1900 favorite list of sorts

[moabmic]

All right people, I know it's out there but you must be hiding it but at one point and time there was kind of a top 100 reasons to fly the 1900 or top 100 list of you must have flown the 1900 if you have seen.... If anyone knows what I'm talking about would ya please post it?

 

[Cardinal]

I'll bump this to the top, as I'm intrigued.

In the meantime, I'll cut 'n paste some comments a Brit over on PPRuNe made. Unfortunately I've lost the name of the poster, but it gave me a laugh:

It is just a big king air. Sorry for the useless advice but it's true. The results of the bigifying are:
1) lousy pressurization control due to only using two BE-20 outflow valves to handle about 5 times the volume of air
2)not enough pressurization due to chopping the top and putting on flat sides. Flat sides don't pressurize well (like building a square balloon) so you only get 4.5lbs max dif. Therefore altitude limited by cabin and you fly around all the time with the cabin at 10000'. It's like flying a BE-99 for a living and you have to plan descents around the pressurization if you're high.
3)EFIS---not. What good is EFIS if all you use it for is displaying conventional instruments? Since it is a big king air, the system is an afterthought, so you have to flick all the normal switches plus a whole bunch more to turn on the TV's and fire up the standby instruments. Oh and by the way they are all over the place since the king air cockpit only had so much space to start with.
4)Plastic props--they work okay as long as they are rigged right and don't do dirt strips (like I did). Misrigged they have been known to feather (happened to a friend just after liftoff) and that is a really wild ride!
5)king air landing gear only bigger--and just as stiff. As well there is a little thing that makes the props go to a finer pitch when you get weight on wheels. So even if you get one on smoothly, the braking action of the props will put the other two on with a big clunk.
6)steering--the old king air stuff wouldn't work on such a big unit (although they did try a form on the early models). So they just added power steering--as an afterthought. Yup, more switches. They conveniently located one right on the power levers, but that is just an ON (not off-thats way across the cockpit) switch. To switch from taxi mode (less sensitive) to park mode (causes whiplash if a new person is driving) you have to dig down on the centre pedestal to the third switch over in a line of four amongst about a thousand others. This changeover usually happens when you are really busy and trying to avoid hitting people and other planes. Suggest the PNF find that one for the first while.
7)Flaps--why change a good thing right? They just put slightly modded king air flaps on because hey, they worked okay on everything since the model 18, right? The result: get ready for approach speeds the same as small jets, even though you only weigh 17000lbs and have props.
8)Tailfeathers--why change a good thing right? Says the redesigner: " Ooops the plane is too big--needs more tail, more rudder, more stabilizer. Oh well lets just start hanging stuff on back there until she flies. Strakes, no bigger, no biggest strakes ever seen get added. Tail-lets and stabilons (don't quote me on the names here) and then oops half of it should get deicing boots. There now it flies right, except oops there isn't enough trim. So, lets add about two inches to the TRIM TABS ONLY so we don't have to mess with anything else. Well no they look like they came off a dash-8, but they work. "
9)Pax door. Well take a king air door and make it BIG. I hope your GF works out because that gas strut is only there for one reason--to scare the cr@p out of pilots when the bolt lets go.
10)Cargo door. Possibly the only truly new equipment on the machine. Since they never thought of that one before, it is a first attempt design. They cut a giant gaping hole in the fuselage, and then hinged it at the top (there were tailplane thingies everywhere else). They then took a gas strut from the tailgate of somebody's Dodge Caravan and charged it enough to hold the door up--at least until it clears KICT. To get it down, they use a hunk of cable with a parking brake handle at the end. Pilatus of course blew about $20 and added a .5lb motor to close a similar door on the PC12, and gas struts on both doors that were up to the job--but what do those Swiss know about building things?
11)Cockpit design. Take a C-90 (which is a pressurized BE-18) add a couple of inches of panel and about five switches for every mod that has been made to the thing since 1935 since nothing is truly new, and you're there. At least the seats got an upgrade.

Speed wise it is great--typical American design--MORE POWER is all you need to make a crappy machine great. She has the stuff to fly at FL310 easily (umm did I say that?) and smoothly, but you aren't supposed to go there........

 

[T-Gates]

That guy sounds like one arrogant asshole.....

I dont know anyone who complained THAT much about the ole' Beech....

--03M

 

[DorkProp]

I thought it was funny. Come on, you know he's right. What pilot hasn't looked at a 1900 and asked, "What the heck is all that stuff hanging off the tail?"

 

[Vladimir Lenin]

I thought it was funny. Come on, you know he's right. What pilot hasn't looked at a 1900 and asked, "What the heck is all that stuff hanging off the tail?"

ditto, it's got a lot of things going on back there
and he's right on the square pressurization aspect of the 1900, 747s had that problem too, in the flat sections up-front
and the trim quirks, well, there's 2 recent accidents where so far, it's been trim related

 

[jbDC9]

Sounds like a whiny Brit to me... I'm sure he thinks the Jetstream 31/32 is the dogs bollocks when it comes to 19 seaters.

Yep, the 1900 is just a big King Air (or big Baron maybe?), but I liked it just fine, thank you very much. Just don't look back at the tail, too much crap hanging off back there... but they sure flew nice. I never had any trouble with the pressurization, cargo or cabin doors; one little incident with a bad prop governor that made the prop uncontrollable. Not that big a deal. Of course, I have only 3500 hrs in 'em, probably not nearly as much as our whiny British buddy.

Oh, and at least the Beech has a cargo door, unlike the Jetstream 31/32/41's where the bags are loaded thru the pax cabin door! Nice design, that....

Jolly good show, Nigel!

 

[Northern Lights]

Oh, and at least the Beech has a cargo door, unlike the Jetstream 31/32/41's where the bags are loaded thru the pax cabin door! Nice design, that....

Jolly good show, Nigel!

LOL

brings back memories of when I had to load bags on to the 31/32. First you had to lift the bags up the stairs into the cabin, and then fit them through the small baggage door, and sort of force it around the corner to fit it in to the somewhat triangular shaped baggage compartment. It was kind of like playing a game of Tetris, trying to fit everything on for a full flight.

It was also embarassing when the pax were on and you had to load a late bag. They would all watch as you shoved, crammed and pushed to get anotherone in! And of course they would be telling you to be careful and ask if thier bag made it on...

On the other hand, the Dash 8 was the easiest plane to load and handle on the ground.

 

[I.P. Freley]

This may be the first time I can recall someone bemoaning MORE POWER in an airplane... Well maybe not bemoaning exactly, but it was little more than a backhanded compliment at best.

I do find it snicker-worthy that a Brit is complaining about a "typical American design". A typical British design is hardly any better, and since the "more power makes a crappy machine better" comment was probably aimed at our automobile industry more than the aircraft industry... Let's play a game.

Answer the following:

"How many of Great Britain's domestic automobile manufacturers are NOT owned by the Germans now?"

Alternately, and on a little reflection, a more accurate question:

"How many of Great Britain's domestic automobile manufacturers, at least those that theoretically still exist, are still in British hands?"

Bonus points if you know the answer to question number two.

 

[T-Gates]

I do find it snicker-worthy that a Brit is complaining about a "typical American design".

How soon they forget that the Jetstream came from thier island....

And what a fantastic plane that is! (No Offense....)

--03M

 

[jetdriven]

1) lousy pressurization control due to only using two BE-20 outflow valves to handle about 5 times the volume of air
2)not enough pressurization due to chopping the top and putting on flat sides. Flat sides don't pressurize well (like building a square balloon) so you only get 4.5lbs max dif. Therefore altitude limited by cabin and you fly around all the time with the cabin at 10000'. It's like flying a BE-99 for a living and you have to plan descents around the pressurization if you're high.

The max diff of a 1900D is 5.25 PSI, which give a 10K cabin at FL250, we usually use FL230, which gives an 8,000' cabin.

3)EFIS---not. What good is EFIS if all you use it for is displaying conventional instruments? Since it is a big king air, the system is an afterthought, so you have to flick all the normal switches plus a whole bunch more to turn on the TV's and fire up the standby instruments. Oh and by the way they are all over the place since the king air cockpit only had so much space to start with

there are 4 switches on the captains side console which flip forward to turn on the "TV's". Oh I forgot theres an EFIX aux power switch and a standby gyro to turn on. OMG, how hard is that? Try being in the middle of a level 4 and trying to make sense of the "fuzz" displayed by a conventional gyro attitude indicator. Also, bonus, it is proven to display pitch up to 90 degrees! (dont ask me how I know that)

4)Plastic props--they work okay as long as they are rigged right and don't do dirt strips (like I did).

perhaps thats why he's so pissed off, flying 1900's out of dirt strips. A real first class job he had. If you think dirt strips hurt the props try looking at the compressor blade erosion!

5)king air landing gear only bigger--and just as stiff. As well there is a little thing that makes the props go to a finer pitch when you get weight on wheels. So even if you get one on smoothly, the braking action of the props will put the other two on with a big clunk

If you land smoothly, which most pilots have no problem doing,, the ground low pitch stop (why didnt he remember what its called from ground school?) engages at about 60 knots.

6)steering--the old king air stuff wouldn't work on such a big unit (although they did try a form on the early models). So they just added power steering--as an afterthought. Yup, more switches. They conveniently located one right on the power levers, but that is just an ON (not off-thats way across the cockpit) switch. To switch from taxi mode (less sensitive) to park mode (causes whiplash if a new person is driving) you have to dig down on the centre pedestal to the third switch over in a line of four amongst about a thousand others

AMW 1900's dont have power steering, and you know what, you dont miss it.

7)Flaps--why change a good thing right? They just put slightly modded king air flaps on because hey, they worked okay on everything since the model 18, right? The result: get ready for approach speeds the same as small jets, even though you only weigh 17000lbs and have props.

Vfe is 182 and full is 154, VREF is 122 at MAX and 101 at 12,000#. The other day I landed and turned off at the 1,000 foot mark.

8)Tailfeathers--why change a good thing right? Says the redesigner: " Ooops the plane is too big--needs more tail, more rudder, more stabilizer. Oh well lets just start hanging stuff on back there until she flies. Strakes, no bigger, no biggest strakes ever seen get added. Tail-lets and stabilons (don't quote me on the names here) and then oops half of it should get deicing boots. There now it flies right, except oops there isn't enough trim. So, lets add about two inches to the TRIM TABS ONLY so we don't have to mess with anything else.

Beech was going to spend a million dollars on a new tail, they didnt have the budget. It's OK, we blow the doors off ANY turbo prop airliner in the climb and are only outrun by a EMB-120 or a Cheyenne 400LS.

9)Pax door. Well take a king air door and make it BIG. I hope your GF works out because that gas strut is only there for one reason--to scare the cr@p out of pilots when the bolt lets go.

one million hours on our airplanes, that bolt has never let go. Besides, there are other bolts which would do more than scare your girlfriend if they let go, right?? Lakes had a pax door open in flight and they made it back with the door still attached. hmmmm

10)Cargo door. Possibly the only truly new equipment on the machine. Since they never thought of that one before, it is a first attempt design. They cut a giant gaping hole in the fuselage, and then hinged it at the top

we can also put about 1800# back there, or a scooter, or a 350V8 engine, to name a few. Can your plane do that?

Speed wise it is great--typical American design--MORE POWER is all you need to make a crappy machine great.

Thats my favorite thing about that plane. Built by corn-fed Wichita farm boys and so overpowered you can climb 5,000 feet per minute when empty

 

[chperplt]

Everything he said... Other than a few "issues" an excellent airplane.

 

[Cardinal]

Wonderful aircraft - of course I probably am suffering from "first turbine syndrome." It would be nice if you didn't have to cancel the Master Caution flasher at the beginning of half of all takeoff rolls because of that darned Autofeather Disable, however.

 

[T-Gates]

It would be nice if you didn't have to cancel the Master Caution flasher at the beginning of half of all takeoff rolls because of that darned Autofeather Disable, however.

I HATED that! Funny to hear someone else bring that up....

--03M

 

[I.P. Freley]

>>>one million hours on our airplanes, that bolt has never let go. Besides, there are other bolts which would do more than scare your girlfriend if they let go, right?? Lakes had a pax door open in flight and they made it back with the door still attached. hmmmm<<<

As I recall Commutair had one of the doors pop open in flight going into Dulles one fine day (fall 2000?), and other than the crews' hats and/or coats being sucked out the open door (of a thankfully empty flight), the airplane was none the worse for wear. Please thank the brand spanking new FO for not latching the door properly... I guess the flashlight wasn't deployed in checking the door bolts... Again, as I recall. Don't quote me on this.

One tough airplane, IMHO.

 

[I.P. Freley]

Oh... Commutair's old fleet (pre 2000) had power steering. Funny how none of US had any problem figuring out how to turn it on and off, I guess the English have a harder time figuring it out... ???

The new airplanes had no such tomfoolery, and I will agree with jetdriven, you never miss it. In fact, you are happy NOT to have it.

Let's not even get started on how "difficult" it was to do a nice landing. Anyone who can't land a 1900 well with a minimum of practice is... Well, calling a spade a spade... a mediocre pilot. I am no Chuck Yeager and I figured it out in practically no time.

 

[chperplt]

Let's not even get started on how "difficult" it was to do a nice landing. Anyone who can't land a 1900 well with a minimum of practice is... Well, calling a spade a spade... a mediocre pilot. I am no Chuck Yeager and I figured it out in practically no time.

Yes, generally a very easy airplane to land. On occasion, those props go into ground idle a little too quickly when landing with a stiff right crosswind and make things interesting.

 

[I.P. Freley]

Of course I didn't mean EVERY landing. Just like any other airplane, you have your good ones and your not-so-good ones.

My first from the left seat was a real doozy... I'm not sure if the ringing in my ears is tinnitus or the sickening echo of that first, horrible cruncher.

 

[Paladin]

Continental Express also had an inflight main cabin door incident some years back in the B1900D...If I remember correctly it happened on departure from KCLE.

Let's play a game.

Answer the following:

"How many of Great Britain's domestic automobile manufacturers are NOT owned by the Germans now?"

Alternately, and on a little reflection, a more accurate question:

"How many of Great Britain's domestic automobile manufacturers, at least those that theoretically still exist, are still in British hands?"

Bonus points if you know the answer to question number two.

Tough question...I think I'll take a stab at them.

1) ...not owned by Germans. My answer is six; Jaguar, TVR, MG, Lotus, Vauxhall, and Aston Martin.

2)...British owned...really tough one. Four; TVR, MG, Lotus and Aston Martin.

Cheers,
Markus

 

[I.P. Freley]

Well here's how I understand it, and anyone can feel free to correct me if I am wrong:

Of the brands mentioned in the above, plus another one or two,

Owned by the Germans- Rolls Royce owned by BMW, Bentley owned by the Volkswagen Group (Bentley's Le Mans-winning car this year was a re-engineered Audi R8). Of course the new Mini is a BMW-owned company, the Mini being a trademark still owned by BMW after selling off MG/Rover (see below). Note that the Rolls Royce Aero Engine division was sold off eons ago by Vickers, who then owned the whole of the RR operation and sold off the Aero portion, keeping the car division until its' sale a few years ago.

Owned by the Americans- Jaguar, Aston Martin and Land Rover are owned by Ford (Land Rover owned until recently by BMW, who designed the newest Range Rover). Vauxhall is owned by GM.

Owned by God-knows-who, but not the British- Lotus, which last I checked was owned by Proton, which I believe is based in Malaysia (!!).

Owned by the British- TVR, Morgan, and (recently) MG/Rover Group, which I recall was purchased outright by a bunch of former MG/Rover execs (Phoenix Venture Holdings is the name of the group, not absolutely positive it is owned by "real" Brits, who bought it from BMW two years ago).

The startling thing is, as recently as two years ago, TVR was the largest British-owned carmaker. MG/Rover is now, with sales in the vicinity of 150,000 units/yr (assuming, as noted above, that PVH is indeed a "british" company). Note that Ford sells six times this many F-150's every year.

 

[Paladin]

Holy Crap!!
I was just going off the top of my head. You must be really into cars. I really only have followed BMW's exploits, mostly because I own one and am in the process of restoring another (2002). Great info.
Cheers,
Markus