Bonanza vs 206 vs 210
'budgie' I'm not too sure if yr impressed with your abilities there but I hope you learnt something from that. None of us here want to read about a C210 that spun out of the cloud covered in ice with all deceased as the end result!!
I've had similar levels of ice on the wings of my mount & it's alarming how the airspeed heads south & that's with around 1700 gee gee's on tap!
Wmk2
I've had similar levels of ice on the wings of my mount & it's alarming how the airspeed heads south & that's with around 1700 gee gee's on tap!
Wmk2
I'm not sure that you aren't being a bit hard on gassed budgie.
We don't know the circumstances in which the ice got there or what actions the gassed budgie took to get out of icing conditions. In fact its possible that the aeroplane is in positive temp air and the ice is diminishing at the time of the photo.
In the photo the aeroplane is in clear air - so its not in icing conditions (which requires water). Its over about 4 oktas, so it can descend in clear air without entering icing conditions.
It has maybe 50 times more ice than I'd be comfortable with, but the the fact is that if its flying happily and it stays in clear air with the ground in sight (ie can descend without further icing), then its probably OK.
Great photo but.
We don't know the circumstances in which the ice got there or what actions the gassed budgie took to get out of icing conditions. In fact its possible that the aeroplane is in positive temp air and the ice is diminishing at the time of the photo.
In the photo the aeroplane is in clear air - so its not in icing conditions (which requires water). Its over about 4 oktas, so it can descend in clear air without entering icing conditions.
It has maybe 50 times more ice than I'd be comfortable with, but the the fact is that if its flying happily and it stays in clear air with the ground in sight (ie can descend without further icing), then its probably OK.
Great photo but.
Yes I am intrugued to hear more about the photo GB.
I have never picked up ice (it's not cold in these parts) and wouldn't know what is "a lot of ice"
That looks like "a lot of ice" to me but I'd be keen to hear how the 210 was performing at the time.
Cheers
I have never picked up ice (it's not cold in these parts) and wouldn't know what is "a lot of ice"
That looks like "a lot of ice" to me but I'd be keen to hear how the 210 was performing at the time.
Cheers
Moderator
Pontius. The aircraft is a Missionary Aviation Fellowship Cessna 206 taking off from a Mission ALA. Not sure where the photo was taken, may be an airstrip south east of Chimbu in the PNG Highlands, or in West Irian. The slope is accentuated or exaggerated slightly by a telephoto lens - but is still steep enough you would need low gear in your Landcruiser. The steepest commercial stip in PNG serviced by RPT services was Omkalai, 14% from memory, now closed.
The C206 is certainly the best workhorse from what I have flown. I know nothing about airvans as they weren't around in my day.
However, as far as a private touring aircraft goes the Bonanza is my favourite.
If I was ever going to purchase a plane to tour around in, I would get a V tail with tip tanks, if there were any good ones left. TAS at ISA at 160 + kts with about 8 hours endurance from memory. I was once planning to fly one from Melbourne direct to the Sunshine Coast many years ago, unfortunately the trip didn't eventuate.
As far as GA aircraft goes, Beechcraft always have been the Rolls Royce of the skies, they are built like brick sh!t houses, fast and very reliable if maintained correctly, not to mention extremely beautiful to fly. They wouldn't be that suited to charter if you were going to try and get 5 or 6 POB in them with bags as they go out side the aft C of G limit very easily when you put a passenger in a back seat.
However, as far as a private touring aircraft goes the Bonanza is my favourite.
If I was ever going to purchase a plane to tour around in, I would get a V tail with tip tanks, if there were any good ones left. TAS at ISA at 160 + kts with about 8 hours endurance from memory. I was once planning to fly one from Melbourne direct to the Sunshine Coast many years ago, unfortunately the trip didn't eventuate.
As far as GA aircraft goes, Beechcraft always have been the Rolls Royce of the skies, they are built like brick sh!t houses, fast and very reliable if maintained correctly, not to mention extremely beautiful to fly. They wouldn't be that suited to charter if you were going to try and get 5 or 6 POB in them with bags as they go out side the aft C of G limit very easily when you put a passenger in a back seat.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 686
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree with Krusty 34 re TAS variation due to temp change. I have approx 4000 hrs on 210's and do trend monitoring every 10 hrs. On reviewing these sheets I see my TAS varies 11.6% from best to worst. Weight is another factor that needs to be included in the speed equation. My 210M varies by 5 knots lightest weight to heaviest weight in egual conditions. It's speed range is 155 K TAS hot and heavy to (not very often) 173 K light and cool . Adding wing tip tanks made it a different aircraft for climb and speed above 8000 ft. Down low it climbs at 500-900 fpm at 120-125 indicated at gross and even on 37 degree + days will go to 13500ft reasonably easily. With it's Gami injectors it burns 45 lph @ 13500 ft and gives a TAS of 157 knots It wouldnt do that when it had standard short wings. I just have to persuade the Minister for War and Finance to allow me to install a Continental IO550P and I'll have the perfect aircraft.
Cheers RA
Cheers RA
Your engine and aerofoil will perform better in cold weather (denser air) however TAS is higher in warmer air than colder air for a given Airspeed or mach number.
Think about the speed of sound, it is faster in warmer air and slower in cooler air.
Think about the speed of sound, it is faster in warmer air and slower in cooler air.
That's what I was thinking GG.
And the TAS doesn't vary that much with temp changes.
Eg.
At 8000' ISA +0 CAS 150kts = 169 kts TAS
At 8000' ISA+20 CAS 150kts = 175 kts TAS
And the TAS doesn't vary that much with temp changes.
Eg.
At 8000' ISA +0 CAS 150kts = 169 kts TAS
At 8000' ISA+20 CAS 150kts = 175 kts TAS
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Melbourne Australia
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
work horse
a couple of questions ...
1...is this to be a cruising machine for hire or private use?
2...or, is this to be a freight hauler?
3...or, senics?
4...or, skydivers?
5...what runways are you wanting to operate off?
comment - if you want a faithfull workhorse to carry anything off most anything I would steer you in the direction of a C206.
ie..C206 vs GA8 - jollies/short haul freight, the GA8 will make you more
money but is very expensive to buy in and is too slow a climber with jumpers
C206 vs C210 - longer sectors suit the C210. If you can find a "good"
one and can put an experienced operator in it not a pup, then go with
the C210.
Bonanza vs Cessna - refer to previous comment re longer sectors.
Chereokee 6 vs C206 - similar speeds and weight carrying but where
are you wanting to put the aircarft? low wing may
become an issue!
There are some very learned/experienced hands who wander througn these threads from time to time and I look forward to reading their thoughts but as a work horse I'm a big fan of the C206.
1...is this to be a cruising machine for hire or private use?
2...or, is this to be a freight hauler?
3...or, senics?
4...or, skydivers?
5...what runways are you wanting to operate off?
comment - if you want a faithfull workhorse to carry anything off most anything I would steer you in the direction of a C206.
ie..C206 vs GA8 - jollies/short haul freight, the GA8 will make you more
money but is very expensive to buy in and is too slow a climber with jumpers
C206 vs C210 - longer sectors suit the C210. If you can find a "good"
one and can put an experienced operator in it not a pup, then go with
the C210.
Bonanza vs Cessna - refer to previous comment re longer sectors.
Chereokee 6 vs C206 - similar speeds and weight carrying but where
are you wanting to put the aircarft? low wing may
become an issue!
There are some very learned/experienced hands who wander througn these threads from time to time and I look forward to reading their thoughts but as a work horse I'm a big fan of the C206.
Are you carrying freight, passengers or a mix of payloads?
With freight will you be cubed out before your MTOW?
Will the floor space in all three aircraft allow you the uplift required?
Might be better with an Islander?
With freight will you be cubed out before your MTOW?
Will the floor space in all three aircraft allow you the uplift required?
Might be better with an Islander?
Regarding the TAS debate all the data I have points to increased TAS with increased temperature, however the manifold pressure must be increased to maintained the same percentage power.
The only similar data I have at hand is for the Piper Lance,
0 degrees C @ 6000ft and 65% (22.3 MAP @ 2300RPM) = 142 KTAS
30 degrees C @ 6000ft and 65%(23.3 MAP @ 2300RPM) = 147 KTAS
For the Chieftain,
ISA @ 10000ft and 65% (29.8 MAP @ 2300RPM) = 184 KTAS
ISA +20 @ 10000ft and 65% (30.9 MAP @ 2300RPM) = 187 KTAS
This was just some quick POH research, in the real world there are lots of other variables.
If you maintain one power setting (manifold pressure/RPM combination) for all temperatures you are not maintaining a constant percentage power output and at higher temperatures your TAS will suffer.
Weight will definately have an impact on any aircraft TAS for a given power due to the increase in angle of attack required to generate more lift to balance weight.
The only similar data I have at hand is for the Piper Lance,
0 degrees C @ 6000ft and 65% (22.3 MAP @ 2300RPM) = 142 KTAS
30 degrees C @ 6000ft and 65%(23.3 MAP @ 2300RPM) = 147 KTAS
For the Chieftain,
ISA @ 10000ft and 65% (29.8 MAP @ 2300RPM) = 184 KTAS
ISA +20 @ 10000ft and 65% (30.9 MAP @ 2300RPM) = 187 KTAS
This was just some quick POH research, in the real world there are lots of other variables.
If you maintain one power setting (manifold pressure/RPM combination) for all temperatures you are not maintaining a constant percentage power output and at higher temperatures your TAS will suffer.
Weight will definately have an impact on any aircraft TAS for a given power due to the increase in angle of attack required to generate more lift to balance weight.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: away...
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by swaziboy
...Islander will probably hurt you cost wise... just way expensive to operate...
You must have been operating the Lamborghini BN-2 Laguna designed by Pinafarina...
If you maintain one power setting (manifold pressure/RPM combination) for all temperatures you are not maintaining a constant percentage power output and at higher temperatures your TAS will suffer.
Weight will definately have an impact on any aircraft TAS for a given power due to the increase in angle of attack required to generate more lift to balance weight.
Quote:
Of course, but regardless TAS will always be higher with a higher temperature as the air is less dense and therefore offers less resistance to an aerofoil passing through it.
However, such TAS will be harder to establish due to engines inefficiency at high Temp. So not quite true their GG
Of course, but regardless TAS will always be higher with a higher temperature as the air is less dense and therefore offers less resistance to an aerofoil passing through it.
However, such TAS will be harder to establish due to engines inefficiency at high Temp. So not quite true their GG
Ah no actually, a higher temp will always result in a higher TAS
Back in ya box
Oh and if you're trying to pull the inefficiency debate in with regards to the engines, if you run as per the POH's scheduled 65% power graphs (or whatever power setting you are using for cruise) will result in a higher power setting for a given percentage
You had better get all your basic aerodynamic theory in your head for all those airline interviews
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Maun, Botswana
Age: 37
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Maun is a good way to prove that the BN2 is too expensive, it is cheaper to run and maintain a caravan than a BN2, hence why ours is parked and now operating 3 vans.
Also looking at selling the 206's in favour of the GA8's
Also looking at selling the 206's in favour of the GA8's
Jober.as.a.Sudge.
The BN2 is only an "accountants machine" in that category of operation for which it was designed - STOL, short haul, bush operations. Taking into account all cost factors - speed, maintenance costs, ultimate airframe life etc - the Islander's seat/mile (or ton/mile) costs are higher that other ME GA aircraft and significantly higher that a comparable C208 or DHC6 on similar operations.
The BN2 is only an "accountants machine" in that category of operation for which it was designed - STOL, short haul, bush operations. Taking into account all cost factors - speed, maintenance costs, ultimate airframe life etc - the Islander's seat/mile (or ton/mile) costs are higher that other ME GA aircraft and significantly higher that a comparable C208 or DHC6 on similar operations.
