quote:

Originally posted by tigereye313:

quote:

Originally posted by P250UA5:
I've got about 30 hrs in single engine.

The first few times my wife & I flew together when we were dating, she'd ask "can you fly this?" 737s mostly.

Probably, but it likely wouldn't be fun nor smooth

Was lucky enough to get to play in a 727 full motion sim when I was working on my instrument rating back in the day. Jets are a whole different animal!

I can imagine. I remember the mythbusters guys trialing this on the show.
They both attempted to land, unassisted & with an ATC 'coach' on the radio.

IIRC, they both crashed unassisted & were able to land with the coast walking them through it.

The big secret is that turbojet aircraft are easier to fly. Turboprops even easier, because they tend to make power management easy (idle descents), but speed changes, too. With autofeather, even an engine-out on takeoff is greatly simplified over say, a Cessna 310 or 414. There's no shock cooling, the airplane has better performance, and the big difference for a single engine private pilot is the size and energy. They land a little faster, but otherwise, it's just another airplane.

If you can fly a Cherokee or 172, you can fly a turboprop or turbojet. It may not be checkride perfect at first, but it's not nearly the challenge it seems, and you'll pick it up quickly. That's why airlines were able to put 250 hour light airplane pilots in transport category equipment for decades.

The King Air is used as a training airplane with a number of foreign airline programs, and students climb into one right out of a Seminole.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

If you can fly a Cherokee or 172, you can fly a turboprop or turbojet.

So, you're saying I have a chance.

Shucks I coulda flown that.

All the way to the crash site.
.

quote:

Originally posted by OKCGene:
Shucks I coulda flown that.

All the way to the crash site.
.

When you arrive at the crash site, be sure to fly the plane all the way through the crash.


As for the OP video...

I'm a licensed SEL pilot, with about the same amount of time as that bloke. I'd like to think I could do as well. But that's what separates aviators from everyone else.

The best part was his voice. He went from freaked out to just freaked to cool as a cucumber to overwhelmed at the joy of being alive.

When they asked him how many were on board it gave so much more weight to his task.
I was watching here, after the fact, knowing the outcome, and it raised my pulse a few times. I can’t imagine how the others on board felt.
Really good job flying and keeping cool enough to do that job perfectly.
Another thread discussed the overused term “hero” but I’d bet his passengers would nominate him for that title.

quote:

Originally posted by coloradohunter44:
V-Tail is correct. Many companies do utilize a SIC for safety, helps with insurance costs too. The air ambulance company I flew for required 2 pilots for all their King Air flights C90, BE200, all of them. In a 24/7 environment, it definitely makes it safer. At least this fellow was a pilot and had some sense of what to do.

Fly it yes. The landing part is where it gets interesting!

quote:

Originally posted by VictimNoMore:

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

If you can fly a Cherokee or 172, you can fly a turboprop or turbojet.

So, you're saying I have a chance.

Probably a lot more than you might think.

I watched a 25 minute y.t. vid containing a step by step start up procedures , on a king air, it also included four or five steps of what never to do. They made it sound like very expensive ,even catastrophic things could occur. My question would be , is shut down procedure any where near as critical?

quote:

Originally posted by darthfuster:
How is this possible? Shouldn't there have been a co-pilot?

Not required.

Wow.

A guy with the means to fly his family on a chartered King Air is no chump. That guy is an intelligent, competent man, and with some aviation skill, he did a fine job.

quote:

is shut down procedure any where near as critical?

Who possibly would care in this situation? on the ground in one piece. Heck if they all walked away from a totally destroyed king air who would complain. But in any case the checklist has nothing that would be critical...
Engine shutdown:Condition lever: ..............................................Cut-offProp lever: ....................................................FeatherFuel firewall valve: ..........................................ClosedFire extinguisher: ............................Actuate if requiredClean up (inop. engine):Bleed air valve: ................................As requiredEngine auto ignition: ....................................OffGenerator: ..................................................OffAutofeather: ................................................OffSynchrophaser: ...........................................OffElectrical load: ................................................Monitor

quote:

Originally posted by 220-9er:
When they asked him how many were on board it gave so much more weight to his task.
I was watching here, after the fact, knowing the outcome, and it raised my pulse a few times. I can’t imagine how the others on board felt.
Really good job flying and keeping cool enough to do that job perfectly.
Another thread discussed the overused term “hero” but I’d bet his passengers would nominate him for that title.

Not just how many...how many SOULS.

This guy is John Wayne or something.

Lisa G. Earned her place in heaven on this one...God bless you girl

quote:

Originally posted by bendable:
I watched a 25 minute y.t. vid containing a step by step start up procedures , on a king air, it also included four or five steps of what never to do. They made it sound like very expensive ,even catastrophic things could occur. My question would be , is shut down procedure any where near as critical?

From an insurance perspective, the engine start is critical as there are 30-60 seconds when a lot of damage can be done during the start procedure. The engines area about 1.5 million each, and it takes a few seconds of overtemperature to do very expensive damage. Introducing fuel at too slow an engine speed, or failing to take action with one of several different start malfunctions, will cause that damage.

Shutting down isn't the same; unlike a car, a turbine engine doesn't simply have an off switch (in most cases). Shutting down the engine has different requirements for different engine installations. In the case of the King Air 200, it's a matter of shutting off the fuel and following the procedure to secure the airplane.

For someone doing an emergency landing, the main thing is to get the airplane down and get stopped. After that, there's time to get everything shut down.

The good news is that the basic flight controls in the King Air look familar and operate in the same way that most private pilots would understand. There is an array of different radio and instrument options available, many of which will not be familiar and do take some training, but the monkey skills of flying the airplane don't change much, and with the power pulled back and the airplane slowed down, it can be flown and landed at speeds that wont' freak out an inexperienced pilot. With radio contact, someone can be talked through it.

With adequate fuel on board, taking the time to get comfortable with the way it handles, and gaining a little confidence, will go a long way to getting someone through the process of landing.

Back before 9/11 we chartered a lot of flights, if you had 4 people or more it was cheaper than flying commercial. It was a sweet way to travel, land at the airport and your rental car would be waiting where the plane would stop. We required a co-pilot, company policy, but it was extra. One flight leaving from Wheeling WV the copilot called off sick, no shit, after talking about it we decided to go anyway. When leaving for the flight home the pilot switched over to the reserve gas tank to burn the fuel for whatever reason. He forgot to switch back to the main tanks and ran the freaking plane out of gas, one engine completely shut down the other was feathering, this happened in seconds. I think we were only at 7000 feet. Scared the living crap out of me. From then on 2 pilots or I drove home.

quote:

Originally posted by RAMIUS:

quote:

Originally posted by 220-9er:
When they asked him how many were on board it gave so much more weight to his task.

Not just how many...how many SOULS.

This guy is John Wayne or something.

"Souls on board" is standard aviation terminology. That phrase has been used for many years.

I was repositioning an airplane from Orlando Executive airport to Orlando-Sanford, just a few minutes of flight time. When I lowered the landing gear for arrival at Sanford, the airflow pattern around the airplane changed and I started to smell smoke, with that distinct odor of electrical insulation. I quickly informed Sanford tower that I would immediately shut down electrical systems, including radios, so there would be no further communication from me.

They replied, clearing me to land, any runway, and asked how many souls on board. After landing, the emergency equipment that they had rolled followed me to the maintenance shop, and while filling out the paperwork, the fire guy asked the standard questions: how many souls on board and how much fuel on board.

The electrical problem turned out to be an auxiliary fuel pump that was in the process of committing suicide.

I'm surprised one of the other passengers weren't enlisted to monitor speed or altitude and settings, set radios, autopilot, remind, make checklists, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by 08 Cayenne:
When leaving for the flight home the pilot switched over to the reserve gas tank to burn the fuel for whatever reason. He forgot to switch back to the main tanks and ran the freaking plane out of gas, one engine completely shut down the other was feathering, this happened in seconds. I think we were only at 7000 feet. Scared the living crap out of me. From then on 2 pilots or I drove home.

That's a really common practice for wing locker tanks on piston twins; there may just be fifteen gallons fuel and there's no way to know how much fuel is in the tank, as there's no quantity indication. Fuel is drawn from that tank until a power loss occurs.

I prefer not to use that method, but know the fuel flow and time the tank, and switch early. It's possible to lose power and be unable to restore it. It's also possible on those airplanes to have a fuel feed situation that results in running out of fuel, with plenty of fuel on board, because it's being moved to a tank where it can't be used. Wise to plan ahead.

When I started flying heavy tankers, one of our airplanes was a WWII bomber with the original glass fuel sight gages. Standard fuel loading was to put one inboard tank system with 1 hour less fuel, the idea being that when that engine failed, the remaining had a hour of fuel, and one had two. The dead engine would be crossfed off the one with two, resulting in four engines with one hour remaining.

I thought it was a stupid idea. Better land early and take on more fuel. Running engines dry causes component damage, resulting in failures later, and reduced component life.