Soloy C206 vs C207

[Jonntis 0]

Hi

Our dropzone is looking at buying a Soloy converted Cessna, and are trying to figure out the difference between the 206 and 207. I understand Soloy put the same engine in them, while the 207 can carry one more jumper and is heavier in itself.

Does anyone have experience of both of these aircarft and could share what the difference in fuel consumption, turn around times etc is? Does the extra slot for a hop n pop outweigh the possibly slower climb rate and higher fuel consumtion of the 207? Any other important differences one should be aware of?

Although we know these aircraft are very hard to run economically, it seems its the only choice that would fit our needs.

Any input would be highly appreciated!


Thanks/Jonathan

[jurgencamps 0]

We had a C207 soloy in 1990. Exit speed was high, (110 knots). Okay the pilots were afraid to stall it and after they had more experience, the speed was lower, but still quite high. The door is quite far to the back.

An other DZ here operates a C 206 soly and if I have to choose between them, I would prefer the C 206. I do not have more info.

[Liemberg 0]

For what it is worth: someone with a lot of experience with turbine engines once pointed out to me that a C207 used as a jumpship will always be using it's engine to the max, because of it's relative high weight. Where (f.i.) a PT6 Porter engine typically runs at 80%, the Soloy C207 must operate at 95% or more. That would logically lead to more wear and tear on the engine. One club in the Netherlands has a C207 and they had serious engine troubles a lot sooner than they hoped for. Two other clubs had/have a C206 and I haven't heard of them experiencing the same difficulties...

However, I really don't know if the above was indeed the cause of the problems with the C207.

Anyway, when you sell it again you may have a hard time convincing the other party that 'it belonged to an old lady and was always parked indoors...'
Furthermore, planning loads is a bit more of a hassle since your payload varies depending on whether you just took in fuel (they had one 6-persons load for every three 7-persons load if I remember correct....)

You may want to try and contact those Dutch clubs directly:

Paracentrum Eelde-Hoogeveen (has a C207)
ENPC (currently has a C206)

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

[Floflo 0]

I do not have much technical data to give you, but I know of two C207 Soloy and three C206 Soloy that are beeing operated at DZ I jump at.

Never heard of any mechanical problem on any of those three 206.
Heard of a lot of problems on both the 207, one had to stop operating for monthes in a row due to severe engine failures.
Plus I think the 206 is a little faster.

[Jonntis 0]

Thanks a lot for your responses so far. Appreciate it.

When I think about it, I've also heard of many 207s with engine troubles. I've thought of it as coincidence, but it makes sense the high demands on the enginge would wear it out faster.

So does anyone know of a 207 thats been running a while without problems?

[riggerrob 558]

Since skydivers exit the P206 and 207 via the co-pilot's door, balance and stall speed would be less risky.

OTOH cargo-door 206s are more popular with tandem instructors, but they door is much closer to the tail, increasing the risk of tail strikes and stalling on jump-run. Furthermore, cargo-door 206s are difficult to launch linked exits (e.g AFF).

[godfrog 2]

I think rex minke at west plains skydiving used to operate a soloy 207, he might have some input.

Experience is a difficult teacher, she gives you the test first and the lesson afterward

[ozonefly.com 0]

seems like wafou skydiving in France use the 207 soloy with not much troubles.

Probably a matter of pilot operating procedures

207 is great if you mix skydive and sighseeing ( 5pax on A 206 for sightseeing or air taxi and 7 on the 207 )

So i think if we talk skydive only 206 is a bit better
If you want to have other uses and/or a best sale value 207 may be better

[GalFisk 0]

We operated a 207 at my DZ in Sweden from 1993 to 2010. AFAIK it worked fine for many years (I started 2 years ago), but this last year we had no end of trouble with metal chips in the oil. I think the engine was taken apart three or four times, and after the last time it developed a serious oil leak.
In addition to this we had a tail strike (SL pilot chute over the tail, bent stabilizer but everyone was ok) and a flat tire, and decided to get rid of it and buy a 206 instead for 2011. Its size will also be better suited for our club.

[Jonntis 0]

Many thanks for your answers everyone.

In case someone would search this forum for the same reason I did couple of months ago, I'll reignite the thread and post what I've learned outside of the forum. I talked to a pilot a while ago who had been flying both the 206 and 207 turbine, a few times on the same dropzone simultaneously.

According to him, you fly the engine on the same effect on both machines(max continuous effect), so it does not make sense the 207 generates more engine problems because of this. It was also his experience the two aircrafts he had operated had quite the same amount of problems.

It does however, take about 2 minutes longer for the 207 than the 206 to climb to 4000m. (16 vs 18 mins roughly) Due to some differences in the deign of the airframe, the 207 has a higher max speed, which allows you to go down about 1 minute faster. Hence, the difference in turnaround was around 1 minute. He said he had timed it himself.

Considering the extra slot in the 207, it is not harder to run this plane economically, which we thought it was at first.

The engine is also positioned different in these aircraft, and it is harder to access in the 207, which makes some of the maintenance slightly more expensive than on the 206. Again, overall the planes are pretty equal it seems economically.



/Jonathan