ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
Capt. Chaos Roger Roger cmill
I just recently flew a brand new - fresh from the factory Cessna Caravan EX from the factory to Merrill Field in Anchorage. My company purchased one, and after 5 days of simulator training in Wichita, my boss and I jumped in the new airplane and headed home.
We did a quick local flight where we did some slowflight, stalls, and a few touch-and-goes before leaving Wichita. The flight characteristics are supremely "normal." Stalls in the clean, and takeoff configuration had barely any tendency to "break." In the landing configuration, the maximum altitude I saw lost was about 150'.
Presently, the new Caravan hasn't completed it's known ice certification (Cessna is still finalizing the paperwork) so we were a little limited in where go right out of the factory. In order to get out of the way of some weather, we departed towards Gallup, NM initially. On our way their, the winds picked up, and we had the fuel, so we decided to continue on to Scottsdale for our overnight. However just after passing ABQ, the winds in the Phoenix area picked up to in excess of 50kts, and we decided to bag it and go back to ABQ. The landing in ABQ was normal, it was a bit gusty, and that efficient wing didn't want to quit flying initially, but monitoring the approach from the right seat, it was a normal Caravan landing.
The G1000 made in-flight fuel planning easy. The configurable range ring let us set that we wanted an hours worth of fuel left over when we landed, and the dynamically changing ring let us see what was available to us in the winds. The situational awareness that's possible with the G1000 is incredible. The only system I have enough experience to compare it with is the Chelton EFIS system (commonly used in SE Alaska), and with some exceptions, it is light years ahead of the Chelton. The synthetic vision is smoother, more robust, and more informative. The screens are larger, and integrate more information into your scan (sometimes more than you'd want), and are mostly configurable. The G1000 is great, however Chelton came up with some nice features that I wish Garmin would have integrated. A glide range ring is available on the Chelton, it is not on the Garmin. You can more easily set altitudes for VNAV on the Chelton, and climbing using the "Highway in the Sky" system is more intuitive on the Chelton. Despite these minor differences, I find using the G1000 a more positive experience than the Chelton. During sim training, it was possible to land back on the runway with the G1000 with an engine out after takeoff in the clouds, the big screen made it a lot easier than it would have been in the Chelton.
After a day's rest in ABQ, it was my leg in the left seat to go to Gooding, Idaho (KGNG). We planned to go VFR and stay out of any icing, and enjoy a scenic run across the 4-Corners area. The flight was a non-event in terms of the weather, however, as we were flying along, it was pretty apparent how incredible the new PT6 Pratt developed for the airplane was. The larger PT6A-140 produces 867HP, and is supposedly more thermodynamically efficient than the 675HP van. I can attest to this as we were easily able to maintain 170KTAS with a fuel burn of around 350pph at 10,000'. Additionally, the takeoff performance available was substantially more than what was necessary - this airplane will suit us well in the more "off the beaten path" airports we routinely go to.
Landing the airplane in Gooding was easy. After crossing over the field to judge the winds and rolling onto the downwind leg, the approach was "normal." An approach speed of 95KIAS (which included about 5kts for gusty winds) worked well, and hitting your point was easy with the flight-path indicator on the G1000. There was a little bit of crosswind (maybe a 10kt component at most), and I used the "crab-and-kick" method in the last 50' and didn't have any problems. I didn't even bother with reverse just a little beta, and rolled about 1000' from my touchdown point to the next taxiway and turned off. I'm out of practice in the Caravan, I suspect that with a little more practice it'll be possible to get the landing roll down to about 800' or so without reverse. We landed after a roughly 4 hour flight with a little less than two hours of fuel remaining.
Engine management with the EIS system included in the G1000 is stupid-easy. Temperatures never seemed to be an issue in the airplane. The dynamic redline for torque auto-magically adjusts to prevent the pilot from overdoing it (though you're required by Cessna to always refer to the AFM for real torque values, wink-wink, nudge-nudge), and it pretty much seemed impossible to exceed the temp limits on this airplane. On the next leg to Bellingham, we elected to go up high and sip some oxygen. Up at 16,000' we were burning 300pph roughly, with 170KTAS. The airplane doesn't want to go much faster than 170 knots true. I suspect that the sheer amount of things hanging off of the airplane make speeds much faster than that practically unattainable without excess power and fuel burn. Getting down from up high was simple with that airplane as the prop begins to flatten out at about 250ft-lbs to 350ft-lbs of torque and then becomes a Caravan shaped brick if you'd like to come down fast.
The rest of the way back to town from Bellingham was exactly similar. The flying was easy, the Garmin Autopilot did most of the work, and we were able to fly back. I flew an approach to PAKT, and found the system to work great. The old Caravan "10-11-12" rule for power settings is pretty close in this airplane too, however there isn't a "10 degree" flap setting, the flaps available are "Up, T/O Appr., and Land." With flaps in the "T/O Appr" position, and 1200ft-lbs of torque, you get real close to 120 knots indicated. All in all, it's a Caravan, but one with a substantially larger motor and TKS. It's a simple to fly, easy to land, light workload airplane with few "gotchas" and lot's going for it. It flies exactly the same as a 206 with more comfortable seats and factory cup-holders. I'm looking forward to flying the thing more, and thoroughly enjoyed the ferry trip up to Anchorage.
Here is a simple bit of data on the machine:
10,000'
171 KTAS
350 pph
Heater on Separator Closed.
This airplane truly is a "navajo replacement." It carries about 800lbs more than our Navajos will, with similar fuel burns and less maintenance costs, but with a new airplane price-tag, I doubt you'll start seeing Chieftain freighters getting replaced any-time soon. Still though, I suspect for our operation, it'll be highly effective.
I just recently flew a brand new - fresh from the factory Cessna Caravan EX from the factory to Merrill Field in Anchorage. My company purchased one, and after 5 days of simulator training in Wichita, my boss and I jumped in the new airplane and headed home.
We did a quick local flight where we did some slowflight, stalls, and a few touch-and-goes before leaving Wichita. The flight characteristics are supremely "normal." Stalls in the clean, and takeoff configuration had barely any tendency to "break." In the landing configuration, the maximum altitude I saw lost was about 150'.
Presently, the new Caravan hasn't completed it's known ice certification (Cessna is still finalizing the paperwork) so we were a little limited in where go right out of the factory. In order to get out of the way of some weather, we departed towards Gallup, NM initially. On our way their, the winds picked up, and we had the fuel, so we decided to continue on to Scottsdale for our overnight. However just after passing ABQ, the winds in the Phoenix area picked up to in excess of 50kts, and we decided to bag it and go back to ABQ. The landing in ABQ was normal, it was a bit gusty, and that efficient wing didn't want to quit flying initially, but monitoring the approach from the right seat, it was a normal Caravan landing.
The G1000 made in-flight fuel planning easy. The configurable range ring let us set that we wanted an hours worth of fuel left over when we landed, and the dynamically changing ring let us see what was available to us in the winds. The situational awareness that's possible with the G1000 is incredible. The only system I have enough experience to compare it with is the Chelton EFIS system (commonly used in SE Alaska), and with some exceptions, it is light years ahead of the Chelton. The synthetic vision is smoother, more robust, and more informative. The screens are larger, and integrate more information into your scan (sometimes more than you'd want), and are mostly configurable. The G1000 is great, however Chelton came up with some nice features that I wish Garmin would have integrated. A glide range ring is available on the Chelton, it is not on the Garmin. You can more easily set altitudes for VNAV on the Chelton, and climbing using the "Highway in the Sky" system is more intuitive on the Chelton. Despite these minor differences, I find using the G1000 a more positive experience than the Chelton. During sim training, it was possible to land back on the runway with the G1000 with an engine out after takeoff in the clouds, the big screen made it a lot easier than it would have been in the Chelton.
After a day's rest in ABQ, it was my leg in the left seat to go to Gooding, Idaho (KGNG). We planned to go VFR and stay out of any icing, and enjoy a scenic run across the 4-Corners area. The flight was a non-event in terms of the weather, however, as we were flying along, it was pretty apparent how incredible the new PT6 Pratt developed for the airplane was. The larger PT6A-140 produces 867HP, and is supposedly more thermodynamically efficient than the 675HP van. I can attest to this as we were easily able to maintain 170KTAS with a fuel burn of around 350pph at 10,000'. Additionally, the takeoff performance available was substantially more than what was necessary - this airplane will suit us well in the more "off the beaten path" airports we routinely go to.
Landing the airplane in Gooding was easy. After crossing over the field to judge the winds and rolling onto the downwind leg, the approach was "normal." An approach speed of 95KIAS (which included about 5kts for gusty winds) worked well, and hitting your point was easy with the flight-path indicator on the G1000. There was a little bit of crosswind (maybe a 10kt component at most), and I used the "crab-and-kick" method in the last 50' and didn't have any problems. I didn't even bother with reverse just a little beta, and rolled about 1000' from my touchdown point to the next taxiway and turned off. I'm out of practice in the Caravan, I suspect that with a little more practice it'll be possible to get the landing roll down to about 800' or so without reverse. We landed after a roughly 4 hour flight with a little less than two hours of fuel remaining.
Engine management with the EIS system included in the G1000 is stupid-easy. Temperatures never seemed to be an issue in the airplane. The dynamic redline for torque auto-magically adjusts to prevent the pilot from overdoing it (though you're required by Cessna to always refer to the AFM for real torque values, wink-wink, nudge-nudge), and it pretty much seemed impossible to exceed the temp limits on this airplane. On the next leg to Bellingham, we elected to go up high and sip some oxygen. Up at 16,000' we were burning 300pph roughly, with 170KTAS. The airplane doesn't want to go much faster than 170 knots true. I suspect that the sheer amount of things hanging off of the airplane make speeds much faster than that practically unattainable without excess power and fuel burn. Getting down from up high was simple with that airplane as the prop begins to flatten out at about 250ft-lbs to 350ft-lbs of torque and then becomes a Caravan shaped brick if you'd like to come down fast.
The rest of the way back to town from Bellingham was exactly similar. The flying was easy, the Garmin Autopilot did most of the work, and we were able to fly back. I flew an approach to PAKT, and found the system to work great. The old Caravan "10-11-12" rule for power settings is pretty close in this airplane too, however there isn't a "10 degree" flap setting, the flaps available are "Up, T/O Appr., and Land." With flaps in the "T/O Appr" position, and 1200ft-lbs of torque, you get real close to 120 knots indicated. All in all, it's a Caravan, but one with a substantially larger motor and TKS. It's a simple to fly, easy to land, light workload airplane with few "gotchas" and lot's going for it. It flies exactly the same as a 206 with more comfortable seats and factory cup-holders. I'm looking forward to flying the thing more, and thoroughly enjoyed the ferry trip up to Anchorage.
Here is a simple bit of data on the machine:
10,000'
171 KTAS
350 pph
Heater on Separator Closed.
This airplane truly is a "navajo replacement." It carries about 800lbs more than our Navajos will, with similar fuel burns and less maintenance costs, but with a new airplane price-tag, I doubt you'll start seeing Chieftain freighters getting replaced any-time soon. Still though, I suspect for our operation, it'll be highly effective.
