King Air 350 question

[787]

Could anyone offer the average BFL for the 350 at ISA, and then...at, say denisty alt of 7500?

Is the aircraft turely able to fly tanks full, seats full?

Beech says 312kts ture, but I've heard it's more like 300kts on a good day. True or untrue?

Anyone flown the glass and steam-gauged versions? Likes? Dislikes?

Thanks

 

[moonlight]

I'm on the road, so I can't help w/ the BFL question, however, let me see what I can do about the rest:
1. Our plane has a BOW of 9830 lbs. It carries 3611 lbs of fuel, and has 8 seats in it (double club). That leaves approx. 1650 lbs available for max ramp (15,100 lbs) If you have 8 pax and bags that weigh less than that, you are good to go (assuming CG is not a problem, which on a King Air almost never is).
2. Ours trues out around 290-300 under most conditions, and is slightly slower than the 300 we used to fly.
3. I have flown the EFIS 85 and our new one has the Proline 21, and I have to say, now that I am more comfortable w/ all the nuances of the new panel, I really enjoy it. Since I fly single pilot as well, I can say that it has cut down on the workload as well, particularly in the airport environment. I know that there were some problems on the earlier ones, and ours is having a SB associated w/ the ESIS battery this week, but we have had very good luck thus far (although on the MX side, I'm happy to announce we have officially joined the "New King Air Fuel Indication Failure Club"). Lost the right aux indication last week. This after being assured by the salesman that the cause of this problem had been "rectified"...his words, not mine. No other issues though.

 

[TimsKeeper]

As always the cruise speed is going to be affected by temperature. I've had a true over the book speed best of approximately 320 at times.

You can fill it up and fill the seats and still have some room for bags as long as they are normal sized....no 300 pounders.

I've never flown the plane out of high and hot..can't help ya, but we operated part 135 in and out of a 3500 ft strip not even close to limits.

 

[satpak77]

Is the aircraft turely able to fly tanks full, seats full?Thanks

I have flown the King Air out of sea level airports to high altitude airports to include La Paz, Bolivia.

In 90% of the situations, the King Air will legally take off with full fuel and full pax seats, to include co-pilot. Extremely hot (30+ C) combined with higher altitudes, say El Paso (4000 MSL), Midland, etc, and you need to pay attention to the POH parameters. However, from a "will it fly standpoint" (not "is it legal"), yes, it will fly. I know this because, uh, well, I did some hypothetical planning....yeah thats it.....

As a side note, I personally prefer to use runways no shorter than 5000 feet, period, light-weight or not. Yes yes, we all know it can go in much shorter strips, but at my low skill level I try to up the safety bar in all areas, and I personally don't go into runways shorter than 5000 feet, unless I personally know them and are familiar with their airport area.

You DO need to be cognizant of the single-engine performance at gross weight and hot/high temps, especially if in mountainous terrain, etc. Just because you are "legal" for TOFL does not mean you can outclimb that mountain in front of you on one engine and come back around to land.

FYI, the airplanes with Raisbeck wing lockers are a little draggier than the ones without. Also, your older 350's, years 1992,1993 seem to be doggier compared to a similar equipped model but say 2002 or 2003. Probably smoother paint, newer engines, etc etc type stuff.

If I was some rich dude and could buy a 350, I would probably buy a PC-12 Pilatus.

"One engine?" you say. I say you have "one heart" and you ain't stressing out when you drive down the highway are you?

my 2 cents

 

[787]

Thanks for the replies

 

[TimsKeeper]

If I had a choice between a King Air 350 and Pilatus I don't think I'm choosing the Pilatus....I know what the 350 safety record is...near perfect, can't say the same for the Pilatus(not that I'm saying it's safety record is poor but do a NTSB search on the two airplanes to compare). I'll take the second engine tyvm.

 

[satpak77]

If I had a choice between a King Air 350 and Pilatus I don't think I'm choosing the Pilatus....I know what the 350 safety record is...near perfect, can't say the same for the Pilatus(not that I'm saying it's safety record is poor but do a NTSB search on the two airplanes to compare). I'll take the second engine tyvm.

Most all the PC-12 accidents/incidents were pilot error, with the exception of the water ditching and the Elk collision. This is likely attributed to Dentists moving from their Bonanza to a Pilatus, all on a Single Engine IFR ticket.

Most crews flying the B350 are "professional pilot" type crews, and not (for the most part) owner-operator.

 

[AerroMatt]

From an owner's perspective, the Pilatus is much cheaper to operate. From a pilot's viewpoint... well its great, but there are times over the Sierra Madre in Mexico where I'd be hard put to safely land it from FL240 on a sunny day in the event of engine failure. Suffice to say I won't operate down there at night, nor over-water at night no matter how much I trust that one engine in the nose.

 

[TimsKeeper]

Right, please don't take my comment as knocking the Pilatus in anyway...if I had to fly a single that would certainly be my first choice. But people who say they would "prefer" the single over, for example, the 350 is looking through blinders when you talk about safety....the few instances where the Pratt is going to let you down I'll still take another one on the other side!

Now we start talking about the Mu2 vs the Pilatus........LOL, yep I opened up that can of worms....bring the attacks.

 

[Geronimo4497]

80,000+ fleet hours on the -67B at our outfit. Not one shutdown, intentional or otherwise. I will say, however, that crossing the Rockies at night is certainly interesting while looking at the TAWS page. Some folks will never get out of the '2 engines are better' mentality, but to each their own I guess. All of the major PC-12 accidents (only 6, I think) there were 2 that were flown by professional crews. In those cases, everyone walked away, whereas the same cannot be said for the 'private pilot' owners.

My dream airplane is a PC-12 with a nice 3 person couch that converts to a bed. A fridge and a microwave would also be nice.

Come to think of it, another 700 lbs of gas would be nice too. The PC-12 could be a true east bound cross country airplane if it held 3500 lbs of gas. Slow as heck? For sure, but that is what the crapper is there for. A guy can dream........