banner
banner

28 Mar 2024, 19:12 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 24 Sep 2018, 20:57 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/26/16
Posts: 248
Post Likes: +149
Aircraft: G36
Are there any Kodiak Owners/Pilots on BT?

I’m intrigued. Talk us into or out of one.

Most trips under 500nm. Would prefer to carry 4-7 adults with full ice chests.

Good, Bad, Ugly. Bring it


Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 24 Sep 2018, 21:51 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/22/12
Posts: 2428
Post Likes: +957
Aircraft: G36 turbo normalized
I haven't owned one but flew in one. My comments are similar to the ones in this article.


https://www.flyingmag.com/aircraft/turb ... est-kodiak


Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 24 Sep 2018, 23:43 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/09/09
Posts: 3930
Post Likes: +795
Buddy just bought one, put it on aerocet amphibs. Haven’t flown in it though


Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 02:33 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 04/06/09
Posts: 12
Post Likes: +30
Location: Central FL
Aircraft: S-70, Kodiak, 182,
I have had the good fortune to fly one for the last 9years. A little over 500 hours in it. It is an early serial # that belongs to our partner and it has been an excellent aircraft. It is an easy airplane to fly and most of the transition revolves around getting used to engine management if you are new to turbines and the G1000. Once you have those systems dialed in it, is a deceptively easy airplane to operate.

It is always referenced to the 182 in regards to flying. With the turbine engine it is easier and some ways and maybe a little harder in others. It is a PT6-34 engine which is the highest rated shp if the “small” PT6 line. You are the limiter when it comes to torque and ITT. Just mind the limits and there isn’t any big worries. It is not a “push it to the firewall” and take off kind of airplane. You have to monitor torque and Temp of the engine as you accelerate to make sure they stay in the green.

300nm is about the ideal stage length with that many people aboard as it is about 2 hours of flight time. 6-7 people and luggage fit quite comfortably even without the cargo pod(which our plane doesn’t have).

The Kodiak was designed by Tom Hamilton of Stoddard/Hamilton (Glasir/Glastar designer) and was designed for the mission field. The goals for the aircraft was to get in and out of anywhere a Cessna 206 could while carrying a similar load to a Cessna Caravan. It fulfills those goals beautifully. It’s cabin is about 3 feet shorter than a regular caravan and it is narrower but taller than a Caravan’s Cabin. I prefer it to the back of a Caravan as it feels more spacious with extra headroom as my head is often brushing the headliner in a Caravan

Transition is pretty easy as the systems are simple and robust. If you have any Garmin experience especially G1000 experience then things will fall into place quickly. It has excellent electronic checklists available in the G1000 and they help a lot.

The aircraft needs about 1500 feet to easily come and go (you can get in and out of MUCH shorter with lighter loads and proper techinique) and I think more than likely the pilot is going to usually be the limiting factor than the plane.

The 182 reference for handling is pretty close. The elevator is the lightest control followed by the ailerons and the rudder brings up the rear for control feel. It is a relatively short airplane for its size so it wags it’s tail in turbulence like a short body Bonanza. The yaw damper helps a lot. We have an early serial # airplane so it is equipped with a STEC 55X autopilot. It is adequate but the ones built later fly a lot better with the Garmin digital autopilot when you don’t feel like flying yourself.

As the airplane was designed for the bush it has lots of redundancy built in (except a 2nd engine). 2 com radios, 2 nav radios, 2 GPS’s, 2 Air data computers, 2 AHRS, 2 magnetometers, 2 Pitot tubes, etc. the fuel system is simple and gravity feeds out of each wing into a header tank that the engine driven fuel pump pulls out of. It has an electric fuel pump as a back up and is used for takeoff and landing just like a Piper PA-28 series.

The airplane sits high if you have the big tires (we do) and they don’t penalize you much for speed but add lots of capability. The airplane just floats over sand and soft ground with them and they increase the options of where you can go with the plane significantly. The wing is relatively compact for the planes size and it is easy to park. The wing is higher than a 182 or Cessna 206 and you can slide right over their wings on the ramp. It has nosewheel steering just like a 182 and if you need to turn tighter just apply the brake on one side and the plane will spin around in its own wingspan.

The large cargo door and two pilot doors make loading easy and the cabin has plenty of room for 7 people and bags and what not. Add the cargo pod for even more options (our plane doesn’t have it and Quest says it only costs you 3 knots).

Passengers love the visibility out of the plane and as the pilots sit in front of the wing visibility is pretty good in the pattern and when maneuvering at low level.

The plane has an oxygen system but we never use it. I mostly fly the plane between 8,000-12,000 feet. I tend to think of it as an oversized A36. It flies about the same speeds (has Leather wrapped Beechcraft yokes...a nice touch) but on 3 times the fuel burn. At 10,000 feet you can plan for 170 knots true on about 44 gallons per hour. It can fly high but the shorter wing starts to show itself at anything much above 14-15k feet. I’ve been to 22k in it but the AOA is high and the controls feel mushy.

Systems are pretty single and the airframe is rugged and well built. We added A/C to the one I fly and would highly recommend it. It will carry about 6 people and bags with full fuel which is good for 8 hours (320 gallons). Leave some fuel off and add more people and bags. Fuel flows are between 35-50 gallons/hour depending on how fast you want to go and altitude.

Not many downsides, capital expense would lead the list. You need a bigger hanger. The tail is very tall even on wheels. Even higher on floats. It shouldn’t be too bad to insure. Fixed gear, familiar rugged simple systems. Plenty of buffet before the stall and the drooped leading edges on the wing keep the ailerons flying deep into the stall. As with most turbo props it is a very flexible airplane and you can do 170 knots on final keeping up with jet traffic and a mile from the runway pull the power back and push the prop forward and start adding flaps and you will cross the numbers at 70 knots. It always makes the first turnoff usually with no beta or reverse application. As with any airplane it’s too slow once you’re in cruise (at least that’s how I feel) but the visibility is good and it’s a pleasant place to spend a few hours. Quest has come a long way on fit and finish from those early serial #’s but pretty much all the mods can be retrofitted to an earlier aircraft (not sure on the G1000 nxi that the series II has). I miss not having a Bonanza but as king as in fortunate enough to have access to the awesome plane I have no reason to get one. I used to think a Kodiak and a PC-12 would cover all the missions I would want to fly. Now I think I will set my sights a little higher and say that a Kodiak and a PC-24 would cover the gamut. If I didn’t address anything else you’re wondering about just ask.


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


Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 04:40 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/26/16
Posts: 248
Post Likes: +149
Aircraft: G36
Thanks Bart
I Have a great G36. Love it but load limited to where I go. I have been watching Kodiaks since they came out and have been in love with it’s capabilities. They are mentioned here often as an option but not much talk about their abilities.
Sounds like they’re a good tweener
Better than a G36/206/Baron worse than a PC12
A little slow but you can bring back all the fish in one trip, might need 02


Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 08:18 
Offline



User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 05/08/09
Posts: 6994
Post Likes: +4280
Location: Stuart, FL (KSUA)
Aircraft: 1967 Bonanza V35
Hey Bart. Glad to see you here.

Great first post. :thumbup:

Maybe some pics and stories on the firefighting thread...? :whistle:


Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 11:25 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 09/16/10
Posts: 8885
Post Likes: +1954
Super write up, thank you!

_________________
If you think nobody cares about you. Try not paying your income tax.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 11:55 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 04/06/09
Posts: 12
Post Likes: +30
Location: Central FL
Aircraft: S-70, Kodiak, 182,
Thank you Jim! I finally found something I felt like I maybe had .02 to add.

Robert, you would find it an easy transition from the G36. You already know the heart of the plane, the G1000.

The Kodiak operates at similar speeds to the G36 so your already used to the envelope. It can approach a little slower and really needs about half the runway the G36 does but the rest of the speeds are similar. You start to rotate at 55 kts, cruise climbs at 110, cruises about 137-147 knots indicated at altitude (165-171 knots true depending on altitude, temp, and power). I fly it mostly by fuel flow. It drinks a lot more than the G36 but the fuel is cheaper and if you get on the jet program cards that will help even more. No yellow band and VNE is 182 knots. Maneuvering speed is 142 knots at gross and I usually slow to 130 indicated for rough turbulence which is somewhere in the neighborhood of 155 knots true at the typical altitude I’m at. Stable IFR platform and the G1000 makes it easy to manage. It’s available with a TKS icing system so it is all weather and has enough power to climb through it quickly. I usually cruise climb and a 1,000 fpm yields about 117-119 indicated down low and slowly falls off to 108-110 knots going through 9,000 feet.
Empty usually runs in the low 4k’s and gross is 7250 (with appropriate mods original was 6,750 lbs. Newer plane’s take off and landing weights are the 7,250, it was just some structural beef up and VG’s added to the wing and flaps to get the higher weight and keep the stall speed under 61 knots). Usable payload is usually just north of 3,000 lb. Full fuel payload is about 1,000-1,100 lbs but you rarely need that much fuel. 5 hours of fuel will give you 1700-1800 lb for people and gear. Definitely going to be easier to insure if you don’t have turbine time with its fixed gear and great record safety.

With really big heavier loads you have to use the tail stand and be careful how you load it so it doesn’t sit on its tail (an expensive repair) but the flow is not hard to learn and it has a big change range. Much bigger and much more tolerant than an A36 or a G36.

It would make a great turbine step up and turbine time builder, it would probably also be a gateway drug. The Pratt is over all easier to manage than the continental. Quest is under stable ownership and continues to crank out planes so parts are available and support continues to improve as the fleet grows. There is now a simulator available in Spokane and the Kodiak community is slowly expanding. They are great workaday airplanes and I have found them to be very reliable. One of my good friends made 7 trips with the one I fly to Puerto Rico bringing in relief supplies and flying out evacuees. He was able to make it from West Palm to San Juan with one fuel stop and a plane packed ceiling to roof and from front to back with generators, water, medicine, food and other supplies and then bring 7 evacuees back to the mainland. It’s a great plane.

It won’t add any speed than what you’re used to but it will add space, comfort, the ability to carry more people, bags, equipment and payload farther and then land and takeoff at a shorter strip. I’m sure a demo wouldn’t be hard to set up and if you find yourself in the central FL area I would of course be happy to show you the plane or take you on a flight.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 13:35 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/26/16
Posts: 248
Post Likes: +149
Aircraft: G36
Thanks again Bart
Any maintenance or reoccurring issues, Hidden bugs or costs? Warranty problems, etc? Questair good to work with and response to issues?
Rdn


Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 19:40 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 05/23/08
Posts: 6059
Post Likes: +702
Location: CMB7, Ottawa, Canada
Aircraft: TBM - C185 - T206
I flown one on wheels and its a great performer.
Sort of a modern day Beaver with more speed.

Bart, how good is the a/c and is it an electric system or engine driven?

One day I wil buy one on floats.

_________________
Former Baron 58 owner.
Pistons engines are for tractors.

Marc Bourdon


Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 22:57 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 04/06/09
Posts: 12
Post Likes: +30
Location: Central FL
Aircraft: S-70, Kodiak, 182,
Hello Robert,

Maintenance wise it is fairly straight forward aircraft. If you buy one new I believe they still come with a maintenance training course from Pratt and Whitney and a mechanic training slot at Quest.

Quest has gone through a few management changes and owners through the years but has always been responsive and supportive. There are over 200 out there now and operating in some of the most austere and rugged environments you can imagine.

The interior was improved a few years back as I recall to make both the fit and finish better and the maintainability better. Having an early serial # has had us go through a few teething pains and a couple of small things that were warrantied but nothing that really sticks out beyond a battle with a faulty yaw damper. G1000 system has been excellent. Passengers enjoy the XM music and I appreciate the XM weather. You can even get radar for it now as well. Several nice seating options available too. Fuel gauging has been a point of frustration but the aircraft has an excellent flow meter and if you know where you are starting it’s easy to keep up with as the glass calculates burn and remaining. Perhaps they sourced their fuel senders from a 182. It’s a known issue because we were sent tubes to stick the tanks with. I don’t know if this has improved on the newer airplanes or not. It generally flies between inspections with no real issues. If you have someone with Pratt training or experience the airplane is no harder to maintain than an 182 or a 206 airframe wise.

Keep the batteries on mainters when not in use and swap the batteries once a year and you will get better life out of them. The plane can be equipped with TKS with or without the cargo pod. It can also be equipped with floats. The Aerocet’s are the recommenced option for weight and handling. They also happen to be designed and built for the plane by the original designer’s company (Tom Hamilton owns Aerocet and the floats are also built in Idaho. We have a pair on our 182). I dream of seeing the Kodiak on floats someday too.

Like every airplane it could use more power (too much power is probably just enough)...if you are hot and high....say 4,000 feet or better and 90-95F or better you will be Temp limited on takeoff. Not so much that it degrades performance drastically but enough that you will realize on takeoff you have to set power based on torque vs temp.

I would have complained about the front doors being somewhat noisy and drafty but they came out with inflatable doors seals for them and we retrofitted the mod and it addressed those complaints.

That is a recurring theme with the plane, weaknesses that are exposed or discovered are addressed and improvements are identified and offered. The front door handles could damage the paint if you weren’t careful with them. They now have rubber bumpers and the problem has been mitigated.

We have the basic interior. I have about a 4.5 hour personal limit in the seat. The timberline interior has better seats and the Summit interior adds a king air like interior to the back with club seating.

Marc to your question it has an engine driven system. I know what your thinking but the cabin does cool down pretty quickly as soon as you start the engine and flip on the generator and alternator and get the AC going even in the wet tropical heat of FL.

One of the things that stands out to me about the airplane is the attention to detail and the fact that it was designed by someone with a vision and not by committee.


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


Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 22:58 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 04/06/09
Posts: 12
Post Likes: +30
Location: Central FL
Aircraft: S-70, Kodiak, 182,
Sorry, I know this isn’t effective talking you out of one....


Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 25 Sep 2018, 23:46 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/26/16
Posts: 248
Post Likes: +149
Aircraft: G36
Bart
Thanks for taking the time.
Good info


Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 30 Aug 2019, 16:53 
Online


 Profile




Joined: 11/26/16
Posts: 248
Post Likes: +149
Aircraft: G36
I flew in a Kodiak demonstration today with Mark their demonstration/test Pilot.
It was hot approx 100f at 10 am when we took off from KNYL (Yuma) we had 7 total on board not sure how much fuel but at least 1/2 full. my son David was PIC. David has 500 hrs mostly in G36
Kodiak was in the air in a little over 1/4 mile but mostly because we took a little extra time spooling up.
Climbed easily 1500fpm to about 3500-4000 AGL.

If you are already G1000 pilot maybe 10-20 hours training it’s just learning setp ops.

We never got over 5000 AGL did some slow flight and maneuvering it is very predictable. You can feel stalls coming slowly and never lose authority. Very predictable it also stalls straight (not right or left) Very docile and honest. Slow flight same thing docile honest easy nothing to be afraid of. Did some simulated “box canyon” type maneuvers turns very tight (360 within less than1/4 mile area no problem)

Landed And took off on a dirt strip no with no issues.

I was surprised that turbulence didn’t kick the heck out of us but we didn’t get bounced once.

Lots of leg room in back, we had 4 seats in club position and one facing forward in the back. A/C was good. We stayed low on purpose so the A/C never got any altitude help. Very comfortable. I believe we had the summit package but without the folding tables and cabinet
David commented that there was great pilot visibility and lots of seat adjustment for pilot. Also commented the the landing sight/profile is very similar to a bonanza. Great passenger visibility as well.

Speed Mods that could be done, smaller tires 2 knots
No belly pod 3 knts, no weather radar 2 knts if I remember correctly. For top end 183knts cruise.

Basically it’s a G36 bonanza x 2.
Twice the passengers, twice the climb, twice the useful load, twice.5 the cap cost, twice the op cost. Twice the plane. Twice the baron but the baron is faster.

We all really enjoyed the demonstration flight and the plane.


Last edited on 30 Aug 2019, 17:45, edited 1 time in total.

Top

 Post subject: Re: Any Kodiak Owner/Pireps?
PostPosted: 30 Aug 2019, 17:01 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/09/09
Posts: 3930
Post Likes: +795
Nope but a buddy has one on amphibs. Looks cool


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  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

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