King Air 90 Training

[f.o.ever]

Good Morning,

We are looking at purchasing a King Air 90 or 100 for personal use (myself and business partners). Any ideas as to where we can go about purchasing training and cost of said training?

[vrrotate]

Well you could just do all the training in the aircraft with somebody who is qualified to train on a king air 90. Then find an examiner who can do a ride for you. But I wouldn't recommend that. Go to Flight Safety or SIMCOM and get a full initial course. For the type/amount of flying you will be doing, it will be invaluable. Of course I don't know your or the other's experience so if you all have King Air time already then option one could be fine. However in my view you're basically only as good as your last training course so make sure it's good. My 2 cents.

[cdnpilot77]

https://www.flightsafety.com/fs_locatio ... 2.21596782

[ahramin]

It's best to practice dealing with potential problems in as realistic a setting as possible, hence the SIMCOM and Flight Safety recommendations. One is more expensive than the other but you're looking at roughly 10k. Instructor quality is highly variable at both companies. Flight Safety has much better training materials and the Wichita site recommended above has developped all their checklists with Beechcraft and are the best available.

Make sure you also budget for 20 or so hours of line indoc with a pilot experienced in your aircraft and the way you plan to operate it. People that learn a completely new aircraft type in a simulator and then jump into the aircraft on their own can come up with the goofiest procedures. Pm for details.

[Colonel Sanders]

We are looking at purchasing a King Air 90 or 100 for personal use

That's a really bad idea in Canada. In the
USA, you can do exactly what you want under
part 91, but in Canada, people are a lot stupider
and need a lot more government "help" in the
form of a CAR 604 POC to fly a docile King Air.

That's a paperwork nightmare that you don't
want to touch.

Get a C421 instead. You can fly it privately
without the TC hassle.

See, in Canada people are really stupid and
can't operate a turbine without TC's "help".
Stick to a piston, even though it's an inferior
engine with a higher pilot workload, in order
to keep the government happy.

Once you realize that the citizens in Canada
serve the government (instead of the other
'way 'round) all sorts of things start to make
sense.

PS It's a real shame. About a year ago, I took
a trip in a part 91 King Air 200, as a pax in the
back. A 17 year old was PIC:



Remember that when people here try to justify
their high taxes and big government and POC
overhead by saying that a King Air is a "fire
breathing dragon". A 17 year old can fly it,
just fine.

[f.o.ever]

Thanks for all the replies,

In keeping with the Colonels latest remarks, is there any other aircraft that is comparable to the King Air without all the gov't red tape as described above?

Requirements:

- Flights less than 500NM
- All weather
- Lower pilot workload is preferable
- We are all experienced pilots (multi ifr, piston and turbine)
- Reasonable cost of ownership/operation

[Colonel Sanders]

C421, Navajo, P Baron?

Not sure how many pounds you need to carry.

You might be able to run a TBM-700 or Meridian
or PC-12 without a POC, but they're all single
engine. Again, TC pushing you towards a lower
level of safety.

A really good autopilot and a really good IFR GPS
is a necessity for this kind of operation, IMHO.

[f.o.ever]

Absolutely agree,

I've never thought about going the C421 route. We do like the ability to carry 8 pax with a decent load of fuel

[oldtimer]

I have absolutly zero time in any pressurized piston pounder and none in a King Air 90 but lots of time in a Cheyenne, King Air 100,200,B200 and 350. It is my humble opinion that the King Air is the route to go. Sure the 604 POC is a headache but the safety and performance of the King Air makes the journey worthwhile. A big problem solved by Flight Safety and other sim trainers is the training manuals and the basic knowledge of the istructors. Flight Safety in a turn key operation with all the manuals and training aids.
The idea of line indoctrination is a great idea. Most excessive wear and tear on an airplane comes from inexperienced pilots.
After the training, one area you MAY want to be aware of is that for an up and coming commercial pilot, King Air time is valuable so you want to be aware of the wannabes who have lots of Parker Pen time but little or poor training who would love to give you line indoc training. The title is a LLP-ba. Looks like pilot, but aint.

[Mr. T]

If you're set on something reliable away from the piston engine, a TBM or a PC12 would be a great choice. They will haul 8 people and lots of fuel, with pilot oriented controls, single pilot (if you choose) to a lot of places. The cabin is larger than a 90, burns half the fuel, will likely have more modern avionics.

[ahramin]

I wouldn't pick your aircraft type based on whether or not it requires a POC. While I agree with CS about the insanity of requiring one for situations like yours, it's not a big deal. I have set up several POCs for King Airs including MSA and SMS for under 4k.

[timel]

PC12 is faster than the k90 flies higher less comsumption with one turbine. Much more enpensive too. Never flew pc12 though but heard good things about it. For private sounds like a perfect aircraft.

[timel]

C421, Navajo, P Baron?

Not sure how many pounds you need to carry.

You might be able to run a TBM-700 or Meridian
or PC-12 without a POC, but they're all single
engine. Again, TC pushing you towards a lower
level of safety.

A really good autopilot and a really good IFR GPS
is a necessity for this kind of operation, IMHO.

Pt-6 turbine are now extremely reliable. Twin always better for sure but $$$$
At least the pc12 glides more than the king and good luck not kissing the ground with engine failure after V1 with the k90 and 100 if you are heavy during a hot day.
Flight safety is a great idea. A good auto pilot helps for sure.

[Colonel Sanders]

I have set up several POCs

I am in awe of your paperpushing ability.
There's nobody around here that can do that.

One question: how long did it take? I have
been told that after you acquire the aircraft,
TC insists that it sit without being flown for
at least six to nine months before you can
get your POC. Some sort of obscure bureaucratic
tax.

Also, does the AMO come for free?

[x-wind]

Transport Canada does King Air 90 training in Ottawa with their level C sim.

[Illya Kuryakin]

Educate me Colonel.
Why can I go buy a Navajo, etc., and just bugger off with it, but I can't with a 90?
Arguably, a 421 has a lot more "going on" than a 90?

I know if I win 649, I'll just grab a 90, and TC can blow goats.

Illya

[Illya Kuryakin]

Sometimes TC has me shaking my head. Single pilot IFR, we have to use ground based approach aids? GPS is SO much easier. To new fangled for the dinosaurs at TC I guess?
Illya

[Colonel Sanders]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanny_state

Nanny state is a term of British origin that conveys a view that a government or its policies are overprotective or interfering unduly with personal choice. The term "nanny state" likens government to the role that a nanny has in child rearing.

I know one of the two guys that developed
CAR 604, all those years ago. Their intent
was to simply keep some records of pilot
training.

Of course, it exploded into the bureaucratic
nightmare that we have today. Canadians just
can't get enough big government and high taxes.

[ahramin]

One question: how long did it take?

Shortest time four days, longest three weeks. In my experience the POC paperwork has always been ready before the aircraft is.

[single_swine_herder]

And the manuals are dead easy to customize by doing a "find & replace" using MS Word and few other tiny touch-ups to make the procedures your own At least that's my experience.

[Aviatorcaptain]

Thanks for all the replies,

In keeping with the Colonels latest remarks, is there any other aircraft that is comparable to the King Air without all the gov't red tape as described above?

Requirements:

- Flights less than 500NM
- All weather
- Lower pilot workload is preferable
- We are all experienced pilots (multi ifr, piston and turbine)
- Reasonable cost of ownership/operation

If you want to avoid the paperwork nightmare I'd say the Navajo Chieftain best suits your needs!
Piper meridian as someone mentioned is a fun airplane but not practical if you need to haul a load.

[cmadude]

All twin turbine under 12,575 lbs. do not require a POC unless you wish to do RNAV approaches, RVSM and any other items that require OPs specs.

King Air 200 and below, fly like a Cessna 172. Sorta

[leftoftrack]

All twin turbine under 12,575 lbs. do not require a POC unless you wish to do RNAV approaches, RVSM and any other items that require OPs specs.

King Air 200 and below, fly like a Cessna 172. Sorta

12566lbs

[azimuthaviation]

Shortest time four days

You submitted an application for an OC and TC got back in four days? It takes them two hours to decide where theyre going for lunch.

[iflyforpie]

All twin turbine under 12,575 lbs. do not require a POC unless you wish to do RNAV approaches, RVSM and any other items that require OPs specs.

King Air 200 and below, fly like a Cessna 172. Sorta

12566lbs

5700 kgs.