Student interested in buying an airplane
03-29-2010 | 08:43 AM
#12
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,895
Likes: 690
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
The one thing that I did try to sell him on and he agrees is an aircraft with known-ice. They want to be able to fly in the winter time IFR. Obviously I stressed the known-ice in a light single/twin is not to fly IN icing conditions, but to fly THROUGH it and get to clear air and even then it's not always the best practice.
03-29-2010 | 09:01 AM
#13
Thread Starter
Does NOT get weekends off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
From: ERJ - 145
03-29-2010 | 09:33 AM
#14
Doing One Pilot's Job
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,883
Likes: 119
A pilot should not have different acceptable levels of risk for when their family is onboard and when they are not.
As long as the pilot knows the limitations of the airplane and its FIKI system (which cannot be stressed enough), a PT6 on the nose isn't necessary for a SE airplane to safely operate in known-icing conditions. If you're hanging out in ice, maybe...but transiting it up or down to get out of it? Not necessary at all.
There are pilots who wouldn't dare fly into known-ice conditions in any SE piston, even one with FIKI. While I understand this perspective, its not unlike those who say they wouldn't fly IFR in a SE piston, or over mountains, or over water. Just because the level of risk in a certain operation is unacceptable to a particular individual or group of individuals doesn't mean its unacceptable period.
As long as the pilot knows the limitations of the airplane and its FIKI system (which cannot be stressed enough), a PT6 on the nose isn't necessary for a SE airplane to safely operate in known-icing conditions. If you're hanging out in ice, maybe...but transiting it up or down to get out of it? Not necessary at all.
There are pilots who wouldn't dare fly into known-ice conditions in any SE piston, even one with FIKI. While I understand this perspective, its not unlike those who say they wouldn't fly IFR in a SE piston, or over mountains, or over water. Just because the level of risk in a certain operation is unacceptable to a particular individual or group of individuals doesn't mean its unacceptable period.
03-29-2010 | 10:59 AM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 528
Likes: 0
From: XJT CA
I've never owned anything to verify the accuracy of the website, but maybe check this out.
PlaneQuest
PlaneQuest
03-29-2010 | 11:22 AM
#16
Thread Starter
Does NOT get weekends off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
From: ERJ - 145
I've never owned anything to verify the accuracy of the website, but maybe check this out.
PlaneQuest
PlaneQuest
03-29-2010 | 12:19 PM
#17
Doing One Pilot's Job
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 7,883
Likes: 119
The Citation II numbers on that PlaneQuest website are WAY wrong, and I'm not just talking fuel.
Rough hourly fuel burn for a Citation II is 180gph, not 151gph.
Maintenance & engine reserve figures are also VERY low for a 25+ year old airframe.
Rough hourly fuel burn for a Citation II is 180gph, not 151gph.
Maintenance & engine reserve figures are also VERY low for a 25+ year old airframe.
03-29-2010 | 12:50 PM
#18
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,895
Likes: 690
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
There are pilots who wouldn't dare fly into known-ice conditions in any SE piston, even one with FIKI. While I understand this perspective, its not unlike those who say they wouldn't fly IFR in a SE piston, or over mountains, or over water. Just because the level of risk in a certain operation is unacceptable to a particular individual or group of individuals doesn't mean its unacceptable period.
That risk is focused mainly on post-crash survival...I am a hell of a lot tougher than my kids, and a lot more mobile. So night/IMC over mountains is out with the family in ASEL.
Of course everyone has their own risk requirements. But intentional FIKI in a light piston airplane is starting to push the boundaries...a non-pro pilot is going to be real busy if anything goes wrong in icing.
03-30-2010 | 05:12 AM
#19
Flying Farmer
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 3,160
Likes: 0
From: Turbo-props' and John Deere's
I won't disagree that a C310 isn't a good choice, I have 2000hrs in them flying freight, and absolutely love the plane. It would be a good plane for the mission. Problem is you have "Full De-ice" and "Known Ice" varients. The difference is the FIKI models have a heated windshield(which sucks 95% of the time when you are flying every day), vs the Alcohol windshield(which I favor except for when icing is all the way down an approach). There aren't very many FIKI C310's out there, so the "Full De-ice" is more popular. At that point, you really have to weigh the additional costs etc... of finding a good FIKI vs the other.
03-30-2010 | 07:38 AM
#20
Thread Starter
Does NOT get weekends off
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,631
Likes: 0
From: ERJ - 145
I won't disagree that a C310 isn't a good choice, I have 2000hrs in them flying freight, and absolutely love the plane. It would be a good plane for the mission. Problem is you have "Full De-ice" and "Known Ice" varients. The difference is the FIKI models have a heated windshield(which sucks 95% of the time when you are flying every day), vs the Alcohol windshield(which I favor except for when icing is all the way down an approach). There aren't very many FIKI C310's out there, so the "Full De-ice" is more popular. At that point, you really have to weigh the additional costs etc... of finding a good FIKI vs the other.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
