A Metro Passenger

[iflyforpie]

Well, I might as well make myself unpopular and throw a few more noisy rattletraps that should have been retired years ago.

The Beaver. The Otter. The Twin Otter. The DC-3. The Beech 18. The Norseman.

From a customer's point of view--one that cares SFA about how 'cool' or 'historic' these aircraft might be--they are just as bad as the Metro.

But like the Metro, they still exist because they can do things other planes can't and still make a profit doing it. Once that case is no longer there for them, savvy operators will dump them and unsavvy ones will go broke.

[Rowdy]

I'd rather get rocked and hypoxic down low in the ol' nine niner airliner

Now there's a POS! Never been in the back. Never again want to be in the front. Make the entire fleet into beer cans!

Them's is Fight'n Words!!


Although I've never flown an airplane where I needed to turn up the radio volume to full during takeoff. The only good thing about flying the Airliner is Multi Turbine PIC in the logbook. Other than that, leaves a bit of to be desired.

My sarcasm didnt come off the way I wanted it too...

[. ._]

[Maynard]

Im thinking if people hopped in a sched king air 200 with 12 seats, they'd rather take a charter config metro.

[THIN CRUST]

THE BEST

[dreidecker]

Okay, I gotta ask: Metroliner/Merlin SAFE???

I have never been trained on the type but I have been a passenger and it was not pleasant. I work with several pilots who have flown them and the info they are giving me makes me wonder if they are pulling my leg.

Metro trained pilots: correct me if I am wrong, but there are several things that come to mind that would not be allowed if that plane was trying to get a type-certificate for commercial operations under the current FAA/TC regulations. First: is it true that the metro has no accelerate/stop distances published? I am told that they came with "accelerate and go off the end of the runway @ 35 knots distances". Maybe they had better tables for the later models. Second: Should a V1 cut occur then the established procedure was to get airborne, accelerate in ground effect, then fly away at blue line. Wow. Any truth there? Third: Provisions for JATO bottles in the tail should a V1 cut happen. Lose an engine and light the rocket to get away from the ground. Gotta tell me about that! Last: single engine ils approach with one engine failed, gear and flaps down... I'm told they can't maintain a 3 degree glideslope in this event.

Thanks in advance for any informed answers.

[BTD]

Okay, I gotta ask: Metroliner/Merlin SAFE???

I have never been trained on the type but I have been a passenger and it was not pleasant. I work with several pilots who have flown them and the info they are giving me makes me wonder if they are pulling my leg.

Metro trained pilots: correct me if I am wrong, but there are several things that come to mind that would not be allowed if that plane was trying to get a type-certificate for commercial operations under the current FAA/TC regulations. First: is it true that the metro has no accelerate/stop distances published? I am told that they came with "accelerate and go off the end of the runway @ 35 knots distances". Maybe they had better tables for the later models. Second: Should a V1 cut occur then the established procedure was to get airborne, accelerate in ground effect, then fly away at blue line. Wow. Any truth there? Third: Provisions for JATO bottles in the tail should a V1 cut happen. Lose an engine and light the rocket to get away from the ground. Gotta tell me about that! Last: single engine ils approach with one engine failed, gear and flaps down... I'm told they can't maintain a 3 degree glideslope in this event.

Thanks in advance for any informed answers.

This sounds like you are refering to a Metro II. Under a certain weight they can be certified 703. And the above is no different then a King Air in terms of certification. I haven't flown a II, so someone who has can correct me.

As far as the III and the 23, all of the above is incorrect. There is published accelerate stop distance. There is a V2 speed and an engine failure at V1 procedure. No rockets in the tail. On slope with gear and flaps out, and one feathered it can maintain 3 degree.

[sky's the limit]

makes me wonder if they are pulling my leg.

No rockets in the tail.

In my pre-coffee haze, I found this extremely funny...!

stl

[blockheater]

The early Metro IIs did in fact have JATO bottles installed as factory option for emergency engine out situations. The original -3 engines didn't have very much OOMPH in hot/high places, let alone enough jam on an engine failure after V1. Once the majority of flat rated -3 engines were replaced with the de-rated -10s, their utility was rendered redundant. Good thing too, as they were a pain in the ass to maintain and keep certified. Don't know of any stories of it being used for real, only on the ground once time-x'd. Not very effective, apparently.

The tailcones on Metro IIs are visibly different between a standard tail and one that had the JATO bottle. They just sealed up the end, rather than refit them with the standard tailcone. Some planes still have the old guarded JATO bottle switch in the cockpit too.

[fish4life]

you are referring to the Metro 2 by the sounds of it, when operated 703 no need to meet any ASD performance numbers, same reason a Navajo doesn't have to meet any charts. I believe your referring to Perimeter for the Accelerate and slow to 35 knots charts, that is actually a company thing they decided to use as a much more conservative performance numbers compared to the required numbers that just need you to make take off distance / run numbers. Yes older models did have a JATO rocket in the tail in the event of a failed engine but these had less powerful engines than they do now (used to be -3 engines now -10) along with AWI which boosts power on the good engine in the event of a failure. As for one engine out situation it can maintain 3 degree slope gear and flaps down but depending on conditions and weight may not be able to maintain level flight.

[oldtimer]

To answer dreidecker.
The Metro 2 is a safe airplane. Noisy, uncomfortable, a people mailing tube interior but a safe airplane. Thy cannot be recertified under the current CARS because the certification program has expired. The Metro 23 could be redone. Many flolks get the short peckered Merli 3 mixed up with the long dong Metro2/3. Same type certificate and mechanically the same airplane but fuselage lenght makes a huge difference.
The dangers apparent in the Metro 2 gets exaggetated directly porpotional to the size of the boobs displayed by the chick that some young pilot is trying to impress in the "airport coffee shop". The bigger the tits, the more dangerous and challenging the airplane.
The FAA attempted to develope a commuter airliner without the expense of FAR 25 airliner certification. Look through the FAA website for FAR 23, sFAR 23 for airplanes designed to carry more than 9 passengers. That explains how the airplane was designed.
Yes, the airplane is either a normal category airplane with take-off over 50 ft performance, landing over 50 ft performance and single pilot certified.
sFAR 23 requires accelerate/slow to 35 knots (Use the overrun), accelerate - go (retract the landing gear while still in ground effect) balked landing performance (gear and flap down when landing assured) and landing over 50 ft.
Another section gives accelerate stop charts, short field take-off and landing performance but they are not FAA certified, observed bt not certified. Manufactureres were allowed to develop their own techniques.
Metro 3 was certified in a somewhat similar fashion (procedures were similar to FAR 25 but not exact) for US domestic use on;ly. In Canada, we had to use ICAO Annex 8 standards which were slightly more in line with FAR 25 as far as performance goes./
Metro 23 is the new Commuter Category certification. See CARS 523.
The airplane flies well if it is going fast. If the approach is flown with gear down and flaps full, the airplane may not have enough power to accelerate if the pilot lets the speed drop too much. Fortunatly, the airplane likes to go fast. It will boith accelerate and decellerate quickly so it is a safe airplane if it is flown "by the book" . That is true of any high perfgormance airplane.

[dreidecker]

Thanks for the responses everyone.

I checked and my coworkers were talking about the early Metro IIs. They all refer to them as scary airplanes if you didn't fly them right but they also loved flying them. I guess that can be said for most planes.

[rigpiggy]

Nice photoshop BTW the 5 bladers aren't certified in Canada "YET"

[oldtimer]

Of just over 1000 Swearingen airplanes built since the early 60's about 70% are still flying and of those not flying, many were scrapped because the pieces were worth more than the whole airplane.
The only one I would be a bit nervous about would be the very early ones with the round cabin windows and only one emergency exit on the right side ( 15 passengers max) that have not modified. The original -3 engine suffered a bit on hot days.

[FighterPilot]

Nice photoshop BTW the 5 bladers aren't certified in Canada "YET"

Defiantly not photoshopped, FZN has 5 blade propellers.

[rigpiggy]

http://www.mt-propeller.com/en/entw/stcs/m7_2.htm

Funny I queried TC, and they were telling me they hadn't finished there "acceptance"

Good on ya tho

[Maynard]

I guess they've been running it illegally then for the past few months....neat. PS, "TheIr" acceptance.

[wrenchturner]

http://www.mt-propeller.com/en/entw/stcs/m7_2.htm

Funny I queried TC, and they were telling me they hadn't finished there "acceptance"

Good on ya tho

Perhaps that explains why it is has the old 4 blade McCauley's back on it again now

[rigpiggy]

I guess they've been running it illegally then for the past few months....neat. PS, "TheIr" acceptance.

Thank you so much, I was tired/distracted and missed it

[Maynard]

http://www.mt-propeller.com/en/entw/stcs/m7_2.htm

Funny I queried TC, and they were telling me they hadn't finished there "acceptance"

Good on ya tho

Perhaps that explains why it is has the old 4 blade McCauley's back on it again now

Actually that has nothing to do with it....

[Maynard]

http://www.mt-propeller.com/

Notice the image halfway down on the left....I don't think MT would put photo shopped pictures on their site.

[FighterPilot]

Back to 4? Ahh that's too bad, looked pretty bad ass with 5. Last time I saw FZN in the hanger I remember it had 5 but thats been about 1-2 weeks now.

[Maynard]

Back to 4 blade due to act of nature

[J31]

Back to 4 blade due to act of nature

So what is this....20 questions with cryptic answers!? If you know what is going on with the 5 blade MT prop on the Bearskin Metro then please do tell. Or is it a big secret! It looks like a great improvement for a Metro.

[Valkyrie_XB70]

Bird strike took a chunk of blade off. So it was reverted to a McAuley 4 blade until a new prop arrives.