The End of SEIFR?

[Snowgoose]

So? It can glide to shore. BFD! In that neighborhood? Okay, you've made it to shore? It's your move.

And that has nothing to do with the SEIFR argument. Now you're talking about how good your survival gear is.

[Snowgoose]

I suspect there's a very accurate chart in the POH that'll give you that answer with out pulling out the whiz wheel and a calculator. After all you'd have a constantly changing TAS due to altitude, which I don't feel like figuring out for the sake of this argument. The fact that you don't know what your critical winds are is what's really illuminating. If it were my ass on the line, you can be sure that I'd know exactly what I could get away with using the direct route.

The POH has a glide time and distance chart. Knowing what your critical wind is doesn't matter. All that matters is what you are grounding and how far you have to go when you are gliding. If it's too low change your heading. Look at the map, there's multiple places anywhere along that route within 35 to 40 miles. Plus since there are rarely fronts and lows tend to shut everything down, the strongest winds you see are 30-40kts. I worked it out and your average true airspeed for your glide would be 138 kts (160 up high, 115 down low). So if you have to glide 40nm in 24 mins (the worst case) you need to ground 100kts. So 38kts in the teeth is your critical windspeed. Turn 30 degrees and it's a 32 knots headwind.

Obviously you don't ever want to fly in a Pilatus. You'd be white knuckled and just wouldn't enjoy the warm quiet cabin. I just hope you are never looking for a job and the only gig going is a PC-12 deal. Then you might have to eat crow. So enough already. You'll make land. That's the SE requirement.

[Four1oh]

dude, I worked in that area for almost 7 years, don't tell me how light the winds are, go sell bullshit somewhere else. 38 kts at those altitudes would be the average.

JSYK, I'd be happy to fly day VFR in your precious PC12, but it won't be at night, and won't be IFR, you can be rest assured I value my own skin more than that. Hey, if you time builders want to justify SEIFR, go for it, but don't go blowing smoke up the rest of our asses. You can justify anything if you want to badly enough.

[Snowgoose]

dude, I worked in that area for almost 7 years, don't tell me how light the winds are, go sell bullshit somewhere else. 38 kts at those altitudes would be the average.

JSYK, I'd be happy to fly day VFR in your precious PC12, but it won't be at night, and won't be IFR, you can be rest assured I value my own skin more than that. Hey, if you time builders want to justify SEIFR, go for it, but don't go blowing smoke up the rest of our asses. You can justify anything if you want to badly enough.

Just the same, you can argue against anything for the sake of arguing. If you are so afraid of crashing why are you in aviation? Flying is inherently dangerous in case you were curious. Having one engine doesn't mean you will crash more often. The plenty of stats out there to prove it.

[Four1oh]

dude, I worked in that area for almost 7 years, don't tell me how light the winds are, go sell bullshit somewhere else. 38 kts at those altitudes would be the average.

JSYK, I'd be happy to fly day VFR in your precious PC12, but it won't be at night, and won't be IFR, you can be rest assured I value my own skin more than that. Hey, if you time builders want to justify SEIFR, go for it, but don't go blowing smoke up the rest of our asses. You can justify anything if you want to badly enough.

Just the same, you can argue against anything for the sake of arguing. If you are so afraid of crashing why are you in aviation? Flying is inherently dangerous in case you were curious. Having one engine doesn't mean you will crash more often. The plenty of stats out there to prove it.

which, once again, I point out how many single engine 705 operations exist. It's about minimizing your risks. I'm not afraid of flying single engine aircrafts, I have over 1500 hours flying them. But I never flew them commercially at night or IFR, which, once again is a point I'm trying to make.

What stats? Enlighten me. 75% of statistics are made up, I hear.

[Doc]

Sno...do you sleep at that computer?

[Snowgoose]

705 = big. 150,000 lbs of thrust in the tail isn't practical. Turbo props aren't fast enough for long haul. That's why there's no 705 carriers.

Here's the stats. Copied from a previous post which was copied from a website trying to silence naysayers.

From the ntsb: All events between 1/1/2000 to 10/27/2005

Pilatus PC-12

Fatal Accident: 2
Non Fatal: 7
Incidents: 1
Engine Failure (Fatal/Non-Fatal/Incidents): 2

Active Worldwide: 564
Active in the USA: 370

Beechcraft BE 200

Fatal Accident: 11
Non Fatal: 21
Incidents: 3
Engine Failure (Fatal/Non-Fatal/Incidents): 2

Active Worldwide: 2,521
Active in the USA: 1,153

Since the beginning of 2000, for 1,153 BE 200 Aircraft there have been 2 accidents attributed to Engine Failure.

Which equates to:

PC12

2/370 = 0.0054 x 100 = 0.54%. Therefore the Risk Factor of having an Accident in a PC-12 due to Engine Failure equals 0.54%.

BE20

2/1,153 = 0.0017 x 100 = 0.17%. Therefore the Risk Factor of having an Accident in a BE 200 due to Engine Failure equals 0.17%.


0.54/0.17 = 3.176.

Ok, 3 times more likely to have an accident due to an engine failure. But both airplanes still less than 1% and engine failure means glide. If you don't glide to an airport it gets classified as an accident I bet.

Consider this though,

Since the beginning of 2000, for 370 PC-12 Aircraft there have been 2 two fatal accidents

Since the beginning of 2000, for 1,153 BE 200 Aircraft there have been 11 fatal accidents.

Which equates to:

2/370 = 0.0054 x 100 = 0.54%. Therefore the Risk Factor of having a fatal Accident in a PC-12 equals 0.54%.

11/1,153 = 0.0095 x 100 = 0.95%. Therefore the Risk Factor of having an Accident in a BE 200 equals 0.95%

0.54/0.95 = 0.568

Therefore the likelihood of having a fatal Accident in a PC-12 is about half of that of a BE 200.

Both those fatal accidents on the PC-12 were pilot error. Search the database for the King Air ones if you like.

[Four1oh]

wow, that's great stuff, now here's my statistics:

If you lose an engine in a PC12, you are 100% guaranteed to become a glider.
If you lose an engine in a BE200, you are 100% still running on 1 engine.

How does that work for you?

[Red Line]

Both those statements are not 100% correct.

[Four1oh]

Both those statements are not 100% correct.

I already stated that statistics are fabricated 75% of the time...

[wtf_over]

If you lose an engine in a BE200, you are 100% still running on 1 engine.

I do recall an unscheduled stop in gimly mb by AC, and another in the azors by AT where one engine stopped than the other one stopped.

me thinks the BE20 might be vulnerable to this type of failure.

[Four1oh]

if that helps you get through the day, knock your socks off.

[Cat Driver]

This argument is going nowhere fast.

[CD]

[wtf_over]

This argument is going nowhere fast

this is avcanada WTF do you think it's going to go

[Doc]

You can always go elsewhere.