots of doctors who got into it for the money and THINK they’re brilliant. These are the guys who get their license then the instrument rating quickly then move to some high performance platform too quick then kill them selves. Same thing in the Porsche world the GT2 is the doctor killer. Too much performance for the average driver.
Great video pilot Mike! Thank you for this.
Sub’d!
Good video. I'd just like to point out that aircraft specs from Tiger Moths to the X-15 always give cruise speeds and top speeds, but the first thing I'd want to know is the stall speed. That hardly ever gets a mention.
Varies from 55MPH for the model 35 up to 60MPH for the V35B.
Flying a light single into a thunderstorm...what could possibly go wrong? Blaming an airframe failure in those condition on the AIRPLANE? Really?
Owner's, usually of high-dollar toys will often contribute failures to gear and structural failures that would be caught on an Annual Inspect. I would be curious to see how many of those aircraft experiencing a full-blown failure been a result of poor judgement on the pilots behalf. Really enjoyed the clip. Thanks.
One expensive negative is early V tails were magnesium which is prone to corrosion and expensive to repair, ie replace.
I got to go for a ride in one of those planes once. It was fun.
I did a BFR with a doctor one time in his nice A-36. He was a very nice guy and pretty competent, just needed to brush up on a few things. He asked if I would fly with a doctor friend of his in his airplane for a BFR. That guy was the total opposite of the first, arrogant, impatient, and wanted to question each of the things I asked on the oral. A real tiring bastard. I gave him a very complex flight plan to figure out involving lots of weight and balance recalculating. Had him get all the takeoff and landing distances with weight changes at each stop. He came back out of the briefing room in about three hours with sweat on his brow… But he had gentled down quite a bit.
I flew one at Moorabbin airport in the mid 60s but they were effectively replaced by the conventional Debonair and 36 Bonanza which we used for freight runs.
A beautiful aircraft.
We are a professional aviation family. Years ago I was a CFII at a flight school and just before I hired on, another CFI who was flying a V tail for a small Company ran into bad turbulence in the Owens Valley. The V-tail was found 1/4 mile from the rest of the wreckage. He was dating my future wife who was an instrument rated club member. In fact he had gotten her her instrument rating.
Of course she was devastated by his death.
We got to know each other, and months later, casually dated. Then three years later we got married. She left flying, started a career in Commercial design,and went on to finish 3rd in the U.S. Nationals pairs figure skating!
Flight instructing, freight, the airlines (American), then on to Part 121 Gulfstreams, Part 135 and finally, 15,000 hours later, I retired.
Now, 35 years later, we are still together.
But when I think of the V tail I am *always* taken back to that horrible accident that changed the lives of so many of us.
Hi. Mike
Some of the things you didn’t mention about the bonanza the model 35 bonanza have a skin that was 16 thousands inch thick pretty light for a high-performance airplane it also had clothe covered control surfaces that didn’t seem to matter it Performed quite well. later on I think it was in the late 70s there was an AD for the V tail to have the spar (that’s what I call it I don’t remember the proper name )to have it inspected and replaced. This is Two prevent some of the ruddervader problems that caused some crashes.
Some of the nice things about Bonanzas if you have an old one they are upgradable two newer models. Are’s was an A model that was upgraded to an M model. Some of the upgrades we did was a one pice windshield, a Continental I O 225, Cleveland brakes, the lager rear side windows and M stile wingtips. We wanted to install tip tanks oh well.
After all that we ended up with a very nice plane and it would cruise at about 175 knots at 10 to 12 gal per Hr.
You asked, "Is it really a Doctor Killer". My experience was in an A-36, but I can attest that it was a "Doctor Killer". I had two partners in the airplane, both Doctors. I am a former USAF pilot. One of them also owned an F-35 Bonanza. The other one crashed and died. Now, his crash and death (he was alone, fortunately) had nothing to do with the fact that he was in a Bonanza. He had "get home itis", and attempted a flight VFR into IMC, at night, without an instrument rating. He didn't make it. Our Bonanza was very well equipped for a 1984 model, with full IFR instruments, autopilot, storm scope, etc. His problem was lack of flying experience which resulted in poor judgement and a situation beyond his capabilities. It can happen in any airplane.
" I can attest that it was a "Doctor Killer."
Then you explained how it isn't.
You hit the nail on the head when you said that the aircraft gained a reputation for killing wealthy amateur pilots. That the profession of medical doctor held an abundance of wealthy people led them to be cleverly used in the ditty "Forked (or V) tailed Doctor killer". In truth, these were just pilots who could afford more airplane than they had time to remain proficient in. Also I have found over my many years in professional aviation that successful people who take up aviation are often cocky and think they can do anything better than anyone else which leads them to take chances others might not take. There is nothing wrong with the Bonanza. You see today that the slick Cirrus is taking the place as the rich guy killer and for the same reason. Get good instruction. Stay proficient. Stay near the middle of the envelope. Fighter pilots aren't magical beings. They just follow these rules. Of course the Military makes them.
The V tail is a handful in gusty crosswinds, not ideal. Sit in the pilot’s seat, put in some aft stick and a lot of rudder, highlights the problem, one ruddervader does nothing and the other has to influence pitch and yaw by itself. Also the weird Beechcraft throw over yoke, all the other manufacturers give you two wheels standard, pay more only get one wheel. I got to ferry a Piper Comanche 250, now that was a fun airplane.
Completely wrong. The Bonanza with the V tail has plenty of rudder authority on both sides. In fact, more authority that the standard tail later on. Go look at the cockpit on a C-195 which was the competitor. Guess what? Throw over yoke. Dual yokes were an option on both planes. Few Bonanzas were ordered with dual yokes, which is a training thing. The Bonanza with 240HP would leave the Comanche 250 and 260 in the dust every time. Better roll control, and certainly easier to land over the Comanche.
Some people simply can't fly an airplane, it's not the model's fault.
Some airplanes fail - the torque box in the pre-AD V tail Bonanzas did that. The AD was not to fix the pilot but to fix the plane.
That said, lots of planes of all sorts go down due to pilot error. When I worked in General Aviation an average of more than one of our customers a year went that route. I remember Wes Winter and William Penn Patrick; I never met Patrick's F86 pilot but a few months later he caused the infamous inferno in the ice cream parlor in Sacramento. Patrick was the most arrogant and profane man I had ever met, Winter one of the nicest. Physics does not care.
The V tail has had a failure rate 26 times greater than the straight tail A&B models. Beechcraft engineers knew it. Granted, a great deal of these failures occurred by exceeding Vne (which is very easy to do if not completely focused) or weather related scenarios.
find a new doctor there buddy
You mean it could actually be due to arrogant doctors? no way
In 1962-2007:
there were 148 reports of in-flight structural failure in Beech models 33, 35 and 36 airplanes.
of those, 136 were in Model 35 ("V-tail") aircraft and 12 were in Model 36 Bonanzas. There were no reports of in-flight break-ups in Model 33 Debonairs or Bonanzas. (per Mastery Flight Training) Nothing to see here... move along.
The "A" and "B" models were both V-tails, as were all 35 model Bonanzas. And your data is flawed: structural failure rates were nowhere near that, especially after the "cuff" was mandated to add strength to the airframe.
@@johnrltr The comparison was the difference between the all V-35 vs all the 36 series. The V tail vs straight tail. These were pre-cuff mod. Granted, this does not compare total hours flown between each group vs accident/strucrural incidents.
I watch Matt’s channel. He’s great.
I own a j35 bonanza with Osborne tip tank is a very cool plane to fly
Great vid Mike. Yes...Matt's quite a pilot.
It would be nice of Beech produced the V-35 again; it was always my favourite GA aircraft. With today's modern engineering, it would be even better.
Why would they produce the V-35 again when the latest model was the V-35B?