RFDS Central Section
Guest
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
meagle2
If you cant wait the 60 seconds required to initiate the FMS/proline then your rushing your departure, it can be done on the run if needed. The Proline has the full Aussie/jepp database with all approaches including vnav on the GPS/NPA. I'm reserving my opinion on the Honeywell, perhaps the CS boys can tell us more.
SN
If you cant wait the 60 seconds required to initiate the FMS/proline then your rushing your departure, it can be done on the run if needed. The Proline has the full Aussie/jepp database with all approaches including vnav on the GPS/NPA. I'm reserving my opinion on the Honeywell, perhaps the CS boys can tell us more.
SN
Last edited by PPRuNeUser0161; 8th May 2010 at 12:02.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Still in Paradise
Age: 61
Posts: 861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Video added as promised, just for Wally & Jaba........
PC12 at 25000' in light ice
See how much better you view of the wing is without that extra engine in the way......
PC12 at 25000' in light ice
See how much better you view of the wing is without that extra engine in the way......
Fantastic view there Jamair, it's so sweet of you to be thinking of Jabba & myself whilst airborne, prolly to take yr mind of the fact that there is only ONE engine! And all the better to see where yr gunna CRASH when the ONLY fan stops!
If I want a better 'view' I'll go hire a C172 & fly in the day where I can see!
Legalized suicide!!!!!! Crazy!
One has to wonder whether all this automation (Pro-Line 21 etc) is really worth/needed. With the advent of accurate LRN (GPS) & decent auto flight systems what's the need for such sophisticated 'add on's'? The task of getting people from one place to another safely doesn't need that level of automation we've been doing it for years without it so why now? CFIT is just as common now with all the automation as it was back when pilots almost guessed where they where in IMC
I know automation is meant to make the pilots task easier but is it? We've had plenty of Airbuses do things that have the pilots scratching their heads.
A little off topic but worth a mention I reckon.
Food for thought & some constructive comments are welcome
Wmk2
And all the better to see where yr gunna CRASH when the ONLY fan stops! If I want a better 'view' I'll go hire a C172 & fly in the day where I can see!
Legalized suicide!!!!!! Crazy!
One has to wonder whether all this automation (Pro-Line 21 etc) is really worth/needed. With the advent of accurate LRN (GPS) & decent auto flight systems what's the need for such sophisticated 'add on's'? The task of getting people from one place to another safely doesn't need that level of automation we've been doing it for years without it so why now? CFIT is just as common now with all the automation as it was back when pilots almost guessed where they where in IMC
I know automation is meant to make the pilots task easier but is it? We've had plenty of Airbuses do things that have the pilots scratching their heads.
A little off topic but worth a mention I reckon.
Food for thought & some constructive comments are welcome
Wmk2
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cairns
Age: 50
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wally,
My opinion,,,, well if one has good training ( which I believe I did ) and system knowledge combined with an adequate level of situational awareness, the more info you have available to you the better.
I have several hundred hours on the PC12E ( "NG" for the slack jaw yokels ), and have had a couple WTF moments, but overall I believe the Apex Primus is a good system and provides a safer environment.
Some of the guys I worked with have flown the Proline 21, they prefered the Apex, but thought the Apex was a little long winded to program at start of flight and to change a flight plan inflight was a pain in comparision.
Anyone with the intelligence to understand that a single engine turbine is not without its risks, but if flown appropriately, can be very safe, would have the intelligence to operate the Apex Primus,,,,,,,,,,,,,not sure where that leaves the multi engine dinosaurs..........
Oh hang on, you wanted constructive comment......
My opinion,,,, well if one has good training ( which I believe I did ) and system knowledge combined with an adequate level of situational awareness, the more info you have available to you the better.
I have several hundred hours on the PC12E ( "NG" for the slack jaw yokels ), and have had a couple WTF moments, but overall I believe the Apex Primus is a good system and provides a safer environment.
Some of the guys I worked with have flown the Proline 21, they prefered the Apex, but thought the Apex was a little long winded to program at start of flight and to change a flight plan inflight was a pain in comparision.
Anyone with the intelligence to understand that a single engine turbine is not without its risks, but if flown appropriately, can be very safe, would have the intelligence to operate the Apex Primus,,,,,,,,,,,,,not sure where that leaves the multi engine dinosaurs..........
Oh hang on, you wanted constructive comment......
Seasonally Adjusted
Legalized suicide!!!!!! Crazy
How many fatal accidents? Not one. But don't let the facts dampen your hysteria.
Soup - the ground delay is with the NG not the Proline.
Point made - you cannot go until the NG is completely fired up - takes time
Proline - if you choose you can go without it
Ground time can be important when the surface is not so good.
I'll leave the "on the run" stuff to you.
Point made - you cannot go until the NG is completely fired up - takes time
Proline - if you choose you can go without it
Ground time can be important when the surface is not so good.
I'll leave the "on the run" stuff to you.
Hey "TQ" I hope like Christ that we never have to be back here talking about an engine failure on a PC But aviation is all about risks, calculated risks just that I personally don't believe the risk is acceptable but then again I don't make the risk assessment rules nor do I need to fly one, again, thank Christ!
As I have mentioned many a time amongst these pages of debate the PC would no doubt sh1t all over the outdated Beech no contest there just that SE ops (of any commercial/AWK nature) should not be allowed in IMC as was once the case & for good reasons too, again juts to appease the head strong here personal opinion only.
Wmk2
But aviation is all about risks, calculated risks just that I personally don't believe the risk is acceptable but then again I don't make the risk assessment rules nor do I need to fly one, again, thank Christ!As I have mentioned many a time amongst these pages of debate the PC would no doubt sh1t all over the outdated Beech no contest there just that SE ops (of any commercial/AWK nature) should not be allowed in IMC as was once the case & for good reasons too, again juts to appease the head strong here personal opinion only
.Wmk2
But Wally, there HAS been a PC-12 engine failure in Australia and at night.
The result: One perfectly executed glide approach back to the airfield, all crew unharmed.
I hope we're never back here talking about a fatal accident from the result of a PC-12 engine failure as well, but I have a good feeling we won't be for a very long time.
morno
The result: One perfectly executed glide approach back to the airfield, all crew unharmed.
I hope we're never back here talking about a fatal accident from the result of a PC-12 engine failure as well, but I have a good feeling we won't be for a very long time.
morno
Yeah 'morno' I am aware of that event in WA. Perhaps I should have worded that to say 'with an ugly outcome etc'. Taking nothing away from the driver as it's obvious the excellent RFDS WA Ops training that kicked in but the end result was amongst other things conducted under 'ideal conditions' IE: VMC, low-ish terrain & excess height etc. All make for a favorable outcome Trouble is we don't always fly in 'ideal' conditions.
And I hope yr right there morno a VERY long time
Wmk2
Trouble is we don't always fly in 'ideal' conditions.And I hope yr right there morno a VERY long time
Wmk2
Guest
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the PC-12 is statistically safe then the B200 is bullet proof! The bottom line is if the PC-12 suffers an engine failure you will make an emergency forced landing-no option. If you suffer the same in the B200 the pilot must screw it up for the same to happen. If you operate the B200 in the normal category there is only a few seconds on each take of that there is any danger, in the transport category there is no danger. There is a very high percentage of flight time where you are exposed to an "out landing" should the engine fail in any single.
If the person who made the decision to get PC-12's is happy with the risk to life that it posses then he is made of stern stuff indeed. I would suggest it’s not his life on the line. That’s not to say I wouldn't fly one if that was what was put on the ramp out front, I would, but it would not give me that warm fuzzy feeling believe me. The King Air is such a safe aircraft by comparison, and safety should be first especially when the cost difference is so little and in most cases its the taxpayer that's funding his own transport.
If the person who made the decision to get PC-12's is happy with the risk to life that it posses then he is made of stern stuff indeed. I would suggest it’s not his life on the line. That’s not to say I wouldn't fly one if that was what was put on the ramp out front, I would, but it would not give me that warm fuzzy feeling believe me. The King Air is such a safe aircraft by comparison, and safety should be first especially when the cost difference is so little and in most cases its the taxpayer that's funding his own transport.
