banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 14:16 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 07 Oct 2018, 12:55 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 06/02/10
Posts: 7236
Post Likes: +4509
Company: Inscrutable Fasteners, LLC
Location: West Palm Beach - F45
Aircraft: Planeless
Username Protected wrote:
Didn’t Air Wisconsin fly them as well as Mesaba?


Yes, Air Willie flew them for UAL. Air Willie has had a very interesting history of ups and downs.

ASA also flew a handful of them.

Best,
Rich


Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 10 Oct 2018, 11:01 
Offline

 Profile




Joined: 10/03/18
Posts: 1
Post Likes: +1
Aircraft: PA28
Flew them for ASA ‘96-97. We had 6 total, 88 seats, ex PSA/USAir. My first jet, Great experience.


Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2018, 09:31 
Online



User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 01/03/12
Posts: 712
Post Likes: +344
Company: Aviation Fabricators
Location: 805 N 4th St. Clinton, Missouri 64735
Looks like a Jota Aviation (www.http://flyjota.com/our-fleet/) has found a niche with the 146's, website says they are adding three more to their fleet. They fly charter for top soccer teams. They also have a KA90 and their sister company JotaSport does pretty well at the 24 Hours of Lemans, winning 1st in 2014 LMP2 and 1st & 2nd in 2017.


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.


Last edited on 12 Oct 2018, 11:22, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2018, 10:28 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 03/01/09
Posts: 1247
Post Likes: +192
Location: Knoxville, TN - KDKX
Aircraft: Bonanza A36
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaMia_Flight_2933

This is my most recent thought about these planes, which isn't fair to the plane seeing as it was asked, by the pilot, to make a flight it just could not make with it's relatively short range. Tragic.

I always thought the 4 engines were super cool when I was a pax on these in the 90's. Flew from TYS to MEM on Northwest's then-airlink partner several times.


Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2018, 13:01 
Offline




User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/12/07
Posts: 7771
Post Likes: +3091
Location: Dallas, TX (KADS)
Aircraft: 1969 Bonanza V35A
I flew on these in California a number of times in the 80s, on both AirCal and on PSA; I found them to be very comfortable, quiet, and well-suited to the service they were providing.

It was important to know in advance about the howling noises the flaps made when deployed, however, or it would scare you pretty well!

_________________
PP, ASEL, Instrument Airplane, A&P
Texas Construction Law: http://www.TexasConstructionLaw.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 12 Oct 2018, 19:28 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/03/08
Posts: 16179
Post Likes: +8782
Location: 2W5
Aircraft: A36
They were commonly referred to as 'Jumbolino' in europe. The way how airport licensing works, lots of regional service required special permits and exemptions to operate out of smaller airports that are otherwise only licensed to 5.7ton operation. The 146 or Avro with its low soundprint was allowed to operate into some airports that were off-limits for other equipment.

In the early 2000s, I was a passenger into Appleton,WI on a Mesaba 146. When we arrived, I noticed what must have been the entire ARFF department staged on both sides of the taxiway. Once we got close, they created a nice set of 'arches' for the plane to taxi through to the terminal. Turns out this was the retirement flight for the captain.


Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 13 Oct 2018, 21:20 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/26/10
Posts: 1031
Post Likes: +441
Location: Holland Airpark, WI
Aircraft: '64 D95A, KA-350
Username Protected wrote:
Any BAE-146 pilots here? Just curious. They look like miniature 747´s. What was their intended purpose? (short haul, mountains etc)

rgs,

Patrick.


What does everyone want to know about them?

I flew them for 10 years at Air Wisconsin, the last 3 years I was a Line Check Airman. For many years, I was in and out of ASE a couple times a day, 4 days a week on average, yes in winter ops where we didn't see the airport until a 1/2 mile before the MAP. Lots of jokes about the 146. We affectionately called her the 4 engine road block. Early teething problems with the ALF 502 got corrected and became quite reliable after we got Aerodata and started doing deep flex takeoffs. The 146 was a true airliner, not one of these eff'in WSCOD (Whistling $hit Can Of Death) RJ's.

Air Wis was instrumental in getting BAe to make the initial stretched -200 series. The first pre-production -200 flight test aircraft was painted in Air Wisconsin livery, and the first production -200 was delivered to Air Wis. Someone wrote earlier that PSA was the first US operator of the 146, bull crap, Air Wis was the first operator in North America. It's flying qualities are neck and neck with the Fokker F27, which I refer to as THE has best flying qualities of an airplane I've ever flown. A very versatile and forgiving airplane, I can see why Neptune Aviation has chosen the 146 for its next generation firebomber tanker aircraft.
Attachment:
N292UE.jpg

Attachment:
Air Wisconsin 052.jpg


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.


Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 13 Oct 2018, 21:58 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/03/08
Posts: 16179
Post Likes: +8782
Location: 2W5
Aircraft: A36
That's a lot of gauges :bugeye:


Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 13 Oct 2018, 22:08 
Offline


User avatar
 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/17/13
Posts: 6322
Post Likes: +5520
Location: Hollywood, Los Angeles, CA
Aircraft: Turbo Commander 680V
Always loved how they looked, but I'm a high wing nut.

I always imagined them as the ideal for direct thin-and-long routes with their 4 engines. Trips like New Orleans-London etc that don't make sense on bigger planes. But they obviously don't have the range and probably never would unless the wing was re-designed. be cool if they did, though!

_________________
Problem is the intelligent people are full of doubt, while the stupid ones are full of confidence.


Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 14 Oct 2018, 13:38 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 05/10/09
Posts: 987
Post Likes: +262
Location: KBDR Bridgeport, CT
Aircraft: V35
As a passenger I flew from New Delhi to Kathmandu and on into Paro, Bhutan in one. We passed Everest off the port side before doing the almost wing-scraping approach down into the valley and looking up at a temple on a cliff. Very cool!


Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 14 Oct 2018, 15:09 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/22/07
Posts: 12813
Post Likes: +13206
Company: Cogswell Cogs, LLC
Location: KPTK (SE Michigan)
Aircraft: C205
Username Protected wrote:
... not one of these eff'in WSCOD (Whistling $hit Can Of Death) RJ's.


Thank you! This will likely be next year’s vanity plate. To insure that I get the slur correct; should it be WSCOD or FWSCOD ?

_________________
Life is a DiY project.


Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 15 Oct 2018, 12:02 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/26/10
Posts: 1031
Post Likes: +441
Location: Holland Airpark, WI
Aircraft: '64 D95A, KA-350
Username Protected wrote:
... not one of these eff'in WSCOD (Whistling $hit Can Of Death) RJ's.


Thank you! This will likely be next year’s vanity plate. To insure that I get the slur correct; should it be WSCOD or FWSCOD ?


Hahaha Doug! I think that "WSCOD" would look good on a vanity plate. I'll stay with my WI truck vanity plate BAE 146 for the time being. Thought about getting BAE ATP oh back about 25 years ago, but nah, that thing was a checkride every day you flew it. Way worse than the RJ, it flew like a Mack truck without power steering and had some big ticket failures. If the 146 was British Aerospace's success, then the ATP was it's failure. They only made 65 airplanes, Air Wisconsin had 10. You'll have to post pics if you get the "WSCOD" plates!
Attachment:
G-MATP.jpg


Please login or Register for a free account via the link in the red bar above to download files.


Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 15 Oct 2018, 15:55 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/21/09
Posts: 693
Post Likes: +40
Location: KBJC
Aircraft: MU-2B-60
Username Protected wrote:
My hangar neighbors had a -146 as a personal aircraft for their family to run down from Fort Worth to Austin for UT games. The interior looked very comfortable. They replaced it two or three years ago with a 737. They had a BAC-111 before the -146.

I think they put less than 150 hours/year on the 737.


I saw this plane in Gunnison fairly often. Now I see the 737 there.
I was told their BAE146 was not RSVM so the fuel burn was terrible.


Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 15 Oct 2018, 23:46 
Online



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 12/10/07
Posts: 7975
Post Likes: +6844
Location: New York, NY
Aircraft: Debonair C33A
Used to commute on those from NYC to Minneapolis every week for a year or so back around 2003. Operated by Mesaba as a regional carrier for Northwest. Very comfortable little planes, but on westbound legs we had to stop for fuel (on a <900 nm flight) if the wind got a little too strong. :bugeye:

It was a small world and the crews were almost always the same every week. It was nice to have stews who knew my first name and brought coffee the way I liked it without asking. Those were the days... :D


Top

 Post subject: Re: BAE-146
PostPosted: 16 Oct 2018, 00:02 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 11/26/10
Posts: 1031
Post Likes: +441
Location: Holland Airpark, WI
Aircraft: '64 D95A, KA-350
Username Protected wrote:
My hangar neighbors had a -146 as a personal aircraft for their family to run down from Fort Worth to Austin for UT games. The interior looked very comfortable. They replaced it two or three years ago with a 737. They had a BAC-111 before the -146.

I think they put less than 150 hours/year on the 737.


I saw this plane in Gunnison fairly often. Now I see the 737 there.
I was told their BAE146 was not RSVM so the fuel burn was terrible.


A couple years ago I saw this corporate 146 parked at the FBO in KSAV. It's sure looked like a -100 series. Air Wis had 2 -100 series for a couple years that came with the merger with Aspen. We all called them the Smurf Jet. Same engines (thrust) as the -200 and -300's but shorter fuselage and MTOW. I remember they were quite sporty when light, I suppose the corporate version is much lighter than a fully loaded airliner. IIRC, the max operating altitude on the -100 and -200 series was 30,000 ft, so really no need for RVSM and none of ours had it. They all burned about the same, the -300 series could cruise at a slightly higher Mach, .73 versus .70 and we flight planned 5000 lbs, but in cruise at altitude you could get the FF down to 1100-1200 per engine. So the -300 with 100 passengers made more sense on longer non mountainous segments. The -200 did the best in the mountains like ASE and EGE performance wise.

Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next




You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  

Terms of Service | Forum FAQ | Contact Us

BeechTalk, LLC is the quintessential Beechcraft Owners & Pilots Group providing a forum for the discussion of technical, practical, and entertaining issues relating to all Beech aircraft. These include the Bonanza (both V-tail and straight-tail models), Baron, Debonair, Duke, Twin Bonanza, King Air, Sierra, Skipper, Sport, Sundowner, Musketeer, Travel Air, Starship, Queen Air, BeechJet, and Premier lines of airplanes, turboprops, and turbojets.

BeechTalk, LLC is not affiliated or endorsed by the Beechcraft Corporation, its subsidiaries, or affiliates. Beechcraft™, King Air™, and Travel Air™ are the registered trademarks of the Beechcraft Corporation.

Copyright© BeechTalk, LLC 2007-2024

.kingairacademy-85x100.png.
.blackhawk-85x100-2019-09-25.jpg.
.headsetsetc_Small_85x50.jpg.
.AAI.jpg.
.jandsaviation-85x50.jpg.
.planelogix-85x100-2015-04-15.jpg.
.Wentworth_85x100.JPG.
.kingairnation-85x50.png.
.pure-medical-85x150.png.
.gallagher_85x50.jpg.
.centex-85x50.jpg.
.one-mile-up-85x100.png.
.aircraftassociates-85x50.png.
.midwest2.jpg.
.sierratrax-85x50.png.
.chairmanaviation-85x50.jpg.
.lucysaviation-85x50.png.
.aircraftferry-85x50.jpg.
.avionwealth-85x50.png.
.pdi-85x50.jpg.
.concorde.jpg.
.wilco-85x100.png.
.Rocky-Mountain-Turbine-85x100.jpg.
.wat-85x50.jpg.
.Genesys_85x50.jpg.
.tat-85x100.png.
.MountainAirframe.jpg.
.ssv-85x50-2023-12-17.jpg.
.geebee-85x50.jpg.
.airmart-85x150.png.
.ABS-85x100.jpg.
.blackwell-85x50.png.
.daytona.jpg.
.Latitude.jpg.
.CiESVer2.jpg.
.tempest.jpg.
.avfab-85x50-2018-12-04.png.
.shortnnumbers-85x100.png.
.cav-85x50.jpg.
.bpt-85x50-2019-07-27.jpg.
.Marsh.jpg.
.stanmusikame-85x50.jpg.
.camguard.jpg.
.SCA.jpg.
.Foreflight_85x50_color.png.
.kadex-85x50.jpg.
.aeroled-85x50-2022-12-06.jpg.
.Wingman 85x50.png.
.aviationdesigndouble.jpg.
.jetacq-85x50.jpg.
.saint-85x50.jpg.
.ei-85x150.jpg.
.boomerang-85x50-2023-12-17.png.
.dbm.jpg.
.temple-85x100-2015-02-23.jpg.
.traceaviation-85x150.png.
.bullardaviation-85x50-2.jpg.