Extreme STOL question

[jetsam]

Just for curious: is any GA aircraft (non helicopter) able to take off at SPRF elev. 14423 ft and land at Sea Level at 100 ft runway?

[cdnpilot77]

never flown it but the info on Wikipedia suggests that the Pilatus PC6 Turbo Porter can land in 164ft at sea level also make a successful landing at over 18,000ft, by factory test pilots of course.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilatus_PC-6

[niss]

Just for curious: is any GA aircraft (non helicopter) able to take off at SPRF elev. 14423 ft and land at Sea Level at 100 ft runway?

Anything with me at the helm baby....

[1000 HP]

Yeah baby yeah! ( I thought I would mention that if you don't need to take off again I will land anything in 100 feet or less for the right price)

[looproll]

PC-6

[sprayrail]

While the porter is a great aircraft it does have an equal out there with a larger payload, the Helio Stallion for one and although the specs say takeoff and land in 350 ft., with the PT6 and half a load a 100 ft is do-able.

Regards

[MUSICMAAN]

Garrett powered Otter would do it better than the Porter or the Stallion....... (in my opinion)

[jetsam]

Porter...such a good STOL capabilities and only few in Canada, strange

[MUSKEG]

Pc-6 is probably the ultimate bush airplane but the range is far to short to be of much use in Canada.

[Just another canuck]

I've flown in the Porter a few times... amazing aircraft. It's definitely not as rugged as our Beavers and Otters, but the STOL capabilities are incredible.

Search Papua, Indonesia and Porter on youtube and you'll find videos from a guy named Sven (possible youtube name porterstans... not sure)... can't remember the last name but I worked with him in Papua. He flew the Otter mostly and DC-3 in Canada for years before getting time in the Porter and according to him, nothing compares. Although, yes, he is Swiss... LOL... and he hasn't flown the Helio, but some of the places the Porter went in and out of in Papua with full pay loads was just unreal. Just like Mel in Air America...

[rigpiggy]

My understanding was the Helio stallion was a better STOL machine, however the CIA bought 24 of them, and then set up there own production line, to avoid the optics of congress etc.... maytag used to fly one out of YVR and he would be at 5000 by the end of the runway

[mag check]

I would think that the stallion and pc6 would be pretty close on t/o, probably come down to piloting, but the stallion is much faster in cruise.
The guy that owns Oakley sunglasses has one.

[Just another canuck]

Personally, I have no idea which is the better STOL machine, but would someone care to speculate why Papua and PNG are full of Porters and 0 Stallions (none that I saw anyway). Price? Availability?

[mag check]

Availability. I think there are only 2 on the registery.

[StudentPilot]

Personally, I have no idea which is the better STOL machine, but would someone care to speculate why Papua and PNG are full of Porters and 0 Stallions (none that I saw anyway). Price? Availability?

I was under the impression there were only ever a few Porters operated in PNG, and they haven't been flown there for quite some time. I've heard there are only a pair of Stallions flying as well...kind of hard to be a common type with so few!

[polar one]

JAC

You said you were in PNG and you have to ask why they use porters there? Susi Air in Indonesia uses them too. I think they have 4 or 6 now. and again, if you have seen what they fly into on a regular and routine basis you wouldnt ask the question.

PNG uses the twin otters a great deal with PNG airlines out of Australia in PNG and the strips they use are a little sketchy..particularily with a plane full of explosives. In both places the porter pilots are all experienced. Enough of a learning curve without trying to learn the basics of the area or STOL flying. Not sure a turbine otter would do what they do as it is more prone to crosswind issues and does not seem so good for flying the wild profiles and back of the curve that extreme STOL in these areas dictate.

Exteme STOL requires you to fly the last phase of the approach (or maybe more) well behind the curve. Porters respond well to this, and I have been told the stallions and the helios in general with their wingie fallout thingies do to. The DHC products (twin otter and turbo beaver) when you get them behind the curve dont give you as much, or any wiggle room
A twin otter is a great plane but the technique is a bit different for getting them in really short and they just land that much faster than the porter.

Extreme STOL is dangerous. It leaves virtually zero tolerance for error, and only takes a bit of an unexpected downdraft or wind gust to make things get really interesting..Lots of wrecks to prove even the pros rely on a bit of luck...not a great thing to do every day.

[Just another canuck]

You said you were in PNG and you have to ask why they use porters there? Susi Air in Indonesia uses them too. I think they have 4 or 6 now. and again, if you have seen what they fly into on a regular and routine basis you wouldnt ask the question.

I never once said I was in PNG... I have, in the past, said that I was in Papua (Irian Jaya if you prefer). There is a difference. Actually, Papua is less developed than PNG, according to my sources.

And the only question I asked was "Why do the operators there use the Porter and not the Stallion?" Try re-reading my post. I know what the Porter can do. Like I said, I've seen it and been in the plane when it has been done.

Extreme STOL is dangerous. It leaves virtually zero tolerance for error, and only takes a bit of an unexpected downdraft or wind gust to make things get really interesting..Lots of wrecks to prove even the pros rely on a bit of luck...not a great thing to do every day.

You're right, it's dangerous, but you know how that old and bold saying goes... and like anything worth doing, it should be done right. I know quite a few of the Porter pilots personally in Papua... all good guys. Some are older folks who've proved that flying around these parts for many years, decades in some cases, can be done. And not just the Porters... the Vans go into some pretty hectic spots as well. And you're right, they (the Porter crew) are very experienced individuals. Mostly ex-ag guys and all "extreme STOL" drivers way before they got to Papua. But even the most experienced can get bitten there... as has been proven many times in the past... just one of the reasons I left the place.

[Just another canuck]

Personally, I have no idea which is the better STOL machine, but would someone care to speculate why Papua and PNG are full of Porters and 0 Stallions (none that I saw anyway). Price? Availability?

I was under the impression there were only ever a few Porters operated in PNG, and they haven't been flown there for quite some time. I've heard there are only a pair of Stallions flying as well...kind of hard to be a common type with so few!

Never been to PNG... I thought there were more.

Cheers.

[Invertago]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBD1XOY5 ... re=related

Carbon cub would probably do it, but it won't carry much.

[StudentPilot]

Carbon cub would probably do it, but it won't carry much.

After a quick Google search I came up with the 2010 Experimental Bush class STOL results and the 2007 (I think) results from the Valdez fly-in. In 2007, the second place Bush class (ie mostly Super Cubs) pilot landed 66' & 101', and there was only one other landing shorter than 100'. In the experimental bush class there was a Carbon Cub that landed 73' & 53', but the other three Carbon Cubs had one landing under 100' and one landing longer than 100'. There was a Gyro (presumably homebuilt?) with two even shorter landings, but take offs around 140'. In the 2010 Experimental Bush class, there was no plane with two landings under 100'. Judging by the difference in take off rolls (ie Paul Claus taking off in 30' & 19' in a CC in 2007, and 64' & 79' in 2010) I'm guessing the competition in 2007 had a decent wind blowing. From what I've heard, the Valdez competition pretty much results in everyone stripping absolutely everything they can out of their planes and absolute minimum fuel. And I'd assume these are probably some of the best Super Cub pilots out there. I have a feeling landing a conventional plane on 100' consistently will only last so long before you go off the end or land short.

If you don't have far to go, I think I'd recommend a hang glider or paraglider (if either works at 14,000') and a couple of those nifty rockets/jets the birdman uses to get airborne...unless you can just jump of a cliff for "take off."

[c185]

I found the right plane for you
http://www.generalaviationnews.com/?p=5681

[Just another canuck]

I found the right plane for you
http://www.generalaviationnews.com/?p=5681

Very cool!!!

[cdnpilot77]

I found the right plane for you
http://www.generalaviationnews.com/?p=5681

Very cool!!!

Holy Crap JAC, we agree on something...common ground, its a beautiful thing!!

[c185]

They also offer a 1000hp version

http://www.sherpaaircraft.com/video.html

[. ._]

Super cool!

But thirsty! (get the numbers at about 0:45)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OwkUKjR6 ... re=related