A36 Jet-Prop!!

[WalterSobchak]

What I want is a turbine Navajo, the turbine 1040 navajo that PenAir flew was friggin' amazing. I saw that thing take off out of dutch once, the thing practically went vertical.

At Paccair we have one. They just got it when I left though. I have seen it a few times and its pretty cool. Cool part is you actually have fire protection. Kind of interesting for that airplane.

Turbine Bonanza vs a New Mooney Acclaim?
<TABLE class=plane-table height=431 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=649><TBODY><TR class=alternate-row><TD>Top Speed </TD><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD>242 ktas</TD></TR><TR><TD>Rate of Climb at sea level (max. wt.)</TD><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD>1,240 fpm

</TD></TR><TR class=alternate-row><TD>Long Range – Standard Fuel (with res.) </TD><TD>

</TD><TD></TD><TD>1,445 nm

</TD></TR><TR><TD>Long Range – Optional Tanks (with res.) </TD><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD>1,852 nm

</TD></TR><TR class=alternate-row><TD>Sevice Ceiling

</TD><TD>

</TD><TD>

</TD><TD>25,000 ft</TD></TR><TR><TD>Take-off Run at sea level (max. wt.)</TD><TD>

</TD><TD>

</TD><TD>2,100 ft

</TD></TR><TR class=alternate-row><TD>Engine</TD><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD>TCM TSI0-550-G
Turbo-Supercharged
Twin Turbo
Dual Intercoolers
</TD></TR><TR><TD>Horsepower</TD><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD>280 bhp

</TD></TR><TR class=alternate-row><TD>TBO</TD><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD>2,000 hrs</TD></TR><TR><TD>Propeller</TD><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD>Hartzell Three-Blade</TD></TR><TR class=alternate-row><TD>Fuel Capacity – Standard (usable)</TD><TD></TD><TD>

</TD><TD>100 usg

</TD></TR><TR><TD>Fuel Capacity
With Optional Tanks (usable)
</TD><TD>

</TD><TD>

</TD><TD>128 usg

</TD></TR><TR class=alternate-row><TD>Gross Weigh </TD><TD>

</TD><TD></TD><TD>3,368 lb

</TD></TR><TR><TD>Approx. Useful Load </TD><TD>

</TD><TD></TD><TD>1,000 lb

</TD></TR><TR class=alternate-row><TD>Wingspan</TD><TD></TD><TD>

</TD><TD>36' 1"

</TD></TR><TR><TD>Height</TD><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD>8' 3"

</TD></TR><TR class=alternate-row><TD>Length</TD><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD>26' 9"

</TD></TR><TR><TD>Wing Loading</TD><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD>19.2 lbs/sq ft

</TD></TR><TR class=alternate-row><TD>Power Loading</TD><TD></TD><TD></TD><TD>12.0 lbs/hp</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

[t-cart]

Is the early Cheyenne a Navajo with PT6's? Honest question.

 

[kiloalpha]

I think the best t-prop aircraft is the Aero Commander Grand Renaissance AC1000. Garret TPE-331-10. 1000hp per side. 300+ knots. Yeah, it hauls. But thats just opinion. I think it goes from SL to Fl290 in 19 minutes? Oh course then there is TBM (The Big Mooney) 850, that hauls too.

 

[TallFlyer]

I'd love to try out their new Turbine Baron. 4500 FPM climb, 300 KTAS.

At least that's what they're advertising.

 

[WalterSobchak]

Is the early Cheyenne a Navajo with PT6's? Honest question.

They are both Pa-31's if that is what you are asking. There are so many differences in the Pa-31 family that could be its own thread. A better discription is a P-Navajo is a Cheyenne with Pistons. Regular Nav's are not pressurized.

 

[ppragman]

I'd love to try out their new Turbine Baron. 4500 FPM climb, 300 KTAS.

At least that's what they're advertising.

That's faster than the 1900.

 

[Rodelu]

Sorry for my ignorance, but how do they achieve 300ft landings? Better brakes?

 

[ppragman]

Sorry for my ignorance, but how do they achieve 300ft landings? Better brakes?

Reverse. The prop will move to a position where its pushing air forward and it slows the bird faster.

 

[Rodelu]

Reverse. The prop will move to a position where its pushing air forward and it slows the bird faster.

Cool! thx

 

[deadstick]

"Can't touch this..."

http://www.royalturbine.com/comparison.html

When you get rid of the "red-headed stepchild" 541 engines, you really have something. No straws up ye' ol' noses, either.


<table id="table1" width="100%" border="1"><tbody><tr><td>
</td> <td align="center">Royal Turbine Duke</td> <td align="center">Standard Duke</td> <td align="center">TBM-700</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Engine model</td> <td align="center">P&W PT6A-35</td> <td align="center">Lycoming TSIO-541</td> <td align="center">P&W PT6A-64</td> </tr> <tr> <td>TBO</td> <td align="center">3,600 hrs</td> <td align="center">1,400 hrs</td> <td align="center">3,600 hrs</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Passenger Seats</td> <td align="center">6</td> <td align="center">6</td> <td align="center">6</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Length</td> <td align="center">33' 10"</td> <td align="center">33' 10"</td> <td align="center">34' 3"</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Height</td> <td align="center">12' 4"</td> <td align="center">12' 4"</td> <td align="center">13' 9"</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Wingspan</td> <td align="center">39' 9"</td> <td align="center">39' 9"</td> <td align="center">41' 3"</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Max Take-Off Weight</td> <td align="center">7,050 lbs</td> <td align="center">7,000 lbs</td> <td align="center">6,579 lbs</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Standard Empty Weight</td> <td align="center">4,650 lbs</td> <td align="center">5,000 lbs</td> <td align="center">4,100 lbs</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Max Useful Load</td> <td align="center">2,400 lbs</td> <td align="center">2,000 lbs</td> <td align="center">2,514 lbs</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Max Useable Fuel</td> <td align="center">260 gal</td> <td align="center">232 gal</td> <td align="center">282 gal</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Payload @ Max Fuel</td> <td align="center">750 lbs</td> <td align="center">608 lbs</td> <td align="center">764 lbs</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Certified Ceiling</td> <td align="center">28,000 ft</td> <td align="center">30,000 ft</td> <td align="center">30,000 ft</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Take-Off Runway</td> <td align="center">1,000 ft</td> <td align="center">2,660 ft</td> <td align="center">2,034 ft</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Landing Runway</td> <td align="center">900 ft</td> <td align="center">3,000 ft</td> <td align="center">2,034 ft</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Max Climb Rate</td> <td align="center">4,000 ft/min</td> <td align="center">1,550 ft/min</td> <td align="center">1,875 ft/min</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Time to Climb (25,000 ft)</td> <td align="center">9 min</td> <td align="center">25 min</td> <td align="center">15 min</td> </tr> <tr> <td>High Speed Cruise (29,000 ft)</td> <td align="center">290+ kts</td> <td align="center">240 kts</td> <td align="center">280 kts</td> </tr> <tr> <td> Fuel Flow</td> <td align="center">66 gph</td> <td align="center">56 gph</td> <td align="center">60 gph</td> </tr> <tr> <td> Max VFR Range (no wind)</td> <td align="center">1,100 nm</td> <td align="center">1,100 nm</td> <td align="center">1,330 nm</td></tr></tbody></table>

 

[WacoFan]

"Can't touch this..."

http://www.royalturbine.com/comparison.html

When you get rid of the "red-headed stepchild" 541 engines, you really have something. No straws up ye' ol' noses, either.


<TABLE id=table1 width="100%" border=1><TBODY><TR><TD>

</TD><TD align=middle>Royal Turbine Duke</TD><TD align=middle>Standard Duke</TD><TD align=middle>TBM-700</TD></TR><TR><TD>Engine model</TD><TD align=middle>P&W PT6A-35</TD><TD align=middle>Lycoming TSIO-541</TD><TD align=middle>P&W PT6A-64</TD></TR><TR><TD>TBO</TD><TD align=middle>3,600 hrs</TD><TD align=middle>1,400 hrs</TD><TD align=middle>3,600 hrs</TD></TR><TR><TD>Passenger Seats</TD><TD align=middle>6</TD><TD align=middle>6</TD><TD align=middle>6</TD></TR><TR><TD>Length</TD><TD align=middle>33' 10"</TD><TD align=middle>33' 10"</TD><TD align=middle>34' 3"</TD></TR><TR><TD>Height</TD><TD align=middle>12' 4"</TD><TD align=middle>12' 4"</TD><TD align=middle>13' 9"</TD></TR><TR><TD>Wingspan</TD><TD align=middle>39' 9"</TD><TD align=middle>39' 9"</TD><TD align=middle>41' 3"</TD></TR><TR><TD>Max Take-Off Weight</TD><TD align=middle>7,050 lbs</TD><TD align=middle>7,000 lbs</TD><TD align=middle>6,579 lbs</TD></TR><TR><TD>Standard Empty Weight</TD><TD align=middle>4,650 lbs</TD><TD align=middle>5,000 lbs</TD><TD align=middle>4,100 lbs</TD></TR><TR><TD>Max Useful Load</TD><TD align=middle>2,400 lbs</TD><TD align=middle>2,000 lbs</TD><TD align=middle>2,514 lbs</TD></TR><TR><TD>Max Useable Fuel</TD><TD align=middle>260 gal</TD><TD align=middle>232 gal</TD><TD align=middle>282 gal</TD></TR><TR><TD>Payload @ Max Fuel</TD><TD align=middle>750 lbs</TD><TD align=middle>608 lbs</TD><TD align=middle>764 lbs</TD></TR><TR><TD>Certified Ceiling</TD><TD align=middle>28,000 ft</TD><TD align=middle>30,000 ft</TD><TD align=middle>30,000 ft</TD></TR><TR><TD>Take-Off Runway</TD><TD align=middle>1,000 ft</TD><TD align=middle>2,660 ft</TD><TD align=middle>2,034 ft</TD></TR><TR><TD>Landing Runway</TD><TD align=middle>900 ft</TD><TD align=middle>3,000 ft</TD><TD align=middle>2,034 ft</TD></TR><TR><TD>Max Climb Rate</TD><TD align=middle>4,000 ft/min</TD><TD align=middle>1,550 ft/min</TD><TD align=middle>1,875 ft/min</TD></TR><TR><TD>Time to Climb (25,000 ft)</TD><TD align=middle>9 min</TD><TD align=middle>25 min</TD><TD align=middle>15 min</TD></TR><TR><TD>High Speed Cruise (29,000 ft)</TD><TD align=middle>290+ kts</TD><TD align=middle>240 kts</TD><TD align=middle>280 kts</TD></TR><TR><TD>Fuel Flow</TD><TD align=middle>66 gph</TD><TD align=middle>56 gph</TD><TD align=middle>60 gph</TD></TR><TR><TD>Max VFR Range (no wind)</TD><TD align=middle>1,100 nm</TD><TD align=middle>1,100 nm</TD><TD align=middle>1,330 nm</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

HUGE fan of the turbine Duke. Awesome machine. If I when powerball, I will have a turbine Duke to fly when my Antilles Goose is in the shop (because my new Goose will be fitted with the traditional R-985's).

 

[t-cart]

One of the best looking planes around. My opinion.:yeahthat:

 

[Boris Badenov]

Solitaire. 320kts true. Actually seats 6. Don't know the field performance numbers, but I assure you they won't be an issue. Can be bought for a song. Doesn't require any do-it-yourself on the airplane you'll be flying in the flight levels.

Or even better (if slightly more ridiculous): Cheyenne 400LS. Reportedly 345kts true, FL380, plus all of the advantages above, except perhaps for the price.

When it's lottery winning time, don't compromise with bolt-ons.

 

[Roger, Roger]

(Response to Boris) Plus if you can fly the Moo, you know you're a real man.

 

[t-cart]

Boris, Do you fly a MU-2? I've heard all the stories but wanted a honest description of the thing. I also heard all the bad stuff about the Apache,,,,,,I really do like mine. I would really like to fly a MU-2, looks like a blast.

 

[Boris Badenov]

Boris, Do you fly a MU-2? I've heard all the stories but wanted a honest description of the thing. I also heard all the bad stuff about the Apache,,,,,,I really do like mine. I would really like to fly a MU-2, looks like a blast.

I can't really describe it for you because it's all I've flown for over a year. The upshot is, yes it's different from a piston twin, but not to the degree that you need to poop your pants. I will say that at least it's a plane that was designed to have turbine power and it takes advantage of that power rather than wasting it dragging around too much wing. IMHO, it's a very well designed twin turboprop that gets too much bad press because dumbasses try to fly it like a kingair 90. If you fly it by the numbers, it's not only built like a brick outhouse (they take them to 300knots in japan, we don't because of silly birdstrike rules...er not that I'd know how it performs above 250...), but it is also a "pilot's airplane". If you can get used to the admittedly weird roll response, it's a totally predictable and friendly aircraft. And it hauls *#&$ ass on the power it has. For me the final analysis is that the Mitsi doesn't compromise. It doesn't demand Bob Hoover behind the stick, it just asks that you remain awake. What it gives back is oustanding performance, plus a certain je ne sais quoi one gains when lesser beings cover their ears when you come on the ramp and act like you're Evel Kenievl when you speak to them. Plus, by the by, I've never flown an easier plane to "land well". If you keep the nose up for even half a second, you'll squeak it. A++ to the mitsi from the admittedly slightly strange Pottsylvanian judge.

What's fun is that they're acting on reputation, whereas you know that you're just doing a job that they could do too, if they were so inclined. It's just an airplane like any other looking for a pilot who doesn't take third hand stupidity to be "knowledge". That's any of us. Don't be afraid of the mitsi or any other airplane anyone ever asks you to fly. If someone flew it before you, you can fly it, and someone will be able to fly it after you. It's nothing special, but it's fun for people to think that it is.

 

[WacoFan]

I can't really describe it for you because it's all I've flown for over a year. The upshot is, yes it's different from a piston twin, but not to the degree that you need to poop your pants. I will say that at least it's a plane that was designed to have turbine power and it takes advantage of that power rather than wasting it dragging around too much wing. IMHO, it's a very well designed twin turboprop that gets too much bad press because dumbasses try to fly it like a kingair 90. If you fly it by the numbers, it's not only built like a brick outhouse (they take them to 300knots in japan, we don't because of silly birdstrike rules...er not that I'd know how it performs above 250...), but it is also a "pilot's airplane". If you can get used to the admittedly weird roll response, it's a totally predictable and friendly aircraft. And it hauls *#&$ ass on the power it has. For me the final analysis is that the Mitsi doesn't compromise. It doesn't demand Bob Hoover behind the stick, it just asks that you remain awake. What it gives back is oustanding performance, plus a certain je ne sais quoi one gains when lesser beings cover their ears when you come on the ramp and act like you're Evel Kenievl when you speak to them. Plus, by the by, I've never flown an easier plane to "land well". If you keep the nose up for even half a second, you'll squeak it. A++ to the mitsi from the admittedly slightly strange Pottsylvanian judge.

What's fun is that they're acting on reputation, whereas you know that you're just doing a job that they could do too, if they were so inclined. It's just an airplane like any other looking for a pilot who doesn't take third hand stupidity to be "knowledge". That's any of us. Don't be afraid of the mitsi or any other airplane anyone ever asks you to fly. If someone flew it before you, you can fly it, and someone will be able to fly it after you. It's nothing special, but it's fun for people to think that it is.

Thanks for this post! I was wondering about these things too and I am glad T-Cart asked. I also like your explaination of maligned airplanes. It seems that there are many airplanes out there with a "reputation". Luscombes are supposed to be tricky, but I have found them to be good airplanes. I have precious little time in a Pitts many years ago...but a Pitts seems to do exactly what you tell it to do - nothing more, nothing less. It just seems that paying attention is the key. I have thought some airplanes are just less tolerant of inattention and I am glad someone more experienced confirmed that.

 

[WalterSobchak]

I think if it make it to production the rolls-royce mooney will be pretty sick.

 

[WacoFan]

I think if it make it to production the rolls-royce mooney will be pretty sick.

But, like a poster above said - why a non-pressurized turbine? What are the advantages you guys see in that?

 

[t-cart]

Boris, Thanks for that writeup. Is the roll sloppy, slow? I figure maybe both. I flew a plane once without ailerons and that seemed to be the feeling I got. Felt like the actual roll was lagging behind the control input.