About turboprops
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newcastle, WA
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
About turboprops
Hello everyone I'm a student pilot and an aviation enthusiast. I love turboprop airplanes and would like more information about some models.
First, what's the best airplane: SAAB 340 or embraer Brazilia?
Second, is embraer Banderante a good airplane? Why is it known as Bandit?
Thanks
James
First, what's the best airplane: SAAB 340 or embraer Brazilia?
Second, is embraer Banderante a good airplane? Why is it known as Bandit?
Thanks
James
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I drive a Jetstream 32 which is proberly considered on the bottom of the pile. But I am very happy with it for a first type rating. It dosn't have anything fancy in it and about 50% of 32's don't have autopilots in them so its manual all the way. Handling is actually better in the none autopilot fitted aircraft. The auto pilot servos stiffen up the controls making them feel heavy compared to the manual aircraft.
The performance of the aircraft is shall we say quite good fun when everything is working. And also due to the props, relative light weight it is very forgiving to pilot cock ups in height and speed management. And if requested you can shoot a ILS down to 5 DME at 220 knts and still be stabilised at 500ft for landing winds dependent of course. Flying the thing is very similar to a MEP apart from you have loads more power to play (2020 SHP) with and the engine managment of the garrets is simple compared to a piston. There is a computer to help out with EGT limits and conditioning the temprature so the indictated temp is easy to set. This computer is about the most high tech thing on the plane ( apart from the torque rudder couple thing which i think is a damn good bit of eng design )and also causes most hassels but its not a problem operating with it US. Its also fitted with a prop sync which i haven't bother to turn on now for about a month. Its ****e and my ear does just as good a job as it does and my ear dosn't scare the pax as much when the whole lot goes for a wander.
Landing a 32 can be a bit interesting. They are not very forgiving and any miss judgment will end up with a carrier landing. But give the Old girl her due she is built like a tank so what feels like a slammer is considered a normal Jetstream landing by those in the know.
Is this what you want to hear about?
MJ
PS the metro must be the worst looking TP of the lot. Looks like a tampon with wings.
The performance of the aircraft is shall we say quite good fun when everything is working. And also due to the props, relative light weight it is very forgiving to pilot cock ups in height and speed management. And if requested you can shoot a ILS down to 5 DME at 220 knts and still be stabilised at 500ft for landing winds dependent of course. Flying the thing is very similar to a MEP apart from you have loads more power to play (2020 SHP) with and the engine managment of the garrets is simple compared to a piston. There is a computer to help out with EGT limits and conditioning the temprature so the indictated temp is easy to set. This computer is about the most high tech thing on the plane ( apart from the torque rudder couple thing which i think is a damn good bit of eng design )and also causes most hassels but its not a problem operating with it US. Its also fitted with a prop sync which i haven't bother to turn on now for about a month. Its ****e and my ear does just as good a job as it does and my ear dosn't scare the pax as much when the whole lot goes for a wander.
Landing a 32 can be a bit interesting. They are not very forgiving and any miss judgment will end up with a carrier landing. But give the Old girl her due she is built like a tank so what feels like a slammer is considered a normal Jetstream landing by those in the know.
Is this what you want to hear about?
MJ
PS the metro must be the worst looking TP of the lot. Looks like a tampon with wings.
PS the metro must be the worst looking TP of the lot. Looks like a tampon with wings.
There's not a single solitary nice thing to be said about Metros!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Good From Far, Far From Good
Posts: 348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
joliver,
I fly Beech1900D's, and can say and agree with all mad_jock.
Too bad turbo-props took the hit after the RJ craze that started in the mid to late nineties.
Although not an expert on the SAAB/EMB120 facts, I think the first A series SAAB made were a disappointment on many levels.
Saab rectified this by putting out the B version which was a lot better.
Comparing the 340B to the Brasilia, you will find that SAAB is more EFIS than the EMB.
Performance wise, there is little difference i think.
Now if you ask me about my favorite Turbo-prop, it will have to be the SAAB2000 and that is where my nickname comes from.
It is the best performing turbo-prop out there, climbs to FL310 and has a max cruise of 365 KTS and carries 50 pax.
Even with Bombardier and their Dash8Q400, the SAAB2000 still has that special place in my heart.
Concordino
I fly Beech1900D's, and can say and agree with all mad_jock.
Too bad turbo-props took the hit after the RJ craze that started in the mid to late nineties.
Although not an expert on the SAAB/EMB120 facts, I think the first A series SAAB made were a disappointment on many levels.
Saab rectified this by putting out the B version which was a lot better.
Comparing the 340B to the Brasilia, you will find that SAAB is more EFIS than the EMB.
Performance wise, there is little difference i think.
Now if you ask me about my favorite Turbo-prop, it will have to be the SAAB2000 and that is where my nickname comes from.
It is the best performing turbo-prop out there, climbs to FL310 and has a max cruise of 365 KTS and carries 50 pax.
Even with Bombardier and their Dash8Q400, the SAAB2000 still has that special place in my heart.
Concordino
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have to agree about the SAAB2000 is one sexy beast of a machine. That ANR system on board makes a real difference.
Now another fun TP to drive purely from a pilots point of view is the Cessna 406. It has PT6 engines (same engines as the shed) and is single crew. Boy does it shift. I had a few poles in one and its brillant fun especially empty.
Landing is apiece of piss, with the trailing link UC taking all the effort. Lands and takesoff in next to nought as well.
The only real problem with TP's as far as i can see these days is that they are noisey barstards. Performance, economics, size, handling, etc are great. Yes some fly slow and low but they are suited to short hops. And a 737 will never beat a TP within 30 NM inbound with height to loose.
MJ
Now another fun TP to drive purely from a pilots point of view is the Cessna 406. It has PT6 engines (same engines as the shed) and is single crew. Boy does it shift. I had a few poles in one and its brillant fun especially empty.
Landing is apiece of piss, with the trailing link UC taking all the effort. Lands and takesoff in next to nought as well.
The only real problem with TP's as far as i can see these days is that they are noisey barstards. Performance, economics, size, handling, etc are great. Yes some fly slow and low but they are suited to short hops. And a 737 will never beat a TP within 30 NM inbound with height to loose.
MJ
PPRuNe Handmaiden
I've flown the Bandeirante, aka the Bandit. It's easier to say "bandit" than "bandeirante". It's also in keeping with pilots habits of giving aircraft nicknames. 
It was my first turboprop. Simple to fly, simple straight forward systems and nice and pacey. Practically impossible to hurt. (except for start of course).
The Twotter, aka DeHavilland Canada (now Bombardier)Twin Otter is also fun. It can fly so slowly and land on a dime. Simple to operate and fun. It's also very easy to bounce too.
Dash 8 is good. The -200 is a good machine. Bigger engines therefore a tad faster. I could only fluke a smooth landing every now and then. Undercarriage is strong...
Now the Shed, Shorts 360. Much nicer than the Shorts 330. As all turboprops with PT6 engines, practically bullet proof there although susceptible to icing and flame outs.
Easy to fly, no vices, not a bad machine either for the job it now does. (fly freight).
It was my first turboprop. Simple to fly, simple straight forward systems and nice and pacey. Practically impossible to hurt. (except for start of course).
The Twotter, aka DeHavilland Canada (now Bombardier)Twin Otter is also fun. It can fly so slowly and land on a dime. Simple to operate and fun. It's also very easy to bounce too.
Dash 8 is good. The -200 is a good machine. Bigger engines therefore a tad faster. I could only fluke a smooth landing every now and then. Undercarriage is strong...
Now the Shed, Shorts 360. Much nicer than the Shorts 330. As all turboprops with PT6 engines, practically bullet proof there although susceptible to icing and flame outs.
Easy to fly, no vices, not a bad machine either for the job it now does. (fly freight).
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: hearth EU
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saab 2000 is really fast with 0.62M and I like it, just a little bit noisy even with ANC, it never worked properly and the PCU the thing which take care of the prop also gave us some high pressure...but it is hard to beat 250 kts until 6 miles!
Also very hard on aileron with more than 180 kts but it saves you the fitness cost!
Also very hard on aileron with more than 180 kts but it saves you the fitness cost!
