Voodooburner
Well-Known Member
No just 91 for a buddy of mine.
-
Thank you for visiting HeavyEquipmentForums.com! Our objective is to provide industry professionals a place to gather to exchange questions, answers and ideas. We welcome you to register using the "Register" icon at the top of the page. We'd appreciate any help you can offer in spreading the word of our new site. The more members that join, the bigger resource for all to enjoy. Thank you!
Help me push trees over and not die
- Thread starter Voodooburner
- Start date
skyking1
Senior Member
I've only flown the 310s. B,C,D,K?
Not sure on that last one. I know it was the piggiest of the bunch. They suffer from model creep like a lot of planes. The early ones are nicer on the controls.
Not sure on that last one. I know it was the piggiest of the bunch. They suffer from model creep like a lot of planes. The early ones are nicer on the controls.
Voodooburner
Well-Known Member
My buddy has a 414 ram 4 with winglets. Very nice machine but 40 gallons an hour at avgas prices is $$$$$$$$$$
charles walton
Senior Member
In the instance that I was talking about a seat belt would only have made it worse as the machine was topless. That said, I actually survived a rollover about 20 years ago because I was buckled up.
Voodooburner
Well-Known Member
I am such a chicken I don’t think I would run a topless machine. I really don’t know much about what I am doing either
skyking1
Senior Member
I took the ROPS off my John Deere crawler loader once, to work under some cantilevered porches. It felt way wrong.
40 Gallons !!! I can't afford 10 Gallons. At that rate, I'd rather have a T-28 Trojan. or a turbine Legend.
skyking1
Senior Member
I did most of the fun flying of the 310 when the price was less than two bucks. @25 an hour, the current prices do have a sting to them.
Welder Dave
Senior Member
How much is insurance for a plane and does it have to be yearly like motorcycles and snowmobiles?
OzDozer
Senior Member
The ultralight owners here pay around AU$2500 annually for insurance and their insured value is probably only around AU$50K-$75K.
Bigger aircraft would be pretty expensive to insure, but I'm sure the insurer adjusts the premium according to the model of aircraft, the pilots experience, and the type of use.
The lighter aircraft have a poorer safety record than the bigger aircraft, and private recreational pilots would pose a much higher insurance risk.
I'd have to guess the insurer probably even takes the pilots age into account.
Bigger aircraft would be pretty expensive to insure, but I'm sure the insurer adjusts the premium according to the model of aircraft, the pilots experience, and the type of use.
The lighter aircraft have a poorer safety record than the bigger aircraft, and private recreational pilots would pose a much higher insurance risk.
I'd have to guess the insurer probably even takes the pilots age into account.
https://www.eaa.org/eaa/news-and-pu...n-news/news/06-15-2017-uninsured-flying-naked
A tail wheel vs. a tricycle gear might add $ 1000. to the premium. Helicopter insurance is, "cost prohibitive".
A tail wheel vs. a tricycle gear might add $ 1000. to the premium. Helicopter insurance is, "cost prohibitive".
skyking1
Senior Member
We carried liability and coverage for our passengers only on the plane, hull insurance was too much. Keeping the hull and contents safe and sound was #1. If I failed in that, there would not be anyone to care about replacing the hull.
I don't know what the cost is now.
I don't know what the cost is now.
If it was turbine then likely 200 gallons or more per hour?
How does JetA compare to 100LL price?
Welder Dave
Senior Member
Never realized insurance wasn't absolutely required.
Voodooburner
Well-Known Member
Jet A is considerably cheaper but you burn a lot more and the mx costs go up a lot….way lot. It is a rich mans game. Brake job is 100+k on what I fly for my job
skyking1
Senior Member
no, not that bad.
the 325 hp continentals in the Ram 414 lean out to 0.45 Lb/HP/Hr.
40 gallons = 240 PPH
That's about 260 HP per engine in cruise.
Pratt and Whitney's smallest engine is 500 SHP
They burn about 0.67 Lb/Hp/Hr at the lower power settings
520 Hp x 0.67 = 350 PPH = 52 GPH.
So the same plane at the same power settings 40 vs 52 gallons per hour.
What is significant is the weight of the fuel, 6 pounds vs 6.75 pounds per gallon.
When they do a turbine conversion, they don't get to jack up the gross weight arbitrarily, so a fast plane like a 414 will fly farther with a heavier load in the original power configuration.
It is just significantly faster on the short hauls and easier to fly, more reliable, etc. as a turbine.
As you dial up a given turbine engine, the efficiency goes up. If they made a smaller PT6A hot section that was more of a match to the 325 HP continental, the burn would be better.
The Allison 250 is a better power match, but they burn more fuel. they burn 0.70lb/hp/hr.
charles walton
Senior Member
Back when that happened topless loaders were mostly like that in the early’70’s here. By the time I started operating in the late’80’s most all machines had ROPS but my Great Uncle had been gone a good while by then.