Caravan/Navajo Pilots

[Mr. Irrelevant]

To anyone who has flown Caravans/Navajos,


I was hoping I could get some feedback on likes/dislikes and any operational considerations that would be pertinent to a 135 operation. I've gotten the basic specs that come from the POH's. Just looking for details that salesmen never tell you. Any recurring maintenance issues? Passenger complaints? Trips would initially be mostly under 150 miles. Any detail is appreciated. Thanks.


Mr. I.

 

[WrightAvia]

If they can afford to purchase the Caravan, they won't regret it. Much safer and reliable than a Navajo. I have flown both under 135.

We have Caravan's with over 12,000 hours on them. They are like the energizer bunny. The keep going and going.

With 150 mile legs, you could easily fill that plane with pax and baggage till you can't put another thing in it since you probably wouldn't need more than 700 pounds of fuel.

Pilot and flight bag...250 Lbs.
C-208 empty WT....4600 Lbs.
Fuel........................1000 Lbs.
assorted gear............50 Lbs.
total.......................5900 Lbs.

MTOW=8750.

8750-5900 Lbs = 2850 left over for pax and luggage.

Your empty wt will vary with interior, but you could easily take 7 people and lots of luggage in the van.

 

[GLSoar]

Caravan Vs Navajo

A Caravan is a great great airplane, however it does not handle ice well so if your planning on flying in icing be carefull. The Navajo is a good airplane and handles ice. Any Turbine engine is more reliable than a recip.

 

[Mr. Irrelevant]

Thanks Wright & GL,


Wright, any icing concerns based on GL's comments? Does it ice on the tail quickly? Seems hard to believe as so many of the Caravans I've seen for sale seem to be operated in cold weather climates. Unless that's why they're for sale

Any approximate operating costs for the Caravan?


Thanks.


Mr. I.

 

[Checks]

The Caravan doesnt handle ice that well.

Just fly the Caravan like it doesnt have de-ice systems. If you get in icing conditiions then do something about it instead of trying to slug it out. I almost always climbed because the air would normally get colder and most of the time I would get on top.

 

[mar]

Be very careful in the ice

I've never flown the Navajo but I have some experience in the Caravan. I don't care if you have boots, a heated windshield, a hot prop and an inertial bypass separator you have to treat the Caravan as if she's not certified for known ice.

That is to say, when I flew the thing I would climb up thru the ice or descend down thru it but under very few circumstances would I linger in cruise in any sort of ice.

The Caravan is a wonderful airplane and it'll make your company a bunch of money but it's really touchy with any contamination on the wings and tail. You just have to look at the horiz. stab. and wonder why there are vortex generators on an airplane that flies so slow???

To illustrate my point I've made a couple links to two accidents that I have personal knowledge of. In both accidents both pilots were highly experienced in the airplane and winter operations. In both accidents both pilots thought they had adequately deiced/defrosted the airplane. Shortly after they left the ground they found out otherwise.

Deiced caravan crash

Defrosted caravan crash

One more thing you'll find buried in the AFM that deserves to be screamed out during groundschool: Don't use the autopilot during icing conditions. If you do the autopilot will continue to trim away to maintain altitude until it reaches it's limit and then it will let go. For a dramatic example of this refer to the American Eagle Roselawn, Ind. accident.

Link not provided.

Fly safe.

 

[Citationkid]

I don't know if you would listen to a kid, but the only problem we've had with our Navajo was with the engines. Once it was making metal and once somthing happend to the fuel injector line broke and the valve stuck and the engine ended up quiting. But it's an old airplane so with a pretty good amount of time on it so some thing was bound to happen.

 

[Timebuilder]

I learned something today. I had no idea that the Caravan had icing issues.

As far as the Navajo is concerned, it's a great short hop twin. Easy to fly, and few bad habits. I liked it.

There are two versions from production, the 310 hp and the 350 hp Chieftain, the one I have flown. One of those engine types was the subject of the AD last year that had so many planes on the ground. It revolved around the way that the crankshaft had been hardened during manufacture. I think there was also a bolt problem on the same engine. I'd check that this work has been done before making a purchase, just as you would with any aircraft purchase. O2 system removed? No problem. Fly it below 10k.

My standard advice is to purchase a plane that has already been in 135 service, so you can eliminate many possible problems from day one.

 

[Citationkid]

The Panther is a nice airplane I only flew it once, but it was nice, got off the ground quick and climbed real well. We had 75% fuel and had no problem with 7 people, they were all light and no bags, that was in the Chieftan.

 

[Timebuilder]

Glad you mentioned the Panther package. It's so nice, it's almost a separate airplane from the normal Chieftain.

And, certainly more expensive...

 

[LAXSaabdude]

Originally posted by Timebuilder
There are two versions from production, the 310 hp and the 350 hp Chieftain, the one I have flown.

Actually, I think there is a third - the CR. It's a short-body Navajo with 325 hp engines and counter-rotating props.

I flew the straight 310 Navajo, and really enjoyed it. I can't really think of anything negative to say about it. Good handling IFR, relatively simple systems, good aircraft overall.

LAXSaabdude.

 

[WrightAvia]

If your pilot judgement is suspect, any plane in icing will cause you problems.

We use only caravans, all year round. When you can't go over it, or under it, you tell the operations you ain't going. That's all there is to it.

You guys say navajo's handle ice well with seven in the back... take that same scenario, add an engine failure and go enjoy the frisbee ride.

 

[Timebuilder]

Actually, the Navajo flies pretty well on one engine. Would I routinely cruise in icing without a hot wing and tail? No. For what it is though, it does well compared to other planes.

I came to the conclusion a long time ago that the only way to avoid an aiplane crash 100% is to stay home. In the basement.

Certainly, pilot judgment is the best safety item. Sometimes it IS best to stay home!

 

[WrightAvia]

Hot off the press...

I have no idea why this plane went down...fuel exhaustion, mechanical failure...who knows. What IS interesting, is that 9 people walked away.


IDENTIFICATION
Regis#: 786DM Make/Model: C208 Description: 208 Caravan 1, (Super)Cargomas
Date: 08/30/2003 Time: 1510

Event Type: Incident Highest Injury: None Mid Air: N Missing: N
Damage: Unknown

LOCATION
City: CULEBRA State: Country: PR

DESCRIPTION
ACFT MADE AN EMERGENCY LANDING ON A BEACH. 9 POB, NO INJURIES AND DAMAGE
IS UNKNOWN. CULEBRA, PR

INJURY DATA Total Fatal: 0
# Crew: 1 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Pass: 9 Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:
# Grnd: Fat: 0 Ser: 0 Min: 0 Unk:

WEATHER: NOT REPORTED

OTHER DATA
Activity: Unknown Phase: Unknown Operation: Air Taxi (On Demand)

Departed: UNKN Dep Date: 08/30/2003 Dep. Time:
Destination: UNKN Flt Plan: Wx Briefing:
Last Radio Cont:
Last Clearance:

FAA FSDO: SAN JUAN, PR (SO21) Entry date: 09/02/2003

 

[GLSoar]

Chieftain

I flew the Chieftain and it is a good airplane, I would always prefer 2 engines in ice or IFR even if it's a recip! My company has a bunch of Caravans and the pilots all say the same thing......Don't fly in ice!

 

[WrightAvia]

I flew the Navajo, the Chieftan and the Panther. Also the Senica and the Aztec, the C-340, C-310, C-320 and the C-414. In fact I got 1,700 hours of flying 135 multi engine, 5000 TT and 1,700 PIC turbine. I even owned my own turbo charged cessna piston twin at one time (with partners).

I'm happy flying the Caravan and I have years of winter flying experience. I'm not saying you can fly with impunity towards winter flying. I fly in the Lake Superior and Lake Michigan region. In fact, the locals joke about the region I fly to, as a place where summer is defined as the worst week of ice fishing. I'll still take the turbine single over piston twins anytime. For the 3 or 4 days in the winter time that you really can't justify flying because of icing, I can't see spending the other 361 days of the year worrying about asymetrical thrust and failure prone vacuum pumps.

Something to think about, beyond trusting piston engines, is how the electrical power for the plane is triple redundant and the vacuum for the instruments is made by using bleed air.

A comfort issue is that the Caravan has pretty good heating. Reliable and safe. In the Chieftan, we had nothing but complaints about the heat, when it worked. So we had to install and auxiliary heating system in them. It basically was a lever that looked like a parking brake conected to a louvre system. You pulled it out and engine heat from the left engine compartment would help to heat the cabin. Kind of like piston singles have. Besides, the idea of a gasoline furnace in the nose of an airplane is a little scary.

 

[Timebuilder]

Gee, no janitrol? I thought I had it rough.

 

[WrightAvia]

Haha. Well Timebuilder, I guess there are alot of opinions on this single turbine vs piston twin debate. That's good. At least we're talking about flying and everybody has something to say or add. That's good enough for me!

To tell you the truth, I buy a lotto ticket now and then, just so I can buy the 1.00 dollar dream of wondering what color my personal TBM 700 would be. Good thing it only costs a buck to dream.

 

[350DRIVER]

I have heard some good things about the Caravan but if it were up to me I would prefer the "2" engines versus the "1" so I would have to choose the twin. If I knew the type of flying that were to be done may cause me to encounter quite abit of actual, shooting approaches down to mins,icing conditions, etc, I surely would prefer having not one but two engines... Just my $.02.


If you loose one engine on a twin then you still have the other to get ya down (safely hopefully), not so with regards to the Caravan (you loose the one then you are along for thy ride). I think this is one of the main reasons that you don't see them knocking down the doors at the 135 charter departments and come to think of I can't think of too many 91 depts. using them to shuttle executives arounds from big city to big city. I guess it all really depends on the type of flying that is expected to be done. Due to the operating costs, payload, short unimproved field capabilities, etc, the Caravan is a great plane to fly boxes, checks, freight, etc, etc, ...


Guess all depends on your intentions.


135 though I would suggest a Navajo. Passengers will also like the "looks" of those two engines out there not to mention a possible reassurance factor.


3 5 0-

 

[mar]

Passengers *do* like the looks

Yeah, no doubt the single engine airplane is the victim of some prejudice but you cannot debate the statistics.

I don't care what anyone says, the PT6 is nearly bullet-proof.

If I had to make my living crossing the mountains, at night, in IMC I'd take one PT6 over two recips--any day of the week.

Fly safe.