King Air C-90

Ted DuPuis said:
Dave, combine the WAAS upgrades with an Aspen or a G-600 and then you're really styling. ;)

Looks like a beautiful plane. Definitely a great panel, pretty similar to the Cheyenne that I fly from time to time. Are the engines on MORE?

The "thought they would keep it forever" owners are usually the best to get a plane from. The 310 is certainly in good shape for that reason. The Aztec will be good for its next owner as well, same reasons.
Click to expand...

I'm actually considering that <g>. The auto pilot wanders a bit: Century 41 and that may need attention first. Not on the MORE program Ted, but just had a hot section that looked good from the same folks that do my maintenance work.

Best,

Dave
 
Dave Theisen said:
I fly the 200 for a living.(PC12 also). Been a long time since I flew the 90, but I don't think there is any such thing as a bad King Air. They wouldn't still be building them if there were.

Good luck with it.
Click to expand...

It really feels like a bigger, more powerful Baron to me.

Best,

Dave
 
Dave Siciliano said:
I'm actually considering that <g>. The auto pilot wanders a bit: Century 41 and that may need attention first. Not on the MORE program Ted, but just had a hot section that looked good from the same folks that do my maintenance work.
Click to expand...

Was just curious. Makes for a good purchase value as you bought it!

Really a beautiful plane.
 
Don't know Rich. So far, I still like flying the P Baron. I think I look taller next to it anyway <g>

Best,

Dave
 
Hot damn, Dave. This was only a question of when. A finer man could not be found. Salut

Dibs on a ride....
 
Apologize for talking about the KA being mine.

My niece saw it tonight and immediately informed me it was hers <g>

Best,

Dave
 
The women in our life are like that, Dave!
 
Dave Siciliano said:
Apologize for talking about the KA being mine.

My niece saw it tonight and immediately informed me it was hers <g>

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...

That is only a sign that, like you, she has good taste! :)
 
I was taken back with the way she said it in no uncertain terms! She's liked all our planes, but never gotten this possessive before. What should I do <g>

Best,

Dave
 
Dave, you are clearly not paying your fair share... :goofy:

denny -o
color me jealous - what a beautiful bird
 
tonycondon said:
how does it run LOP??
Click to expand...

Continuously so. There is no operating a turbine "ROP", the only ROP event a turbine sees is the start, and if you get too "ROP" there you get a "Hot Start". ROP is even more destructive to a turbine than a recip.
 
Henning said:
ROP is even more destructive to a turbine than a recip.
Click to expand...

ROP is not destructive in a recip.

Running your engine poorly, regardless of type, is destructive.
 
Hey Dave. I am out of the loop and just saw this. Congratulations! KAs are great. I only have a whopping 17 hours logged in KAs, but I remember every one of them fondly. I'm happy for you.
 
Dave Siciliano said:
I was taken back with the way she said it in no uncertain terms! She's liked all our planes, but never gotten this possessive before. What should I do <g>

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...
I suspect this might be due to the onboard potty.
 
On the way back from Wisconsin yesterday, I used Tom's Clement's power settings and here's how things came out.

Props were at 1900; 13.700 pressure altitude; OAT -9; IAS 195
Left Right
ITT 685 682
Torque 1240 1240
N1 96.4 96.8
Fuel Flow 270 300

We believe the right FF gauge reads high as the right fuel level gauge does not go down and faster than the left. We'll check when we top the tanks.

If the Garmin was correct, that's a TAS of 238 knots! Sounds very good.

We also did the book power settings and were right on left gauge fuel flow; as said, we think the right reads high. We were to the knot in IAS.

Looks like this bird will perform right where Beech predicted with book speeds. Using speeds from the C90-1 which Tom recommended, better than I expected at a higher fuel flow.

Best,

Dave
 
Dave Siciliano said:
I was taken back with the way she said it in no uncertain terms! She's liked all our planes, but never gotten this possessive before. What should I do <g>

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...
Be very careful, Dave! I can remember getting ready at the FBO when a King Air pulled up. Line guys put out the red carpet and one lady got out. Then here they come with the luggage cart -- and they filled that sucker to the top with shopping bags!!! :eek:

Hide yer wallet. ;)
 
Dave Siciliano said:
On the way back from Wisconsin yesterday, I used Tom's Clement's power settings and here's how things came out.

Props were at 1900; 13.700 pressure altitude; OAT -9; IAS 195
Left Right
ITT 685 682
Torque 1240 1240
N1 96.4 96.8
Fuel Flow 270 300

We believe the right FF gauge reads high as the right fuel level gauge does not go down and faster than the left. We'll check when we top the tanks.

If the Garmin was correct, that's a TAS of 238 knots! Sounds very good.

We also did the book power settings and were right on left gauge fuel flow; as said, we think the right reads high. We were to the knot in IAS.

Looks like this bird will perform right where Beech predicted with book speeds. Using speeds from the C90-1 which Tom recommended, better than I expected at a higher fuel flow.

Best,

Dave
Click to expand...

Wow, 90gph to go 238kts?

I use to fly a Merlin 4C with 1000shp Garretts and I would get 270kts on 600pph total FF (100gph).
 
I looked for your airplane last night. Saw a couple 90s while taxiing on A but I didn't know your number until I looked at the picture this morning. We were only there for a short RON and a very early morning departure. We may be coming back tomorrow for the day but that isn't certain yet.
 
Rotor&Wing said:
Wow, 90gph to go 238kts?

I use to fly a Merlin 4C with 1000shp Garretts and I would get 270kts on 600pph total FF (100gph).
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you weren't doing that at about 14,000 ft.
 
Rotor&Wing said:
Wow, 90gph to go 238kts?
Click to expand...

Buuuuuurrrrrrrpppp! Uh yes. I was at 14,000 because of very strong headwinds. Book numbers show closer to 70 gph up a bit higher. And, one can slow down a bit and improve those numbers. I was checking performance against book to see if the engines were making book power.

Best,

Dave
 
Rotor&Wing said:
Wow, 90gph to go 238kts?

I use to fly a Merlin 4C with 1000shp Garretts and I would get 270kts on 600pph total FF (100gph).
Click to expand...
He was flying somewhere around 13-14,000 feet though. We always flew higher, even on much shorter legs. It seems like I was told to fly the 90s up around FL200 or so.

Edit: Haha, I guess we all replied at the same time.
 
Everskyward said:
I looked for your airplane last night. Saw a couple 90s while taxiing on A but I didn't know your number until I looked at the picture this morning. We were only there for a short RON and a very early morning departure. We may be coming back tomorrow for the day but that isn't certain yet.
Click to expand...

It's always nice to see you. Let me know if you get here and have some time to visit. You can also say you knew me back when I seemed to have a secure retirement <g>.

I have had three folks already express interest in partnering or dry leasing some time in the plane. We'll see where that all goes.

Dave
 
Everskyward said:
He was flying somewhere around 13-14,000 feet though. We always flew higher, even on much shorter legs. It seems like I was told to fly the 90s up around FL200 or so.

Edit: Haha, I guess we all replied at the same time.
Click to expand...

Yea, IIRC the optimum altitude for the C90's works out between 16-18k.

The Garrett's are proportionally better in fuel economy than the PW's.
 
Dave Siciliano said:
It's always nice to see you. Let me know if you get here and have some time to visit. You can also say you knew me back when I seemed to have a secure retirement <g>.
Click to expand...
Ok, I'll let you know. We'll probably find out by late this afternoon.

Dave Siciliano said:
I have had three folks already express interest in partnering or dry leasing some time in the plane. We'll see where that all goes.
Click to expand...
Good luck with that!
 
rpadula said:
Be very careful, Dave! I can remember getting ready at the FBO when a King Air pulled up. Line guys put out the red carpet and one lady got out. Then here they come with the luggage cart -- and they filled that sucker to the top with shopping bags!!! :eek:

Hide yer wallet. ;)
Click to expand...

I really look at this as my SUV. The Baron is more like a sports car <g>.
A friend I usually drop in Rockford on the way to Wisconsin brought back several tool boxes--probably a couple hundred pounds worth. We put them in back and it got the CG more toward the rear. Maybe it's more like a pickup truck <g>. One does buy this to haul stuff (remember the old George Carlin routine about stuff!)

If you could have seem my nieces and I when we returned from Cozumel a couple years ago, that lady might have been out classed! The poor 58P was simply loaded to the gills. It wasn't really a weight issue: just stuff from shopping. I think the customs guys just kind of waived us through when they saw three teenage girls and I with all those bags <g>

Best,

Dave
 
Rotor&Wing said:
Yea, IIRC the optimum altitude for the C90's works out between 16-18k.

The Garrett's are proportionally better in fuel economy than the PW's.
Click to expand...

I looked at the MU-2 with -10s and it certainly was faster. There are so many factors one considers when looking at planes. One has to mix them all together and decide what all fits best. I had a couple friends I talked to MU-2s a bit and they were adamant I shouldn't be flying them. These are experienced folks. Older systems, insurance issues and one had a very good friend that was a good pilot lost in one. I'm not flying professionally. I'm just flying a bit over 150 hours.

The KA has a lot of systems in common with my 58P; handling is somewhat similar. The real kicker was knowing the seller; my mechanic having taken care of it and speaking highly of how the seller maintained it and the seller letting me test drive it for 20 hours. That's kind of what pushed me over the edge. Had it been another plane with Garrets and those same circumstances, who knows.

Best,

Dave
 
I don't have the C90-1 performance manual here which one can run the -21s at. The POH book for my plane shows 216 PPH at FL180 and 218 TAS. Of course, as one goes a bit higher, TAS tapers off and fuel flow also is less. I'll look at the C90-1 table tonight. I would guess to get up to 235 or so at FL180 would be around 250 to 260PPH on a standard day. I'll check. Still, a lot of fuel. It's a pretty big piece of equipment to be pushing through the air.

Best,

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top