Does the Premier have auto land?

[pilotmiketx]

Maybe ven Otto ist flugin der plane, ja?

 

[HawkerF/O]

He's right, that was pretty good. The only thing I didn't like about it was the fact I didn't think of it 1st. Kudos FlyFlyFly.

Now folks, that's a good one!!

 

[400A]

I think you have auto-land confused with the in-development auto-launch anchor option. Shoots an anchor out the back when it senses only 500 ft of runway left.

Ahhh, I see your head is out of the books and the new rating on your profile. Congrats Man!!! I hope they put that mod on the one at our place. It needs that one and the owner/operator ejection seat.

 

[airludy]

Well the guy that bought this airplane is telling everyone it has a full auto land feature.. He says the pilot doesnt have to do anything, thats why it only needs one pilot. By the way, he isnt even a pilot. I guess the salesman at Raytheon blew some serious smoke up this guys butt... I thought it was BS and and looked it up online, and figured I would as some of you guys. This airplane doesnt sound too impressive

 

[400A]

Well the guy that bought this airplane is telling everyone it has a full auto land feature.. He says the pilot doesnt have to do anything, thats why it only needs one pilot. By the way, he isnt even a pilot. I guess the salesman at Raytheon blew some serious smoke up this guys butt... I thought it was BS and and looked it up online, and figured I would as some of you guys. This airplane doesnt sound too impressive

I know many of the Raytheon sales guys, and I dont think any of them said that.

Either he just does not understand, or he is the one blowing smoke trying to cover up the fact he is to cheap to pay 2 pilots. He may also be playing the my jet is better than your jet game. I have seen owners do that before.

As an example, I once watched a pilot bragging to a counter chick how hard it was to fly a Citation. I am think I blew his cover when I started laughing.

 

[OviedoBob]

The Premier does NOT have any "autoland".

It has the Collins Pro Line 21 system with 3 displays.

Can be flown single pilot with the single pilot type.

Payload is crappy. With full fuel and two pilots, only 1 pax with bags!

TAS about 440 K at MCT.

It was designed as an owner flown (single pilot) aircraft, but during the developement of the aircraft, it became heavier and heavier. With one pilot on board, 2-3 pax onboard with full fuel. Read the June 2005 article in BCA.

With 2 pilots, it cannot take six adults and bags because it will be over max ZFW.

It is a great 500-800 nm plane depending on pax load.

Goes right to FL410 in about 25-28 min.

Not a big seller. Have sold about 140 in the 4-5 years it has been on the market. Raytheon slow to improve it. Lots of design quirks, maint glithces, etc.

Flt Ops tried them a couple of years ago, it didn't work out. Avantair has two of them now.

Ref speeds have been reduced and landing numbers are better. Rule of thumb: need 4500 to land dry runway, 5000 wet runway.

Pax like interiors, great headroom and mucho bag space.

 

[User546]

Payload is crappy. With full fuel and two pilots, only 1 pax with bags!

I wouldn't quite go that far. Our company demoed one on a trip a couple months ago, and I rode right-seat as the company represenative pilot. We blasted out of a 5,000 foot runway with full fuel, two pilots, two passengers, and enough bags for four people to stay four nights.

With that said, one of the first things the pilot said to me when I was talking to him about performance is: "This airplane will get you in and out of most places you want to go (shorter runways), however not legally by the book. If you want to be legal and follow the performance charts, you won't be flying into many places. If you're willing to smile and forget the book, you should be fine."

Thank gawd they decided not to go with that pregnant guppy looking aircraft.

I'm sure what the owner is confused about is the new "landing system" that the Premiere has that creates an imaginary 3 deg glide slope based on the approach end of every runway in the United States. It works okay I guess, but the three times we used it, it always had us, on final, off the side of the runway, and the pilot mentioned "I usually chicken out and turn it off about 200' anyways." Three demos of that convinced me it wasn't good for much. But I could see how the owner could mistake that for an autoland capability.

 

[OviedoBob]

Now I think what that "autoland" mean to that owner.

The Collins Pro Line FMS can give a 3 degree glideslope only to be used as reference for visual approaches only.

That 3 degrees can be modified for any desired angle.

Glideslope only, as the lateral guidance to the runway can be slightly off.

Its very handy for night/limited vis visual approahes. Not to be used for any IFR approach, since it is not an IFR approach.

Yes, if you disregard the AFM, you can takeoff overweight on any plane, but I follow the book to insure single engine climb performance.

There is no way you can put full fuel with that many pax/bags. Definitely over 12500 TOGW.

I know, my company thinks we can put full fuel with 5 pax and bags and go from NYto FL nonstop on the Premier.

It ain't gonna happen (legally).