diverdriver 5 #76 January 24, 2007 Best jump plane is the one the DZ can afford to maintain properly for the amount of traffic they run through.Chris Schindler www.diverdriver.com ATP/D-19012 FB #4125 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Oke 0 #77 January 24, 2007 Pitts Special Anyone? The pictures look killer!-Adam Oke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Adriandavies 0 #78 January 24, 2007 QuoteQuoteEven with just 5 jumpers in the dropzone midweek, the Caravan will go up. Ours doesn't. I don't think its as fast as the PACs and Porters I've jumped either (Someone else mentioned the TurboFinist - that's worth a mention during winter months for having a completely draughtproof door. Toasty Its all down to marketing. If the DZ will only put the plane up with say 10 or 12 skydivers then on a quiet midweek day customers are likely to be put off as they might assume that there won't be enough people around to justify flying it. If on the other hand you advertise that it will fly with only 5 on board you are likely to get a lot more interest and will probably attract a lot more jumpers meaning that the plane will probably end up doing a lot more business. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PeterB 0 #79 January 25, 2007 QuoteI like the C-182 because it helped skydiving grow to the sport we know today. Re-engined to 300HP and with other available mods, an early wide-body 182 can carry 6 jumpers plus a pilot. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where is your DZ ... beside a pygmy village in deepest, darkest Africa? We have a wide-body Cessna 182 pimped-out with wing-tip extensions, dive brakes and a 300 horsepower engine from a 206. It barely carries 5 jumpers and they better not all be as big as me. A sixth jumper would unbalance the airplane. The other issue is climb rate. While it climbs well on cool days, it is painfully slow on hot, humid days. A couple of days ago, I took our 182 to 3,000 feet with a single student. Our pilot complained that we were barely climbing at 500 feet per minute! He didn't want to waste the rest of the afternoon hauling tandems to 10,000 feet. We got a C-182, wingtip extensions, 300hp engine. while it's possible to take 6 skydivers I really don't like it and have opted out of such loads. It's definiely doable though, if a little sardine-like. We're not having any performance problems. 20 minutes to 13k with 5 jumpers (not dwarvers I assure you). We did have a problem at a time but that was fixed after the pistons were replaced (loss of compression). Thin you might have had an issue with that? Bit slower on really hot days. It still manages around 1000ft/m up to about 3000 though. I like the big turbines for their speed and capacity but a C-182 isn't that bad if it's properly equipped and flown. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fabiana 0 #80 January 25, 2007 QuoteQuoteSorry but you forgot one 206 cessna Centurion V8 Diesel Turbo!!!!!!!!!! 4000meters 17 minutes. does your dropzone have that engine installed? Is it living up to expectations? what is the cycle time - I imagine it can descend quickly being liquid cooled... Yes our dropzone have it! cycle time is 22-23 minutes.yes you can descend quickly! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RMURRAY 1 #81 January 25, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteSorry but you forgot one 206 cessna Centurion V8 Diesel Turbo!!!!!!!!!! 4000meters 17 minutes. does your dropzone have that engine installed? Is it living up to expectations? what is the cycle time - I imagine it can descend quickly being liquid cooled... Yes our dropzone have it! cycle time is 22-23 minutes.yes you can descend quickly! not bad and the fuel and maintenance bills should be low.... rm Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkymonkeyONE 4 #82 January 26, 2007 Caravan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Inthebuff 0 #83 January 27, 2007 Done most of my jumps out of the Porter at Lillo so I'll always have a soft spot for Wolfy Recently started jumping a Caravan. Out of the two I deffo prefer the Porter. Reasons. The seating arrangement.Being kind of semi circular leads to a better atmosphere on the way up.( apart from the back right rear corner because the jumper in front squashes you big time ) If your lucks in you get to sit in the reversed Co Pilots seat and you get to see everyone go down the Hill which for me is and always will be an awesome sight. It's got a bigger door than the Caravan and the step is a nice touch. I love the sound of the engine,especially on throttle back when she kind of growls. Finally,she's a fast bird just a great looking aircraft.*********************************** Fly Like Zie Eagle, Not Like Zie Chicken ! Good advice from an instructor I know. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites toolbox 0 #84 January 27, 2007 C208 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #85 January 27, 2007 Ditto.. I love the Porter.. ours has 2 doors.. and both of them open..so you can launch a 4 way chunk out of each side at the same time.. and there is a porch 13" below the door sill's( some call them a step but there are PORCHES... it is 8" deep and 42" long) Each of the doors has a window that goes from about 6" from the floor to the top of the normal window.... WSO you can really see the amazing scenery of Puget Sound and the Olympic Mountians as well as the American Alps to the East of the DZ. It is also VERY fast... and will haul 8 of us to 14000' in about 10 to 12 minutes. http://nwskydivers.com/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zenister 0 #86 January 28, 2007 love the Porter myself (still pissed Eloy sold theirs) but apparently it is a very tiring aircraft to fly. Caravan rocks.. Pac750 is supposedly the fastest of the three and the auto closing door is neat.____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites acmik 0 #87 July 5, 2010 QuoteTrubo Finnist is powered by a Polish Walter turboprop engine. Czech... not the same. Quote At arm's length, Walter turbines look like communist copies of the Pratt & Whitney PT6A engines that power Turbo Beavers, Caravans, King Airs, Porters, PAC 750s, Twin Otters and many of the single Otter turbine conversions. It's Walter M601... nowdays produced as GE Aviation Czech H80 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_M601 Walter Aircraft Engines was founded in 1911, a little bit sooner then P&W :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RMURRAY 1 #88 July 5, 2010 I know this is an old thread but I vote for skys the limit 900HP Caravan...not sure how anyone could prefer a Porter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #89 July 5, 2010 QuotePac750 is supposedly the fastest of the three and the auto closing door is neat. A Pac reminds me of a clown car in a circus. If you are 3 feet tall, all your friends can run out of it at the same time. You can barely hunch over in the thing. Plus, there are many bars in range of your head. If you try to run out a group, the last person is standing next to the pilot. If you are floating, look back sometime. Sometimes, you are stuck with one, but there is no reason to prefer it from a jumpers standpoint. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites totter 2 #90 July 5, 2010 Quoteanyone seen a DHC-3 single otter fitted with the 600HP turbocharged Orenda (now called Trace Engines) V8? Might be a nice jump plane for a midsized DZ RM, The STC will be for the Beaver, not the Single Otter. Sealand Aviation is working on it along with Trace. It will include an Upgross to 6000 lbs also. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skybytch 273 #91 July 5, 2010 Quote Sometimes, you are stuck with one, but there is no reason to prefer it from a jumpers standpoint. For anything other than a "big way", the PAC is the best. It gets me to altitude faster and more comfortably than any other plane. Plus I have my own window. That whole hard to be last out thing? Consider it good diving practice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lekstrom10k 0 #92 July 5, 2010 The insurance for the Porter is a double whammy . Who has tail dragger time and single engine turbine time. C-180-185 time is fairly common. C-208 turbine time can be had easily enough.Its the old "Catch22" you cant get the job without the experience, but you cant get the experience without the job. Joe Webber had aC-208b Cargomaster with even floater steps in front of the door and a floater bar from the camera step to the trailing edge of the flaps. Great seats, useful belts,and grand Caravan windows. no right air stair door to make the sliding door track rear mounting a nuisance. Thanks Joe Skydive Oregon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhys 0 #93 July 5, 2010 QuoteThe insurance for the Porter is a double whammy . Who has tail dragger time and single engine turbine time. C-180-185 time is fairly common. C-208 turbine time can be had easily enough.Its the old "Catch22" you cant get the job without the experience, but you cant get the experience without the job. We are getting a porter and there are people tripping over each other to fly it. The thing Ilike about tail draggers is that incompetant pilots don't like flying them, so (generally) you get a good pilot if you have a tail dragger! You can easily guess what my choice was, though for owners a Cresco (Not XL) is probably the most efficient in its class (10 place). 20 minute sortie times to 15k so 3 loads an hour = 30 people an hour which is not too shy of a XL... both aircraft have PT6A-34 Aresco is better for a mid sized DZ. The Cresco is what the XL was based on and Both are made by P.A.C. (which is a company by the way not an aircraft. Pacific Aerospace Corporation)"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 4 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
RMURRAY 1 #81 January 25, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteSorry but you forgot one 206 cessna Centurion V8 Diesel Turbo!!!!!!!!!! 4000meters 17 minutes. does your dropzone have that engine installed? Is it living up to expectations? what is the cycle time - I imagine it can descend quickly being liquid cooled... Yes our dropzone have it! cycle time is 22-23 minutes.yes you can descend quickly! not bad and the fuel and maintenance bills should be low.... rm Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites SkymonkeyONE 4 #82 January 26, 2007 Caravan Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Inthebuff 0 #83 January 27, 2007 Done most of my jumps out of the Porter at Lillo so I'll always have a soft spot for Wolfy Recently started jumping a Caravan. Out of the two I deffo prefer the Porter. Reasons. The seating arrangement.Being kind of semi circular leads to a better atmosphere on the way up.( apart from the back right rear corner because the jumper in front squashes you big time ) If your lucks in you get to sit in the reversed Co Pilots seat and you get to see everyone go down the Hill which for me is and always will be an awesome sight. It's got a bigger door than the Caravan and the step is a nice touch. I love the sound of the engine,especially on throttle back when she kind of growls. Finally,she's a fast bird just a great looking aircraft.*********************************** Fly Like Zie Eagle, Not Like Zie Chicken ! Good advice from an instructor I know. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites toolbox 0 #84 January 27, 2007 C208 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #85 January 27, 2007 Ditto.. I love the Porter.. ours has 2 doors.. and both of them open..so you can launch a 4 way chunk out of each side at the same time.. and there is a porch 13" below the door sill's( some call them a step but there are PORCHES... it is 8" deep and 42" long) Each of the doors has a window that goes from about 6" from the floor to the top of the normal window.... WSO you can really see the amazing scenery of Puget Sound and the Olympic Mountians as well as the American Alps to the East of the DZ. It is also VERY fast... and will haul 8 of us to 14000' in about 10 to 12 minutes. http://nwskydivers.com/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Zenister 0 #86 January 28, 2007 love the Porter myself (still pissed Eloy sold theirs) but apparently it is a very tiring aircraft to fly. Caravan rocks.. Pac750 is supposedly the fastest of the three and the auto closing door is neat.____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites acmik 0 #87 July 5, 2010 QuoteTrubo Finnist is powered by a Polish Walter turboprop engine. Czech... not the same. Quote At arm's length, Walter turbines look like communist copies of the Pratt & Whitney PT6A engines that power Turbo Beavers, Caravans, King Airs, Porters, PAC 750s, Twin Otters and many of the single Otter turbine conversions. It's Walter M601... nowdays produced as GE Aviation Czech H80 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_M601 Walter Aircraft Engines was founded in 1911, a little bit sooner then P&W :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RMURRAY 1 #88 July 5, 2010 I know this is an old thread but I vote for skys the limit 900HP Caravan...not sure how anyone could prefer a Porter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #89 July 5, 2010 QuotePac750 is supposedly the fastest of the three and the auto closing door is neat. A Pac reminds me of a clown car in a circus. If you are 3 feet tall, all your friends can run out of it at the same time. You can barely hunch over in the thing. Plus, there are many bars in range of your head. If you try to run out a group, the last person is standing next to the pilot. If you are floating, look back sometime. Sometimes, you are stuck with one, but there is no reason to prefer it from a jumpers standpoint. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites totter 2 #90 July 5, 2010 Quoteanyone seen a DHC-3 single otter fitted with the 600HP turbocharged Orenda (now called Trace Engines) V8? Might be a nice jump plane for a midsized DZ RM, The STC will be for the Beaver, not the Single Otter. Sealand Aviation is working on it along with Trace. It will include an Upgross to 6000 lbs also. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites skybytch 273 #91 July 5, 2010 Quote Sometimes, you are stuck with one, but there is no reason to prefer it from a jumpers standpoint. For anything other than a "big way", the PAC is the best. It gets me to altitude faster and more comfortably than any other plane. Plus I have my own window. That whole hard to be last out thing? Consider it good diving practice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lekstrom10k 0 #92 July 5, 2010 The insurance for the Porter is a double whammy . Who has tail dragger time and single engine turbine time. C-180-185 time is fairly common. C-208 turbine time can be had easily enough.Its the old "Catch22" you cant get the job without the experience, but you cant get the experience without the job. Joe Webber had aC-208b Cargomaster with even floater steps in front of the door and a floater bar from the camera step to the trailing edge of the flaps. Great seats, useful belts,and grand Caravan windows. no right air stair door to make the sliding door track rear mounting a nuisance. Thanks Joe Skydive Oregon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rhys 0 #93 July 5, 2010 QuoteThe insurance for the Porter is a double whammy . Who has tail dragger time and single engine turbine time. C-180-185 time is fairly common. C-208 turbine time can be had easily enough.Its the old "Catch22" you cant get the job without the experience, but you cant get the experience without the job. We are getting a porter and there are people tripping over each other to fly it. The thing Ilike about tail draggers is that incompetant pilots don't like flying them, so (generally) you get a good pilot if you have a tail dragger! You can easily guess what my choice was, though for owners a Cresco (Not XL) is probably the most efficient in its class (10 place). 20 minute sortie times to 15k so 3 loads an hour = 30 people an hour which is not too shy of a XL... both aircraft have PT6A-34 Aresco is better for a mid sized DZ. The Cresco is what the XL was based on and Both are made by P.A.C. (which is a company by the way not an aircraft. Pacific Aerospace Corporation)"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 4 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
Inthebuff 0 #83 January 27, 2007 Done most of my jumps out of the Porter at Lillo so I'll always have a soft spot for Wolfy Recently started jumping a Caravan. Out of the two I deffo prefer the Porter. Reasons. The seating arrangement.Being kind of semi circular leads to a better atmosphere on the way up.( apart from the back right rear corner because the jumper in front squashes you big time ) If your lucks in you get to sit in the reversed Co Pilots seat and you get to see everyone go down the Hill which for me is and always will be an awesome sight. It's got a bigger door than the Caravan and the step is a nice touch. I love the sound of the engine,especially on throttle back when she kind of growls. Finally,she's a fast bird just a great looking aircraft.*********************************** Fly Like Zie Eagle, Not Like Zie Chicken ! Good advice from an instructor I know. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #85 January 27, 2007 Ditto.. I love the Porter.. ours has 2 doors.. and both of them open..so you can launch a 4 way chunk out of each side at the same time.. and there is a porch 13" below the door sill's( some call them a step but there are PORCHES... it is 8" deep and 42" long) Each of the doors has a window that goes from about 6" from the floor to the top of the normal window.... WSO you can really see the amazing scenery of Puget Sound and the Olympic Mountians as well as the American Alps to the East of the DZ. It is also VERY fast... and will haul 8 of us to 14000' in about 10 to 12 minutes. http://nwskydivers.com/ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #86 January 28, 2007 love the Porter myself (still pissed Eloy sold theirs) but apparently it is a very tiring aircraft to fly. Caravan rocks.. Pac750 is supposedly the fastest of the three and the auto closing door is neat.____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
acmik 0 #87 July 5, 2010 QuoteTrubo Finnist is powered by a Polish Walter turboprop engine. Czech... not the same. Quote At arm's length, Walter turbines look like communist copies of the Pratt & Whitney PT6A engines that power Turbo Beavers, Caravans, King Airs, Porters, PAC 750s, Twin Otters and many of the single Otter turbine conversions. It's Walter M601... nowdays produced as GE Aviation Czech H80 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_M601 Walter Aircraft Engines was founded in 1911, a little bit sooner then P&W :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RMURRAY 1 #88 July 5, 2010 I know this is an old thread but I vote for skys the limit 900HP Caravan...not sure how anyone could prefer a Porter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #89 July 5, 2010 QuotePac750 is supposedly the fastest of the three and the auto closing door is neat. A Pac reminds me of a clown car in a circus. If you are 3 feet tall, all your friends can run out of it at the same time. You can barely hunch over in the thing. Plus, there are many bars in range of your head. If you try to run out a group, the last person is standing next to the pilot. If you are floating, look back sometime. Sometimes, you are stuck with one, but there is no reason to prefer it from a jumpers standpoint. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
totter 2 #90 July 5, 2010 Quoteanyone seen a DHC-3 single otter fitted with the 600HP turbocharged Orenda (now called Trace Engines) V8? Might be a nice jump plane for a midsized DZ RM, The STC will be for the Beaver, not the Single Otter. Sealand Aviation is working on it along with Trace. It will include an Upgross to 6000 lbs also. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybytch 273 #91 July 5, 2010 Quote Sometimes, you are stuck with one, but there is no reason to prefer it from a jumpers standpoint. For anything other than a "big way", the PAC is the best. It gets me to altitude faster and more comfortably than any other plane. Plus I have my own window. That whole hard to be last out thing? Consider it good diving practice. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lekstrom10k 0 #92 July 5, 2010 The insurance for the Porter is a double whammy . Who has tail dragger time and single engine turbine time. C-180-185 time is fairly common. C-208 turbine time can be had easily enough.Its the old "Catch22" you cant get the job without the experience, but you cant get the experience without the job. Joe Webber had aC-208b Cargomaster with even floater steps in front of the door and a floater bar from the camera step to the trailing edge of the flaps. Great seats, useful belts,and grand Caravan windows. no right air stair door to make the sliding door track rear mounting a nuisance. Thanks Joe Skydive Oregon Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhys 0 #93 July 5, 2010 QuoteThe insurance for the Porter is a double whammy . Who has tail dragger time and single engine turbine time. C-180-185 time is fairly common. C-208 turbine time can be had easily enough.Its the old "Catch22" you cant get the job without the experience, but you cant get the experience without the job. We are getting a porter and there are people tripping over each other to fly it. The thing Ilike about tail draggers is that incompetant pilots don't like flying them, so (generally) you get a good pilot if you have a tail dragger! You can easily guess what my choice was, though for owners a Cresco (Not XL) is probably the most efficient in its class (10 place). 20 minute sortie times to 15k so 3 loads an hour = 30 people an hour which is not too shy of a XL... both aircraft have PT6A-34 Aresco is better for a mid sized DZ. The Cresco is what the XL was based on and Both are made by P.A.C. (which is a company by the way not an aircraft. Pacific Aerospace Corporation)"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
