banner
banner

29 Mar 2024, 08:12 [ UTC - 5; DST ]


Concorde Battery (banner)



Reply to topic  [ 281 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19
Username Protected Message
 Post subject: Re: Bought a PC-12 - still miss the B200!
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2023, 18:03 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 09/05/09
Posts: 4082
Post Likes: +2731
Location: Small Town, NC
Username Protected wrote:
Clearly mission matters. The PC-12 and TBM are great. But just as a counterpoint, my ‘74 -10 short body Mits cruises at 300-315, has 24” prop clearance with certification for unimproved strips, very stout gear, with good short field performance, a second engine for overwater flight, and it costs about 1/8th of a new TBM.
Yes it’s an old, loud airplane, but they had some pretty good ideas when they put these together.


I'd love to have one of those... if my current arrangement falls apart, it's definitely on the list.

_________________
"Find worthy causes in your life."


Top

 Post subject: Re: Bought a PC-12 - still miss the B200!
PostPosted: 18 Feb 2023, 22:47 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 01/28/13
Posts: 6037
Post Likes: +3998
Location: Indiana
Aircraft: C195, D17S, M20TN
Username Protected wrote:
Clearly mission matters. The PC-12 and TBM are great. But just as a counterpoint, my ‘74 -10 short body Mits cruises at 300-315, has 24” prop clearance with certification for unimproved strips, very stout gear, with good short field performance, a second engine for overwater flight, and it costs about 1/8th of a new TBM.
Yes it’s an old, loud airplane, but they had some pretty good ideas when they put these together.


Thomas they are great machines. I’ve flown a couple of times in them and Commanders and I can tell you that it is not loud, inside, and who gives a sheet whether it is on the ramp. It also carries a ton and slices through turbulence like a tank with wings. Much better than the two planes plus TBM in this thread :D :cheers:

300+ KTAS and the TPE331 low fuel burn is a winner as has been said so many times. They’re a lot of fools not banging your door down for your bird. Good luck with the sale.

:popcorn: Perhaps embarrassing them will loosen their wallets….

_________________
Chuck
KEVV


Top

 Post subject: Re: Bought a PC-12 - still miss the B200!
PostPosted: 19 Feb 2023, 06:13 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/15/21
Posts: 2514
Post Likes: +1240
Username Protected wrote:
You land many places you can take a 12 with a TBM and you’ll need a doggy bag for the parts

We had one that broke when someone put cocks too big behind it

You have much time in the Pilatus?

Still, gotta be careful.

viewtopic.php?f=41&t=216428


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

_________________
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, Administrate, Litigate.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Bought a PC-12 - still miss the B200!
PostPosted: 17 Mar 2023, 21:42 
Offline


 Profile




Joined: 10/31/11
Posts: 984
Post Likes: +633
Company: B777, 767, 757, 727, MD11, S80
Location: Colorado Springs
Aircraft: Thrush S2R, AC500B,
Username Protected wrote:
I mean, at this point, I’d have to say the single. Seems like people have higher survival (statistically). Engine failure after rotation- definitely the single. Engine failure in cruise, the twin.

And in fact, we are saying that there will be a 1:1,000,000 engine failure.


If you are losing control why don’t you just pull the other engine back? Then you are just like a single when the engine quits.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Bought a PC-12 - still miss the B200!
PostPosted: 17 Mar 2023, 23:46 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/15/21
Posts: 2514
Post Likes: +1240
Username Protected wrote:
I mean, at this point, I’d have to say the single. Seems like people have higher survival (statistically). Engine failure after rotation- definitely the single. Engine failure in cruise, the twin.

And in fact, we are saying that there will be a 1:1,000,000 engine failure.


If you are losing control why don’t you just pull the other engine back? Then you are just like a single when the engine quits.

Two points:

1. A twin has at least twice the chance of one engine failing as a single. That's a disadvantage in situations where you need both engines to continue flight.

2. Singles generally have a lower stall speed than twins, leading to a safer forced landing.
_________________
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, Administrate, Litigate.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Bought a PC-12 - still miss the B200!
PostPosted: 18 Mar 2023, 00:17 
Offline


 WWW  Profile




Joined: 12/03/14
Posts: 19252
Post Likes: +23615
Company: Ciholas, Inc
Location: KEHR
Aircraft: C560V
Username Protected wrote:
A twin has at least twice the chance of one engine failing as a single.

That's not entirely clear.

Twins are generally more gentle on their engines, spend less time at high power in climb, and tend to fly faster with better cooling.

The ability to compare engines also leads to early detection of issues that may not be as noticeable in a single.

In other words, I don't think engine failure is statistically independent of which airframe they are on.

For piston aircraft, nobody has really good numbers for this either from analysis or from field data, however.

Mike C.

_________________
Email mikec (at) ciholas.com


Top

 Post subject: Re: Bought a PC-12 - still miss the B200!
PostPosted: 18 Mar 2023, 05:26 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/15/21
Posts: 2514
Post Likes: +1240
Username Protected wrote:
A twin has at least twice the chance of one engine failing as a single.

That's not entirely clear.

Twins are generally more gentle on their engines, spend less time at high power in climb, and tend to fly faster with better cooling.

The ability to compare engines also leads to early detection of issues that may not be as noticeable in a single.

In other words, I don't think engine failure is statistically independent of which airframe they are on.

For piston aircraft, nobody has really good numbers for this either from analysis or from field data, however.

Mike C.

You can also argue that engines in single-engine planes are better taken care of than the engines in twins because in the minds of some pilots and mechanics "there is more riding on that single engine".

But fair point. We don't have good actual numbers.

So in the absence of good statistics I'm just looking at it from a purely theorectical angle.
_________________
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, Administrate, Litigate.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Bought a PC-12 - still miss the B200!
PostPosted: 18 Mar 2023, 08:10 
Offline



 WWW  Profile




Joined: 05/23/13
Posts: 6718
Post Likes: +7257
Company: Jet Acquisitions
Location: Franklin, TN 615-739-9091 chip@jetacq.com
Turbine engines rarely fail, no matter single or twin.

It’s usually something else that causes the “engine” failure.

_________________
It’s a brave new world, one where most have forgotten the old ways.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Bought a PC-12 - still miss the B200!
PostPosted: 18 Mar 2023, 11:04 
Offline



 Profile




Joined: 01/24/10
Posts: 6730
Post Likes: +4406
Location: Concord , CA (KCCR)
Aircraft: 1967 Baron B55
Username Protected wrote:
Turbine engines rarely fail, no matter single or twin.

It’s usually something else that causes the “engine” failure.


What about all the accessories attached to engine that make it run?
When they fail does the engine fail? How often do they fail?


Top

 Post subject: Re: Bought a PC-12 - still miss the B200!
PostPosted: 18 Mar 2023, 11:18 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 02/15/21
Posts: 2514
Post Likes: +1240
The fact that many PC-12's are being used as air ambulances day/night/hard IFR speaks volumes as to the perceived reliability of the engine.

_________________
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, Administrate, Litigate.


Top

 Post subject: Re: Bought a PC-12 - still miss the B200!
PostPosted: 18 Mar 2023, 19:09 
Offline


User avatar
 Profile




Joined: 08/16/15
Posts: 2868
Post Likes: +3578
Location: Ogden UT
Aircraft: Piper M600
And in very remote areas. See a lot of PC12's around the arctic circle, up into Alaska and Canada, where landing strips are far apart. There is no delta in safety between cross country, twin TP's and Single TP's. The pilots pretty much dictate the safety record of all these aircraft. Pretty much every fatal accident you review in cross country turboprops, the aircraft had usable thrust. I would leave the Caravan out of this, as it is an unpressurized low and slow flyer, which doesn't afford it many options for weather and glide. That is a very hostile environment.

_________________
Chuck Ivester
Piper M600
Ogden UT


Top

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic  [ 281 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 15, 16, 17, 18, 19




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

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