Jetstream pilots/maintenance

[eggplantwalking]

Is there anyone out there that has experience with the BAE Jetstream? I was asked by a company about the maintenance costs of the Jetstream as compared to other aircraft in the same catagory. I have no knowledge of this machine but remember hearing that the maintenance was higher than that of similar machines. Is there anyone out there that can verify or deny this? Apparently, the Jetstream fits the 25 year or less age catagory, which is now inforced by many countries, and is priced very reasonably. Perhaps the low price is an indication that there are hidden problems with the aircraft. Any input would be most appreciated.

[cavortingcheetah]

:hmm:

Rather depends, one would have thought, upon which Jetstream you are taliking about. On the rather precipitate assumption that you speak of the aging J31/32 I would imagine that the costs involved are pretty high. The Garrett engines are not of the same reliability as the PT6 and the aircraft itself seems better suited to an air force where the salaries of apprentices and engineers are paid for by the taxpayer. Do not forget that it was designed and built by the British and the aviation industry in that country has never been allowed to create anything other than something which will provide employment to the masses and thus allow the government to massage unemployment figures.
You could try contacting Eastern Airways at Humberside Airport, UK. The owner, one RL, was a decent chap when he started the airline. They flew J31/32s for a long time and I think still have one, or had one fairly recently, based at Wick in Scotland. He might be prepared to give you some serious helpful information, especially if he wanted to sell you his last limping airborne battle cruiser.
If you speak of the J42 then RL is still probably your best bet because, as far as I know, Eastern still use the things.:sad:

[eggplantwalking]

Cavortingcheetah,
Thanks for the info, and the contact information is great. You have very well described the problems that plague all British designs. I shall forward your input to the prospective buyers. I appreciate the response.

[The Real Slim Shady]

If you are looking at J41s and dealing with BAe, beware of their MACRO program which is horrendously expensive.

[cavortingcheetah]

:hmm:

In the highly unlikely event that you have a contact with the ageing racing Scotch racing driver, Jackie S, he used to have one which we flew years ago on charters. Funnily enough, that was the J31/32 operator which Eastern took over. It had an autopilot which was a bit of a novelty.
Engine starts on the aircraft with a tail wind are quite hazardous to start temperatures. So it is rather a machine which really requires the added expense of ground power availability to be on the safe side.
Some J31/32s were fitted with a French engine called an Astazou ( I think that's correct). At least one of them ended up being used as a flight test aircraft, I mean airborne parameters here, not training. I think that the last one in which I flew was based at Cranfield. If the Garrett is not the firendliest engine, the Astazou was perhaps even more hostile and I would not get suckered in to one of those, if any still exist.:)

[747ENG]

As a EASA Part 66 licenced Engineer rated on J31/32 and with previous Garrett TPE Engine experience in 2 other airframes BAE seem to have made a reasonable engine into a bit more of a nightmare when they fitted in a J31/32 and the whole aircraft is a typical British maintenance nightmare at times. Its quicker to change a 747 engine than a J31 engine

I dont have the most recent experience but I can only say that airframe are older and spares support you are dependent on one company and once on a good day, flying around 17 or 19 pax whatever it was might have made some money but technology and pax expectations have moved on Try and get something with PT6 engines in it Might cost more initially but you get what you pay for

[The Real Slim Shady]

I have to agree with 747Eng: I did an analysis of the RJ /ATP and J41 for an operator and whilst the original figures I was given made some sense, as those figures were revised as we came closer to signing the agreement, the viability collapsed.

Wouldn't touch the BAe product with a bargepole.

[mad_jock]

I would think as the fuel price increases the Garretts are going to become more economic.

On the 32 you are looking at 600lbs/hr at FL230 with a TAS of 230knts and 800lbs/hour at FL120.

A comparision between the PT6's on a C406 and a J31 at FL100 was a slightly higher burn on the PT6's for 20% less power and 50knts less airspeed.

Also because of a new use of the garrett engines that nobody is meant to know about the engine has been put back into production.

TAking Jet A at 1500$ a tonne thats 410$ per hour or 22$ per seat or 10cents per mile in a J32 still wind.

This link shows the differnt fuel burns for a nominal 600shp

http://www.texasturbines.com/otter/images/Engine_Fuel_Burn_Comparison.pdf

The garretts have atleast 10% advantage over the other engines

Jetstreams

They can be a pain to fix and rely alot of the skill/experence of the Engineer.

They are built like a brick poo house. And land like one as well.

The cabin is pretty comfy compared to similar types (streets ahead of a metro)

And apart from the usual crew moans about bits and bobs in my experence (about 3000 hours on J31/32/41) they are pretty reliable. And from seeing the state/number of Dash 8's parked up on the stand tech, streets ahead of them.

They are pretty handy in crap wx as well

To be honest though the market could do with a new design sub 10 ton 19 seat TP cruising at 300 knts TAS with a drift down of 10k plus, a fuel burn of < 800lbs/hr in cruise, 35knt xwind limit, a fat body cabin and a decent baggage bay and a 2hr range fully loaded plus IFR mins and a 30min divert.


Ohh and a proper bloody toilet that doesn't leak into the cabin or the pod would be nice as well.

The J41 is nearly there, a bit of SAAB 2000 noise cancelling gear in the cabin, a modern engine in it, modern materials, and none complicated instrument fit Dare I say it steam driven, as most of the tech issues with the J41 was the avionics as are the ATR/DASH/DONIER etc. The J31/32's apart from the retro fit TCAS and EGWS fits, hardly have any apart from the occasional flux valve going or gyro wearing out.

If someone markets a modern Jetstream with the attitude of easy fix, keep it simple stupid it can't fail to sell as there is nothing out there at the moment.

[TL1R]

Jetstream 31/32 and 41 no more reliable or unreliable than other T/P aircraft in the same class. Operating and maintenance costs on the J41 for are considerably less than a SF340. Comments re the J41 engines posted previously not true engines generally reliable apart from some oil contam issues. Maintenance intervals on the (J41) TPE331-14 are 4500 hr HSI and 9000 hr CAM which match anything else in the same market. J31/32 engines on High Utilisation have 3500 hr HSI and 7000 hr O/H. Parts for the J41 pretty scarce especially proprietary parts. J31 32 spares readily available due aircraft available cheap to purchase and broken for spares albeit most based in US. Macro costs may be expensive depending on your appetite to purchase spares to support your own R&O but depending on your utilisation and fleet size may be the best option. J41s a few years back could be picked upfor the same cost as a J32 although market has changed recently and values have risen even for older models parked for a few years.

[eggplantwalking]

Thanks very much to all of you who have given a very clear picture of the Jetstream and it's associated problems. We really appreciate the imput and the advice. Nice to know that there is so much tallent out there and all connected through PPRUNE.