Comp Air 8 Experimental Skydive Aircraft ???

[Dusk till Prawn]

What are the regs in OZ for the use of experimental aircraft for skydiving?

This Comp Air 8 might be the turbine answer for under $400K

11 minutes to 13,000ft with 6 jumpers , the walter turbine engines are very reliable eastern European PT6 copy

Airplane, 2001 Aerocomp Comp Air 8 for sale in Santa Maria, California (http://www.chooseyouritem.com/airplanes/files/616500/616682.html)

Skydive Andes | Paracaidismo en Chile | Tandems, Cursos, skydive andes Chile paracaidismo paracaidista skydiving tandem freefly Sudamérica South America Santiago Chiñihue salto adventure parachute fun cursos Cuatro Diablos, Paracaidismo en Chile. Tan (http://www.skydiveandes.cl/) see video on the left

Nordic Aviation - Compair 8 - The ultimate jump plane (http://www.ecatech.fi/nordicaviation/content/view/31/32/) these guys say 10 pax

[RadioSaigon]

That link you provided is invalid VH-XXX... try this (http://www.aerocompinc.com/) one!

[Alistair]

The door looks a bit small for jumping. The Andes one has a step and a handle but it looks hard to stack up more than 2 in the door and 1 on the strut. Interesting though.

They spec them out too, nice looking example.

http://www.aerocompinc.com/used/airplanes/ca8/wallcace/IMG_3837_small.JPG

http://www.aerocompinc.com/used/airplanes/ca8/wallcace/Wallace-Panel_small.jpg

[VH-XXX]

That Compair 9 on their front page is a mean looking piece of Kit and on floats they look awesome.

What is amazing about them is their sheer size. They are much larger than they first look.

There's a 10 in the completed sections with modified skydive door......

http://www.aerocompinc.com/Completions/DSC07091sm.jpg

[Stikybeke]

VH XXX

"There is a guy in Melbourne with a checkered history in aviation"

He's a mate of mine.........be nice.

:oh:

[VH-XXX]

Half the people in Melbourne have a checkered history in aviation. I could have been referring to anyone! :ok:

[Stikybeke]

Thanks for that.....It's refreshing to see someone man enough to say sorry...Well done!!

Counting you....that's 2 mates I've got now...

:ok:

[Alistair]

Now your talking with that door! Looks like the standard rear door is 2 piece. Here is the same plane from my earlier post but with the door fully open.

http://www.aerocompinc.com/Completions/Chuck%20Wallace/wallace6.jpg

But...

In their FAQ

"Would the Comp Air 10XL Turbine be suitable for use as a skydiving jump plane?"

Yes, the Comp Air 10 would make a fantastic "jump plane" for a skydiving club. With a useful load of up to 3000 lbs, roomy cabin, and the outstanding climb performance provided by the 657 eshp Walter M601D, it would make an ideal jump plane.

But...
Current FAA regulations, however, do not permit the use of a US-registered experimental airplane "for hire or compensation" [14CFR 91.319]. It is our understanding that members of private clubs and organizations might be able to build or purchase an experimental airplane for the exclusive use of club members, but US regulations do not permit using an experimental airplane to provide aviation services to the general public. Standard operating limitations (see Section 7) issued for US amateur-built experimental aircraft expressly prohibit use of the airplane for skydiving. Doing so legally would require an exemption or modified operating limitations for each particular aircraft.

Certification?
Aerocomp Inc. receives numerous enquiries about the possibility of using a CA10 for skydiving, and we are interested in any proposals that would provide the funds necessary to produce a 14CFR Part 23 certified version of the airplane. Certification costs have been roughly estimated at US$20 to $30 million. Without Part 23 certification, commercial use of the exciting Comp Air Turbines is not permitted.

That is for the US, I don't know what CASA would make of it. You might get away with club use but as for lobbing the general public as tandoms, probably not. If they were able to certify the aircraft under part 23 you would be paying a whole lot more for the aircraft than US$400k for them to recoup the US$20 million or so that it would take for it to happen.

[Dusk till Prawn]

Tandem skydiving is still classed as an instructional introduction to skydiving , although it's totally makes money:ok: it still is a club activity , if people decide to pursue their skydiving then the Tandem "can" count as the first jump in their course .... this is how tandems are allowed under the private system.

If they can get a big door on that Comp Air 10XL pad the floor up to meet the door seal then bingo we are in business big time! $300K and you got a 10 seat jump ship ..... something skydive centers have been dreaming about!

I know a guy who flew the Let's with Walter engines in Africa he said they're great ..... the engine life isn't effected by start cycles just it's usual TBO ...

I don't know if I should get my hopes up but this is AWESOME if it can be used for skydiving ...

[VH-XXX]

For starters, in Australia you can not carry more than 6 persons in an experimental aircraft, unless approved by CASA or an "authorised person" so even if you could, you already have a barrier before you get started.

Also, under experimental regulations in OZ:

Operating Limitations

An experimental aircraft may be used for any of the following operations in support of an operation for which the special certificate of airworthiness was issued:

(a) taking the aircraft to or from a place where maintenance on the aircraft can be done, or has been done;
(b) testing the aircraft after maintenance;
(c) training a person to qualify for an aircraft endorsement on the aircraft; practice in flying the aircraft; carrying out a demonstration or test of the aircraft for sale; delivering the aircraft to a person under a contract of sale;
(g) for an amateur‑built or kit‑built aircraft -- flying training given in the aircraft to its owner.

[Dusk till Prawn]

I Just called CASA ..... they were like "hmmmm interesting one whats your e-mail we'll get back to you"

Put a roller door on that beast and game on I say .....

6 people ... well you need 7 for a pilot and 3 tandems .... here comes the red tape again! :ugh:

[Alistair]

I get the whole 'tandem is a student' thing but the problem is that the US FAA expressly prohibit the aircraft from use in skydiving (probably to prevent the back door you have mentioned).

It doesn't seem likely that CASA would allow it if it isn't in the US, regardless of the operation being private or not. They would want to protect the public, as the average person on the street would not understand the difference between an experimental reg. aircraft and a VH reg. and the differences in testing for certification.

Recreational flying in experimental reg. aircraft is one thing, making money in a 'private' operation would be something completely different.

I guess you would have to get an approval from CASA before even thinking about throwing cash in the direction of an aircraft like this.

Nice idea though, I'm all for cheap turbine aircraft operating at DZ's.

[Alistair]

If they will give an approval to use the aircraft for skydiving it shouldn't be too much of a leap to get approval to fly it full of people.

After all they will all have a parachute on :ok:

[remoak]

Nice bike, can you get it without that ugly red packing container?

(;))

[Alistair]

What bike?

Thats the engine!:)

[sms777]

If they put a fully blingded up Harley Chopper in there they would have sold hundreds of those aeroplanes already.
Not very good marketing IMHO.

[Dusk till Prawn]

The APF should put a proposal to CASA to have these approved for club operations at least ..... A machine that can could get 8 or so people to flight levels under $400K would fill a massive hole in the market .... Pistons to Caravans & Cresco's are a massive financial jump for the smaller operators to take.
APF gather all the aircraft data
Proposal to CASA
Dispo for 8-10 people
Club Ops
Turbines are safer! even if they are Eastern Block!:ok: Gold Jerry

Comp AIR 10XL

Airplane, 2008 Aerocomp Comp Air 10 for sale in Santa Maria, California (http://www.chooseyouritem.com/airplanes/files/616500/616679.html)

COMP AIR 8

http://www.airplanemart.com/sun_fun_2007/sun_and_fun_2007_pix/n555rw_comp_air_8_turbine.jpg

[VH-YES]

Hi all,

There is a Comp Air agent supporting the Australasian region "check their web site" and presently a para club in QLD (with the assistance of Comp Air) are pushing CASA for approval but from sources within and outside CASA, it seems some senior CASA employee's just don't get off their ass because I was told only two days ago heaps of flt & strc test reports for the Comp Air 8/10 have sat on the floor of a CASA FOI's office since Feb 09! Great work guys, fantastic seeing where my tax goes! := get a real job will you!

VH-NO! :D

[VH-XXX]

Not knocking the previous poster, as much as I would like to think that it will go ahead for them, but I fail to see how even a massive pile of structural reports and engineering information on anyones desk or floor at CASA will do any good to the potential operator. Surely the aircraft either has to be certified or it doesn't? There's no middle ground in this discussion, it's black or white and I would be surprised that someone at CASA would just peruse some engineering info and give it the big tick of approval to operate - I'm a little more skeptical than that. As we've seen, it costs millions to certify an aircraft so it makes you wonder what they are thinking of doing.

Long term, short of some huge investor coming along, the only way I can see certification happening would be if there was military interest in the aircraft and they funded the certification process, like they have been talking about with the Furio in NZ to be used as a trainer.

This is why LSA is so good because the costs are tiny in comparison, but you can't jump 8 people out of an LSA unfortunately.

[Dusk till Prawn]

BAD NEWS JUMP FANS!

Just got an e-mail back from CASA and it's a no go for the Comp Air & skydiving.

Better keep saving for the Caravan or Cresco :{

[VH-XXX]

Can you pleas elaborate on the reasoning behind this so others are more informed by your efforts? I would be interested considering the talk earlier of others who have a proposal on the table.

[aseanaero]

The Walter turbine is incredible value for money (1/4 to 1/3 the price of an overhauled Pratt or Garrett) and compares in many ways with the PT6A-20

In 2007 Walter was purchased by GE so longer term the prices will probably start creeping up

GE - Aviation: General Electric Company To Acquire Walter Engines a.s. (http://www.geae.com/aboutgeae/presscenter/other/other_20070827.html)

Walter M601 powered C207 anyone ? That would be a nice STC for someone to do.

[jakessalvage]

In recent years I've been involved in maintaining aircraft for several different parachute operators on both sides of the ditch. The holy grail I speak of is a "cheap" single engine turbine jump plane. Currently its a requirement to use an aircraft that has a Certificate of Airworthiness in the standard category. In Aus this is then endorsed restricted due to the nature of the operation, not the standard the aircraft or aircraft modification complies with.
The Walter Fletcher is the cheapest option, albeit the Walter Engine has some unique disadvantages and advantages. The engine has a fuel consumption up to 15% greater than a PT6 of equivalent SHP. That's the biggest issue, but the Fletcher installation has at times had problems with fuel components and in the past random turbine/compressor blade failures although only one was in a Parachute aircraft to the best of my knowledge.
The upside of the Walter is apart from the lower purchase price, no HSI. no fuel nozzles, and in my opinion a better propeller and prop operating system. Also the factory support has in the past been great and they have on occasions pro-rata warrantied components up to the TBO of the engine. Be aware the M601D-11NZ has a unique cycle count formula and is not as simple as other M601 variants.
The Garret Fletcher conversion in Aus despite been a superior engineered aircraft is not certified in the Standard category and therefore is not eligible for use in Parachuting, given the right circumstances this would be a great aircraft.
As of today there is another option.............the stretched Fletcher Super Air NZ call the Fletcher EX with a PT6-11AG engine has been issued a STC in Standard Category. The one example of this aircraft set up for Parachuting in Aus will probably start work sometime in the near future. There could be bugs to work through but there are several of the stretched Fletchers doing Ag work in NZ with no obvious problems.
Fletcher airframes are cheap at the moment, but beware, some are cheap for very good reasons.
Jake

[aseanaero]

Good post Jake

How many jumpers would the Walter Fletcher carry ?

Nice big wing on the Fletch also so it would be a good stable platform

Poor mans Porter ?

[Dusk till Prawn]

Walter powered C207 that would be it! perfect size / price range ....

Email from CASA

CASA has had enquiry on using the Comp Air for parachuting in Australia.
Unfortunately this aircraft does not meet certification for this role.
Regards ###

[aseanaero]

Walter powered C207 that would be it! perfect size / price range ....


It would be a rocket ship with the M601s 650 shp compared to 300-310hp for a standard C207

I'm surprised nobody has done it. I think there's an RR250-B17 (Allison) conversion for the 207 but the Allison and Garrett fixed turbine designs don't seem to like the high rates of descent and aerodynamic braking forces on the propellor and gearbox.

A Free turbine design like the PT6 and Walter seems to be the best set up for skydiving.

Always wanted to fly a jump plane with lift spoilers as well ! Could probably get an 8,000-10,000 fpm descent with a turbine / lift spoiler set up :)

[jakessalvage]

Best to talk to the existing operators, NZONE and Skydive Nelson are both very good operators and will give you an honest assessment of the aircraft, they can both be found on the web.
Not sure if the comparison to the Porter has merit, Porter's are a fantastically unique aeroplane, and a Fletchers not..............its hard to describe what a Fletcher is, perhaps the most highly modified, adaptable, dependable, rugged, and lots of other things, GA aeroplane of all time. Don't forget it started out with a 220hp continental engine.
Just be aware if buying a used Fletcher, be very careful, they can be very expensive to return to a high standard if they've had years of neglect, poor maintenance, and repairs/modifications.
A good Fletcher does allow an operator to control costs and therefore stand a chance of making some much needed $$$$$$.
Jake

[Dusk till Prawn]

According to this link on the Walter site some one is operating a Walter Cessna 207

Number of Aircraft Types Flying with M601 Turboprop Engine Has Reached 30 (http://72.14.235.132/search?q=cache:FVPPNoGMom8J:www.walterengines.com/editor/image/download1_soubory/4.doc+cessna+207+walter+engine&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=hk&client=firefox-a)

I will try get their contact details & e-mail Walter to see who did the conversion.

[aseanaero]

Looks like the C207 M601 conversion was done by Turbine Solutions LLC .

I looked at their website (very basic) and it doesn't mention the C207 M601 , it maybe an experimental conversion only

Turbine Solutions, L.L.C. Home (http://www.turbinesolutions.biz/)

[aseanaero]

Here's the pricing for the Soloy C207 using an RR250 (418hp)

http://www.soloy.com/files/Products/Documents/207-2008%20Price.pdf

More good Walter info here

http://www.skytractor.com/WALTER.htm

Partners (http://www.walterengines.com/customers-service/members.htm)

Best bet is to email [email protected] and see what they know , there maybe a Walter C207 in the STC approval process

-

[Dusk till Prawn]

This might be the guys here : Turbine Solution Group

New Page 1 (http://www.turbinesolutiongroup.com/)

They mod Cessna 340's as well .....

[Dusk till Prawn]

Soloy & PT6 conversions are all upwards of $500K which is exactly what this thread is all about , which is trying to find a cheap turbine jump plane solution.

The Walter Turbine with mounts & accessories are about $120K , the engine alone new is only $50K so ... if you could get an old 207 and have this fitted you would have a great jump machine for under $500K

This would fill a huge gap in the market for the skydiving industry.

Firewall Forward Engine Packge • Complete IRAN "Firewall Forward" engine package $117,000
Walter M601D Powerplant Options Available • Deluxe Stainless Steel Baffle Kit $1645 • Ceramic Coated Extractor Exhaust $3850 • Turbine Exhaust and Intake Covers (fabric muffs) $545

[aseanaero]

Turbine Solution Group



That looks like the right company :ok:

[aseanaero]

Going on those 207 conversion costs you are looking at costs of about a mill including the airframe right?

Probably $600 to $700k including an old airframe which is getting close to Caravan money

A Walter conversion would be able to be done for $300k to $450k if there was an STC out there in the market.

[flog]

M601 Airvan anyone?

What's the process in Aus for getting an STC done?

[VH-XXX]

Dusk Till Prawn, can you please pm me or post who you spoke to or emailed at CASA? I've been re-reading and still fail to see why an aircraft needs to be certified for a Private Operation. (I am aware of the whole argument of Private versus Commercial Ops for Skydiving).

I don't understand how a CASA employee can say that an aircraft can't be used because it's not certified when it clearly doesn't.

Eg. A Building materials company can fly people round all day in a Compair experimental whatver size and I don't understand why a skydiving aircraft can't.

[D-J]

XXX

The 'soon' to be introduced update of the APF op regs will be the clincher, as it will require PJE a/c to be maintained to the same schedule as chtr cat a/c (cat B if I recall correctly)

The draft copy of the update was on the APF website.. be buggered if I can find it now... :confused:

[VH-XXX]

Ok, but that won't be a casa document I guess. Depends if all operators abide by APF rules. Not sure how all that works.

[D-J]

the APF being the governing body as appointed by casa (hence APF op regs are approved by casa) , operators in breach of the APF op regs would in the find themselves subject to a casa 'probing'

APF's the toothless tiger, casa well........

[NNB]

you still have that "little" hurdle of EXPERIMENTAL

[VH-XXX]

That's right NNB, BUT you are talking about a Private Operation.

As an example as I said earlier, any company can own and operate an experimental aircraft as I understand it carrying around non-paying passengers or employees... so if you are not operating for hire or reward which must be the case for PJE then an experimental aircraft can be used. ??? The only issue I see is that if the Parachute Mob dictates that a certified aircraft must be used.

Same as the PVT versus Commercial Ops argument for Para ops, the same for experimental, you can't fly them for hire or reward.

At worst, no tandem ops for non members in the experimental aircraft on the face of it. ??? I can't see any regs saying otherwise.

I would liken this to the traffic watch helicopters operating over the CBD at NIGHT with SINGLE engine. You can't do that in charter, but can because it's a private aircraft. No CPL required either.

[NNB]

you're on the right track with PJE in PVT category BUT I cannot see any skydive operation buying one just for "fun jumpers" when they make their money out of non licenced jumpers. A mob in SE Qld is pushing hard for the Comp Air to be approved but so far have run up against a brick CASA wall. As they say - watch this space for further developments...!!
NNB

[D-J]

Extract from the proposed draft regs relation to operation of aircraft involved in parachute ops


General Conditions
6.1 A drop aircraft when dropping parachutists must be operated in accordance with the APF Jump Pilot’s Handbook.
6.2 A pilot in command of a drop aircraft must hold an APF Jump Pilot’s Certificate.
6.3 A drop aircraft that is not a Class A aircraft must be maintained as if it were a Class B charter aircraft and must have a current maintenance release issued in that category.
6.4 Applications for exemptions to carry fire extinguishes may be made for certain type aircraft i.e. C172, C182, C206
6.5 Any alteration of the APF Jump Pilot’s Handbook must be notified to CASA for acceptance.
6.6 If CASA does not accept the alteration, it must notify the APF.





There is a fair bit more to the doc but mostly it's about making the pilot responsible for jump operations & hence how they can screw the pilot in the event something goes wrong

[Yank04]

This is just a general warning, since this post discusses the Comp Air product. :=

I was informed today, that their :mad: agent filed for court action due to misappropriation (nice word for thieft) of funds that dealer sent Comp Air's CEO name :mad: last year and his only trying to get it returned. Poor bastard.

Around $90,000 USD worth of missing and paid for parts, which have been outstanding around 12 months now! Sh-t, thank god I purchased a Jab instead!

Not bad considering they work on the same side, but interestingly there are now customers coming out of the woodwork with similar issues!

I've seen all this before unfortunately, it'll close down Comp Air for sure, their US team will probably end up in jail or having nothing except the shirts on their back whilst customers and the poor :mad: guy looses out too.

The machine is sound, management is shady though, :} least thats my expereince, so if anyone is seeking to continue getting one their machines be warned, unless you have a cool $100g's to 'drop on the ground' give them a very wide berth. Go with a proven and stable company, not these shady drop kicks I'm reading about.

I'll let you know how it goes, but it's looks bad, real bad and even if you have one to sell 2nd hand, getting parts will be the problem, basically they are lemons now and have lost value overnight.

The joys of GA and the Experimential world we live in or is it just Comp Air
:D
Y

[Redflags]

Hi Yank04,

Funny you mentioned that because I just heard the very same thing over here! It appears the CEO has ripped people off before it seems, takes deposits and spends it on other than what it was meant for, then has the gore to tell customers his "broke" or "due to finical hardships we can't supply parts"

Trouble is, they are still trying to get deposits of a guy in South Africa, I've warned him off, hopefully I've saved his $200g's :ok: and now his buying a C208!

Mr CEO of Comp Air, R-N :mad:, be prepared for an industry backlash! The FAA are on your case! :=

The world of IT is way bigger than you! :D

Tx Yank04 for the headsup

[Yank04]

[Yeah, and I reckon a few here will thank you two for the heads up, cheers http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif Owen Stanely]


Thanks Owen,

[VH-XXX]

Yankie, please ensure that your "facts" are accurate before posting further as certain people that you speak of are reading this thread and have already identified areas where your alleged facts are incorrect. I would exercise caution with your choice of words.

[Yank04]

hello VH-XXX

Tx for sending me that swift kick. :O

That guy you speak of is someone I actually know, and yes probably should not have spilled the beans as it were, so thanks. :oh:

However I still say companies like Comp Air, should not be allowed to trade if they rip people off. :=

CYL
Yank