99 replacement aircraft?

Boris Badenov said:
I'd imagine someone could come up with a pilot hatch STC for the KA200...they did it for the mitsi. As for the replacement aircraft, the PC-12 fits the numbers pretty well. I think maybe slightly less load, but a fair bit more speed, at least on longer legs, plus significantly less fuel burn and engine reserve. Now, whether they're economical to PURCHASE is a different question, but maybe in 10 years...

Of course you could solve all of this right now and buy a fleet of well broken in MU-2s for peanuts, but I'd imagine if the bossman thinks the Caravan is danger-city, that idea is pretty much a non-starter...

One thing's for certain. The sooner that flying batch of cobbled-together King-Air castoffs stops flying, the better for all! :D
Click to expand...

So where would you buy an mu2 for peanuts? And how well do the mu2s handle short field? How much runway would they use empty? Better yet what is the accelerate stop distance for an mu2 with one pilot and one hour of fuel?
 
BigWaveDave said:
So where would you buy an mu2 for peanuts? And how well do the mu2s handle short field? How much runway would they use empty? Better yet what is the accelerate stop distance for an mu2 with one pilot and one hour of fuel?
Click to expand...

http://www.ijetservice.com/

http://www.air1st.com/

The first one was the mx center that was owned by the same guy who owned the company I worked for. They really know their stuff w/r/t the Mitsi. I've heard lots of horror stories about missrigging and poor mx knowledge from owner/operators. The ones I flew were always surprisingly sound for their age and TT. It's definitely one of those "orphan" airplanes for which you need the right shop...you can't just take it down to Cousin Ed the A&P and expect for things to work out well. The second is (as I understand it) the biggest MU-2 broker/sales organization in the US (probably anywhere).

As to accel/stop, IMS, they actually took that OUT of the AFM after all the various nastiness of lawyers trying to yank its airworthniess, so as not to be encumbered by people claiming the aircraft didn't meet the numbers (it's no worse in that regard than any other I've flown). Anecdotally, I can tell you that it will get in to just about anything...I've stopped a -60 (Marquise) with "questionable" brakes in less than 1500ft (those big four blades in reverse will literally put you in the straps). It certainly takes a little bit more to get out, but if you're willing to risk flaps 40 on takeoff (that means, essentially, that if one quits at rotation, you're gonna die) you can get out in maybe 2500 near full load. A more reasonable flaps 20 takeoff at gross and I'd GUESS 3500? (Sea Level, ISA, etc). As I recall, anything less than 4000 at gross (which we usually were, or close to it) and you had to run numbers and think about it real hard. Empty and I'd feel comfortable with maybe 500 less in either scenario. Remember, I (sadly) haven't flown one for quite a while.

PS. I should append that I don't think I EVER took off without at least three hours of fuel, even empty. The numbers might be much better in that circumstance. Never had the opportunity.
 
Boris Badenov said:
http://www.ijetservice.com/

http://www.air1st.com/

The first one was the mx center that was owned by the same guy who owned the company I worked for. They really know their stuff w/r/t the Mitsi. I've heard lots of horror stories about missrigging and poor mx knowledge from owner/operators. The ones I flew were always surprisingly sound for their age and TT. It's definitely one of those "orphan" airplanes for which you need the right shop...you can't just take it down to Cousin Ed the A&P and expect for things to work out well. The second is (as I understand it) the biggest MU-2 broker/sales organization in the US (probably anywhere).

As to accel/stop, IMS, they actually took that OUT of the AFM after all the various nastiness of lawyers trying to yank its airworthniess, so as not to be encumbered by people claiming the aircraft didn't meet the numbers (it's no worse in that regard than any other I've flown). Anecdotally, I can tell you that it will get in to just about anything...I've stopped a -60 (Marquise) with "questionable" brakes in less than 1500ft (those big four blades in reverse will literally put you in the straps). It certainly takes a little bit more to get out, but if you're willing to risk flaps 40 on takeoff (that means, essentially, that if one quits at rotation, you're gonna die) you can get out in maybe 2500 near full load. A more reasonable flaps 20 takeoff at gross and I'd GUESS 3500? (Sea Level, ISA, etc). As I recall, anything less than 4000 at gross (which we usually were, or close to it) and you had to run numbers and think about it real hard. Empty and I'd feel comfortable with maybe 500 less in either scenario. Remember, I (sadly) haven't flown one for quite a while.

PS. I should append that I don't think I EVER took off without at least three hours of fuel, even empty. The numbers might be much better in that circumstance. Never had the opportunity.
Click to expand...

Thanks man!
 
Thanks, I'm pretty happy with life. I'm home everyday from about 8 am to 6:15 pm logging a little over 10 hours TPIC per week! I love it out here, my girlfriend and I are moving in together to a pretty sweet house near downtown later this week.
 
congrats, enjoy Bend, Its a really cool town. One of my very first IFR students is actually based out there now on the PA31.
 
Does the 99 not have beta? I hear all these bald tire stories all I can think is the beta sucks (impossible) or there is no beta.
 
jynxyjoe said:
So why the heavy braking?
Click to expand...

Since it is my first turboprop, I have no clue how it stacks up against others. I do know that it is good enough that you don't need reverse and can use almost no brake if you have a long roll out to a taxiway.

The pilot doesn't have to apply heavy brakes to flat spot them. If the plane is going over (roughly) 50, especially if the tires are slightly worn, there won't be enough weight on the assembly and poof...insta embarrasment. And that is with barely even touching the brakes.
 
It's got beta (and reverse), and it works ok when it finally decides to join the party. To be fair, this particular problem is endemic to PT-6 powered aircraft (pitooie!) and isn't Beech's fault. PT-6 has to A) Go in to reverse and B) Spool back up. It's pretty much like a turbofan with buckets. A Garrett, on the other hand...honk on the "stop" levers and hope you tied down the cargo effectively, cause it's coming your way at high speed RIGHT NOW.
 
I believe the tires are easier to flat spot since there are two per main gear with independent axles/bearings, and no anti skid technology. So, if one tire locks up, and the other is still rolling, the airplane still tracks straight and you have no idea you locked a tire up. Soft rubber compounds used in aviation tires mean that if it locks up it flat spots QUICKLY! I'll admit that I blew a tire in training, braking aggressively to make the taxiway and not have to 180 on the runway. One tire locked up, plane kept rolling like nothing happened, taxied in without issue and only noticed a hole in the tire on post flight inspection. Even more unfortunate was that it was basically a brand new tire. Whoops.
 
jynxyjoe said:
Does the 99 not have beta? I hear all these bald tire stories all I can think is the beta sucks (impossible) or there is no beta.
Click to expand...

Because making taxi way Charlie gets to you the ramp three minutes faster or I lose the bet if I can't make Dixie. j/k

Seriously though. The reversing cabalities varied from aircraft to aircraft when I flew them. Some were fantastic and others not so much. They're also flown into places such as EKA where you have 2000ft to get it stopped if you hit the aiming point. Getting it down and waiting on the spool up takes an eternity sometime.

This airport is used as one of the alternates when you can't get into the 3000ft EKA.

http://www.airnav.com/airport/O19

Thats flying the aircraft to it's limits in my opinion.
 
It can brake like a champ, it's when you want to make a highspeed, or turn off, that the round tires become square tires.

Beta is for wusses, Full reverse, all the time!
 
Boris Badenov said:
It's got beta (and reverse), and it works ok when it finally decides to join the party. To be fair, this particular problem is endemic to PT-6 powered aircraft (pitooie!) and isn't Beech's fault. PT-6 has to A) Go in to reverse and B) Spool back up. It's pretty much like a turbofan with buckets. A Garrett, on the other hand...honk on the "stop" levers and hope you tied down the cargo effectively, cause it's coming your way at high speed RIGHT NOW.
Click to expand...

The Garrett grenades hu? Make sure you spin them when you are done, because that's what real engines require.

Boris, these harsh comments about the PT-6 are fighting words.

KLB said:
Because making taxi way Charlie gets to you the ramp three minutes faster or I lose the bet if I can't make Dixie. j/k

Seriously though. The reversing cabalities varied from aircraft to aircraft when I flew them. Some were fantastic and others not so much. They're also flown into places such as EKA where you have 2000ft to get it stopped if you hit the aiming point. Getting it down and waiting on the spool up takes an eternity sometime.

This airport is used as one of the alternates when you can't get into the 3000ft EKA.

http://www.airnav.com/airport/O19

Thats flying the aircraft to it's limits in my opinion.
Click to expand...

Very cool, response. You say it varied from aircraft to aircraft, I know the beta sleeve could get slow on the PT6-67D on the 1900 (real fun when one is slow and the other is fast, thank God for smart quick captains), is it a beta sleeve problem or just the way things are?
 
PetrolBurner said:
I believe the tires are easier to flat spot since there are two per main gear with independent axles/bearings, and no anti skid technology. So, if one tire locks up, and the other is still rolling, the airplane still tracks straight and you have no idea you locked a tire up. Soft rubber compounds used in aviation tires mean that if it locks up it flat spots QUICKLY! I'll admit that I blew a tire in training, braking aggressively to make the taxiway and not have to 180 on the runway. One tire locked up, plane kept rolling like nothing happened, taxied in without issue and only noticed a hole in the tire on post flight inspection. Even more unfortunate was that it was basically a brand new tire. Whoops.
Click to expand...

We had one guy on a 1900 square all 4 mains (before I got there), two weeks before he'd done the same thing with 2 tires on the right. So I know it's easy to do. Years back ACK had 4 of those thick rubber strips down the first half of the runway, courtesy of the mighty 1900.
 
jynxyjoe said:
Very cool, response. You say it varied from aircraft to aircraft, I know the beta sleeve could get slow on the PT6-67D on the 1900 (real fun when one is slow and the other is fast, thank God for smart quick captains), is it a beta sleeve problem or just the way things are?
Click to expand...
There is a rope that goes from the power levers to the beta arm. If someone shuts down an engine in beta or tried to move a power lever into beta while the engine was already shut down it would stretch the rope. This would cause beta to become less effective.

If the person tries to bring the levers back into reverse it could break the beta arm completely and you would have no beta or reverse.
 
Maurus said:
There is a rope that goes from the power levers to the beta arm. If someone shuts down an engine in beta or tried to move a power lever into beta while the engine was already shut down it would stretch the rope. This would cause beta to become less effective.

If the person tries to bring the levers back into reverse it could break the beta arm completely and you would have no beta or reverse.
Click to expand...

Use and abuse, gotcha.

Are the old Garrett's better with the use and abuse?
 
The 99 really wants to flat a tire if you try to turn while breaking. Power asymmetry will flat a tire too. I haven't done it...yet, but seen plenty of guys do it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top