Conquest vs King Air 200 vs 300????
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 115
Conquest vs King Air 200 vs 300????
We're on the cusp of buying a King Air.
Our longest leg will be Tetorboro to Oklahoma City (1157 nm).
As far as I can tell with average winds both the King Air 200 and 300 (not 350) will just make the 5 hour leg with a reserve, but any higher than normal head wind (over 50 kts) will require a fuel stop.
Any thought?
Also....someone just threw the Conquest into the mix but it doesn't look like it has any greater range than the King Air's.
Thoughts?
And I'm curious how much range might be gained with winglets on the King Air?
Our longest leg will be Tetorboro to Oklahoma City (1157 nm).
As far as I can tell with average winds both the King Air 200 and 300 (not 350) will just make the 5 hour leg with a reserve, but any higher than normal head wind (over 50 kts) will require a fuel stop.
Any thought?
Also....someone just threw the Conquest into the mix but it doesn't look like it has any greater range than the King Air's.
Thoughts?
And I'm curious how much range might be gained with winglets on the King Air?
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: C560/G200
Posts: 117
The 200 will make the trip, and I believe the 350 would also. The 300 doesn't come close to that kind of endurance though (maybe with the power WAY back). 3.5hrs is about the max, you better be over the field as 4hr approaches
#3
On paper both the 200 and 350 can climb to 350. In reality the 200 is out of steam in the high twenty's while you can realistically get FL310 out of a 350. The fuel flow on the 350 up there is about the same as a 200 at FL26/280 and a bit faster. The 350 is the plane to have. Check the payload on a 200 with full fuel, pretty weak. The 350 you can fill it up and still carry loads of stuff. Nicer handling aircraft as well.
#5
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: 737, Gulfstream G-IV, Gulfstream G200, King Air 350,
Posts: 51
I've done the trip fro Teb to Omaha about 8 times, which is about 100 miles shorter than OKC. We've had varying head winds up to about 75 knots, flying in the mid 20's in our B200 and A200. Worst I've landed with was a 1 hour reserve. I think OKC might be pushing it for the 200. Have also taken a 350 out there, and you'll have no problems,,,almost regardless of weight and wind.
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 117
We're on the cusp of buying a King Air........ longest leg will be ...1157 nm......As far as I can tell with average winds both the King Air 200 and 300 (not 350) will just make the 5 hour leg with a reserve, but any higher than normal head wind (over 50 kts) will require a fuel stop......Any thought? .........Conquest........how much range might be gained with winglets on the King Air?
#9
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 117
Most of the 350's are RVSM'd and are quite capable of ops at FL330, FL340.....giving you reduced fuel burns and greater range, compared to the 200's and 300's, very few of which are RVSM'd. (Except for the new B200's, I'm guessing they are factory RVSM'd but not sure. Very few of the older ones are.)
#10
This time of year, winds along that route at KA altitudes (upper 20s through low-mid 30s) are probably going to average in excess of 75kts...with many times well north of 100kts. Even flying a 200GT or 300 with cruise TAS of 300kt+ there will still be many times where your groundspeed is down in the 170-210kt range.
Cook @ KBMG has cheap fuel if you need a quick intermediate tech stop...
Cook @ KBMG has cheap fuel if you need a quick intermediate tech stop...
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post