Succesor to the Navajo, Chieftain, Metro
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: The Back Paddock
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Succesor to the Navajo, Chieftain, Metro
Slip
Unfortunately the 1900D line is closed. Eagle Air in NZ got the last bunch lovingly prepared by the Mexican 'B' team as all the decent workers at Ratheon had moved on to producing the company's other aviation masterpieces.
I agree with RFG the C208 Grand, but the metro replacement what about Beech 1900D
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Australia
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Succesor to the Navajo, Chieftain, Metro
A metro with turbines.....it already has turbines doesn't it? I logged it as such!! The only good thing about a Metro is that is was relatively cheap to operate for 19 seats. Terrible to passengerin and bloody awful to fly. Mind you I never flew the 23 which had the -12 donks. I believe they were FAR 25 certified. The rest were just plain frightening. I wonder how long it is going to take either the GA manufacturing sector of the Airline manufacturer's to adopt technology from the brains trust of Burt Rutan whom in my most humble opinion has been the only true modern pioneer of advance aerodynamic concepts. Except for the advent and development of the jet engine very little has changed with aircraft design in fifty years. We just keep tweaking the old concepts.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Succesor to the Navajo, Chieftain, Metro
One of Burt Rutan's designs did go into commercial production and a great aircraft it appeared to be.
Problem was, no one wanted to buy it mostly because it "looked different"!
Problem was, no one wanted to buy it mostly because it "looked different"!
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: with the porangi,s in Pohara
Age: 66
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Succesor to the Navajo, Chieftain, Metro
woomera...you are right it did go into commercial production.....my sister in law in Burt Rutans personal secretary.....I have flown several of the E-Z,s(managed to get a little stick time in the starship also) and have been invited to several of the "launchs" in the Mohave.....called the sis-in law to ask if in fact it was because of its looks(the A/C in question)....seems that there is a lot more to it..."looks" by the sounds of it is/was only a small part of the problem.
Burt is an amazing bloke,and the comments about his A/C can not be overstated.His organization has to be seen to be believed.Aviation is lucky to have a person of this calibre in its ranks............nui pakeha
Burt is an amazing bloke,and the comments about his A/C can not be overstated.His organization has to be seen to be believed.Aviation is lucky to have a person of this calibre in its ranks............nui pakeha
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: oz
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Succesor to the Navajo, Chieftain, Metro
Unfortunately the Starship simply didn't live up to the promises made for it re range, speed, etc. And maybe it was just a bit too different.
Re: Succesor to the Navajo, Chieftain, Metro
Th Starship was a learning tool for Raytheon, their first attempt at composites in that scale, was hand laidup and wit their limited experiance/ knowedge then, it came out much heavier than intended.
The lessons learned have been applied to teh Premier 1 Jet, i hear two average strength giys can lift the fuselage barel without straining at all. The techmology of that Viper machine for fuselages is the way of the future.
The lessons learned have been applied to teh Premier 1 Jet, i hear two average strength giys can lift the fuselage barel without straining at all. The techmology of that Viper machine for fuselages is the way of the future.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: with the porangi,s in Pohara
Age: 66
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Succesor to the Navajo, Chieftain, Metro
M.M....ditto on your comments,....nice piece of equipment though.....some very tough "legal" wranglings were and now at its doorstep
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Dunnunda & Godzone
Age: 74
Posts: 4,275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Succesor to the Navajo, Chieftain, Metro
One of the problems of the Starship I seem to recall, was that it was designed as a B200/300/350 and Cessna 500/550 replacement, but with the fans at the blunt end, certification into unsealed runways became an issue.
Certainly the PT6's reversed as in the Starship was the perfect configuration for what is normally a reverse flow free turbine - no fancy intake air ducting!
Certainly the PT6's reversed as in the Starship was the perfect configuration for what is normally a reverse flow free turbine - no fancy intake air ducting!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 447
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Succesor to the Navajo, Chieftain, Metro
Sprucegoose,
The Metro 23 was not certified to Far 25. Pretty sure it's the same for the B1900. That's why they are certified to fly with just one pilot eg. freight ops. And don't be too hard on them. I flew both 23's and III's for years. They're a good machine. Great for aspiring airline types to cut their teeth on and an excellent rig to learn how to operate IFR without all the bells and whistles. Most companies that operate them love them for their low operating and aquisition costs. Management type told me once that the 23 was 1/3 cheaper to operate than a Bandit. Go figure. It was nice to go to a different type but I still have a big soft spot for them.
D
The Metro 23 was not certified to Far 25. Pretty sure it's the same for the B1900. That's why they are certified to fly with just one pilot eg. freight ops. And don't be too hard on them. I flew both 23's and III's for years. They're a good machine. Great for aspiring airline types to cut their teeth on and an excellent rig to learn how to operate IFR without all the bells and whistles. Most companies that operate them love them for their low operating and aquisition costs. Management type told me once that the 23 was 1/3 cheaper to operate than a Bandit. Go figure. It was nice to go to a different type but I still have a big soft spot for them.
D
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Succesor to the Navajo, Chieftain, Metro
Wooms,
I think I recall another problem with the Starship was that the FAA mandated much higher airframe loads as there was absolutely no information about how composites would age. As a result the airframe came out much heavier than a comparable aluminium one with the resultant performance costs.
I understand that all but one (not the one in Australia) has been re-purchased by Raytheon and grounded. There must still be one owner who loves the concept.
I think I recall another problem with the Starship was that the FAA mandated much higher airframe loads as there was absolutely no information about how composites would age. As a result the airframe came out much heavier than a comparable aluminium one with the resultant performance costs.
I understand that all but one (not the one in Australia) has been re-purchased by Raytheon and grounded. There must still be one owner who loves the concept.
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: Australia
Posts: 413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Succesor to the Navajo, Chieftain, Metro
Hey Defenstrator, I might have the certification number slightly wrong in so far as the Metro 23 might have been certified under FAR 23 or 25. I can never remember which one is which anymore. In any case it would have been one or the other. The older Metro's were all certified under SFAR41 which was a compromise by the FAA in the late 70's or early eighties in response to a rapidly growing air taxi segment of the aviation industry following deregulationin the USA. In a response to this growing market Fairchild, British Aerospace (J31) and Beech in particular responded to demand for aircraft in the 19 seat catagory by stretching existing models of corporate turbo prop aircraft to fit more seats. The FAA had no specific regulations for the required performance for aircraft operating in this FAR 135 environment and so in order to allow the production of these new 19 seaters and to not be seen to be impeding the growth of the air taxi business they allowed such aircraft to fly under a supplementay set of regulations that were born from the regulations governing private and corporate aircraft operating under FAR 91. To you and I this meant little except in the context of performance. SFAR 41 only required an aircraft at max all up weight to be able to climb at 50 feet a minute at sea level with one engine inoperative on a standard ISA day. Under either FAR 23 or 25 aircraft were certified to transport catagory standards which required the minimum climb gradient's of I think 2.5% with OEI after take off at sea level. Having flown the Metro III and then the J3200 I can assure you the difference was remarkable. We did our training at nightafter the days revenue flying was complete in the Metro III and two students, one instuctor and full tanks had us at the max weight of around 14,400 pounds from memory and performance on one donk was not a whole lot better than the minimum required. It was better though but I used CAWI plenty of times to get out of hot and high airports and the old Metro II's we had were equiped with a JATO bottle for performance!! The J3200 was a dream to fly after those babies. As for the single pilot certification of the Metro 23 I am having an educated guess here and thinking that it was grandfathered from the II's and III's which were available as single pilot aircraft simply to allow operators of both types to have a common type rating. As with any American bureaucracy the FAA, I'm sure, remains flexible in the face of lobbying from interest groups. Just look at 207 minute ETOPS! It served Boeing in the commercial chest thumping with Airbus. The US government even "encouraged" the FAA to approve it.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: East of YRTI
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Succesor to the Navajo, Chieftain, Metro
Replacement for etc......
Given the cutthroat nature of <5700kg operations, one item that seems to get regularly left out of the quote calculation formula is an allowance for a replacement a/c, say $50 - 100 per hour. No wonder that there are so many 20,000 hr Pa31's around. Still CASA, despite their statement that "CASA will ensure the financial competence of operators" allows the shonkies to continue to operate. How many times is the YSBK Cirrus going to go to the wall and get reborn, go to the w............
To answer the q, it looks to me that one of the better 10 seat contenders would have to be the C441. Not much else around.
Given the cutthroat nature of <5700kg operations, one item that seems to get regularly left out of the quote calculation formula is an allowance for a replacement a/c, say $50 - 100 per hour. No wonder that there are so many 20,000 hr Pa31's around. Still CASA, despite their statement that "CASA will ensure the financial competence of operators" allows the shonkies to continue to operate. How many times is the YSBK Cirrus going to go to the wall and get reborn, go to the w............
To answer the q, it looks to me that one of the better 10 seat contenders would have to be the C441. Not much else around.
