Cessna 408 SkyCourier
Thread Starter
Cessna 408 SkyCourier
Looks like they bred a BE1900 with a DHC8.
Then again maybe it's a westernised LET410
Textron Aviation Unveils New Large-Utility Turboprop, the Cessna SkyCourier | Business Wire
Cessna SkyCourier
Then again maybe it's a westernised LET410
Textron Aviation Unveils New Large-Utility Turboprop, the Cessna SkyCourier | Business Wire
Cessna SkyCourier
Looks like a bit of a hybrid from everything.
The question is...... expected cost?
Sounds like good speed when put next to the Viking.
Now a float option would be sweet!
The question is...... expected cost?
Sounds like good speed when put next to the Viking.
Now a float option would be sweet!
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Adeliade
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whats is interesting is the choice of engines. Seams they gone for the pt6. Had they gone for the GE it woyld have been a game changer for GE. Fedex was the reason forthe pt6 to get the single engine ifr charter certification. Had they gone with ge and proved its reliable would have give ge some extremly strong data for the same
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why wouldn't they use a PT6? Its clear from the press release that the project is built around the FedEx order and FedEx and its associates has a long history of using PT6 powered aircraft.
The transition period of the new aircraft coming online to current PT6 operators alone would justify a common engine type.
Wunwing
The transition period of the new aircraft coming online to current PT6 operators alone would justify a common engine type.
Wunwing
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 60
Posts: 1,550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quoted price 5.5 us
Whats is interesting is the choice of engines. Seams they gone for the pt6. Had they gone for the GE it woyld have been a game changer for GE. Fedex was the reason forthe pt6 to get the single engine ifr charter certification. Had they gone with ge and proved its reliable would have give ge some extremly strong data for the same
Whats is interesting is the choice of engines. Seams they gone for the pt6. Had they gone for the GE it woyld have been a game changer for GE. Fedex was the reason forthe pt6 to get the single engine ifr charter certification. Had they gone with ge and proved its reliable would have give ge some extremly strong data for the same
So, P&W got single engine IFR certification due to the record of single engine IFR operations on the caravan with FedEx ... Taking that at face value, how would putting GE's engine on a multi-engine airplane help them gain single engine certification?
The PT6 family is known for its reliability with an in-flight shutdown rate of 1 per 333000 hours since 1963,[6] 1 per 651,126 hours over 12 months in 2016.
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Adeliade
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because the engines are independent of each other. Plus the bonus of ever 1 hour flyi g time you are getting 2 hours of reliable record. So in fact it can be shown in half the flight hours as againts to 208
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Adeliade
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ASEPTA approval in Australia is based on engine/airframe reliability not just the engine. Think you will find that some C-208 variants aren’t ASEPTA approved in Australia (yet), Caravan EX maybe? Other types such as the PC-6 won’t get a lookin without reliability data.
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Adeliade
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ASEPTA approval in Australia is based on engine/airframe reliability not just the engine. Think you will find that some C-208 variants aren’t ASEPTA approved in Australia (yet), Caravan EX maybe? Other types such as the PC-6 won’t get a lookin without reliability data.
Thread Starter
GE vs PW argument aside, there are some potential uses for it. Payload is on par with DHC6-400. Faster cruise but takeoff distance handicap. Pacific Islands over water uses spring to mind.
Folks,
Looks like it will be the first aircraft to be certified under the new FAR/EASA 23.
Be interesting to see if the rather radical new system will work, probably beautifully, as CASA are already saying No!
Tootle pip!!
Looks like it will be the first aircraft to be certified under the new FAR/EASA 23.
Be interesting to see if the rather radical new system will work, probably beautifully, as CASA are already saying No!
Tootle pip!!