RFDS Pilatus PC24
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rio Tinto have a big chunk invested in this machine, without their $$$$ this would not have happened!
Be interesting to see how it performs in the real world, not just on paper for feel good' commercial results:-)
Be interesting to see how it performs in the real world, not just on paper for feel good' commercial results:-)
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: back to the land of small pay and big bills
Age: 50
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could probably get a nice Nextant upgraded beechjet 400 like Careflight in Darwin has for about 4 mil. Same engines, better range, same speed, bigger cabin diameter, (not length) and very robust.
they don’t go into unprepared fields and they dont have beautiful cargo doors but
(if the Pilatus can actually do everything they promised)
they don’t go into unprepared fields and they dont have beautiful cargo doors but
(if the Pilatus can actually do everything they promised)
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You could probably get a nice Nextant upgraded beechjet 400 like Careflight in Darwin has for about 4 mil. Same engines, better range, same speed, bigger cabin diameter, (not length) and very robust.
they don’t go into unprepared fields and they dont have beautiful cargo doors but
(if the Pilatus can actually do everything they promised)
they don’t go into unprepared fields and they dont have beautiful cargo doors but
(if the Pilatus can actually do everything they promised)
Last edited by machtuk; 30th Nov 2018 at 21:36.
Folks,
Many of you seem to forget that this company has a long history of building very rugged aircraft, remember the Porter and Turbo-Porter.
What makes some of you think it will not perform to specification, including unsealed runways, all their previous aircraft have a good service record.
Or do you have an inability to not knock something new.
Tootle pip!!
Many of you seem to forget that this company has a long history of building very rugged aircraft, remember the Porter and Turbo-Porter.
What makes some of you think it will not perform to specification, including unsealed runways, all their previous aircraft have a good service record.
Or do you have an inability to not knock something new.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: back to the land of small pay and big bills
Age: 50
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No one is doubting their ability to build undercarriage that can land on unprepared surfaces or build an excellent cargo door. The pics suggest they have achieved both these things. But the high speed and long range quoted are a bit dubious
From Wiki - I guess they are just using data to obtain dubious speed figures. Was it on flight tracker for the ferry?
During EBACE 2016, it was commented that the program was on track and test flights had been free of surprises; during a transatlantic crossing to the US, P02 had achieved a cruise speed in excess of 800 km/hr (432 kt.), which was better than expected.
The three prototypes flew 2205 hours including icing conditions and very hot temperatures, outside its flight envelope, bird strikes, structural stress tests and noise tests before it received EASA and FAA type certification on 7 December 2017. Its performance goals were met or exceeded, like its maximum speed raised from 425 to 440 knots (787 to 815 km/h).
During EBACE 2016, it was commented that the program was on track and test flights had been free of surprises; during a transatlantic crossing to the US, P02 had achieved a cruise speed in excess of 800 km/hr (432 kt.), which was better than expected.
The three prototypes flew 2205 hours including icing conditions and very hot temperatures, outside its flight envelope, bird strikes, structural stress tests and noise tests before it received EASA and FAA type certification on 7 December 2017. Its performance goals were met or exceeded, like its maximum speed raised from 425 to 440 knots (787 to 815 km/h).
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tonight's Ch 7 news.....one for JT, and one for BRM. (BME)
I cannot see what advantages the Broome basing would bring. Surely, every single job that the Broome aircraft would do, could be done by a Perth/Jandakot aircraft - for the exact same response times.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about an international task from Broome?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Broome to the Rio Tinto mines faster?
They have a base in Broome, so I guess it has advantages.
When I worked for the RFDS WA Section many moons ago, I think we had 4 or 5 bases other than Jandakot. Of the 5 they have now only Meka and the Port are the same. Some of the others were covered by the Goldfields section and pretty sure Broome came under the Victorian section back then.
So for much of the RFDS operational history shows they operate from bases - so when a new type is implemented, I don't see why the operation now should operate from a single base when using multiple bases has proved effective.
So for much of the RFDS operational history shows they operate from bases - so when a new type is implemented, I don't see why the operation now should operate from a single base when using multiple bases has proved effective.
