AVCANADA

It is currently Thu Oct 19, 2017 2:39 am

All times are UTC-07:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 178 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 3 4 58 Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed Oct 12, 2016 1:20 am 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2

Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 6:12 am
Posts: 50
New rfp was supposed to come out? Anyone have any info?


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Oct 12, 2016 5:32 am 
Offline
Rank 1
Rank 1

Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:49 am
Posts: 47
It's already come out and closed. I think the results are supposed to be announced by the end of October.


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Oct 13, 2016 10:12 pm 
Offline
Rank 11
Rank 11

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:33 am
Posts: 3083
Location: YYC 230 degree radial at about 10 DME
Any new metal in the bids or still 200's?


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2016 7:52 am 
Offline
Rank 10
Rank 10

Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 7:17 pm
Posts: 2170
Location: west to east and west again
Grouping northern Alta.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Nov 01, 2016 10:56 am 
Offline
Rank 5
Rank 5

Joined: Fri Feb 22, 2013 10:55 pm
Posts: 368
Location: The sky
nine sixteenths wrote:
It's already come out and closed. I think the results are supposed to be announced by the end of October.



were supposed to be... sounds like longer now



Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Nov 02, 2016 3:38 pm 
Offline
Rank 0
Rank 0

Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2016 12:22 pm
Posts: 4
Any update on this?


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:00 pm 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2013 11:01 pm
Posts: 52
Any updates yet!


Top
   
PostPosted: Mon Nov 07, 2016 8:52 pm 
Offline
Rank 1
Rank 1

Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 1:36 pm
Posts: 47
Should be out by end of November hopefully. But AHS being another part government entity, it'll show up when ever it does. Northern Alberta RFP requires upgrade of aircraft, King Air 250s I think. Or quite newer 200s anyway.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:24 am 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)

Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:30 am
Posts: 1289
Location: the stars playground
What a shame they don't use PC12s, far better ship for the mission.


Top
   
PostPosted: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:20 am 
Offline
Rank 1
Rank 1

Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 1:36 pm
Posts: 47
SuperchargedRS wrote:
What a shame they don't use PC12s, far better ship for the mission.



Personally I think the King Air is the perfect machine. Most of the missions are less than an hour of flying time, and it's just easy to do in a King Air. There is a company that uses a Twin Otter that is retrofitted for bariatric patients. so for the heavier set patients, a wider body Twin Otter or 1900 is also available and great. I'm sure the PC-12 is a very capable airplane for a similar mission, but having two turboprop engines is a must for AHS contracts. And personally, I prefer it that way too.



Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2016 12:44 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)

Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:30 am
Posts: 1289
Location: the stars playground
MrTurbine wrote:
SuperchargedRS wrote:
What a shame they don't use PC12s, far better ship for the mission.



Personally I think the King Air is the perfect machine. Most of the missions are less than an hour of flying time, and it's just easy to do in a King Air. There is a company that uses a Twin Otter that is retrofitted for bariatric patients. so for the heavier set patients, a wider body Twin Otter or 1900 is also available and great. I'm sure the PC-12 is a very capable airplane for a similar mission, but having two turboprop engines is a must for AHS contracts. And personally, I prefer it that way too.


It's really the rear door, size of the cabin, better landing gear and better sort field performance.

The multi engine saftey thing is more of a marketing pitch, how many MEDEVAC PC12s have gone down due to a engine failure?



Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2016 1:30 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7

Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 4:12 pm
Posts: 722
.

The multi engine saftey thing is more of a marketing pitch, how many MEDEVAC PC12s have gone down due to a engine failure?[/quote]
It only takes On



Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2016 1:49 pm 
Offline
Rank 3
Rank 3

Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 4:04 pm
Posts: 178
SuperchargedRS wrote:
MrTurbine wrote:
SuperchargedRS wrote:
What a shame they don't use PC12s, far better ship for the mission.



Personally I think the King Air is the perfect machine. Most of the missions are less than an hour of flying time, and it's just easy to do in a King Air. There is a company that uses a Twin Otter that is retrofitted for bariatric patients. so for the heavier set patients, a wider body Twin Otter or 1900 is also available and great. I'm sure the PC-12 is a very capable airplane for a similar mission, but having two turboprop engines is a must for AHS contracts. And personally, I prefer it that way too.


It's really the rear door, size of the cabin, better landing gear and better sort field performance.

The multi engine saftey thing is more of a marketing pitch, how many MEDEVAC PC12s have gone down due to a engine failure?

What's wrong with King Air doors?
Image



Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2016 2:41 pm 
Offline
Rank 0
Rank 0

Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 6:45 am
Posts: 4
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that's an FAA only approved door mod. Not approved however by TC.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2016 6:25 pm 
Offline
Rank 1
Rank 1

Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 6:49 am
Posts: 47
Beech makes king airs with the cargo door on them from factory, plus there's the STC available through Avcon that installs the same door that the beech factory installs, plus a smaller version of the cargo door as well. Both are STC modifications not just 337 form modifications. Just like putting Raisbeck wing lockers, or the lifeport system on with an STC

Here's the page for the cargo airstair combo door:

http://www.avconindustries.com/product_details.php?id=9

And the smaller "baggage" door:

http://www.avconindustries.com/product_ ... .php?id=14

There might be other companies out there making this type of modification as well, this is the one I've heard of.



Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2016 7:31 pm 
Offline
Rank 10
Rank 10

Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2005 7:17 pm
Posts: 2170
Location: west to east and west again
Well dont tell PNR, or Central region. NAC, and helitransport both run KA's with the big door


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Nov 09, 2016 8:51 pm 
Offline
Rank 1
Rank 1

Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 1:36 pm
Posts: 47
hopefully the Cargo door is legal and approved by TC. I've seen a few of them flying around up north already.
In terms of PC-12 single engine VS. the twin turbine, yes, obviously it looks great on paper. But I would never ever want to see even a single one go down with pilots, medics, patient or even the patients family on board, which is common practice in the king air medevacs. It only takes one accident to change the course of history. I might be biased , but I prefer my airplanes with more than one engine.



Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Nov 10, 2016 11:40 am 
Offline
Rank 11
Rank 11

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 2:33 am
Posts: 3083
Location: YYC 230 degree radial at about 10 DME
The only 200 I've ever seen with the cargo door was Tindi's, which is a B200C from the factory. Looks great but I think it has a lower pressure differential than a regular B200 which can be an issue for some patients and can effect your range.


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Nov 10, 2016 11:08 pm 
Offline
Rank (9)
Rank (9)

Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 6:32 am
Posts: 1362
Why buy some fancy king air when a metro will do?
Big cargo door
Faster
Less fuel burn
Better cabin diff = lower pax cabin

Literally the only downside I can think of is noise



Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2016 12:31 am 
Offline
Rank 2
Rank 2

Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2016 6:12 am
Posts: 50
Because metro's are garbage


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2016 10:43 am 
Offline
Rank 8
Rank 8

Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am
Posts: 763
fish4life wrote:
Why buy some fancy king air when a metro will do?
Big cargo door
Faster
Less fuel burn
Better cabin diff = lower pax cabin

Literally the only downside I can think of is noise


Big door is generally not required, but can be STC'd.
Faster? Not too sure about that. With the -42 it will do 270kts and the -52 will touch 300kts. The King Air also climbs faster, so it's at altitude and cruising earlier. For the same stage length, I bet the race would be extremely close.
Okay, the Metro burns less fuel
Comparing 6.5 PSID to 7.0 really isn't worth mentioning.

How about ability to climb out of icing or above weather? The King Air is still making 850hp per side into the mid-teens and doing 1000+ fpm at FL280. How does the metro perform at 28,000ft?

King Airs also have better dispatch reliability and are more dependable.

I haven't met a pilot or mechanic that prefers the Metro over a King Air. Beechcraft are better to fly and easier fix.

If you are in a car crash, would you rather have a Chevy ambulance with a big turbo diesel V8 and studded winter tires come to get you, or a Oldsmobile with a straight-6 and Toyota Prius tires, because it burns less gas?



Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2016 12:49 pm 
Offline
Rank 1
Rank 1

Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 1:36 pm
Posts: 47
fish4life wrote:
Why buy some fancy king air when a metro will do?
Big cargo door
Faster
Less fuel burn
Better cabin diff = lower pax cabin

Literally the only downside I can think of is noise





You know you've never flown a King Air when . .

To be honest, to cruise around North America with my family, I prefer a King Air 350 over most light jets!



Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2016 1:36 pm 
Offline
Rank 4
Rank 4

Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2004 8:47 am
Posts: 239
Quote:
The only 200 I've ever seen with the cargo door was Tindi's, which is a B200C from the factory. Looks great but I think it has a lower pressure differential than a regular B200 which can be an issue for some patients and can effect your range.


Same pressurization limitations, and no negative effects on patient care. Primarily used due to contractual obligations for Bariatric transport, but can obviously be used for 'normal' medevac missions as well. Also makes loading/unloading a walk in the park!


_________________
YG


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2016 2:00 pm 
Offline
Rank 7
Rank 7

Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 4:12 pm
Posts: 722
[quote="goingnowherefast"][quote="fish4life"]Why buy some fancy king air when a metro will do?
Big cargo door
Faster
Less fuel burn


How about ability to climb out of icing or above weather? The King Air is still making 850hp per side into the mid-teens and doing 1000+ fpm at FL280. How does the metro perform at 28,000ft?


Any Metro with the -10 Garrett is making 1,000 HP continues.



Top
   
PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2016 3:26 pm 
Offline
Rank 3
Rank 3

Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 4:04 pm
Posts: 178
godsrcrazy wrote:
Any Metro with the -10 Garrett is making 1,000 HP continues.


Not at FL280 you're not!!! If you're not at 100% Torque and 100% RPM, then you are not making full rated horsepower.

BTW, the Metro 3 and 23 have -11, and -12 engines with even more power, but they still can't produce 1000 HP at FL280



Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 178 posts ]  Go to page 1 2 3 4 58 Next

All times are UTC-07:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bhuntsy, Victory and 18 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]

For questions/comments please send them to
avcanada@gmail.com


AvCanada Topsites List
AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com Avitop.com

While the administrators and moderators of this forum will attempt to remove or edit any generally objectionable material as quickly as possible, it is impossible to review every message. If you feel a topic or post is inappropriate email us at avcanada@gmail.com .  By reading these forums you acknowledge that all posts made to these forums express the views and opinions of the author and not the administrators, moderators or webmaster (except for posts by these people) and hence will not be held liable. This website is not responsible or liable in any way for any false or misleading messages or job ads placed at our site. 

Use AvCanada's information at your own risk!

We reserve the right to remove any messages that we deem unacceptable.
When you post a message, your IP is logged and may be provided to concerned parties where unethical or illegal behavior is apparent. All rights reserved.