Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 04-19-2016, 01:15 PM   #1  
New Hire
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Jun 2013
Posts: 2
Default Caravan overwater regulations -Cuba

Hey guys,
Never flown a caravan, just currently King Airs. A competitor of ours out of PBI is mentioning flying a Caravan 135 Key West to Havana when things open up. Pax no cargo. I didn't think this would be possible due to 135 single engine rules.

Reason I ask is I have a possible opening to get into this competitor with a position in my first jet. However they will also qualify me in a caravan. Not too excited about that, especially of sketchy stuff bending 135 regs is happening. But hoping to get into my first slowtation...can anyone offer insight on the legality of this? Thanks!!
Skycakes is offline  
Old 04-19-2016, 05:49 PM   #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2015
Posts: 126
Default

Does this particular operator's name rhyme with Tofuleyley?

If so then they won't do it. I was with the company last year and they said they couldn't figure how to do it while staying in proper glide range.
WillFlyForSpam is offline  
Old 04-19-2016, 07:32 PM   #3  
Sitting on the sidelines
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 434
Default

Can't do it. 135 regs clearly require you to be able to make it to shore with one engine inop. Tough to make it 45 miles with one engine inop in a Caravan!
Navajo31 is offline  
Old 04-28-2016, 07:49 PM   #4  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jan 2016
Posts: 29
Default

25 miles off shore is about as far as you wanna go with people on board before you have oxygen on board... anything more than that, well. Thank god the PT-6 is one of the most reliable motors out there, or we'd hear about a lot more planes going in the ocean apparently...
loveme117 is offline  
Old 09-02-2016, 07:53 AM   #5  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Posts: 70
Default

135.167 covers extended overwater requirements (beyond 50nm from a shoreline). Just have to carry raft and survival equipment and train on it.
I miss my dog is offline  
Old 09-08-2016, 02:10 PM   #6  
Sitting on the sidelines
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 434
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I miss my dog View Post
135.167 covers extended overwater requirements (beyond 50nm from a shoreline). Just have to carry raft and survival equipment and train on it.
Wrong. You need to be able to reach the nearest shoreline with an engine inoperative. When you only have one engine, well.....it's gliding distance. (PAR 135.183)

A contact in the South Florida FSDO told me they are looking very closely at FLL operators who are flying the Van to the Bahamas. They are not happy about it. Their definition of "gliding distance" seems to be even more than the 14:1 ratio that Cessna claims. When they accept "cross DEKAL at 4,000" they are definitely swimming home if the engine quits.
Navajo31 is offline  
Old 09-08-2016, 02:38 PM   #7  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Position: Left seat of a Jet
Posts: 511
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Navajo31 View Post
Wrong. You need to be able to reach the nearest shoreline with an engine inoperative. When you only have one engine, well.....it's gliding distance. (PAR 135.183)

A contact in the South Florida FSDO told me they are looking very closely at FLL operators who are flying the Van to the Bahamas. They are not happy about it. Their definition of "gliding distance" seems to be even more than the 14:1 ratio that Cessna claims. When they accept "cross DEKAL at 4,000" they are definitely swimming home if the engine quits.
Don't know what altitude that glide ratio is for but I will make this perfectly clear, the data is based on a new engine and airframe. Insurance companies love this type of stuff because their lives are generally boring in which is good. Don't give them anything to be excited about.
bozobigtop is offline  
Old 09-09-2016, 07:55 AM   #8  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2016
Posts: 338
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Navajo31 View Post
Wrong. You need to be able to reach the nearest shoreline with an engine inoperative. When you only have one engine, well.....it's gliding distance. (PAR 135.183)

A contact in the South Florida FSDO told me they are looking very closely at FLL operators who are flying the Van to the Bahamas. They are not happy about it. Their definition of "gliding distance" seems to be even more than the 14:1 ratio that Cessna claims. When they accept "cross DEKAL at 4,000" they are definitely swimming home if the engine quits.
We use a conservative 2 miles/1000' (10:1) in the Pilatus to judge our power off glide distance for meeting this regulation. Our version out here on the west coast is "cross PACIF at 5,000", puts us right on the edge of the envelope as to whether we'd make it to the coast. Luckily the predominate winds are onshore and that'd help a little if we lost an engine.

On another note, I heard the PT-6A is being used to generate electricity in certain undeveloped regions and for oil drilling platforms. Apparently the engine can run perfectly for years without a fraction of the maintenance required by FARs.
TimetoClimb is offline  
 
 
 

 
Post Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FAA's drone regulations RhinoPherret Safety 45 06-21-2016 06:04 PM
NAI opinion piece tom11011 Major 1 06-21-2014 02:48 PM
CFI FIA versus CPL written dl773 Flight Schools and Training 2 06-17-2014 04:03 PM
Colgan Sunshine Hearing Airsupport Regional 84 02-06-2010 10:38 AM
C-208 Fact SuperD Part 135 10 03-16-2008 03:39 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:23 PM.