PPRuNe Forums - Britten Norman Islanders [Love em or Hate em?]

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)

- The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions (https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions-91/)

- - Britten Norman Islanders [Love em or Hate em?] (https://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions/450846-britten-norman-islanders-love-em-hate-em.html)

Britten Norman Islanders [Love em or Hate em?]

Over the past couple of weeks I have flown a fair few hours as a passenger in the Britten Norman Islander.

All I can say is I love um.

With the exceptional STOL aircraft and great viewing by the passenger and when comparing the numbers on operating costs any accountant would love them!

What's everyone else's thoughts?

EH..???

Whadidja say..??

Can't hear ya....its this noise in me ears....:}

Cheers:ok:

True there as noisy as me x girlfriend, but a good pair of earmuffs, muffs it out.

I love em, but then again I have never flown one!;)

Britten-Norman BN2 XL

By a well-known Flight magazine.

Undaunted by technical realities, the design team at Pilatus Britten - Norman has announced plans for the BN2-XL, promising more noise, reduced payload, a lower cruise speed, and increased pilot workload.

We spoke to Mr. Fred Gribble, former British Rail boilermaker, and now Chief Project Engineer. Fred was responsible for developing many original and creative design flaws in the service of his former employer, and will be incorporating these in the new BN2-XL technology under a licensing agreement. Fred reassured BN-2 pilots, however, that all fundamental design flaws of the original model had been retained. Further good news is that the XL version is available as a retrofit.

Among the new measures is that of locking the ailerons in the central position, following airborne and simulator tests which showed that whilst pilots of average strength were able to achieve up to 30 degrees of control wheel deflection, this produced no appreciable variation in the net flight of the aircraft. Thus the removal of costly and unnecessary linkages has been possible, and the rudder has been nominated as the primary directional control. In keeping with this new philosophy, but to retain commonality for crews transitioning to the XL, additional resistance to foot pressure has been built in to the rudder pedals to prevent over-controlling in gusty conditions (defined as those in which wind velocity exceeds 3 knots).

An outstanding feature of Islander technology has always been the adaptation of the O-540 engine which, when mounted in any other aircraft in the free world (except the Trislander) is known for its low vibration levels. The Islander adaptations cause it to shake and batter the airframe, gradually crystallise the main spar, desynchronise the accompanying engine, and simulate the sound of fifty skeletons fornicating in an aluminium dustbin. PBN will not disclose the technology they applied in preserving this effect in the XL but Mr. Gribble assures us it will be perpetrated in later models and sees it as a strong selling point. "After all, the Concorde makes a lot of noise" he said, "and look how fast that goes."

However design documents clandestinely recovered from the PBN shredder have solved a question that has puzzled aerodynamicists and pilots for many years, disclosing that it is actually noise which causes the BN2 to fly. The vibration set up by the engines, and amplified by the airframe, in turn causes the air molecules above the wing to oscillate at atomic frequency, reducing their density and creating lift. This can be demonstrated by sudden closure of the throttles, which causes the aircraft to fall from the sky. As a result, lift is proportional to noise, rather than speed, explaining amongst other things the aircraft's remarkable takeoff performance.

In the driver's cab (as Gribble describes it) ergonomic measures will ensure that long-term PBN pilots' deafness does not cause in-flight dozing. Orthopaedic surgeons have designed a cockpit layout and seat to maximise backache, en-route insomnia, chronic irritability, and terminal (post-flight) lethargy. Redesigned "bullworker" elastic aileron cables, now disconnected from the control surfaces, increase pilot workload and fitness. Special noise retention cabin lining is an innovation on the XL, and it is hoped in later models to develop cabin noise to a level which will enable pilots to relate ear-pain directly to engine power, eliminating the need for engine instruments altogether.

We were offered an opportunity to fly the XL at Britten-Norman's development facility, adjacent to the British Rail tearooms at Little Chortling. (The flight was originally to have been conducted at the Pilatus plant but aircraft of BN design are now prohibited from operating in Swiss airspace during avalanche season). For our mission profile, the XL was loaded with coal for a standard 100 N.M. trip with British Rail reserves, carrying one pilot and nine passengers to maximise discomfort. Passenger loading is unchanged, the normal under-wing protrusions inflicting serious lacerations on 71% of boarding passengers, and there was the usual confusion in selecting a door appropriate to the allocated seat. The facility for the clothing of embarking passengers to remove oil slicks from engine cowls during loading has been thoughtfully retained.

Start-up is standard, and taxiing, as in the BN2 is accomplished by brute force. Takeoff calculations called for a 250-decibel power setting, and the rotation force for the (neutral) C of G was calculated at 180 ft/lbs. of backpressure.

Initial warning of an engine failure during takeoff is provided by a reduction in vibration of the flight instrument panel. Complete seizure of one engine is indicated by the momentary illusion that the engines have suddenly and inexplicably become synchronised. Otherwise, identification of the failed engine is achieved by comparing the vibration levels of the windows on either side of the cabin. (Relative passenger pallor has been found to be an unreliable guide on many BN2 routes because of ethnic consideration).

Shortly after takeoff the XL's chief test pilot, Capt. Mike "Muscles" Mulligan demonstrated the extent to which modern aeronautical design has left the BN2 untouched; he simulated pilot incapacitation by slumping forward onto the control column, simultaneously applying full right rudder and bleeding from the ears. The XL, like its predecessor, demonstrated total control rigidity and continued undisturbed. Power was then reduced to 249 decibels for cruise, and we carried out some comparisons of actual flight performance with graph predictions. At 5000 ft and ISA, we achieved a vibration amplitude of 500 CPS and 240 decibels, for a fuel flow of 210 lb/hr, making the BN2-XL the most efficient converter of fuel to noise after the Titan rocket.

Exploring the Constant noise/Variable noise concepts, we found that in a VNE dive, vibration reached its design maximum at 1000 CPS, at which point the limiting factor is the emulsification of human tissue. The catatonic condition of long-term BN2 pilots is attributed to this syndrome, which commences in the cerebral cortex and spreads outwards. We asked Capt. Mulligan what he considered the outstanding features of the XL. He cupped his hand behind his ear and shouted "Whazzat?"

We returned to Britten-Norman convinced that the XL model retains the marque's most memorable features, whilst showing some significant and worthwhile regressions.
PBN are not, however, resting on their laurels. Plans are already advanced for the Trislander XL and noise tunnel testing has commenced. The basis of preliminary design and performance specifications is that lift increases as the square of the noise, and as the principle of acoustic lift is further developed, a later five-engined vertical take-off model is also a possibility."

All in all, a wonderful aeroplane.

I fly the said aircraft.

I love them STOL capabilities are awesome, is a solid machine, yes they are loud but get yourself a pair of Bose A20's and the noise is no different to any other twin.!

Thumbs up for the Islander, Capable machine love flying them!:ok:

"great viewing by passengers"

unless your in the 3rd row :=

In the couple I flew the built in shower unit for the ferals was quite good- esp those in rows 3 &4 (for those who haven't seen it- during and after rain, water would flow in through the roof wing/fuselage join and accumulate in the ceiling, only to become evident with movement or acceleration - such as taxying or t/o).

Quote:

....any accountant would love them!

A fallacy.

Where the operation dictates an aircraft of the capacity and capability of the Islander - e.g. STOL bush operations - there is very little to compare to a BN2 except perhaps, a C206, which has lower seat/mile costs. Certainly, DHC6 and particularly C208 seat/mile costs are significantly lower than BN2 seat/mile costs.

On normal, non STOL operations, the Islander seat/mile costs are far higher than similar capacity twin engine aircraft, particularly if one takes to account aircraft speed, the high cost of maintenance and limited major component life. And the inevitable buckled wings! And cracked engine mounts! And corrosion in the lower wing skin laminates! And.....

Horses for courses! They do the job they were intended to do, but at a cost penalty. :=

Constant noise ,variable power

This cool one belongs to a mate of mine ...... Kero Burner;)

http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a1...202011/430.jpg

When 6 minutes is your longest sector and the STOL capabilities are required then yeah they weren't bad... In all other circumstances not so good...

The PAC 750 performed better - took more load - was cheaper to run - safer - waterproof - quiet - faster and more comfortable. The only real advantage to the islander is initial price... Apart from that - it's had it's day. If you want a high wing version go the kodiak.

Mind you our choice was between 30,000hr airframes vs a 500 Hr one.

Other choice was arm mm from a prop or face full of exhaust when getting in and out... Why oh why didn't PAC follow cessna's lead in placing an augmentor Or similar down the side...(sorry thread drift)

I don't miss the plane so much as the flying associated with it's type...

Anyone looking for a bushy in png/west Papua??:}

yes but how does a PAC 750 price compare with the BN-20?

Or a better question, 'what's the load carrying profit margin earning potential of a PAC 750 vs an Islander?' ;) Pritty hard to beat the 750 on that one...

O hush your mouth all you NaYsayERS, it is a great truck.
Was standing at Horn Island airstrip one time, 14 of the machines took off, didn't see no pack 750s anywhere.
And has far as Maintenance costs Mr. TOrres, as you would know, there wasn't any.:suspect:
Saw evidence of sb190 carried out in three days.

Quote:

load carrying profit margin

Depends on whozat loading

Ah the good old days.

A very 'British' design: Excellent at doing a particular job it was designed for and sod any other possible improvement.

One day Messrs. Britten & Norman were chatting about their forthcoming design. Said Mr Britten "I say, old boy, this aeroplane will excellent at short field operations. Don't fancy being the one to fly it though. What say we make some improvements to the ergonomics before we start manufacturing it?"

"Why?" replied Mr Norman

"Yes. I see what you mean."

I seem to recall Torres was the only operator at Horn Island to have hangar, engineer and maintenance costs. The other operators appear to consistently achieve 100 hours (and more!), defect free.

Torres must have had the -A or -B models. The others would have had the -M** version. There's a conversion process if you're unfortunate enough to only have the As or Bs. Very cheap too with a great benefit to the profit margin, as long as you don't have an accident or the regulator is a bit dozy.

** Minus maintenance

Jaba. They were a special purpose aircraft - as is that machine - and they do that task well.

Unfortunately in charter or RPT, nine seats won't fund the capital and maintenance cost of two Allison B250's. I vaguely recall the Turbine Islander also had less endurance, and over a 100 mile plus sector, less payload than the piston Islander due to higher fuel burn?

The best part of the Islander was the Lycoming 540s, the rest was fairly maintenance intensive. The BN2A Mk III Trislander was Britain's revenge on the Empire!

Tins. There were many BN2A-M's in the Torres Strait. Some had very questionable histories......

1300 hrs in the Bongo all up.

As someone has already said, I probably miss the interesting places the old bucket could get me into and out of, rather than the actual aircraft itself, very fun flying!

That said, it has got me out of some tight corners on occasion, so I guess I have a bit of a soft spot for it...just don't make me fly one ever again...please.

CAC Sabre - that was brilliant... brought tears to my ears...

Just over 800 hours in the flamin' things, all logged cruising about various parts of PNG.

Got me into and out of an assortment of goat tracks, ex WW11 strips and several 'Ohhh Sheeeeett' moments.:eek: Managed to get a 260hp version up to 17,000' once.

Carried SLF, the odd coffin (occupied), bags of coffee (the aroma was :ok:), on one occasion some curiously smelling black rubbish bags of which I thought it would be very wise of me if I asked no questions:uhoh:, freshly slaughtered pigs:eek: and once a souvenired 50cal BMG, minus the action.

Wouldn't have missed the experiences for the world!:ok: Even if I am now half deaf!:uhoh:

Quote:

The best part of the Islander was the Lycoming 540s

not bad engines hey! :ok:

If you love flying Islanders you haven't flown them enough - best part of 2000hrs...in both seats. It garners a level of respect....but LOVE?

YGBSM:uhoh::hmm::ouch::ooh::E

Yeah, I've got something around 800+ BN-2 time across 1/2-doz different airframes, 2 of which had the Row 3 additional window mod. That certainly made a difference from a pax PoV.

I've used the BN-2 from the beaches to the mountains and everywhere in-between, in NZ. I'll always have something of a soft-spot for the (IMO maligned) Islander. I reckon they're a tremendous wee airframe. As others have mentioned already, the biggest issue with an Islander these days is corrosion and of course SB190.

I had to laugh (quietly) one day not long after arriving in the West Island... I was at a cafe in Port Hedland not completely intentionally eavesdropping the next table, where a couple of likely lads complete with uniform shirts, wings, bars & large watches were (loudly) regaling one-another with stories of their heroics in the BN-2... one mentioned to the other that he had recently "put her down and got her off again in just under 600m"!!! Sounded pretty hair-raising :hmm:

I left before it was necessary to point out we regularly operated off strips sub-600m at gross weight, regularly requiring less than 1/2 the available length, without any drama... and was considered so absolutely routine to be not worthy of mention :E

So yeah, I reckon they're a bloody marvellous wee machine. Not many out there that'll get into tight, unlikely spots with a good load and get out with a good load too.

I too have a soft-spot for the 540's -bloody things just don't know when to quit! Damn fine mills.

I first flew an.Islander.in 1971 .VH ISA and since that first flight I have flown them .in excess of 3500 hrs in Papua New .Guinea and NW Australia We had all sorts of nicknames for him ie .BROOM BROOOOM Thames Trader Rumble Guts ETC I .bloody well love them all 36 different aircraft The most interesting cargo was a 4 metre live crocidile in PNG and the only fright apart from every day flying in PNG was when some boof head did nt remove the aileron lock before take off . .in Port HEDLAND WA..Dont try this at home but you can get eneough rudder to get away with it the boof head of course me no ribbon on the lock last bloke put lock.inboard of aileron time running out jet departing jet on mid final ATC asks to expedite no bloody .excuse THE BN2 is my favourite Balus.No geat stakes in the glamour glitz but .in the .real world of practical bush operations in my day you could nt beat him

Rabbit. That was a fairly normal attitude for a Trislander - especially if the crew alighted first! At one time the Islander and Trislander were a common type endorsement in Australia.

Jaba. Cost and reliability wise, the Lycoming 540 series engines were the best and certainly superior to comparable Continental engines. Lycoming 540s installed in Islanders were rigidly mounted, ensuring all vibration is successfully transferred to the airframe, thus keeping thousands of rivets vibrating in unison! Unfortunately, that also leads to engine mount fatigue cracks....

I believe the Lycoming IO720 (11.8 liters, 400 HP) series are also great engines (there is no O720 engine) - perhaps the Trislander should have two 720s, total 800 HP, rather than 3 x O540s for 780 HP? Two Allison B250s would also be better than three 540s.

There was one long nose Islander in Australia which was unique. Also, the last new Trislander airframes were also shipped to Australia with a view to installing two light weight V8s, but that was some years ago and I don't know where they ended up, maybe converted to pots, pans and beer cans?

I think we operated 23 or 24 Islanders in PNG, 260 and 300 HP models, at one time the world's largest operator of the type. They had a hard life but well maintained and most would have been rather second hand by the time Chuck got to fly them!

They did the job well but were maintenance intensive and no one ever knew who buckled the wings... SB190 did not exist in the Talair days, but subsequently incresed the type operating costs; for some reason the aluminium used in Islanders appears more prone to corrosion than US aircraft aluminium, particularly in the lower wing skin laminates. There is over 300 Service Bulletins on Islanders, far more than comparable US built aircraft.

The Islander was built (or assembled) in the UK, Romania and the Philippines.

Flown both piston and turbine dropping parachutists. In the turbine I could T/O get up to 10,000', drop the free fall idiots and be back on the ground before them all in 15 mins. Great aircraft. :ok:

Ah yes, acoustic lift technology..50 skeletons fornicating in an aluminium dustbin...More like 100 of them I'd say.

Put me off flying twins for life, it did! :uhoh:

Did about 40 hrs in the BN-2T in the UK dropping meat bombs..great beasty..for doing that.

They did a good job in PNG...
I skillfully avoided having to fly one...

I did 800 hours in them in Shetland.

I flew in a Trislander once. We climbed for 2 hours and then we landed...

Did umpteen hours in them as a passenger... nearly ran into the Wall between Tabubil and Telefomin once in one. Beautiful day it was too... so good that the pilot said "I should be paying Junior today" (I kid you not) until we hit that down draft!!!

Young pilot once took off with both aileron and elevator locks in place (no flags, rusty locks, in a hurry etc) and barely survived. The BN2 pitched up vertical and stalled, he had trimmed forward so it recovered just above the runway, real drama. He flew it back onto the runway using rudder and asy power, very skillful I thought. On the runway he shut down the left engine, jumped out and removed the locks, started up and took off again. He had 9 passengers. None got out when they had the chance. Must have thought it was normal.
The airplane is tough.

after nearly 700hours flying jumpers in one I still look back with have fond memories of the old girl who has since been pressed back into service island hopping with tourists:ok:

My first twin VH-AIA. Like a fella's first girlfriend,solo flight or car,the first twin is always a great joy. I was told VH-AIA was the first BN2 in Australia.

http://i1032.photobucket.com/albums/...g?t=1305015759

After a while the company traded it in for another,VH-SQS

http://i1032.photobucket.com/albums/...g?t=1305015840

I was like a dog with two tails. Further along the career path,I scored a job with Bushies flying the Trislander....initially I thought,the islander was SO much fun,the Trislander being 50% bigger would be 50% more fun....OH.HOW.WRONG.I.WAS.

Who was the Island distributor in Australia?