King Air Question

CBpilot

Well-Known Member
I have two trips coming up and we were looking into some affordable flight options. I was hoping some of you guys could provide some helpful insight and knowledge.

Trip #1:

BLM (NJ) to Bermuda. 4 of us are traveling and the boss does not want to fly commercial. Would the most affordable and fastest aircraft be a King Air? Would you recommend making this trip in a KA?

Trip #2:

BLM to LIT: 3 of us and a dog are going to Arkansas to duck hunt in Jan. Again what would be the most affordable/fastest option. We usually fly CO but I want to bring my dog and I am not comfortable putting him in the back of a RJ.

Thanks again for any advice.

CB
 
Doesn't sound like a problem. Roomy enough to move around in if ya need to and it'll definitely carry the weight. I know someone that used to take a commander to bermuda, so I'm sure a 300 would work.

-mini
 
I have two trips coming up and we were looking into some affordable flight options. I was hoping some of you guys could provide some helpful insight and knowledge.

Trip #1:

BLM (NJ) to Bermuda. 4 of us are traveling and the boss does not want to fly commercial. Would the most affordable and fastest aircraft be a King Air? Would you recommend making this trip in a KA?

Trip #2:

BLM to LIT: 3 of us and a dog are going to Arkansas to duck hunt in Jan. Again what would be the most affordable/fastest option. We usually fly CO but I want to bring my dog and I am not comfortable putting him in the back of a RJ.

Thanks again for any advice.

CB

For trip 1, a KA is nice since you have 2 engines. For trip 2 a PC12 should cost less and go about the same speed with plenty of payload. I've gone to LIT from Maryland with 5 people in the Pilatus and it's no problem. Sucks to come back in the same day though (for me).

Edit: for the first trip, see if you can find a Piaggio at a reasonable price.
 
BLM (NJ) to Bermuda. 4 of us are traveling and the boss does not want to fly commercial. Would the most affordable and fastest aircraft be a King Air? Would you recommend making this trip in a KA?
A KA300 would be arguable. With all things working? Sure. Things you have to consider are as follows: You must go out there with a plan to return after a missed approach. Weather can go down, winds out of limits, or sudden runway closure. BLM-TXKF is approx 650 nm, so you need a plane with >1300nm range. ACK is your closest alternate at 590nm, ORF is approx 630nm. You also need to consider if you can continue on one engine with respect to fuel burn at the SE ceiling or depressurized.

It would also be helpful if it had a HF radio, and of course a raft and life jackets.

PS....I have seen a Meridian (1000nm range) out there. (Was probably missing a seat cushion when he got there.)
 
A KA300 would be arguable. With all things working? Sure. Things you have to consider are as follows: You must go out there with a plan to return after a missed approach.
Says who? Just have to plan the trip when it's forecast VFR (or at least no alternate required). Like any other flight.

Good idea? Yep. Required? Show me.

-mini
 
I didn't say it wasn't a good idea. I even said that it was a good idea. Just saying that "you must..." is inaccurate as far as I know.

-mini

I think you're approaching this from a legal stand-point. However, anything off-shore is a "must" regardess of legality.
 
I think you're approaching this from a legal stand-point.

Yes. For accuracy. You must flight plan appropriately. That doesn't mean you must to plan to come all the way back.

I sure as hell would...but it isn't something I must do.

-mini
 
That doesn't mean you must to plan to come all the way back.

I sure as hell would...but it isn't something I must do.
Acutally....It Does.

91.103 Preflight Action

Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. This information must include—

(a) For a flight under IFR or a flight not in the vicinity of an airport, weather reports and forecasts, fuel requirements, alternatives available if the planned flight cannot be completed, and any known traffic delays of which the pilot in command has been advised by ATC;


And if all else fails, there is always "Careless and Reckless."
 
Acutally....It Does.

91.103 Preflight Action

Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. This information must include—

(a) For a flight under IFR or a flight not in the vicinity of an airport, weather reports and forecasts, fuel requirements, alternatives available if the planned flight cannot be completed, and any known traffic delays of which the pilot in command has been advised by ATC;


And if all else fails, there is always "Careless and Reckless."

Absolutely correct, however, a suitable airport for landing may not be a suitable airport for your customers.

Edit: and of course this plays into the flight planning, however from a strictly legal standpoint an RTB isn't required to be in the flight plan.
 
Acutally....It Does.

91.103 Preflight Action
...

(a) ...alternatives available if the planned flight cannot be completed...

And if all else fails, there is always "Careless and Reckless."
First of all, careless and reckless can be slapped on you if you run over a cone on the ramp and knock it into a parked aircraft, so we'll leave that one alone. I think we all know how that works.

Now, if the feds wanted to require you to pick an alternate for each flight, the rules for choosing an alternate would never give you relief from doing so. You would always have to plan and file an alternate, even if the weather is better than the 1-2-3 rule (or appropriate 135/121 version of the same rule). I think you'll note that the rule says nothing about island airports, only weather requirements.

Note that it doesn't say you must plan for landing at an airport "if the planned flight cannot be completed", just that you have to be made aware of alternatives available. Sometimes there are zero alternatives available. If you're aware of that, you fulfill the requirements of 91.103.

Not a flight I'd be willing to do, but some are comfortable with that and it's perfectly legal.

-mini
 
I wouldn't have much of a problem going over lots of warm water in a single, its the short hops over really really cold water that makes me nervous.
 
Yeah warm water is much better. You survive hypothermia just long enough for the sharks to eat you.

-mini

Ughhh, I've crossed the shelikov straight a number of times, and I tell you what, I don't like being that far from dry land in cold water. I'd much rather take my chances with the sharks, though even that isn't fun.
 
I can't swim. I'm hosed either way.
<input id="gwProxy" type="hidden"><!--Session data--><input onclick="jsCall();" id="jsProxy" type="hidden">
 
Back
Top