28 Mar 2024, 06:58 [ UTC - 5; DST ]
|
Username Protected |
Message |
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: BAE-146 Posted: 07 Oct 2018, 12:55 |
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: BAE-146 Posted: 10 Oct 2018, 11:01 |
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: BAE-146 Posted: 12 Oct 2018, 10:28 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 03/01/09 Posts: 1247 Post Likes: +192 Location: Knoxville, TN - KDKX
Aircraft: Bonanza A36
|
|
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LaMia_Flight_2933This 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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: BAE-146 Posted: 12 Oct 2018, 13:01 |
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: BAE-146 Posted: 13 Oct 2018, 21:20 |
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: BAE-146 Posted: 14 Oct 2018, 15:09 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: 12/22/07 Posts: 12813 Post Likes: +13205 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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: BAE-146 Posted: 15 Oct 2018, 12:02 |
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: BAE-146 Posted: 15 Oct 2018, 15:55 |
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
Username Protected
|
Post subject: Re: BAE-146 Posted: 16 Oct 2018, 00:02 |
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
|
|
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
|
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
|
|
|
|