Obviously some people do..and you`ve clarified that you`re not one of them. Thanks for sharing.
P-3 or CP-140?
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1887
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 6:53 am
- Location: On final so get off the damn runway!
Re: P-3 or CP-140?
-
- Rank 8
- Posts: 899
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:16 pm
- Location: A sigma left of the top of the bell curve
Re: P-3 or CP-140?
When I flew Metros, ATC sometimes called them Merlins, and when I flew 1900s they sometimes called them Super King Airs. In every circumstance, I always filed a complaint directly with the Minister of Transport.
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1989
- Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am
Re: P-3 or CP-140?
Super king air is the marketing name for the 200/300 series. The 1900 is the super duper king air.
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1887
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 6:53 am
- Location: On final so get off the damn runway!
Re: P-3 or CP-140?
Before they added the type designator "B190", the Beech 1900 was filed as BE02, which caused confusion with the Beech 200.
- CH124 Driver
- Rank 2
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2005 12:01 pm
- Location: 12 Wing
Re: P-3 or CP-140?
The GPH 204A is the military flight planning guide. It details the ICAO flight plan and what to put where. We don’t use RCAF type designators, we use ICAO ones. In 15 years of flying Sea Kings, I only ever entered S61 as the aircraft type. CT156 Harvard II was entered as TEX2, CH148 Cyclone is entered as S92. And so on.
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1887
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 6:53 am
- Location: On final so get off the damn runway!
Re: P-3 or CP-140?
This made me chuckle. Shouldn't it be PC9? Just kidding...just kidding....
- CH124 Driver
- Rank 2
- Posts: 63
- Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2005 12:01 pm
- Location: 12 Wing
Re: P-3 or CP-140?
If it were a PC9, yes. But it’s not. They’re different with different designators.
https://www.icao.int/publications/DOC86 ... earch.aspx
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1887
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 6:53 am
- Location: On final so get off the damn runway!
Re: P-3 or CP-140?
True in a sense but it' not always the case. An example is the Russian built Lisunov Li-2, a copy of the DC-3 where no parts are compatible due to the fact that they are all measured in metric, but shares the same ICAO designator of DC-3. The Beech Mk. II (aka Texan II/Harvard II) is essentially a Pilatus PC-9 but has it's own designator.CH124 Driver wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 2:01 pmIf it were a PC9, yes. But it’s not. They’re different with different designators.
https://www.icao.int/publications/DOC86 ... earch.aspx
Re: P-3 or CP-140?
I used to be a tech on the aurora and I have flown many time with the aircraft in the us, Canada and internationally. I can’t remember them using the p3 designator in Canada but I heard them use it many times outside Canada. They would use it with their CANFORCE callsign.
Basically, the first aurora was a p3 airframe with the s2 Vikings avionics suite but with the latest bloc II and III avionics, it’s a totally different animal today that has nothing to do with the original.
Basically, the first aurora was a p3 airframe with the s2 Vikings avionics suite but with the latest bloc II and III avionics, it’s a totally different animal today that has nothing to do with the original.