BeechTalk - BT

Username Protected · **Posted:** 01 Apr 2017, 23:58

Username Protected wrote:

I annual my PC12 with many inspections during said annual :peace:

Just curious, does Pilatas refer to it as an annual?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Apr 2017, 00:16

Username Protected wrote:

I annual my PC12 with many inspections during said annual :peace:

Just curious, does Pilatas refer to it as an annual?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Apr 2017, 00:32

Username Protected wrote:

The question was predicated on engine being not repairable and needing replacement.

If the engine is not repairable, we buy one on the used market.

If there isn't an engine on the used market for my plane, then we buy a -6 engine and have it converted to -10.

If none of the above are possible, which seems highly unlikely, then I can try to see if Honeywell will build me a new one. I'm not sure this is an option.

Last resort, the engine shop orders parts and builds a new engine from it, transfer my old data plate (if it exists) or uses a plate from a derelict engine.

If none of the above work, we part out the airplane.

None of the above should be surprising to you.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Apr 2017, 08:22

Username Protected wrote:

Ok guys... ya'll are driving my OCD self CRAZY!!!!

Pistons are for tractors... and ANNUALS are for PISTONS!

I know I'm a little old school and I guess maybe some manufacturers are using this term to make it seem as though their maintenance events are cheap like a Bonanza? I've been doing this seventeen years and I've always understood that we do not use the term ANNUAL when referring to turbine aircraft. To do so (at least back in the day) made you seem like a rube in the turbine world. Of course that was before the internet, when anyone with AOL could be an expert.

Yes, most aircraft receive some type of inspection every 12 months... but it isn't an annual, it's an inspection and it has a name.

Is an ANNUAL on a jet really a thing? Do I have to reprogram myself?

Rick Witt, Paul Sneden... are you guys cringing like me when you hear ANNUAL?

What's wrong with calling it an annual if you are doing an inspection... annually?

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Apr 2017, 08:26

Username Protected wrote:

No idea, but our maintenance facility does :-)

I call it an "annual".

Embraer calls it an "annual" for the Phenoms.

Seems to me the only planes that get Phase Inspections are ones owned by Textron or some other obscure brands designed back in the day.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Apr 2017, 08:54

In the TBMs we do 200 hrs inspections or once a year min if you fly less than 200 hrs.

We have A, B and C checks.

Here is what Daher as to say,

Username Protected · **Posted:** 02 Apr 2017, 19:16

Username Protected wrote:

If the engine is not repairable, we buy one on the used market.

If there isn't an engine on the used market for my plane, then we buy a -6 engine and have it converted to -10.

If none of the above are possible, which seems highly unlikely, then I can try to see if Honeywell will build me a new one. I'm not sure this is an option.

Last resort, the engine shop orders parts and builds a new engine from it, transfer my old data plate (if it exists) or uses a plate from a derelict engine.

If none of the above work, we part out the airplane.

None of the above should be surprising to you.

Mike C.

Yes, those are all reasonable ways to get YOUR old plane flying, but that's still not what I am asking, and I am sure you know it. :roll:

Username Protected · **Posted:** 10 Apr 2017, 21:25

Username Protected wrote:

Has Cirrus started delivering airplanes?

Kinda. Today's news says they've delivered six. They have the type certificate (so the FAA is satisfied that planes that match the approved design will be airworthy) but not yet the production certificate (so the FAA is not yet satisfied that their production process will unfailingly reproduce the approved design). Each one built thus requires lots of FAA-rep inspections so understandably manufacturers at this stage take it real slow and Cirrus is no exception. Once they get the production certificate they'll ramp up, to 125/year they say.
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ ... production

Username Protected · **Posted:** 10 Apr 2017, 22:52

Username Protected wrote:

Today's news says they've delivered six.

Not yet reflected on the FAA registry.

I'll be curious to see the airworthiness and registrations dates on those next three and see if this statement was true or an exaggeration.

Quote:

Each one built thus requires lots of FAA-rep inspections so understandably manufacturers at this stage take it real slow and Cirrus is no exception.

This is not at all how they said it would go. They now say production certificate in June.

For an established manufacturer, this seems like gross incompetence to not be able to get a PC given all the press they had about their modern factory and processes from years before delivery.

Cessna goes right from TC to PC and starts building planes.

I suspect this is really a cover story for other problems in production. The FAA makes a convenient scapegoat for which is usually their own incompetence.

Quote:

Once they get the production certificate they'll ramp up, to 125/year they say.

They don't have a good track record of predicting production.

Mike C.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Apr 2017, 17:27

They don't show up on JetNet at all... there's 28 Pilatus PC24 positions committed that show up... but zero for the Cirrus...

Weird.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Apr 2017, 17:30

Who has time for this thread today - with all the excitement on the United thread? Congrats Chip - working overtime.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 12 Apr 2017, 18:50

Username Protected wrote:

Who has time for this thread today - with all the excitement on the United thread? Congrats Chip - working overtime.

Unusually quiet today... my clients all seem to be busy! Maybe they're over on the United thread too!

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Apr 2017, 19:16

Was rolling along at 280 today and what do I hear on frequency, a Vision Jet!

Got ATC to let me ask him a question.

At fl280, he was trueing out at 315kts burning 65gph. I was about 30 miles from him at the same alt doing 305kts on 72gph. It was ISA +6 or so.

Username Protected · **Posted:** 13 Apr 2017, 19:52

Same speed as my TBM 850 on about 3 gph more fuel, not bad.

Username Protected wrote:

Was rolling along at 280 today and what do I hear on frequency, a Vision Jet!

Got ATC to let me ask him a question.

At fl280, he was trueing out at 315kts burning 65gph. I was about 30 miles from him at the same alt doing 305kts on 72gph. It was ISA +6 or so.