Which Plane?

[Ted]

Thought I'd pose a hypothetical question based on a real world trip I had to do.

It's January, and you've been assigned to do what amounts to a medevac. The destination is 1100 nm away, with freezing levels at the surface. For about 600 nm in the middle of the trip there is a big system of moderate precip, tops FL200, lots of ice forecast within it. Trip involves flying over (very cold) water that neither you nor your passenger want to end up in. The passenger is stable, but feeling horrible and the effects of altitude are unknown. Cost is a consideration, but so is safety. Winds are 80 KTS @ FL250, 60 @ 230, 40 @ 200, and go down from there.

Assume that cost is a factor, but obviously safety comes first. IOW, don't just pick the most expensive option because you can.

So, which of the above would be the minimum and why? Assume that you know how to fly each one.

 

[wabower]

You're kidding, right?

Thought I'd pose a hypothetical question based on a real world trip I had to do.

It's January, and you've been assigned to do what amounts to a medevac. The destination is 1100 nm away, with freezing levels at the surface. For about 600 nm in the middle of the trip there is a big system of moderate precip, tops FL200, lots of ice forecast within it. Trip involves flying over (very cold) water that neither you nor your passenger want to end up in. The passenger is stable, but feeling horrible and the effects of altitude are unknown. Cost is a consideration, but so is safety. Winds are 80 KTS @ FL250, 60 @ 230, 40 @ 200, and go down from there.

So, which of the above would you pick?

 

[N801BH]

I picked the Lear... Geez Ted.. it just burns kerosene... When I was a kid, the local gas station sold that stuff for 10 cents a gallon, how much could it possibly cost now ..

 

[Everskyward]

Having flown air ambulance in the past, not even counting the weather, >500 miles we preferred the Lear rather than the King Air and you are talking about 1100 miles. Part of the object is not to make it hard on the patient.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Is Henning flying the 310???

 

[N801BH]

Is Henning flying the 310???

 

[wabower]

No, it's less than 50 years old.

 

[Ted]

You're kidding, right?

Mostly. I just wanted to confirm some suspicions.

 

[Ted]

Having flown air ambulance in the past, not even counting the weather, >500 miles we preferred the Lear rather than the King Air and you are talking about 1100 miles. Part of the object is not to make it hard on the patient.

True, but for a traditional air ambulance, money is no object. Assume the patient is paying.

 

[Ted]

I picked the Lear... Geez Ted.. it just burns kerosene... When I was a kid, the local gas station sold that stuff for 10 cents a gallon, how much could it possibly cost now ..

There's another kerosene burner in the list there as well, and even if kerosene did cost 10 cents a gallon, airframe time does not.

 

[N801BH]

True, but for a traditional air ambulance, money is no object. Assume the patient is paying.

Well... actually his insurance is paying..

 

[Everskyward]

True, but for a traditional air ambulance, money is no object. Assume the patient is paying.

How much more are they going to pay on an 1100 mile trip? The Lear costs more per hour but is much faster.

 

[Ted]

Well... actually his insurance is paying..

Negative. See post 1. "What amounts to a medevac." IOW out-of-pocket.

 

[wabower]

After you explain the options to him, his decision is even easier.

True, but for a traditional air ambulance, money is no object. Assume the patient is paying.

 

[N801BH]

There's another kerosene burner in the list there as well, and even if kerosene did cost 10 cents a gallon, airframe time does not.

Yeah, but.... The patients condition can take a dive in 1100 nm... The faster there, the better... Altho block to block the Cheyenne is probably close to the Lears time.

 

[Ted]

How much more are they going to pay on an 1100 mile trip? The Lear costs more per hour but is much faster.

Figure:

310: $5,000
Navajo: $7,000
Malibu: $6,000
Cheyenne: $9,000
Lear: $13,000

 

[Everskyward]

Altho block to block the Cheyenne is probably close to the Lears time.

How fast is a Cheyenne? A Lear 35 cruises at about 440 true.

 

[Ted]

Yeah, but.... The patients condition can take a dive in 1100 nm... The faster there, the better... Altho block to block the Cheyenne is probably close to the Lears time.

Condition is stable and does not require presence of medical personnel.

Assume Lear does not offer any advantage on a return trip as far as non-stop due to needing to clear customs (international).

How fast is a Cheyenne? A Lear 35 cruises at about 440 true.

Cheyenne trues out at 230 KTAS. Lear would probably do the trip in about 2/3 the block time.

 

[Fearless Tower]

Negative. See post 1. "What amounts to a medevac." IOW out-of-pocket.

Wait a minute.....doesn't he have Obamacare???

 

[N801BH]

Wait a minute.....doesn't he have Obamacare???

...............

 

[wabower]

I'd bet at least 2x time required for any piston or T/P.

Condition is stable and does not require presence of medical personnel.

Assume Lear does not offer any advantage on a return trip as far as non-stop due to needing to clear customs (international).



Cheyenne trues out at 230 KTAS. Lear would probably do the trip in about 2/3 the block time.

 

[Ted]

I'm curious as to those who voted for something not the Lear, and appropriate logic. Especially the Malibu and Navajo.

 

[Ted]

I'd bet at least 2x time required for any piston or T/P.

Lear would definitely be at least twice as fast as the piston options. The Cheyenne I think approaches 2/3, but maybe not. Significant time savings for sure.

 

[Henning]

Thought I'd pose a hypothetical question based on a real world trip I had to do.

It's January, and you've been assigned to do what amounts to a medevac. The destination is 1100 nm away, with freezing levels at the surface. For about 600 nm in the middle of the trip there is a big system of moderate precip, tops FL200, lots of ice forecast within it. Trip involves flying over (very cold) water that neither you nor your passenger want to end up in. The passenger is stable, but feeling horrible and the effects of altitude are unknown. Cost is a consideration, but so is safety. Winds are 80 KTS @ FL250, 60 @ 230, 40 @ 200, and go down from there.

Assume that cost is a factor, but obviously safety comes first. IOW, don't just pick the most expensive option because you can.

So, which of the above would be the minimum and why? Assume that you know how to fly each one.

I want the Lear but I would accept the Cheyenne. That flight requires turbines.

 

[wabower]

Run the trip on fltplan.com and see what they say.

Lear would definitely be at least twice as fast as the piston options. The Cheyenne I think approaches 2/3, but maybe not. Significant time savings for sure.

 

[Henning]

Is Henning flying the 310???

Not in that weather he's not, I don't need to be slinging ice.

 

[Ted]

Run the trip on fltplan.com and see what they say.

Now you're trying to make me work. Not fair. I fold.

 

[alaskaflyer]

I'm curious as to those who voted for something not the Lear, and appropriate logic. Especially the Malibu and Navajo.

Which Cheyenne?

I once put a patient on a Cheyenne IIxl at our local 2800' airstrip in central Alaska in the middle of the night in the icy fall. It then flew 1300nm to Seattle on the great circle route over coastal southeast Alaska.

So I figure if it was good enough for my patient, suffering from full thickness burns it's good enough for a sick doggie

 

[wabower]

I've flown that 1100 miler to and from California in everything from 210's to G-V's including King Air 90's (had to refuel in Tucson) B-200's (chose to refuel in ELP) Citation III (didn't break a sweat to Fullerton) G-V required about 1/3 fuel load and we were at FL250 passing FTW.

Now you're trying to make me work. Not fair. I fold.

 

[Ted]

Which Cheyenne?

Good question. Cheyenne II.

I once put a patient on a Cheyenne IIxl at our local 2800' airstrip in central Alaska in the middle of the night in the icy fall. It then flew 1300nm to Seattle on the great circle route over coastal southeast Alaska.

So I figure if it was good enough for my patient, suffering from full thickness burns it's good enough for a sick doggie

Patient was a human, not a doggie.

 

[Ted]

I've flown that 1100 miler to and from California in everything from 210's to G-V's including King Air 90's (had to refuel in Tucson) B-200's (chose to refuel in ELP) Citation III (didn't break a sweat to Fullerton) G-V required about 1/3 fuel load and we were at FL250 passing FTW.

G-V wasn't listed as an option. Maybe I should've called you.

 

[Henning]

I'm curious as to those who voted for something not the Lear, and appropriate logic. Especially the Malibu and Navajo.

Can it even be legally done in the Malibu?

 

[Everskyward]

I once put a patient on a Cheyenne IIxl at our local 2800' airstrip in central Alaska in the middle of the night in the icy fall. It then flew 1300nm to Seattle on the great circle route over coastal southeast Alaska.

Lear wasn't an option in that case unless you switched airplanes somewhere.

 

[wabower]

Depends on the equipment. Most people don't ever fly trips that long, Bock never flies one that short.

G-V wasn't listed as an option. Maybe I should've called you.

 

[Henning]

Which Cheyenne?

I once put a patient on a Cheyenne IIxl at our local 2800' airstrip in central Alaska in the middle of the night in the icy fall. It then flew 1300nm to Seattle on the great circle route over coastal southeast Alaska.

So I figure if it was good enough for my patient, suffering from full thickness burns it's good enough for a sick doggie

Yeah, I'd accept a Cheyenne. If I'm not in condition to be transporting myself, get me there ASAP and don't show up with recip gear.

 

[Greg Bockelman]

Depends on the equipment. Most people don't ever fly trips that long, Bock never flies one that short.

ROTFLMAO

 

[alaskaflyer]

Lear wasn't an option in that case unless you switched airplanes somewhere.

Exactomundo. Give me a Cheyenne II/III or a King Air over a jet any day unless one is flying internationally Too many places I want to go with short runways.

 

[Henning]

Exactomundo. Give me a Cheyenne II/III or a King Air over a jet any day unless one is flying internationally Too many places I want to go with short runways.

Your neck of the woods the Cheyenne is a pretty good value.

 

[Dave Siciliano]

I didn't hear anything about crew. If SP, that could make a difference. Long trip for SP though.
Hope if works out for you Ted. I certainly cast my vote with the turbine folks. Lear first. That's be a one stopper for my C90.

Best,

Dave

 

[Ted]

I want the Lear but I would accept the Cheyenne. That flight requires turbines.

And we have a winner.

The 310 and Navajo were out. Even though there might have been a way through the icing at altitudes those two could do, wanting to stay at a reasonable pressure altitude for the passenger may not have been feasible while staying away from ice. The duration of the flight here was a consideration as well - the crappy weather was heading right for the pickup point, and 24 hours later it was so bad that the airliners weren't going in and out. So an overnight was not an option.

The Malibu would never have been a consideration for me. Even though it can fly at appropriate altitudes to get above the weather, a piston single over the North Atlantic in January (at night for the return trip) is not a good idea, in my opinion. Doubly so for a piston single with a high rate of engine failures. If it was better weather and we weren't flying over such inhospitable areas, maybe.

The Lear would've been nice, but the trip required a stop anyway on the return trip to clear customs (international). There would have been a time benefit, maybe even a significant one, but the extra cost would not have made it worthwhile. A lower-cost smaller jet might have been a more viable option, but wouldn't have been available.

We ended up taking the Cheyenne II. With the 80 kt winds at FL250, we were doing 300 kts over the ground on 400 pph combined, made it there in just under 4 hours including the climb and an approach. Flying back home we stopped for clearing customs on what by then was the western edge of that bad weather. Flying home we were at FL200 for both legs. 500 pph combined and only 180 kts GS. But we had a nice 4,000 ft cabin pressure, which was comfortable for crew and passengers.

It was 10 hours of flight time. Part 91 operation and I've had much longer days than that, but it was nicer having two people for that long in one day.