Jump Planes?

[twatterpilot 0]

vpjr

Multi engine aircraft have a greater chance of engine failure than Single engine aircraft. I do not have that statistic just heard that over all my years at the airport and seams right.
My opinion is the Twin Otter reaches blue line from Vr over time quicker than the KA, both have adequate rudder authority at blue line and climb rate, The KA is more complicated during V1 cut / climbout than a Twin Otter with the retract gear. After flying 25+ load days I am happier in a Twin Otter because of the reduced work load. The Twin Otter is cheaper on labor maint cost per seat than the King Air but more expensive in replacement parts cost. King air is definitely cheaper, I couldn't afford to keep my Twin Otter. If a Twin Otter just had that nice KA seat.

I am with ya on some of that. The King Air does have a very comfy seat. With 2200 hours in the Twin Otter, and about a 1000 in King Airs, in spite of the slightly added complexity of the undercarriage, I feel more comfortable in the King Air in a V1 cut situation. Dunno why, just do.

As far as maintenance goes, over the years I have found the King Air to be more reliable, with less component failures than the Twin Otter. The Twin Otter is actually a bit more complicated in my opinion with the critical boost pumps, (which I have had about a half dozen failures), Electric hydraulic pump, of which I have had 3 failures, beta back up system, which I cannot even count how many times that damn thing has gone haywire, and issues with the hydraulic nose wheel steering. Much of this could be attributed to how much they were flown between MX visits, who was maintaining them, and how hard they were flown. MX cost per seat, compare the 200 and the Twin Otter, both seating 22 jumpers, I think you will find the 200 has a lower operating and MX cost. Especially in the fuel burn. I never had a Twin Otter burn less than 30 a load, the 200 to 13,500 burns about 22 gallons.

I am very fortunate to fly at a place with good mechanics, good airplanes and low utilization. This could have loads to do with why I have this opinion.

As far as engine failure rates...I dunno vpjr, I have loads of multi time, as do you, and I have had 1 precautionary shutdown in 8000 hours. Maybe I am just lucky. *shrug*

Workload wise I will agree, but being as I am 6'3" tall, I am far more fatigued in the Twatter than the King Air. I just fit in the airplane a lot better. Although I really do miss the pilot window!

Airline Transport Pilot, Multi-Engine Land, DHC-8
Commercial Multi-Engine Sea, Single Engine Land
Private Glider

[Remster 24]

This.https://www.google.com/search?q=an72+skydive&safe=off&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=Yv25UaflAYauyAGrtICABQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=955#safe=off&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=an72+tailgate&oq=an72+tailgate&gs_l=img.3...39431.40774.0.40909.8.8.0.0.0.0.64.478.8.8.0...0.0.0..1c.1.17.img.sJDO67UtELI&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.47883778,d.aWc&fp=2868ce43d98175a7&biw=1920&bih=955&facrc=_&imgrc=qsSbc4xCNgSK8M%3A%3BkZQdcR_76D56IM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.fas.org%252Fman%252Fdod-101%252Fsys%252Fac%252Frow%252Fru_aircraft_an72_02.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.ls1gto.com%252Fforums%252Fshowthread.php%253Ft%253D437574%3B802%3B532

Remster

[twatterpilot 0]

Zlew

As a jumper, a KA is my least favorite jump plane (turbine). Climes fast...sure... but the door sucks, and most I have been in have the worst prop blast of a side exit plane. Combo that with said shitty door, and pulling off even small exits can be tricky. I'd take a 208 any day (really like the looks of the super 900 336 conversion!) over a KA, and would take a Twotter any day over a 208.

Most may not agree with me, but I think there are some advantages to being in a plane that just becomes a simple glider (and slow flyer) when power is out. Part of me likes the idea of teh worst case being me landing slow with the plane off field. I live in a place with tons of open fields, so might think differently if I lived in a wooded area. That is one thing I used to love about the Porter. Loses power...and that thing can land anywhere and crazy slow speeds. The short takeoff and landing abilities of that plane are pretty cool.

off field landing in a KA....those things don't like to slow down do they (saying out of some ignorance)?

I fly jump run in all models of King Air as slow as 75 kts. Most of the time 80 kts. I won't fly the Twin Otter slower than 85-90 depending on what the load is and what is launching. (big ways, tandems etc.) If you are having issues with prop blast, perhaps some retraining of the pilot is in order?

It is not the best airplane for group exits. That is a given. But would you rather a Cessna 182 or a King Air?

Glide speed in the King Air is higher, true, by about 15 kts., but isn't that why you have two engines? Having gotten my flying start in Gliders at age 12, it don't scare me. I would rather be in a Twin Otter if both decide to take lunch at the same time.

The King Air slows down just fine, over the fence at 90-100 kts, the Twatter 70-80 or so. Not a huge difference, but noticeable.

The whole point of being a competent pilot with a multi engine aircraft is to NOT land off airport. That is why the second engine is there no?

Airline Transport Pilot, Multi-Engine Land, DHC-8
Commercial Multi-Engine Sea, Single Engine Land
Private Glider

[twatterpilot 0]

Remster

This.https://www.google.com/search?q=an72+skydive&safe=off&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=Yv25UaflAYauyAGrtICABQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=955#safe=off&tbm=isch&sa=1&q=an72+tailgate&oq=an72+tailgate&gs_l=img.3...39431.40774.0.40909.8.8.0.0.0.0.64.478.8.8.0...0.0.0..1c.1.17.img.sJDO67UtELI&bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&bvm=bv.47883778,d.aWc&fp=2868ce43d98175a7&biw=1920&bih=955&facrc=_&imgrc=qsSbc4xCNgSK8M%3A%3BkZQdcR_76D56IM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.fas.org%252Fman%252Fdod-101%252Fsys%252Fac%252Frow%252Fru_aircraft_an72_02.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.ls1gto.com%252Fforums%252Fshowthread.php%253Ft%253D437574%3B802%3B532

I WANT ONE!!! Awesome bird!!!

Airline Transport Pilot, Multi-Engine Land, DHC-8
Commercial Multi-Engine Sea, Single Engine Land
Private Glider

[Remster 24]

It was awesome to jump from. A tailgate jet: your argument is invalid.

Remster

[Zlew 0]

twatterpilot

It is not the best airplane for group exits. That is a given. But would you rather a Cessna 182 or a King Air?

KA over a 182 for sure.

As for having 2 engines- I agree that the idea is one dies and the other will get you home. But that doesn't help with things like bad gas. There have been a few KA's (or any plane really) that landed off with no power. In that situation give me a slow flying bird, good pilot, big ass wheels, and some good luck....or 1500 feet AGL :)

[Ron 7]

To jump:
1. Twin otter
2. Garret converted Caravan
3. Any tailgate.
4. King air
5. 206/182

If I had to own:
1. Garret powered Caravan
2. Twin Otter
3. Any tailgate
4. 182/206
5. King Air

I do not like jumping and would not buy a KA. And I have 6-700 jumps out of one. Might work fine for a tandem mill. But for AFF and fun jumping I find it lacking.

As for cost.... Every 5(?) years the gear needs pretty big MX. It is a twin so it is burning two engines and burning two engines worth of fuel.

The DZ I work at just got one of those Garret powered Caravans. So far from talking to the owners/pilots I am nothing but impressed.

Others will disagree... Of this I am sure

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[obatzda 0]

Hej Mr Pilot - what about this one?

"The Douglas DC-9-20 was one of the rarer variants of the type, and only ten were ever built.
It was developed for Scandinavian Airlines System (SAS) and their requirements for short-field takeoffs in remote airports around Norway and Sweden.
The DC-9-20 featured the fuselage of a DC-9-10, but the improved engines and wings of a DC-9-30."

[MrBester 0]

MikeJD

***My favourite: Dornier DO28 G92 - seats 15 very comfortably, really fast, big door.

Another vote for the G92, for all the reasons you mention.

For those who don't know it, seating is typically on two benches running the length of the cabin and jumpers straddle the benches so that they are facing fully aft. The only time it's not comfortable in there is if you're at the rear end of one of those benches, and the people who got in before you have left you virtually nothing to perch on - then it's hell. On the other hand, it gives your calves and thighs a pretty good workout!

For me it's a shame that Caravans have become so prevalent in the UK, although I understand it all comes down to running and maintenance costs. In my experience, when they're full of jumpers and fuel, most are noticeably slower than other turbines. They're also cramped and the C of G rules prohibit bigger launches.

I have never come across a G92 with benches. Most of my G92 jumps have been out of the HA-ACY and HA-ACZ. I know there's one stationed in the UK. HA-ACO, if I'm not mistaken - is that the one you're talking about?
Would very much like to try one with benches.

[Douggarr 6]

I've jumped about 25 different aircraft.

The one I am sure I will have a lot of fun jumping is the Perris DC-10, if it's ever commissioned again. There is a rumor (circulated mostly by me) that they are going to overhaul the engines and get it in the air again. 13,500 in about what four minutes? I'll even fly coach.

SCR-442, SCS-202, CCR-870, SOS-1353

[3mpire 0]

thevasc21

There is a rumor (circulated mostly by me) that they are going to overhaul the engines and get it in the air again.

don't tease me bro

[demoknite 0]

Not up on all the flying lingo, but from a purely jumper perspective...

Caravan. Too cramped, center of gravity concerns, very average to altitude. Barely acceptable to turbine snobs.

Grand Caravan. One or two more jumpers than the caravan, not as cramped at max capacity. Popular overseas. Easy to launch 4 or more.

Twin Otter. Industry standard. Roomy with benches or floor seating at max altitude. Quick to altitude.

Super Otter. Same as above with a little added capacity. That much faster to altitude. Probably the most favorited skydivers aircraft with all variables considered. My personal favorite for sure.

Skyvan. Anchor line cable makes it a favorite for military contracting the aircraft out. Slower to altitude but skydivers love the "novelty" of the tailgate. Linked 10 ways, raft dives and overspeed wingsuit exits make it well loved. Lifting the gate can be trouble for the non initiated.

PAC. Super fast to altitude but crowded at max capacity. Small door. For some reason being on the outside gets you blasted by the relative wind more so than most common aircraft.

[sundevil777 93]

Quote

the Perris DC-10

That would be different, to jump a DC-10!

A slightly different bird than what they have.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

[totter 2]

The Direct Operating Cost is all relative to the age of the aircraft and how it was maintained and operated as well as how it is going to be operated.
I've had the privilege of being responsible for the maintenance on 14 Twin Otters, 4 Caravans and 1 Kodiak.
The Twins are all legacy 300s, the oldest Caravan is a 2009 and the Kodiak a 2012.
The Caravans were by far the cheapest to maintain (at about $75/flight hour), the Kodiak next ($85/ flight hour) and the Twin being the most expensive (at about $300 per flight hour)
If you went head to head with a new Caravan EX and a -400 the MX cost would be similar, but the operting cost for the -400 would be higher. Two engines as compared to one.
Now the typical Twin Otter is the DZ whore, it's been around so long it's been jumped by everyone. Most likely a -100 or -200 that was built somewhere between 1966 and 1972. And most nearing the end of their fatigue life. Yes, these would be and are very costly to be maintained.
Same applies to the early A and B model King Airs (very early LJ serial numbers).
And I would agree that if you had an early model ('84-'87) A series Caravan you would also be looking at high maintenance costs. Landing gear, wing struts all being due for replacement and all the expensive NDT inspections that are due.
But the King Air and the Twin Otter all have their own life limited items and special inspections.
To get an aircraft that will not need any major maintenance for quite some time will cost, though.
By far the early King Airs are the cheapest $200 - 400k. An early Caravan around $400k. A 100/200 series Twin Otter $400 - $800k. 300 series -6 over $1 million. '08-'11 Caravan about $1.5 million. New Caravan EX $2.5 million and -400 series Twin Otter $4 million.
So it mainly comes down to "do you want to spend your money now or later?"
As far as the Caravan crashes have been concerned most have been due to flying into Known Icing when they shouldn't have been or CT blade failure. The last being Pratt and Whitney's doing, not Cessna's. I've heard that the FAA is going to release a new AD on the -114A engines form this reason. The FedEx crash 5 months ago was due to CT blade failure. I had a jump 208 years ago that chunked it's CT blades and I wouldn't doubt that Transport Canada will find this to be the cause of the Toronto crash. The occurrence is very similar to the FedEx crash.

[MikeJD 0]

MrBester

I have never come across a G92 with benches. Most of my G92 jumps have been out of the HA-ACY and HA-ACZ. I know there's one stationed in the UK. HA-ACO, if I'm not mistaken - is that the one you're talking about?
Would very much like to try one with benches.

They're the main aircraft used at the UK Nationals. I've jumped several, all owned by Skydive Hibaldstow in the UK - HA-ACO is one of those. They operate at Hibaldstow, its sister DZ Skydive Spain near Seville, and on loan to various other dropzones.

Here's an interior photo of one of them, giving you an idea of the seating - maximum three on the floor near the door, and everyone else on benches.

I do love the Dorniers - they're not pretty, but they certainly do the job!

[jimmytavino 16]

Quote

But would you rather (take ) a Cessna 182 or a King Air? ...

Years ago I developed a philosophy about Cessnas vs. Turbines...


" I would rather take a turbine, FALL for 25 SECONDS, and find myself at 9 - Five..

.. Than to take a Cessna, Sit in the plane for 25 MINUTES....and find myself at 9 - Five...."


But...... as "regular old jumpers " we get what we GET... and only have whatever is deemed "feasible" by the local DZOs..
OR we travel... to where we can Find the planes ( And people ) that we Like.!!!

Of course we LIKE most all of the local people,,,, a LOT...
the local planes.... well not so much..they ARE safe and well maintained but it's tough " to share the air " with Lots of pals,,, out of a 182 or a 206..

jmy

[MrBester 0]

MikeJD

They're the main aircraft used at the UK Nationals. I've jumped several, all owned by Skydive Hibaldstow in the UK - HA-ACO is one of those. They operate at Hibaldstow, its sister DZ Skydive Spain near Seville, and on loan to various other dropzones.

Here's an interior photo of one of them, giving you an idea of the seating - maximum three on the floor near the door, and everyone else on benches.

I do love the Dorniers - they're not pretty, but they certainly do the job!

Very nice, thanks for the photo! I think the Dorniers are very pretty, especially from the inside with the ground vanishing rapidly below.

[babz 0]

If I recall correctly Hibaldstow / Skydive Seville have the following dorniers..
HA - ACO
HA - VOC
HA - HIB
EC - KTC

And I've seen two other dorniers in Portugal with call signs (and no benches)..
HA - ACX
HA - ACY


Definitely one of the best jump planes out there.. still can't work out if I prefer these or the super otters, sadly no super otters in the UK :(

[cavscout73 0]

Gotta love the old beech 18 turbines.. Decent climb, huge door....
But something about the 182 though, still my daily favorite..

[jumpwally 0]

Anyone flying Westwinds ? how are they as jump ships ? Seen one or two but never got to jump one....

smile, be nice, enjoy life
FB # - 1083

[twatterpilot 0]

jumpwally

Anyone flying Westwinds ? how are they as jump ships ? Seen one or two but never got to jump one....

Pretty sure Jim West is still flying a Westwind at Skydive Greene County in Zenia OH.

Airline Transport Pilot, Multi-Engine Land, DHC-8
Commercial Multi-Engine Sea, Single Engine Land
Private Glider

[sundevil777 93]

twatterpilot

***Anyone flying Westwinds ? how are they as jump ships ? Seen one or two but never got to jump one....

Pretty sure Jim West is still flying a Westwind at Skydive Greene County in Zenia OH.

Their website says they have 2 of them, in Xenia.

People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am