Chris-Ottawa 0 #26 April 23, 2009 Definitely excited to get into that bird....coming from a Cessna DZ and jumping that Caravan all last year was amazing. Looking forward to the incredibly quick lifts. And of course....credit to Jason for being the best pilot of the fastest Caravan in the west....errrr...North? Can't wait! I wonder what the climb angle would be in that thing while empty and running on fumes. Probably something ridiculous...."When once you have tasted flight..." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
totter 2 #27 April 23, 2009 QuoteJust the other day, I was watching turbine (P&W) single Otters land and take off from Vancouver harbour. Harbour Air a good company. I'm 500 miles north of you and we operate 6 Turbine Otters, with the -34's on them. We also have 4 Beavers w/ 985s. I never had to work on the PW 1340s. All the plans were converted before I got here. We did maintain one DHC-3 with the PZL on it. What a maintenance pig that was. Our Beavers, to my suprise, are pretty much trouble free, KNOCK ON WOOD. Our pilots don't beat the crap out of them, so that helps. There is an operator up in Juneau that has a couple -3s with Garretts on them. All fairly new engines. We are waiting to see how they fair. Garretts in salt water. Just the thought makes me shutter. We do have an operator here that has a 208 with the Garrett on it with Wipline floats. That thing hauls ass when it's flying. The big statement is "When it's flying". On the ground and in the water it's still LOUD. It also takes 3 times the distance to get off the water compared to the Otter. It comes up on step fairly quickly, but eats up about 3/4 of a mile to get airborne. Thats empty. I had a good chance to look at it when it was parked on our ramp. On thing I did not like was that there is no inertial seperator. You injest a bird or FOD on take off, make sure your helmet is on. Also, being on saltwater you have that big magnesim nose case just waiting to get corroded. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #28 April 23, 2009 QuoteAnd of course....credit to Jason for being the best pilot of the fastest Caravan in the west....errrr...North? But does he still look like a homeless guy? Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fishejas 0 #29 April 27, 2009 no I shave and shower now Dave, How are things in CONN? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DougH 270 #30 April 27, 2009 Damn that is huge change! Did you get married or something??! "The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fishejas 0 #31 April 28, 2009 your jsut made cause i can out drink ya, Alicia says hello Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RMURRAY 1 #32 May 31, 2009 Quotehttp://www.texasturbines.com/caravan/ttci_c.htm This'd be nice for a DZ. 900 hp for a caravan. Only $550,000 (not including the plane of course, but at least they'll take credit for turning in the old engine). 13 mins to 14,000 feet on a 95 degree day. 5000 hour TBO (for part 91 operators). Dave we were jumping the 900 hp Caravan at the Parachute School of Toronto yesterday and it is VERY quick off the ground and fast to altitude. I don't think we jammed 21 jumpers in it yet but it will not be a pproblem even with our relatively short grass runway. I will let the pilot (Jason Fisher) talk about the details when he has the time.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brettski74 0 #33 May 31, 2009 Quotewe were jumping the 900 hp Caravan at the Parachute School of Toronto yesterday and it is VERY quick off the ground and fast to altitude. I would also say that it did not seem particularly noisy. It's certainly nowhere near as loud as a Skyvan for those worried that the engine and prop would be loud. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohanW 0 #34 May 31, 2009 21 Jumpers? Do be careful loading that, I've seen a Grand Caravan go on its tail taxiing with 18 (+ 1) in it. Twice. And with a relatively short grass runway, if the engine quits at the wrong moment, I hope you don't have obstacles off the far end of the runway. Sure, with 900 HP you can lug a lot of dead weight into the air on raw power .. until it quits. Then you'll be heavy. Johan. I am. I think. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RMURRAY 1 #35 June 28, 2009 Quotehttp://www.texasturbines.com/caravan/ttci_c.htm This'd be nice for a DZ. 900 hp for a caravan. Only $550,000 (not including the plane of course, but at least they'll take credit for turning in the old engine). 13 mins to 14,000 feet on a 95 degree day. 5000 hour TBO (for part 91 operators). Dave according to adam mabee the DZO of Parachute School of Toronto Jason got a load of 21 to 13500 ft agl in 14 minutes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mdrejhon 8 #36 June 29, 2009 Quote according to adam mabee the DZO of Parachute School of Toronto Jason got a load of 21 to 13500 ft agl in 14 minutes. 21 people in a Caravan? It didn't happen unless you got video Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
980 0 #37 June 29, 2009 Quote according to adam mabee the DZO of Parachute School of Toronto Jason got a load of 21 to 13500 ft agl in 14 minutes. well, whoop-de-fuckin-doo! 21 people to 13500 in 14 mins? How is that impressive? OK for a Caravan maybe, but methinks you have probaly not been in a real fast jumpship yet... I reccommend a ride in something like the KingAir at Skydive Spacecenter in Titusville Florida. That baby does 15 (or 16) people to 15 000ft in 7 mins, or 15 people to 18 000 ft in 9 mins. It's faster with a light load and I can guarantee you it's on the ground before even the most determined tandems. but on the other hand, I enjoy turbines that are slow enough that I can eat my lunch on the climb Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #38 June 29, 2009 We used to operate that plane, with the same pilot, with a limit of 17 jumpers because of our short runway. Took about 25 minutes to 13K. So I'm impressed! Obviously it doesn't climb like a king air, but it doesn't have a king air's child size door either. I'm glad we never had to squeeze 21 people in it. There were 21 seatbelts, but that never seemed like enough for 17 people. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #39 June 29, 2009 QuoteQuotehttp://www.texasturbines.com/caravan/ttci_c.htm This'd be nice for a DZ. 900 hp for a caravan. Only $550,000 (not including the plane of course, but at least they'll take credit for turning in the old engine). 13 mins to 14,000 feet on a 95 degree day. 5000 hour TBO (for part 91 operators). Dave according to adam mabee the DZO of Parachute School of Toronto Jason got a load of 21 to 13500 ft agl in 14 minutes. 21 people in that aircraft is an accident waiting to happen.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pchapman 278 #40 June 29, 2009 Quote 21 people in that aircraft is an accident waiting to happen. Any particular reason? C of G hard to hold within limits? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #41 June 30, 2009 Run the numbers on the Max take off and Max landing numbers. Max take off weight is 8750 lbs, Max landing is 8500 lbs. Empty weight of the aircraft is about 4500 lbs. Figure the average weight of your jumper with gear is 200 lbs and you are putting 21 on board. You had 4200 lbs to work with and you just put 4200 on and have no fuel on board yet either. JetA weights about 8 pounds to the gallon, I'm not sure how much your DZ is putting in it but at a single load and then refueling its still going to be more then a couple of gallons since the PT6-114 burns over 300 pounds an hour at high power settings and a bigger engine burns even more. http://www.airliners.net/aircraft-data/stats.main?id=158 http://www.wilsonaircraft.com/cessna/grand_caravan/Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
brettski74 0 #42 June 30, 2009 QuoteRun the numbers on the Max take off and Max landing numbers. Max take off weight is 8750 lbs, Max landing is 8500 lbs. Those look like standard Grand Caravan numbers, although the stats for the supervan don't increase the useful load all that much, so your argument may still be valid. I'd be more worried about how tight it will be in the cabin and how much weight you'll need to put at the rear. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybum1 0 #43 June 30, 2009 QuoteQuoteRun the numbers on the Max take off and Max landing numbers. Max take off weight is 8750 lbs, Max landing is 8500 lbs. Those look like standard Grand Caravan numbers, although the stats for the supervan don't increase the useful load all that much, so your argument may still be valid. I'd be more worried about how tight it will be in the cabin and how much weight you'll need to put at the rear. According to the stats, does this equate to 15 gallons of fuel per load? Please correct me if I'm wrong. Thanks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #44 June 30, 2009 QuoteAny particular reason? C of G hard to hold within limits? Yes. Quote Those look like standard Grand Caravan numbers, although the stats for the supervan don't increase the useful load all that much, so your argument may still be valid. I'd be more worried about how tight it will be in the cabin and how much weight you'll need to put at the rear. The revised stats for the "Supervan" don't do a thing to change the wing loading and performance when the noisy bit at the front end stops making noise. QuoteAccording to the stats, does this equate to 15 gallons of fuel per load? Please correct me if I'm wrong. Don't forget the required reserves, which may require another 1/2 hours worth of fuel. The "occupancy" figures for a skydiving aircraft are often figured with the "standard" body weight numbers from the FAA, which I think still sit around 170lbs for males, and 140lbs for females. This is not a real world number anymore. Humans have become bigger. 200lbs fully kitted up is a far more realistic number. The "supervan" will quickly become a brick when the Garrett up front stops providing power, and my experience has led me to believe that Garretts have a lower level of reliability in the skydiving environment. Being that I'm often working with a student these days, and my minimum exit altitudes are higher and that I'm stuck in the front of the aircraft as a result I would find myself unlikely to get into that aircraft with such a load. The "enhancements" to the performance stats might be ok when talking about cargo and a single pilot, but I'm not willing to risk it.---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #45 June 30, 2009 Quote The "occupancy" figures for a skydiving aircraft are often figured with the "standard" body weight numbers from the FAA, which I think still sit around 170lbs for males, and 140lbs for females. This is not a real world number anymore. Humans have become bigger. 200lbs fully kitted up is a far more realistic number. Exactly. Figure for every jumper that they are 20 pounds more then their normal body weight. That goes for the tandem students also since the TI's have on a 40+ pound rig. Look around the DZ and see how many people are over 150 pounds (plus 20) and each one of them is messing up the standard calculations for W&B. For everyone of them higher then the FAA numbers then it pushes you that much closer to being over Max for the aircraft. I talked to a Grand Caravan pilot and even with 17 on board if anyone moves to the back deck its pushing the CG of the aircraft when you run the real numbers. Per the FAA numbers it looks fine but when you actually run the jumpers real weight unless you are putting all the tiny girls in the tail when he was showing me the numbers the CG was close to being too far aft of limits. Question for the DZ that is putting 21 on board, are you using a computerized manifest system that has all the jumpers weights on it and will hold people back if you put too much weight on a load or are there no limits for the weight on a load? If you look at numbers for a 182's there are multiple operators out there that are running every load at or over max gross for the aircraft and it works fine until the engine stops working and then it all goes to hell since the planes just don't perform correctly past their max. The NTSB has cited the cause for multiple recent fatal skydiving crashes to be the failure of the pilot to keep with in Weight, balance and CG issues. Just because you put a more powerful engine up front and can climb faster it does not mean its going to help out when the engine stops working. I've personally seen a Garrett turn into a flame thrower, can't say the same about any of the PT6's I've seen in use for a lot more time.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohanW 0 #46 June 30, 2009 Maybe not flamethrowers, but we've blown up two PT6s in our Caravan. In two years. I (heart) n=1 experiments.Johan. I am. I think. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #47 June 30, 2009 Now that is impressive! Expensive but impressive! Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohanW 0 #48 June 30, 2009 And in spite of that, we just bought our second Grand Caravan. Or maybe because of it .. because not having one available was even more expensive .. Johan. I am. I think. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
aphid 0 #49 June 30, 2009 QuoteDon't forget the required reserves, which may require another 1/2 hours worth of fuel. Even in the third-world country of Canada, it's not "may", it is "MUST" under the Canadian Aviation Regulations. QuoteThe "occupancy" figures for a skydiving aircraft are often figured with the "standard" body weight numbers from the FAA And also from Transport Canada. The current standard (which you can use "legally" for your W&B calculations) is Male: 206 lbs, Female:P 171 lbs. Every Canadian DZ does calculate and carry W&B reports for every aircraft and every configuration as required by Regulation, don't they? Of course they do... :( To say nothing of the number of certified seatbelts required which limits occupancy as well. QuoteThe "enhancements" to the performance stats I'd be very surprised if the "useful load", much less the max TO weight changed appreciably with the conversion. Climb, runway distance, yes. Payload, no. If somebody has the published statistical certified data approved by the FAA or Cessna, I'll shut my trap. I'm glad this isn't my DZ and my up-jumpers aren't on here bragging about the local jumpship with their limited aviation knowledge, which could so easily risk drawing the attention of the Transport Canada compliance officers. Non-compliance penalties can become very expensive, and losing your Operating Certificate is no picnic. It doesn't matter how fast or cool your a/c is when you are grounded by the authorities. John Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PhreeZone 15 #50 June 30, 2009 Even per the specs of the converter the max useful load is only increasing by 212 pounds. http://www.texasturbines.com/caravan/ttci_specs_c.htm How does one determine the max number of seatbelts that are allowed on a jump plane? Every Caravan I've seen has them either in the cargo rails on the floor or on the wall so its easy to add/subtract as needed for a given set up.Yesterday is history And tomorrow is a mystery Parachutemanuals.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
This Site Is For Sale
