Cessna 209 POH and hire
 

Hi,

I was wondering if anyone knows where I can find a Cessna 209 POH and also where in Australia one can be private hired?

I'm suppose to be starting a job over in India flying them late next month and wanted to get familiar with the machine. I've never heard of them before but apparently they're a stretched c207 but with the same engine.

Any help would be appreciated. I have a photo that someone sent to me, apparently they are quite rare.

Cheers,

Tiger.

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g2..._Guts/C209.jpg

Ha ha, you crack me up. I think though you forgot the Photoshop editing on the front of the aircraft like you did on the back. The way it looks it wants to sit on it’s a**e.:suspect: ;)

SHADOW
 

Must agree Titan

Trailing edge of wing to TE wing Shadow, then TE of elevator to TE elevator shadow.

Does not seem to work out hay Mr Tiger 77.

Unless of course the sunlight refracts differently over there in India, was it.

What a shame, KAK AIR would make a killing with them on the senics.

richo

I think you'll find that the photo above is genuine. I have seen a 209 while visiting the US and it's a weird machine. Theres a very critical loading procedure and a strict weight limit for the most rear seats. The engine has also been moved further forward when compared to the c207.

Sorry Tiger, can't help you with your questions. Don't think there would be any 209's in Aus, but good luck with the new job. :ok:

NK.

N1517U
1969 Cessna 207
Serial Number 20700117

and the FAA has never issued a type certificate for the 209.

www.faa.gov if you don't believe me.

C209 is there also a C209T?
 

Tiger 77

Brilliant mate!

ROFLMAO :ok:

Irony is absolutely lost on some people.....:suspect:

You should have shopped a few donks on the wing and called it a mini buff. :}

Just watch out for those reduced power take offs, the book says that you can do it, but I don't know.....;)

As to the Kak Air scenics, thank god for thermals, sometime it was the only thing that got you over the escarpement!!:ok:

I reckon they'd also make a killing on the PKT/KAL/FRV runs!

Ehhh datta long wun eh, pit de hole pamileh in dat wun! :}

...Disco

C209 Weight and Balance
 

Rumaging through some old files I came across a copy of a page from the weight and balance section of an old C209 POH, heres the weight and balance extract:

Remember the footnote there:

In some marginal 'in balance' cases, the nose oleo will be extended so as to no longer be connected to the rudder pedal steering mechanism. In addition to poor forward visibility problems when taxiing, steering must be done cautiously with differential braking only. Turning off runway may only be done at very low speed.

...Disco

Would be a bugger to sit in the back :yuk: :E :}

Reminds me of the Boeing 757 Stretch model I flew home in after my C209 interview in India

http://i57.photobucket.com/albums/g2...stretch757.jpg


DT

if you say so, BTW here is the original of the obove photo.
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0212461/M/

Montyjames,

The photo which you found on airliners.net is actually about 5 years old and I have been told that particular aircraft (the 207 - cn 20700117) was re-registered about 2 years ago and sold.

The Cessna 209 in my photo was re-registered as N1517U and purchased by the same company who owned the 207. I guess they painted it the same colours, and took the photo outside the same hangar so it looks similar. I guarantee you're looking at two different aircraft.

As for the earlier post regarding the registration details showing it as a c207, the reason is a C209 is also officially known as a C207-900 (or stretched 207) and has the same engine and wing as a c207. Bit like a Navajo and Chieftain known as a PA31, even though the chieftain is a stretched Navajo.

Hope this clears a few things up. BTW I'm still waiting for answers to my original questions!

Cheers,

Tiger.

I wasn't arguing the existence of a C209, but rather point out that the photo you posted IS infact an edited photo, Everything in it is exactly the same, from the paint scheme to the Rego, that car is in the same spot, as well as the shadow in exactly the same spot, even look at the nose wheel, pointing the same way in both photos.

There are many things the same I agree, but theres a perfectly logical explanation for everything.

1. The car is in the same spot because the company CEO has parked in that spot everyday for the past 10 years.

2. The shadow is similar because both photo's were taken at the same time of day and year.

3. The nosewheel is turned the same way because whenever a plane is parked in that spot the pilot must make a tight turn to get in, and theres not much room to straighten the nose wheel.

4. The paint scheme is the same because its the same company and they like all their aircraft painted the same way.

5. See my previous post regarding same rego.

Not arguing, just giving out the facts.

Cheers,

Tiger.

Not quiet the same monty, the pic you showed was obviously taken before the hangar was jacked up, moved to the right and extended.

A regular occurrence at most GA airfields :}

Tiger77
All those points may be true, but it also seems that they have added an extra door/panel to the building behind. The original has 8 and the stretched one has 9, extra inseted in stretched position.





Necessary I am informed, as the C209 is usually moved sideways into the hangar.

:}

Sunny Woomera

Monty, I can personally vouch for this aircraft, having flown it in the U.S. for the last few months(got home last week). It is being used at a skdiving centre in Utah (Salt Lake Skydiving, locally known as the 'Bonneville Bouncers'!) and is a popular aircraft for formation jumps as it can lift 10 skydivers. The jumpers were always taking the piss, saying "It must take a long time to wind up the rubber band in this one"
We also did an unusual charter, with the seats out, flying three green Anacondas from Ecuador to a private zoo in Orlando, Florida.
Cheers, Sailing.:ok:

As i said before, Im not arguing the existance of the 209, but more to the fact that its an edited photo, everything in it is the same, including glare etc, all of which would be imposible to get if the photos were taken on different days.

Notice how the truck is also longer.



Hotter day, heat expansion. Actually, like most GA fuel trucks that one broke down 10 years ago and hasn't moved since.

All seems very logical to me!

:}

Sunny Woomera

Monty,

Regarding the fuel truck - I believe the company obtained a new fuel truck about 2 years ago, following a collision between the old one and an aircraft taking off on a taxiway (by mistake). The new truck was slightly longer but otherwise looked identical to the old one. I guess thats the new truck in the c209 photo.

Sailing,

Any tips on flying the aircraft?


Cheers,

Tiger.

Tiger you crack me up mate!

This is just TOO funny :p

....Disco

Quite agree Monty...

Draw lines from the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer where it joins the empennage, to it's corresponding shadow point. Then do the same for the Leading and Trailing edges of the wing where it joins the fuselage, and the top of the main gear to it's corresponding shadow point. Now see if they appear to be parallel. They're not ? Hmmmmm....... something not quite right here.... :E

Also take a look at the lower white coloured section of the engine cowling forward of the main gear, and you'll see five or six "ripples" which can only be caused by the "clone stamp" function in Adobe Photoshop.

Like Monty, I'm not doubting the existance of such a machine, but I'm 'fraid to say that in the case of this photo Tiger, you have been well and truly had :O

cheers

Gunnadothat.



Not so. The fuselage length is such that the sun's rays strike the wing and horizontal stabiliser at two different vectors. The following formula will explain the displaced shaddow:

The vector angle from P1 to P2 is
d = sqrt[(x1-x2)2+ (y1-y2)2].
The coordinates of the point dividing the line segment P1P2 in the ratio r/s are:
([r x2+s x1]/[r+s], [r y2+s y1]/[r+s]).
As a special case, when r = s, the midpoint of the line segment has coordinates
([x2+x1]/2,[y2+y1]/2).

Simple school kid stuff really!

They are not "ripples"! They are JATO mounts, required when the wind is less than 40 kts on the nose for take off!!

:}

Sunny Woomera

You guys suck. :yuk: Get a sense of humour!

Get a better person to do the photo editing first :D That one was child's play :E

cheers

GDT:ok:

Gunnadothat,

I think you may be wrong about the lines having to be parallel. One of the laws of physics (can't remember the name) says something about the difficulty of measuring shadows in photographs. Because of the angle between the camera and the light source, shadows can never be measured accurately in the photograph.

Although in this photo the shadow may appear to be wrong, it is probably 100% correct.


NK.

Funnily enough, I actually knew the bloke who drove the truck. His name was Dwayne, and he was telling me the accident occured one day while he was driving along the tarmac. Another 207-900 was attempting to take-off on RWY 16, but mistook the RWY for a parallel taxiway - and due to the pilot's excessive aft CoG, visability was reduced over the nose, and a colision resulted. Dwayne was immediately sent to counciling, and still today, is deeply affected by those events that unfolded on that faithful day 2 years ago.:(
Also, i think you'll find Gunnadothat that those ripples were caused by yet another collision related to reduced foward visability.
DT

And I know Phil the meteorologist who just happened to arrange for the two clouds in the picture to be in exactly the same location and size as the undoctored Airliners.net photo ;)

It's been a fun half-hour.... thanks for putting the smile on my dial, lads.

GDT:)

Nav-King,
That law of photography is year 11 Physics, Vanka's Law

Anyone know if there is one available for hire on the east coast? Thanks.

[quote=Tiger 77
Sailing,

Any tips on flying the aircraft?


Cheers,

Tiger.[/quote]
Tiger, it flies very much like the 207, but when landing you have to flare just a touch higher as due to the extra length the gear is lower relative to the pilot seat in the landing attitude. The other trick is to flare slightly earlier, due to the control lag. This is caused by stretch due the length of the control cables, which delays elevator response by a fraction of a second, but you soon get used to it.
Of course, as in all older Cessnas, you have to make sure that the seat detents are fully engaged in the track. On the early 209s, the tracks were in one piece right through the cabin and this was the cause of the fuel truck accident mentioned by Dry Twotter. The pilot was just opening the throttle when the nosewheel hit a bump, and the throttle jerked forward. The acceleration caused the seat to slide back down the tracks into the rear of the cabin(there were no rear seats due skydive ops). It fell off the tracks and as it tipped over, the pilot disappeared into the tailcone headfirst, strapped to the seat. The aircaft, still accelerating, impacted the fuel truck in an extreme nose high attitude and suffered damage to the fuselage skin (apparent in the photos). What no-one had realised was that one of the anacondas (see my previous post) had been pregnant and had given birth during the flight from Ecuador a few days before. The babies had been hibernating under the floor and were thrown out and into the cab of the truck, causing Dwayne extreme distress.
cheers, Sailing.

Sounded like quite a harrowing experience! :eek:
Does anyone know if I need an endorsement on the 207-900? I have a CPL, but someone said I need an endorsement on this type of aircraft before I can get a job.
Also, I was also told that to carry anacondas you need a special add-on course to your Dangerous Goods Certificate entitled S.N.A.K.E-
Special iNdemnity for Anaconda Keeping and Export

I think you'll find that those clouds appear the same due to a local orographic effect that produces clouds of similar appearance for many days during a certain time of the year. :rolleyes:

...Disco

Hold yer horses...
 

Guys I'd appreciate if you could stop taking the pi$$ out of a very memorable time of my career in aviation. I was actually the head of check and training on the C209 for a company based in Riga, Latvia many moons ago when C209was more common.

We used them for all sorts of things, real workhorses. We had one which came with factory fitted spoilers too, cause due to the reduced visibility over the dash when loaded up, you really had no idea how much runway you had left, so aerodynamic braking was a must.

I've still got an old POH if anyone wants it. Trade it for a C209RG manual, if anyone out there still has one. Heard they were rarer still.


520.

No endorsement required for the 207-900, but you need a twin endorsement for the 207-900T which is, you guessed it, the twin engine version. It has two IO 470s up front, one behind the other. The rear one drives by 2 gears to a shaft over the top of both engines, which turns a left handed prop (the gears reverse direction of rotation), and the forward engine uses a hy-vo chain to drive a hollow shaft concentric with the other. This has a right handed prop just behind the LH one, so you end up with contra-rotating props and no P-factor to worry about. The beauty of it is, you can shut down the front engine (NB. it drives the rear prop!) in the cruise, feather the prop, and get really good fuel burn figures. To re-start is simplicity itself, you just un-feather the rear prop and the wash from the front one spins the engine up! This is known to old -900T drivers as "getting a blow job!":E
We didn't get the S.N.A.K.E. Certificate as it was a lot of paperwork for just a one-off job, and we were only importing.
Cheers, Sailing.

Sunny Wooms added:

Isn't that just the long winded way of saying that the shadows are only different because the nose of the aircraft is so much nearer the sun, thus in fact taking advantage of one of the square laws of nature in so much as opposite shadows attract due to, in no small measure, the light refracted by the air sinking above the cooler shaded tarmac under the fuse interacting with the rising air above the tarmac in the open (which causes both tortional and lateral buckling of the reflected light), inducing a refraction into the negative co-efficient of the cast shadow?

Simple really.... ;)

Tige. Deadset priceless.:}