What's hard to fly, what's easy?

[HvyjetFO]

My .02

Here's my list of goods and bads...

Be-1900: Awesome airplane to fly. Very responsive and easy. Flew an ILS like it was on rails down to the runway. Plenty of power (D model) and good instrumentation. Simple systems that were easy to learn but could have been a bit "beefier". Very little room up front for anything besides 2 pilots. Handles ice very well. Landed regualrly on 33R in BOS (2200 ft long) with plenty of room to spare.

E-120: Fun after you learn it's quirks but otherwise a systems nightmare. Prop, electrical systems very complex. Constant need to retrim rudder with any pitch/power change. Comfortable ram horn yokes. Maintainence nightmare (at least for the company I flew it for). Electrical relays would chatter like a typewriter sometimes. De-icing eqpt was awful.

L-1011: Wonderful airplane. Enormous cockpit. Systems were not extremely difficult. Great innovative ideas like Direct Lift Control - spoilers would raise to 7 degrees when flaps went down 30 degrees. While descending on glideslope, pushing forward on the yoke would pop the spoilers up to 14 degrees, and cause an increased sink rate with no change in attitude. Conversely, pulling back would push spoilers back down to zero to decrease sink rate with no change in pitch. With this system you could fly an ILS with your fingertips. Excellent autopilot with outstanding autoland capability. Very good 2 engine performer. I did a 2 engine ferry MCO-IND and 2 engine climb rate was almost 2000 FPM, but then again we were empty. Took a little while to get used to the nosegear being 19 feet behind the cockpit. Mains were 92 feet aft (or thereabouts). Upon main gear touchdown the pilots were still 32 feet in the air. 2 elevators mid cabin to get down to the lower galley. I could go on forever...

B-727: Fun, fun, fun to hand fly. Simple autopilot. Handled like a sports car. Descent size cockpit but not a lot of extra room. Good systems but definitely out of touch by todays automated standards. Just when you think you got the thing figured out how to land it, she bites you in the A$$. Pull the power to idle and she'll come down like a greased bowling ball. Eats runway like nobody's business! Ya gotta love her.

Hvy

 

[avbug]

avbug never said he was "sh!t hot".

I did say that a professional pilot who finds glitches in his equipment, such that he is drawn to say it is poor equipment, should look at himself first. I stated it before, and will state it again; only a poor carpenter blames his tools.

As for the 20 series learjets; there are no bad habits. The airplanes fly honestly, have much more performance than they need, and are simple, straightforward machines. These airplanes are older, and not graced with the latest autopilots, avionics suites, or other acouterments. Big deal. They're a lot of fun, give a good ride, fly great in weather and ice, and perform very well on one engine when should the need arise. The powerplants are bulletproof for the most part; very reliable. (Their two great drawbacks being high fuel consumption and noise, and for some the latter is no great drawback). Personally, I like the sound.

If a pilot finds an airplane hard to fly, the pilot has no business in that airplane. Challenging is another matter. When we cease to be challenged, we become complacent, we die.

 

[Ameriagle]

The Beech 99 is a gem. I good beginner turbine......the systems are simple and straight forward, the PT6 is bulletproof, and it has great performance (c-99).

Another post mentioned the ATR. The 42 and the 500 series 72 are relatively decent handling birds...good performance. At Eagle we were flying the 42 into some confined runways. The 72-212 is like flying a Greyhound bus. But all aircraft are very capable and do a good job of moving large amounts of people and bags. Another note about the 500 series ATR....its interior noise level is actually less than that in the EMB I am flying now and vibrations for a turbo prop are almost non-existant.

The EMB is another great airplane. Good performance, great handling.....a real sports car. Probably the easiest airplane I have ever flown. Dispatch reliability and range (145) are the 2 most common heard gripes.

 

[cougar6903]

How does the Dash 8 compare? Is it easy or hard to fly?

 

[NuGuy]

Hi Cougar,

I have a fair amount of time in the DHC-8, so here goes:

Nice flying bird. Built like a tank. A bunch of years back, Horizon had one with a engine fire that burned out all the hydraulics, but they put it on the ground, bounced off the terminal and some ground equipment and everyone walked off the airplane.

The thing had some really low gear and flap speeds (something like 158 and 148, I think). It was the only airplane I ever flew that you put the gear down before the flaps. Coupled with a very low cruise/descent RPM (900), it was interesting to fly an ILS at 170, then try to slow up to drop the gear and flaps. Most people I knew brought the props up to 1050 to slow up. The gear was straight legged, so getting a decent landing was a matter of extreme skill or luck.

OTOH, once slowed up, the ship was semi-STOL, and you could regularly land at DCA on 15 and hold short of 19 (about 1800 feet, I think). Pretty impressive for something that can land at 33,900 lbs. We also took it into Hilton Head, which was pretty short, and we were rarely weight limited.

You almost never left people, pax or jumpseaters behind. On the -200, you could take 37 people, 2000 lbs of bags, 5000 lbs of fuel and a jumpseater.

Cruise and climb for the -100s were weak, especially in the summer (about 245kts true), but the -200s did alot better (around 280kts).

Same with the AC. On the -100s it was weak, but the -200s had better AC. Best bet was to leave the APU running anytime the engines weren't. OTOH, they had some pretty restrictive rules about running the APU unattended.

But the autopilot rocked, and DHC-8s either have a KNS660 or a UNS-1B for nav, and the thing would fly itself.

It had fairly complex systems to learn, but once flying, they were all automatic. Very nice cockpit layout...plenty of room. Some AC had EFIS, others steam, but they were equally nice to fly. On the non-EFIS birds, the radar had a graphics unit that would display the waypoints and route of flight from the KNS.

Best,
Nu

 

[UPS DC8]

What about the DC 8

The 70 series we have at UPS have plenty of power, but the aircraft will eat your lunch. It will not slow down and go down, only one or the other (no speed brakes). You only have 22 inches of clearance on the outboard engines before you scrape a pod on landing (5 degrees of bank max). This makes cross wind landings very challenging. 8 degrees max rotation on take-off or you'll scrape the tail. The airplane is stable, but getting it to turn takes some muscle. Sometimes I have to use both hands on the wheel to get is moving. UPS has updated the avionics, but it does not have an FMS. You have to figure all desends and crossing restrictions. This can be tough with a stiff tail wind. You never get comfortable or good at landing this thing. Anyone who says they are is full of it.

Hope this helps

 

[KickSave]

I haven't flown one, but I've seen a video of the A320 that my Cousin flies. Apparently, when you are around the threshold and in position to begin your flare, it starts talking to you in a quasi French accent and calls you a "Retard! Retard!"

I would think it's very hard to fly with the plane insulting you like that. Maybe I'm too sensitive?

 

[freightdogfred]

Re: What about the DC 8

The 70 series we have at UPS have plenty of power, but the aircraft will eat your lunch. You never get comfortable or good at landing this thing. Anyone who says they are is full of it.

Hope this helps

Actually. I can't think of an airplane I'm more comfortable landing than stretch 8's. (I must be full of it?) When you get near the ground/ground effect, try easing forward on the yoke instead of flaring...(Ya gotta be on speed though) A greaser almost every time.

I guess most of the young bucks cruising this board never even heard of a C-46.... Any fool can fly an airplane, it's taking off and landing that's the hard part. You start flying a C-46 as soon as you pull the chocks. There is no airplane built that will change directions on a runway quicker than that beast.....

 

[skyking1976]

If bricks don't fly well, how do you explain the F-4 Phantom???

It just proves that with enough thrust you can get anything into the air.

SK

 

[Clownpilot]

A little reminder

Sometimes I feel bad about how tough I am on Avroach........

Then I read another gem from him like this one..............

and that feeling quickly goes away. Very quickly.

Thanks for the reminder, McGyver.

avbug never said he was "sh!t hot".

I did say that a professional pilot who finds glitches in his equipment, such that he is drawn to say it is poor equipment, should look at himself first. I stated it before, and will state it again; only a poor carpenter blames his tools.

As for the 20 series learjets; there are no bad habits. The airplanes fly honestly, have much more performance than they need, and are simple, straightforward machines. These airplanes are older, and not graced with the latest autopilots, avionics suites, or other acouterments. Big deal. They're a lot of fun, give a good ride, fly great in weather and ice, and perform very well on one engine when should the need arise. The powerplants are bulletproof for the most part; very reliable. (Their two great drawbacks being high fuel consumption and noise, and for some the latter is no great drawback). Personally, I like the sound.

If a pilot finds an airplane hard to fly, the pilot has no business in that airplane. Challenging is another matter. When we cease to be challenged, we become complacent, we die.

 

[Clownpilot]

1836 POSTS.............ONE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED THIRTY SIX!!!!!!!!

...................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
AND COUNTING..........................................

avbug never said he was "sh!t hot".

I did say that a professional pilot who finds glitches in his equipment, such that he is drawn to say it is poor equipment, should look at himself first. I stated it before, and will state it again; only a poor carpenter blames his tools.

As for the 20 series learjets; there are no bad habits. The airplanes fly honestly, have much more performance than they need, and are simple, straightforward machines. These airplanes are older, and not graced with the latest autopilots, avionics suites, or other acouterments. Big deal. They're a lot of fun, give a good ride, fly great in weather and ice, and perform very well on one engine when should the need arise. The powerplants are bulletproof for the most part; very reliable. (Their two great drawbacks being high fuel consumption and noise, and for some the latter is no great drawback). Personally, I like the sound.

If a pilot finds an airplane hard to fly, the pilot has no business in that airplane. Challenging is another matter. When we cease to be challenged, we become complacent, we die.

 

[UPS DC8]

Freightdogfred,

When you get near the ground/ground effect, try easing forward on the yoke instead of flaring...

I think you meant to say...AFTER you flare, ease forward on the yoke. If you push forward instead of flairing you will prang the nose gear everytime. I'm not a high time DC 8 driver, but the guys I fly with are and when you get too confident the 8 will humble you real quick.

 

[Vector4fun]

When my Dad retired from DAL. he said the DC-6 was his favorite, followed closely by the L-1011. Of course, he flew the -6 when they were relatively new. CV-880s were very fast and fun, DC-8's were very comfortable, a short -9 with -30 series (big) engines was the closest to a fighter he ever flew.


And regarding the C-46, when he was a brand new co-pilot for DAL, they landed one in Ohio with a (unkown to them) flat tire. Captain left it half on and half off the runway, told the airport manager if they wanted it moved, they could do it their **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** selves, and went for a drink....

 

[f9driver]

The B-707-300's were a bit of a handful at times, mainly because they were an early design without airspeed data feeding various pieces of the controls. It flew well when going fast and was a little sloppy when slowed to the landing configuration. To make a "greaser" you had to flare a little and than ease the nose over so the rear trucks were coming up not going down.

 

[GREAT LAKES]

Easy/Hard airplanes to fly

I fell asleep while landing the Kingair 90 one time. I flew a 1900C for while (30hrs) and felt it was hard to make a "greaser". How did this post get so wide (on the computer screen?)