Garrett Powered King Air 90

[skydive80 0]

Any idea how fast the new King Air at West TN is ?   The King Air with Garett’s ?

[michaelmullins 77]

16 hours ago, skydive80 said:

Any idea how fast the new King Air at West TN is ?   The King Air with Garett’s ?

Yes

[IanHarrop 37]

an article on the conversion and the performace. I have no idea if this is the conversion done to Mik'e plane

http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=8ad64375-4da9-4825-b82a-138580066aae

[skypilotA1 67]

I will leave it up to Mr. Mullins to release exact figures, but the new Super Super KingAir  at West Tennessee Skydiving is SUBSTANTIALLY faster than the original N9HW KingAir…and it’s average time to 14.5 was usually 7-7.5 minutes…not noticeably faster, substantially faster!!! I was on it about 26 times last week. No time to relax and get comfortable.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

13 minutes ago, skypilotA1 said:

I will leave it up to Mr. Mullins to release exact figures, but the new Super Super KingAir  at West Tennessee Skydiving is SUBSTANTIALLY faster than the original N9HW KingAir…and it’s average time to 14.5 was usually 7-7.5 minutes…not noticeably faster, substantially faster!!! I was on it about 26 times last week. No time to relax and get comfortable.

Well that's all fine and dandy, for sure, and fast jump aircraft are pretty cool. But even if it was twice as fast as that why would anyone want to jump a King Air when Super Caravans or -34 Otters will get a load to 14K in 12 minutes in comfort and then have a nice big door to make life happy for the jumpers? No time to relax and get comfortable is hardly a selling point for practicing a dive flow, calming a student, or doing a few safety checks. To each their own, I guess.

[michaelmullins 77]

28 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Well that's all fine and dandy, for sure, and fast jump aircraft are pretty cool. But even if it was twice as fast as that why would anyone want to jump a King Air when Super Caravans or -34 Otters will get a load to 14K in 12 minutes in comfort and then have a nice big door to make life happy for the jumpers? No time to relax and get comfortable is hardly a selling point for practicing a dive flow, calming a student, or doing a few safety checks. To each their own, I guess.

As I have made over 45,000 loads in my original King Air, 9HW, I would say that a bunch of jumpers seem to be very happy with a fast King Air, and now we have a faster King Air.  The additional speed means that we can put out more loads/more jumpers per day, with either King Air, than any Caravan or Otter, burning less fuel, with a much less expensive aircraft. But I am sure that some can find a negative in anything.

Mike Mullins

[JoeWeber 2,299]

9 minutes ago, michaelmullins said:

As I have made over 45,000 loads in my original King Air, 9HW, I would say that a bunch of jumpers seem to be very happy with a fast King Air, and now we have a faster King Air.  The additional speed means that we can put out more loads/more jumpers per day, with either King Air, than any Caravan or Otter, burning less fuel, with a much less expensive aircraft. But I am sure that some can find a negative in anything.

Mike Mullins

Relax Mike,

I can calculate the difference in the of number of loads possible in an aircraft with half the climb time, too. So here's a question, I've flown 36 loads a day in a Super Caravan on back to back days too often. Have you flown 72 loads on back to back days in a Super even faster King Air? You are promoting the machines production advantage after all.

Edited September 13, 2023 by JoeWeber

[michaelmullins 77]

8 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Relax Mike,

I can calculate the difference in the of number of loads possible in an aircraft with half the climb time, too. So here's a question, I've flown 36 loads a day in a Super Caravan on back to back days too often. Have you flown 72 loads on back to back days in a Super even faster King Air? You are promoting the machines production advantage after all.

Geez, I never said I could do twice as many loads, I said I could put out more jumpers per day, I have flown over 50 loads per day on many days.

 

[JoeWeber 2,299]

1 minute ago, michaelmullins said:

Geez, I never said I could do twice as many loads, I said I could put out more jumpers per day, I have flown over 50 loads per day on many days.

 

Well, you're a rockstar, that's a fact. I am also a fan of fast climbing jump planes, my current fave is my -42A Short Caravan with full traffic, glass etc. Super fun to fly and 2 minutes 11 seconds to all three on the runway from 14K. From jumping, I'm just not a fan of small doors, I guess. No matter, when it comes to fast planes you are the ruler, no doubt.

[gowlerk 1,912]

32 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Well, you're a rockstar, that's a fact. I am also a fan of fast climbing jump planes, my current fave is my -42A Short Caravan with full traffic, glass etc. Super fun to fly and 2 minutes 11 seconds to all three on the runway from 14K. From jumping, I'm just not a fan of small doors, I guess. No matter, when it comes to fast planes you are the ruler, no doubt.

I’m sure it is a wonderful King Air. Many big time and long established DZOs love them for personal travel. As a jump ship it’s still just a King Air.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

11 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

I’m sure it is a wonderful King Air. Many big time and long established DZOs love them for personal travel. As a jump ship it’s still just a King Air.:

Yep, it's a pilots airplane for sure. I've owned and operated two retractable gear aircraft used for jumping: a regular Twin Beech and a Turbine Twin Beech. Never again. Same with King Airs for jumping, the small door and tight cabin don't work for me no matter how fast it climbs.

[riggerrob 558]

23 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Well that's all fine and dandy, for sure, and fast jump aircraft are pretty cool. But even if it was twice as fast as that why would anyone want to jump a King Air when Super Caravans or -34 Otters will get a load to 14K in 12 minutes in comfort and then have a nice big door to make life happy for the jumpers? No time to relax and get comfortable is hardly a selling point for practicing a dive flow, calming a student, or doing a few safety checks. To each their own, I guess.

What?

You want to get comfortable in a jump-plane?

The last time I rode in a comfortable jump-plane was a good 30 years ago. It was in Jan Van Arvitson's DC-3 over California City. It had a sofa near the front of the cabin where I sat with my tandem student. We stood on our hind legs - like gentlemen - to hook up and casually walked (upright) to the door.

I always found the climb to altitude boring.

The quicker the better.

As for briefing the freefall student on the way up ... noisy airplane cabins are the worst possible teaching environment. Better to do the full briefing before boarding and just touch on the key points during the climb.

[skypilotA1 67]

45 minutes ago, riggerrob said:

What?

You want to get comfortable in a jump-plane?

The last time I rode in a comfortable jump-plane was a good 30 years ago. It was in Jan Van Arvitson's DC-3 over California City. It had a sofa near the front of the cabin where I sat with my tandem student. We stood on our hind legs - like gentlemen - to hook up and casually walked (upright) to the door.

I always found the climb to altitude boring.

The quicker the better.

As for briefing the freefall student on the way up ... noisy airplane cabins are the worst possible teaching environment. Better to do the full briefing before boarding and just touch on the key points during the climb.

I tend to agree with you. I prefer the fast ride with my students. Consistently, the students say the plane ride to altitude induces the most stress for them. In my opinion, a last radio check, a review of the dive flow and hand signals, gear check….and I am ready to go! Anything longer than a minute of quiet time and slow breathing has adverse effects. True, the KingAir door is narrow…but it is tall, as am I. We easily get a cameraman and 2 instructor AFF out that door without effort. We had a Caravan here for a couple of weeks, all my Instructors (tandem and AFF) hated it because of the short door height. Glad to see it go. But, as has been said…to each his own. One adapts to what is available.

[SethInMI 145]

On 9/12/2023 at 10:46 PM, michaelmullins said:

I said I could put out more jumpers per day

So with this new KA what are your numbers Mike, if I may ask?  Time to altitude and cycle time for a load wheels up to wheels down?

[maxmadmax 8]

On 9/12/2023 at 10:26 PM, michaelmullins said:

As I have made over 45,000 loads in my original King Air, 9HW, I would say that a bunch of jumpers seem to be very happy with a fast King Air, and now we have a faster King Air.  The additional speed means that we can put out more loads/more jumpers per day, with either King Air, than any Caravan or Otter, burning less fuel, with a much less expensive aircraft. But I am sure that some can find a negative in anything.

Mike Mullins

Awesome!!!!!

 

[JoeWeber 2,299]

On 9/12/2023 at 7:26 PM, michaelmullins said:

As I have made over 45,000 loads in my original King Air, 9HW, I would say that a bunch of jumpers seem to be very happy with a fast King Air, and now we have a faster King Air.  The additional speed means that we can put out more loads/more jumpers per day, with either King Air, than any Caravan or Otter, burning less fuel, with a much less expensive aircraft. But I am sure that some can find a negative in anything.

Mike Mullins

Making legitimate observations does not equate to finding fault or negatives; the simple fact of the matter is that most jumpers like a bigger door if they have a choice. So as long as we are talking pilot stuff, how many loads a day are you good for in the King Air? I've done 36 loads too many times in a Super Caravan and, at least for me, the novelty was long gone after load 20. Yes, the King Air is a less expensive platform but, like a Caravan, the landing gear wasn't built for that number of cycles, especially true of retractable gear aircraft,  and you also have the cost of two engines. So your total maintenance must be somewhat more expensive. 

[riggerrob 558]

16 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

.... Yes, the King Air is a less expensive platform but, like a Caravan, the landing gear wasn't built for that number of cycles, especially true of retractable gear aircraft,  and you also have the cost of two engines. So your total maintenance must be somewhat more expensive. 

Yes, 60-year-old King Airs can be picked up for a song.

Consider that Beechcraft started building King Airs in 1963 and more than 3,000 have been built. More King Airs have been built than all of the other light turbine twin executive transports combined (BAE Jetstream, Embraer Bandierante, Cessna 4??, Piaggio Avanti, Piper Cheyanne, etc.).

A DZ can pick up a 60 year old King Air for a song, barely more than the value of the instrument panel and the time remaining on the engines. But long-term maintenance is far more expensive on King Airs with their pressurized cabins, retractable landing gear, de-icing boots, IFR panels, etc. King Airs also require hard-surfaced runways 3,000 feet (1 kilometer) or longer.

All those extra systems also make King Airs more complicated to fly, hence not suitable for freshly-minted commercial pilots. Complex airplanes are also more expensive to insure.

When my boss bought a 1960s vintage King Air, I asked him why he did not buy a simpler Cessna Caravan and he replied that his 1960s vintage King Air was the most that he could afford. A few years later he was complaining about spending $45,000 on a landing gear inspection due every 5 years. A few years even later he crashed the King Air because of some neglected engine maintenance.

Bottom line, King Airs are the cheapest turbine jump-planes to purchase and you get what you pay for.

Edited September 20, 2023 by riggerrob

[michaelmullins 77]

8 hours ago, riggerrob said:

Yes, 60-year-old King Airs can be picked up for a song.

Consider that Beechcraft started building King Airs in 1963 and more than 3,000 have been built. More King Airs have been built than all of the other light turbine twin executive transports combined (BAE Jetstream, Embraer Bandierante, Cessna 4??, Piaggio Avanti, Piper Cheyanne, etc.).

A DZ can pick up a 60 year old King Air for a song, barely more than the value of the instrument panel and the time remaining on the engines. But long-term maintenance is far more expensive on King Airs with their pressurized cabins, retractable landing gear, de-icing boots, IFR panels, etc. King Airs also require hard-surfaced runways 3,000 feet (1 kilometer) or longer.

All those extra systems also make King Airs more complicated to fly, hence not suitable for freshly-minted commercial pilots. Complex airplanes are also more expensive to insure.

When my boss bought a 1960s vintage King Air, I asked him why he did not buy a simpler Cessna Caravan and he replied that his 1960s vintage King Air was the most that he could afford. A few years later he was complaining about spending $45,000 on a landing gear inspection due every 5 years. A few years even later he crashed the King Air because of some neglected engine maintenance.

Bottom line, King Airs are the cheapest turbine jump-planes to purchase and you get what you pay for.

I have advised numerous people to not buy a King Air unless you have a very experienced pilot to fly it, a very knowledgable mechanic on staff that can maintain it, and that you are very knowledgeable about all aspects of flying and maintaining one.  Otherwise, the costs of maintenance will eat you alive and an inexperienced pilot will have a good chance of crashing it or landing it gear up.  I have told them that "you don't know what you don't know" but this advice has fallen on deaf ears on occasion.  I have had very good service from my King Air B90 with -34 engines, have flown it over 45,000 loads.  I recently had an engine failure when a $0.25 "C" clip fell out of the oil pressure regulating valve.  We had never touched that clip, whatever defect it had was from the last overhaul, engine shop said they had never seen one do that.  So, we sold the other engine, parting out the rest, and bought a C90 with -10, 1000 hp engines to replace it.

[sfzombie13 307]

i call bullshit on this.  no way in hell you got anything for an airplane for under a dollar. 

[billvon 2,400]

On 9/13/2023 at 6:06 PM, riggerrob said:

What?

You want to get comfortable in a jump-plane?

The last time I rode in a comfortable jump-plane was a good 30 years ago.

Last time for me was about 15 years ago in the Perris DC-9.

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

On 9/19/2023 at 6:15 PM, JoeWeber said:

Making legitimate observations does not equate to finding fault or negatives; the simple fact of the matter is that most jumpers like a bigger door if they have a choice. So as long as we are talking pilot stuff, how many loads a day are you good for in the King Air? I've done 36 loads too many times in a Super Caravan and, at least for me, the novelty was long gone after load 20. Yes, the King Air is a less expensive platform but, like a Caravan, the landing gear wasn't built for that number of cycles, especially true of retractable gear aircraft,  and you also have the cost of two engines. So your total maintenance must be somewhat more expensive. 

Hi Joe,

Rumor has it that you have sold one of your Caravans.

So, that begs the question:  Are you going to replace it with a King Air?

Jerry Baumchen

[JoeWeber 2,299]

5 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Joe,

Rumor has it that you have sold one of your Caravans.

So, that begs the question:  Are you going to replace it with a King Air?

Jerry Baumchen

Nope, I'm looking at going back to Turbine Beech's for up jumpers and innovating by doing Students and Tandems out of tall trees. Of course, given that they'll be doing their own hand cams, we'll need to discount a little but we live in changing times.

[gowlerk 1,912]

23 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Nope, I'm looking at going back to Turbine Beech's for up jumpers and innovating by doing Students and Tandems out of tall trees. Of course, given that they'll be doing their own hand cams, we'll need to discount a little but we live in changing times.

What is a King Air if not a turbine Beech?

[JoeWeber 2,299]

10 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

What is a King Air if not a turbine Beech?

Well, Grasshopper, it is a very different animal. And an animal it is. A Turbine Beech, that is the Hamilton Westwind conversion as opposed to the Tradewinds version, is a tail dragger. That is, for your edification, a Twin Turbine tail dragger. Now if'n you've never spooled up an early PT6 you probably don't know that the engines will accelerate to full take-off horsepower at different rates. Now imagine you are taking off in a quartering tailwind and need to not only manage the engines as they accelerate but also the location of the tail as you wait to get on the mains. Now, I loved the thing, and for the history books we were first to own one not Skydive Arizona, but it was a handful on the best day's. That said, they could bring out the dumb in you like few other airplanes and getting the right stick to fly it was a drama.

[gowlerk 1,912]

44 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Now, I loved the thing, and for the history books we were first to own one not Skydive Arizona, but it was a handful on the best day's. That said, they could bring out the dumb in you like few other airplanes and getting the right stick to fly it was a drama.

I'm sure I am misinterpreting you. It seems you want the romance and adventure that is now gone from your life back again. If you were to forego the large door of a Caravan and once more tolerate the Beechcraft cave style entry and egress you will also leave behind the increased control and safety of the updated tricycle gear successor to the Beech 18. I can understand the desire to relive the old days. But why stop at the Westwind? Why not give the R-985s another day in the Sun?