b200 king air performance

[ir1]

hello,

was inbound to darwin sat just gone and heard an airmed 3 callup on descent to 14000. what altitude would he have been at / do they typically operate at? he was also told to reduce speed by 20 knots. just wandering what kind of speeds they can reach on descent?

what really impressed me though was the landing distance required. i landed 36 hold short and he landed 11 and backtracked my rwy and went of at twy near 18 threshold. i think he could have probably vacated the twy before the rwy as was moving quite slowly when he turned onto 36/18. wind was about 10 knots down the rwy.

they just seem a very versatile plane. one min being told to slow down then to land and use the length or rwy that some piston singles would struggle with.

any comment from those that have / do fly them?

[morno]

Not endorsed on them, however could comment with a little bit of knowledge.

Operating altitudes typically in the FL160-290 range. Depending on the engines, as a lot of the later ones, and a few of the old one's have the Raizbeck mods, which gives more performance from the engines. I think the 'useful' ceiling is around the FL310 mark. Pretty sure the Pearl/Airmed B200's don't have Raizbeck though.

Airspeed on descent get's up to around the 210-240kt mark. Could probably even go beyond that if you pushed the torque up.

So they're a very good performer. One of the nicer light twin turbines you could fly.

morno

[Tiger 77]

If ur inpressed by the Kingair, wait til you see a Buffalo perform. :eek: No need for runways, just a 100m long piece of land will suffice.

But anyway Kingairs arn't too bad. They'll land fairly short (400m), but use up a fair amount of runway for takeoff. Typical cruise is anywhere from 14,000 to about 25,000ft depending on sector length and patient requirements (Airmed). Max operating altitude is given as 31,000ft for the SKA200 model.

Groundspeed on descent usually around 280-300kts average.

This is for the old Kingair 200, I know the newer ones perform heaps better.

Cheers,
Tiger.

[bushy]

The B200c is a surprisingly good bush aeroplane with high floatation gear. It can handle dirt and gravel bush strips OK, and can climb out of the thermal turbulence of central Australia. The Raisbeck mods make quite a difference to it's TO and Landing performanec. Much better than the beloved Chieftains they replaced in every way except cost.

The PC 12 does about the same, with one engine, and has a crew door which is a big advantage.

[G.A. Boy]

Best performer of the 200 series is the B200 (-42), with ALL raisbeck mods. Ideal altitude, (sector length and winds aside), is FL250-FL270. Certified to FL350, but cabin alt will go > 10,000. (Not by much though). No real point going above those alts unless tailwinds. Typical IAS on decent is 230 to a max of about 250, but thats with the nose pushed down a bit more than usual. TAS at those alts varies, depending on company power settings, 260-278. As someone used to have a signature on pprune years ago, "Props are for boats, unless its a kingair".

[Monopole]

Typical cruise is anywhere from 14,000 to about 25,000ft Not if you want to keep your job Tiger77 :} :} or unless your doing only 100nm sectors. These aircraft chew the juice something fierce in the lower levels. I would be more inclined to say typical cruise would be between FL220 to FL270. The Kingairs I have flown had a tendency to 'roll' (want for a better word) at altitudes above FL270.

[Tiger 77]

Quote:
Typical cruise is anywhere from 14,000 to about 25,000ft

Not if you want to keep your job Tiger77 or unless your doing only 100nm sectors. These aircraft chew the juice something fierce in the lower levels. I would be more inclined to say typical cruise would be between FL220 to FL270. The Kingairs I have flown had a tendency to 'roll' (want for a better word) at altitudes above FL270.

Yep true. I was referring specifically to the Airmed op. 14,000ft is common as it results in a sea-level cabin. Usually FL220-260 where I work, above that it starts to struggle with a bit of weight.

Cheers,
Tiger.

[TwoHundred]

I thought the -41 and -42 wre both 850shp and main difference between was ITT limits.

200

[Capt Wally]

Mark Tuck (is that name refering to Mack Tuck?, as in pitching down when the Cof P moves back as the speed increases?)was pretty much spot on with his numbers ref the B200. Vmo is actually 259 kts at lower levels, it changes with ALT but to get there as in right up againts the 'barbers pole' means a high ROD and high power settings. The airframe/power plant combination is suited well up to approx mid 20's ie 26000 ft, above that TAS starts to fall off as power (torque) drops. The thick wing of the Beech works well for high lift therefor yielding good short field capabilities, but it's a trade off (as is with all airframes) when it comes to low level flt where high fuel flows are experienced due to the high drag thick wing. Typical Beech built like a brick Shi*house !:-)
GA Boy was correct with FL350 having a cabin ALT just above 10K, besides with ISA + 20 for Eg & a high weight they struggle to maintain such a high ALT especially in cloud where there is likely to be turbulence and the constant upset of the planes flight.
The RaizeBeck mods as mentioned elswhere here make the B200 just that little better over the std factory units. The modified wing LE, the addition of duel aft strakes, 4 bladed props, fully enclosed (when retracted) high flotation gear as well as engine ram recovery all make it a little more user friendly where it counts, off the ground & in the climb/cruise.
If you want to fall out of the sky (as in get down fast) with a 4 bladed kingair then reduce pwr to flight idle, an express elevator comes close to it's decent !:-)
All round a robust & uselful airframe well suited to aeromed work in the bush environment.

Capt Wally :-)

[tail wheel]

The PT6A-41 and -42 are both rated at 850 SHP in the King Air 200/B200.

The PT6A-41 features a modified compressor and 2-stage power turbine for higher ratings.

The PT6A-42 is similar to the PT6A-41 except for increased cruise rating and increased ITT limits with improved compressor reduced loss exhaust ducts.

Both engines weigh 182 kg and are effectively interchangeable. Ambient temp limits on the -42 are higher.

I suspect most -41s in SKA 200s in Australia would now be converted to -42 status.

Used to smile ....... Beech says you fit Raisbeck mods (ram air recovery, four blade props etc) you'll void your Beech 200 warranty.

And what did Beech do - bring out identical mods as standard on the 300 and 350! :}

[clear to land]

I had the pleasure of flying some very nice B200's and 200SE. With the SE, with a full fuel load and payload 300kg under max, time to FL350 was just on 25 mins at ISA+15. With high float gear and Max ITT-20 TAS was around 250kts for slightly less than 400pph. FL240-FL280 is the best TAS/FF trade off without good winds, usually around 270/480 in NQ. Sea Level cabin around FL150 gave around 260/550 respectively. With four blades the field performance was damned good, Vrefs around 90. DHC6 is still my favourite, but the SKA is a brilliant all rounder - thats why they still make/sell them!

[Track Direct]

IR1

The B200 with -42's has a service ceiling of FL350.
On a 200NM sector the B200 operates most efficiently at FL240-250.
Speeds on descent obviously vary with winds and power settings however, groundspeeds in excess of 300kts are not uncommon.
With Raisebeck mods, a landing distance of 300-400m can easily be achieved, using flaps 40, brakes and reverse.:ok:
The short field performance is impressive and it affords us plenty of margin when operating into/out of shorter strips.
The B200 is perfectly suited to the challenging aeromedical environment.

[tinpis]

"Props are for boats..." wasnt that Sheepguts ?

Whats he doin these days last I heard he was flyin for the Taliban...:rolleyes:

[G.A. Boy]

Sheepguts sounds correct from memory. Last I heard he was flying A320s in asia somewhere, but that news is a year or more old now.

[Shredder6]

I have a little time in the bastard son of the B200, the B1900, and heard once that the M.48/248kt Vmo limit was only due to a windscreen limitation of some sort. Haven't seen anything in course notes to explain the limit.

Considering that the B1900 has the same cockpit and windscreen design as the B200, any B200 drivers know a bit more about this?

[Ultergra]

I have a bit of time flying the C90 variant of the King Air. Gota say, from my personal experience, it's very difficult to fault the machine. I would love to get my hands on the 350 but the 90 does it for me.

Top bus, reliable, performance, comfort and style. What more could you want?? :ok:

[Monopole]

M.48/248kt Vmo limit was only due to a windscreen limitation of some sort
The speed limitation for the windsceen in sustained icing conditions. Cant remember from memory, but I thought the speed was higher then 248kts in the Kingair :confused:

[OZBUSDRIVER]

B200. I wish I could describe that feeling of flying left seat in one as a PPL holder with nothing bigger than a C182 in the logbook. That unusual feeling of lifting the levers up and back into flat pitch, that waaaaaaah of the props that seems to echo off everything you pass. Rolling onto line up, clicking the throttles forward out of flat pitch and have that note change to a satisfying hum, that just steadily increases as you get pushed back in the seat like a bigbore cycle. Pitch up and "30 degree banks" in a climbing turn whilst still doing better than 2000fpm. HSI rolling around for a thirty degree intercept, flight director cueing you onto the most perfect intercept of a radial ever. I just didn't want to hit that button on the AP, wanted to just keep flying it for the whole hour at FL290. Strange feeling in the controls for me as I try to get the aircraft to maintain S&L Felt like bugger all air for the controls to bite into. Groote Eylandt just starts to show up on the WX radar as we approach TOD, 10kts below MMo and down it comes like a freight train, left base for 10, taking care as I get a rap over the knuckles for pulling the throttles back too far on short finals, Full Flap three greens and that RVS not ready light showing (Cool:ok: ) on the lower annunciator panel, nose up to start the flare,feel the mains kiss and lower the nose to the ground RVS light out and back and up into flat pitch and just a hint of beta to get the knots down without using the brakes. Taxi into the awaiting wardscargo van. Baz pulls the fuel levers and thats it my flight is over. 26 years 5 months and 23 days ago and it still feels like yesterday..B200 1.1hrs, what an aeroplane:D

[morno]

Only 1.1 Oz? :E

I've got 1.2 B200 time, :}

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Curses! There would have been more but I couldn't convince my mate to let me go via Perth:E

[Sarcs]

A true Cadillac of the skies, ie they handled beautifully with all the trim wheels, radio stack etc all in the right place but they were a bit of guzzler fuel-wise. As a result you were always recalculating fuel and over long sectors with adverse wx at destination you'd be sweating on it a fair bit and playing with levels, requesting blocks etc trying to milk the best combination of range versus endurance. The best fuel flow I'd ever seen in a B200 was 360lb/hr, that was achieved at FL340 and LRC. The aircraft was a B200SE fairly new and fully kitted out with Raisbeck mod, this aircraft use to TAS at 280kts and the vsi hardly dipped below a 1000ft/min up to about FL280.
Yeah the Super Kingair a trully classic pilot's aircraft....!!

[Continental-520]

Morno, stop bragging about your King Air time and just look after those onions, orright?


520!! :)

[tail wheel]

I don't vouch for the accuracy of this statement, but I was once told the King Air wing outboard of the engines is a Beech Baron wing, with a "filler" wing between the King Air engines. I would be very surprised if that were the case, however there is a remarkable similarity.

It is true that the King Air grew out of the Beech Queen Air and the King Air 100 looks remarkably similar to the Queen Air.

[Howard Hughes]

You are correct Tail Wheel, on both counts!
I understand the outboard section of the Kingair and the Baron use exactly the same NACA aerofoil design...:ok:

[Monopole]

OZBUSDRIVER

Wow, with all that excitment, and all those years ago, you actually still remember the RVS NOT READY light :D

You didn't mention it, but I hope you remembered to put the props into the high RPM position as this is the requirement for reverse being available, not weight on the undercarriage :=

Sorry, hate to be picky :E

[morno]

It's ok 520, the onions are doing fine. Perhaps if you paid them some onion support, they'd be doing even better, :E.

morno

[TwoHundred]

Props high rpm is required for max reverse. (As is cond lever to high idle)

Reverse is still available with less than full fine set however, it just won't be max reverse.

cheers

[OZBUSDRIVER]

I guess I can put that down to the sands of time:ok:

[Reverseflowkeroburna]

226 KIAS is the max speed for guaranteed ice prevention. You can go above that but, you might just get ice.

Vne btw is 259/0.52 for the B200, and 269/0.48 for the earlier 200's. Was the windscreen beefed-up along the way here? The B200 does run an extra 1/2 psid!?!?!

Does anyone have any ideas on the cause for the 140kt minimum in icing conditions? Is it true that this relates to the possibility of ice forming on the unprotected undersides at the higher AOA's??

[TwoHundred]

Any slower than 140kt in icing conditions and it will accumulate ice under the wing, rather than on the leading edge where it can be booted off.

Cheers

[Monopole]

TwoHundred

I vaguely remember something about a mechanical linkage from the throttle levers to a cast iron 'block' that could crack if the throttle levers were moved into reverse without the prop levers in high RPM :confused: :confused: (max reverse RPM is only 1900 RPM controlled by the fuel topping governor to prevent the props from coming 'back on speed)
(As is cond lever to high idle)
I disagree with this though. Max reverse is at 83% N1. You can do this from 'Low Idle' which is 52% N1. It is just that you will reach 83% in reverse operations quicker if the condition levers were at high idle of 70% N1 :ok:

The RVS NOT READY caution annunciator is a result of the prop levers not being in the High RPM position with the landing gear extended. This suggests to me that until you have meet all the coditions ie; gear down and props max, you will not achieve the correct reverse operation.

We could of course be comparing different models :}

[Reverseflowkeroburna]

Thanks 200, I suspected it was along those lines or the bottom of the fuse collecting it due to the higher body angle. It is however interesting that no other aircraft has anything similiar specified......or at least that I know of!

[TwoHundred]

Crikeys Monopole, i might have to get the book out:uhoh:


cast iron block. Sounds sus to me:confused:
max reverse prop prm 1900. Agreed
max N1 in reverse 83%. AgreedAnd your conclusion that max reverse will ocurr earlier/quicker if you have high idle set sounds good also.

So for maximum reverse effectiveness - set high idle and high RPM right?

200