Beechcraft 200 v 737
 

I have some time on a kingair unfortunaely none on the jet, I heard a rumour that a kingair to handle is like handlng a 737
true or false anybody clear this up for me thanks.:)

If I say flying a 737 is like making love to a love to a beautiful woman, due to my lack of experience of light turboprops, I can't quite think what sort of sex partner a Kingair can be equated to. But yes, I'm sure ******* one with one's eyes closed is much like ******* any other.

well that is a bit of a different reply!:ok: :ok:

Beech 200 handles better than a -3/4/500.

d2d;
thanks

d2d;
From a feel point of view ? or a response point of view. I guess the bottom line; why I ask is if ever one day I crack it into a jet job the would a Kingair 200 be a good starting model on which to use for the purpose of a lets say a sim check ride at interview on a jet?
thanks

Dean, if you get a shot at a sim ride on a 737, you'd be a fool not to get at least some practice in a 737 sim.

I'm very current on the 737, but god forbit if I lost my job and was faced a 737 sim ride for a job I really wanted after more than a short period of not flying it, I'd pay for for as much sim practice as I felt I needed.

Much better taking on a bit more short term debt than being unemployed.

Having flown both - v. different kettle of fish. KingAir v. stable in both roll & pitch, 737 just as stable (and more pleasant) in pitch,but less so in the roll channel. Classics better than NGs in this respect.

That being said, I find both very rewarding aircraft that are dead easy to fly and that won't run away with you performance-wise.

Empty

A B200 won't teach you anything about flying 73s. Everything is different - performance, systems and specially the Boeing way of operating their birds. If you want to prepare for a 73 sim ride, do as notdavegorman suggests.

Thanks fellers for the pointers ; I will take these on board for future refererence thanks again.:ok: