Question for Dash-8 Drivers
08-06-2009 | 06:26 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
From: E-190 Leftist
Does anyone know why changing to a -200 spar would change the ZFW? I would think that spar would be beefier than the -100 spar since it strengthens the wing to hold -300 engines and go faster. Maybe I'm just too tired and not seeing something obvious with the airframe strength relating to ZFW?
08-06-2009 | 07:26 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
From: SLC ERB
I seem to remember that QX's 200's had a max ZFW of 32400. I'm surprised that you guys are usually able to take a jumpseater then - maybe your average BOW's are less but don't Mesa's 200's have APUs? They weren't installed on the QX 200's and max ZFW was still a problem and that's with 400 more available lbs.
Max landing weight was 34500 - you could always take 2100 lbs of fuel + burn + 100 lbs for taxi. It's been a little while now, but that's one of those numbers I will probably always remember
Max landing weight was 34500 - you could always take 2100 lbs of fuel + burn + 100 lbs for taxi. It's been a little while now, but that's one of those numbers I will probably always remember
08-06-2009 | 07:39 AM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 467
Likes: 0
From: SLC ERB
Does anyone know why changing to a -200 spar would change the ZFW? I would think that spar would be beefier than the -100 spar since it strengthens the wing to hold -300 engines and go faster. Maybe I'm just too tired and not seeing something obvious with the airframe strength relating to ZFW?
Having said this - I doubt that swapping a Q200 wing spar would be much of an option. The spars are (usually two spars - front and rear) an integral part of the wing and the wing would probably have to be disassemble to replace the spars. A major undertaking to get only 500 lbs more allowable ZFW. A more likely scenario would be to add to the existing spar to beef it up a bit - still, a costly solution but a bit more doable.
08-08-2009 | 07:57 AM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Mesa counts every bag in the cargo compartment as 30 lbs, even carry ons. So that is 190lbs of pax + carry on + 30 lbs in the back if they check the carry on.
Why, for the love of all that is holy, are some people criticizing doing what it takes (2 minutes to move 3 or 4 bags up front) to get a brother or sister pilot in the jump?
Why, for the love of all that is holy, are some people criticizing doing what it takes (2 minutes to move 3 or 4 bags up front) to get a brother or sister pilot in the jump?
08-09-2009 | 10:26 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
And that is written... where exactly? You're not allowed to move CHECKED bags from the cargo compartment to the passenger compartment but you MAY move already screened carry on bags (which have a special ALREADY SCREENED neon green tag in united) from the cargo compartment to the passenger compartment.
Not only would I say this in public, I would do it in front of a safety inspector grinning the entire time. Besides, most of the time they're not even in the cargo compartment yet -- they're on the rack.
Not only would I say this in public, I would do it in front of a safety inspector grinning the entire time. Besides, most of the time they're not even in the cargo compartment yet -- they're on the rack.
08-09-2009 | 11:48 AM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
From: A320/321
It is in my FOM page 13-5 & POH 10-9!!
I am not trying to get in a p*ssing match with you or tell you how to load you A/C .
But I have read FAA AC 120-27E. And always leave room for error. Thanks for the insight. Dash
I am not trying to get in a p*ssing match with you or tell you how to load you A/C .
But I have read FAA AC 120-27E. And always leave room for error. Thanks for the insight. Dash
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
RVSM Certified
Flight Schools and Training
22
02-27-2009 12:04 PM
