enigma
good ol boy
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2001
- Posts
- 2,279
My heart goes out to the friends and family. I put in a call to a friend who recently flew for Mesa (making sure it wasn't him) and learned that both pilots were good pilots and good people. I'm praying that it was the airplane that failed them.
It's been over ten years since I flew the mighty Beech, so my memory is a little dim; but my take on the engine out climb capabilities of the 1900 is that it may do 1000fpm dirty when it's empty on a training flight, but no way will it do it anywhere close to gross.
Someone speculated earlier that they could have been somehow out of CG. I remember reading about a UB1900 that crashed in AK in the middle 80's, they managed to fly an extremely aft CG 1900 for almost an entire flight after being overloaded with moose meat in the aft/aft. They were almost 1500#s overweight and the CG was somewhere around 48%MAC. (cg range is 4% to 40%) The aircraft was controllable right up to the point that landing flaps were selected. Only then did the horizontal tailsurface run out of ooph with the subsequent loss of control. So I doubt that CG was the cause.
Just in case some media type is reading this, if I had to pick one airplane to fly for the rest of my career, the 1900 would be tied for number one alongside an old Lear55. It's that good an airplane. It it only had a blue-lagoon, it'd be almost perfect.
regards,
8N
It's been over ten years since I flew the mighty Beech, so my memory is a little dim; but my take on the engine out climb capabilities of the 1900 is that it may do 1000fpm dirty when it's empty on a training flight, but no way will it do it anywhere close to gross.
Someone speculated earlier that they could have been somehow out of CG. I remember reading about a UB1900 that crashed in AK in the middle 80's, they managed to fly an extremely aft CG 1900 for almost an entire flight after being overloaded with moose meat in the aft/aft. They were almost 1500#s overweight and the CG was somewhere around 48%MAC. (cg range is 4% to 40%) The aircraft was controllable right up to the point that landing flaps were selected. Only then did the horizontal tailsurface run out of ooph with the subsequent loss of control. So I doubt that CG was the cause.
Just in case some media type is reading this, if I had to pick one airplane to fly for the rest of my career, the 1900 would be tied for number one alongside an old Lear55. It's that good an airplane. It it only had a blue-lagoon, it'd be almost perfect.
regards,
8N