[Purchasing] a Nomad N24/N22A/C/S and a Skyvan SC 7-3-100/200
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Malaysia
Age: 37
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[Purchasing] a Nomad N24/N22A/C/S and a Skyvan SC 7-3-100/200
Hello there ^_^
My company is currently in need of a Skyvan SC-7 Series 3 Variant 100 or 200 and a GAF nomad n24 preferably or an n22 c/s
unfortunately there hasnt been any on sale lately and it's a tough hunt.
if anyone here could help me out it would be lovely
thank you so much
regards,
shawn
My company is currently in need of a Skyvan SC-7 Series 3 Variant 100 or 200 and a GAF nomad n24 preferably or an n22 c/s
unfortunately there hasnt been any on sale lately and it's a tough hunt.
if anyone here could help me out it would be lovely
thank you so much
regards,
shawn
Try Phil Onis at the Parachute place in Bankstown Airport Sydney. He has two SC7's one with engines and one without - both were originally from the malaysian Air Force. I'm sure he would be prepared to sell one to you
Cheers
PS Do not buy a Nomad - unless you have a death wish.
Cheers
PS Do not buy a Nomad - unless you have a death wish.
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Why not get a Twotter instead? A much more capable machine, although they are a lot more pricey!
Of the 4 Nomads in NZ right now, none are up for sale (and aren't likely to be in the future).
Don't listen to the Aussies destroying their own product, they just don't follow manufacturer's recommendations hence why they call them deathtraps.. In 24 years of operating N22s and N24s they are a great machine, carry a good load and have excellent fuel consumption (even the enhanced 500hp RR/Allison on ours still have a fuel consumption LESS than a C208).
Don't listen to the Aussies destroying their own product, they just don't follow manufacturer's recommendations hence why they call them deathtraps.. In 24 years of operating N22s and N24s they are a great machine, carry a good load and have excellent fuel consumption (even the enhanced 500hp RR/Allison on ours still have a fuel consumption LESS than a C208).
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Don't listen to the Kiwi's they like ugly aircraft, I mean after all the gave us the Cresco/Fletcher...
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
now now "HH" ulgyness is in the eye of te beholder, blind as batst the Kiwis are
"HH" lets send over a new 'gumboot' design for the Kiwis, saves having to turn the std ones around facing backwards
Isn't the Nomad looking like being re-invented some time soon?
CW
"HH" lets send over a new 'gumboot' design for the Kiwis, saves having to turn the std ones around facing backwardsIsn't the Nomad looking like being re-invented some time soon?
CW
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Isn't the Nomad looking like being re-invented some time soon?
Isn't the Nomad looking like being re-invented some time soon?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Malaysia
Age: 37
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it's a shame about the nomad though
such a capable flier and with many good traits
dont we all hate it ^^ the ol' still in service n out of production
though i have to agree on the skyvan,
the rear hatch/ "door" seems to be perfect for parajumping
we once had a chance to dive off the platform but our current skyvan setup requires hopper tank to be fitted for cloud seeding/ crop spraying/ sea oil breakage etc etc operations.
would love to dive off a skyvan again. such a pleasurable experience
not to mention it's tricky to fly at first but once u get the hang of it
she's a beauty
wonderful take off abilities.
such a capable flier and with many good traits
dont we all hate it ^^ the ol' still in service n out of production
though i have to agree on the skyvan,
the rear hatch/ "door" seems to be perfect for parajumping
we once had a chance to dive off the platform but our current skyvan setup requires hopper tank to be fitted for cloud seeding/ crop spraying/ sea oil breakage etc etc operations.
would love to dive off a skyvan again. such a pleasurable experience
not to mention it's tricky to fly at first but once u get the hang of it
she's a beauty
wonderful take off abilities.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shhhhhhhhhz "HH", we went from Bi-Planes to Monoplanes during the evolution of aviation, lets not go back further with a Gomad ok buddy?
Everytime I slip into BHI & see that old Gomad out there on display at our HQ's I think God they where brave
CW
Everytime I slip into BHI & see that old Gomad out there on display at our HQ's I think God they where brave
CW
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Malaysia
Age: 37
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ah it's been a long time
been too caught up for half a year sorry for the really late post
aha i love that paint job i googled one before and saw another one like this but i cant
the skyvan's is planned to do aerial survey, oil breakage, cloud seeding, "the paradropper experience" and a load of other jobs
i wish i could paint one up that way...
just wondering..
how many layers did they use ? isn't it a bunch of extra weight?
been too caught up for half a year sorry for the really late post
aha i love that paint job i googled one before and saw another one like this but i cant
the skyvan's is planned to do aerial survey, oil breakage, cloud seeding, "the paradropper experience" and a load of other jobs
i wish i could paint one up that way...
just wondering..
how many layers did they use ? isn't it a bunch of extra weight?
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: East Coast Oz
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Resale???
Flown the N22 and its an airplane with limitations. Its an aging airframe like all the others, that required attention. I was never aware of the bigger engines being certified. Sure could do with some. Unfortunately Allison is not the best choice for fixed wing ops though. I can completely understand the Kiwi's passion for the product. Cool temps are ideal for the Allison engine. And the airframe, apart from the obvious problems with its behind is a supurb design. I prefer the interior to the Twin Otter, but the layout of the cockpit following the AD on the seat tracks being restricted as to the movement of the seat aft of the prop arc's made it a nightmare regarding what was once a pilots' cockpit. Its short field performance did things that the Otter couldn't, however it did buffet uncomfortably in the full flap config that made me nervous. And i have great authority on short field performance regarding the GAF and De Havilland products, but on the whole the Twin Otter is by far the better airplane for the job. Yes the Nomad might burn less fuel, but its all the other issues that come around, like fatigue cracks, and fuel problems due to the not so thought through fuel system. Remember the double engine failure on the gold coast??? Have good authority on that one too. My issue is the resale value of the aircraft. How much is it going to cost you to keep it to the standard compared to its better counterpart. Would you overcapitalize because of this. Sometimes a more expensive purchase can prove cheaper in the long run if you choose the right type for the job at hand. Like they say, if it had a T Tail, and PT-6's, deHavilland might have had a contender.
And the N24, its an N22 with another row of seats. No bigger engines and a more fickle Wt and Balance issue. Nomads were never performers in assymetric ops, and could be compared to Cessna twin performance in this regard. Fill it and fail one and you will see for your self. Its limitations might include Day VFR, as flight requiring anti icing requires an immediate descent as a great deal of power is lost with this on. Non Contaminated runways are another one. The float version suffered from flame out with not much more than spray investion. Never had a problem with it on wheels, but stone damage does occur as the 1st stage comp is right there unprotected in the airflow for anything to knock its teeth out. No partical separator like the B17 or C20'd Jetrangers with the same engine.
If i had a choice, i'd choose a clapped out -100 series that needed major reno work over a Nad, because down the track, a Twin Otter is a Twin Otter and can be converted to -27/-34 engines later and has been a success in any config since its humble beginnings, but the Nad will always be the Nad, with its history following behind.
If you saw an ad for both, what would you choose to take you kids flying in???
Fly safe
-27
And the N24, its an N22 with another row of seats. No bigger engines and a more fickle Wt and Balance issue. Nomads were never performers in assymetric ops, and could be compared to Cessna twin performance in this regard. Fill it and fail one and you will see for your self. Its limitations might include Day VFR, as flight requiring anti icing requires an immediate descent as a great deal of power is lost with this on. Non Contaminated runways are another one. The float version suffered from flame out with not much more than spray investion. Never had a problem with it on wheels, but stone damage does occur as the 1st stage comp is right there unprotected in the airflow for anything to knock its teeth out. No partical separator like the B17 or C20'd Jetrangers with the same engine.
If i had a choice, i'd choose a clapped out -100 series that needed major reno work over a Nad, because down the track, a Twin Otter is a Twin Otter and can be converted to -27/-34 engines later and has been a success in any config since its humble beginnings, but the Nad will always be the Nad, with its history following behind.
If you saw an ad for both, what would you choose to take you kids flying in???
Fly safe
-27
844 Twotters built since 1966, probably an average 20,000 plus hours per airframe = 21,100,000 fleet hours, vast majority of hours on bush STOL operations.
As of August 2006, a total of 584 Twin Otter aircraft (all variants) remain in service worldwide. A number of Series 100/200 were scrapped due to reaching wing life limits. Series 400 back in production.
Would not consider that safety record unreasonable?
170 Nomads built. Wonder how many survive?
As of August 2006, a total of 584 Twin Otter aircraft (all variants) remain in service worldwide. A number of Series 100/200 were scrapped due to reaching wing life limits. Series 400 back in production.
Would not consider that safety record unreasonable?
170 Nomads built. Wonder how many survive?
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: All over
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im interested to see how Gippsland get on with their intentions now that the viking 400 is up and running, those I know that were unfortunate enough to log hours in the nad all agree it felt constantly behind the drag curve with both engines running. 
my preference - anything with P&W's
but I'll settle for anything that pays the rent
my preference - anything with P&W's
but I'll settle for anything that pays the rent