PanEuropean wrote:[The aircraft doesn't have the range to make it from the West coast of North America to Hawaii. Several people have tried this in the past - some succeeded, but at least two Twin Otters have been ditched in the sea just short of Hawaii while making the attempt.

In a best-case scenario, with both wing tanks and a 9 barrel ferry system fitted, the aircraft can carry 6,253 pounds of usable fuel. Assuming a specific range of .266 of a nautical mile per pound of fuel burned (keep in mind that the aircraft is operating at very high weights, hence SFC is worse than usual), that works out to 1,660 miles before all the fuel is exhausted. The shortest point-to-point distance from North America to Hawaii is over 2,000 miles. It just can't be done legally or safely.

Michael

I beg to defer, I've had three friends do the Hawaii trip with Twin Otters accumulatively over 70 times Legally and Safely.

I agree that I wouldn't do the trip with the antiquated barrel system, but what I can't figure is why you wouldn't use fuel bladders? I can't remember the range but I believe it's over 17hrs.

Lurch

Hello Lurch:

I guess it comes down to the question "How much risk are you willing to accept?" The first question to ponder, when making a route analysis for a ferry of a Twin Otter from anywhere in North America to Hawaii, is the wet footprint of the aircraft. By this I mean what will happen if one engine fails during the first part of the flight when the aircraft is over the ocean, and there is no land nearby.

By way of example, I'm aware of one pilot who flew a Twin Otter from Adak (PADK) to Japan. You're probably aware of this particular flight also. I am sure that was less expensive than flying through Russia, but whether it was legal (from a MTOW point of view) or safe (from a wet footprint point of view) is, uh, 'uncertain'. It also may have been 'culturally appropriate' for that particular operator at the time, but then again, in that same decade, so was a Twin Otter ferry flight departing out of Rothera, Antarctica that ended very tragically.

'Best Industry Practices' tend to tighten up as time goes on, and activities that may have been acceptable in the past are not always acceptable today. I'm pretty conservative, which is why I stick to the 'tortoise and hare' analogy I made earlier in this narrative - the slow moving, cautious tortoise will always get there, whereas the hare doesn't always make it.

Michael

How long is the trip to Hawaii in an Otter? Is Midway still closed or did a private contractor take it over? The US released a statement that they would no longer operate it a while back. I think it's a longer trip on the other side to Japan.

To the best of my knowledge, Midway (PMDY) is still open and operating. It's a little over 1,400 miles from Adak (PADK) to Midway, and about 1,150 miles from Midway to Honolulu. So, on the face of it, that route could be viable. But, closer investigation reveals that the whole Aleutian Island chain is not a good place to be with a non-de-iced aircraft in the wintertime, and the winds generated by the Aleutian Low in the wintertime are not favourable for the Adak to Midway sector. In the summertime, with the right winds, it might be a suitable route to Hawaii and then onwards to the South Pacific.

The image below shows the route PADK to PMDY and PMDY to PHNL superimposed over the weather that exists today (i.e. at the time I wrote this reply). Not favourable...

Michael

Once you made it to PADK I don't think PMDY is going to be a short cut to Japan.

I only brought up PMDY because if one was taking Lurch's routing it is between Hawaii and Japan making that part somewhat shorter. I don't know how often there's icing from San Francisco to Hawaii which at around 2400 miles is farther than PADK to PMDY.

Beefitarian wrote:Once you made it to PADK I don't think PMDY is going to be a short cut to Japan...

Yes, you are correct, what you say makes sense. What I was alluding to (I should have said it more clearly) was that Adak to Midway to Hawaii could be a viable alternative for someone wanting to ferry a small aircraft to somewhere in the South Pacific. If you have to ferry a small aircraft to Asia, and don't have the range to go from North America to Hawaii, then the route I described earlier through the Bering Strait is about the only option.

Michael

, that works out to 1,660 miles before all the fuel is exhausted. The shortest point-to-point distance from North America to Hawaii is over 2,000 miles. It just can't be done legally or safely.


Hello Michael,

And all the others following the posts.... It was interesting stumbling across this tale and it was obvious you spent a lot of time documenting your trip with photos and so on, that people appreciate.

However, this statement of yours is simply your opinion regarding safely and completely inaccurate regarding legally. Having 198 oceanic crossings myself, both Atlantic and Pacific in a variety of aircraft, I am familiar with the barrel system you used. It is not in great favour among ferry pilots for the most part, and on my longest Pacific flights, bladder or form-made tanks are far superior and indeed give you the fuel necessary for the California-Hawaii leg. To use your personal opinion to try and convince people that the routing is somehow unsafe, and even worse, illegal, is preposterous!

You are clever enough by saying a typical Socratic argument....if we assume.....and then make all arguments meaningless if one accepts your assumptions..

Of course, backing up and examining your assumptions, and one quickly sees that there is no logic to the conclusion.

Safety---your argument would preclude all single-engine ferries requiring one to fly over water, as an engine out would mean a ditching. Of course some aircraft go down for a variety of reasons and some pilots have taken off with poor weather and reserves, but it is still a viable delivery method and has huge advantages.

Legally--completely inaccurate statement.

So entertaining, but your opinions and statements are better for the "not been there" readers. Don't try and pull a fast one with the experienced......

Hello Robert:

Welcome to the AvCanada forum.

In this discussion thread, I documented a ferry flight that I made. I did this for the benefit of others who may need to fly this same route in the future in any type of aircraft, not necessarily a Twin Otter. Some months ago, I posted an inquiry on Pprune about using UHMA, UHMM, and UHWW in Russia, and found that there was very little information available about these airports. I made a promise in that discussion on Pprune that I would share with others whatever information I learned about those airports on this trip. That is why I documented my trip here.

At the bottom of page 2 of this discussion, below where I posted several pictures showing the ferry fuel system installed in this aircraft I used and after I had described the ferry fuel system I was using in considerable detail, forum member Lurch asked me why I didn't go via Hawaii. That was a reasonable question, and I answered his question at face value as follows (bold emphasis added for your benefit below):

PanEuropean wrote:In a best-case scenario, with both wing tanks and a 9 barrel ferry system fitted, the aircraft can carry 6,253 pounds of usable fuel. Assuming a specific range of .266 of a nautical mile per pound of fuel burned (keep in mind that the aircraft is operating at very high weights, hence SFC is worse than usual), that works out to 1,660 miles before all the fuel is exhausted. The shortest point-to-point distance from North America to Hawaii is over 2,000 miles. It just can't be done legally or safely.

I am sure that you will agree that if the aircraft only has fuel for 1,600 NM on board, it cannot legally or safely accomplish a flight that is over 2,000 NM. Bob, please only read the 'black ink' in my post, don't read anything that isn't there.

Bob, please also keep in mind that I made my posts about the flight that I made, using the aircraft that I flew. Furthermore, even though I don't post anonymously here, anything I have ever written here on AvCanada is, quite understandably, my personal expression only.

If other people in this world elect to carry more or less fuel when ferrying aircraft, then their range will be greater or less than what my range was. Similarly, if I make a ferry flight in the future with an aircraft that carries more or less fuel than I did on this flight, my range on that future flight will be greater or less than it was on this specific flight.

Michael

I want to thank you for sharing your experiences and airmanship with us Michael.

I am retired now and like you I always took the safest route when possible.

Looking back on some of the ferry flights I did that required a ferry permit due to over legal gross weight I understand the stress factor in the drift down scenario if one loses an engine before you burn off the excess weight you have to carry in fuel.

Hope to meet you one of these days.

. ..

From the looks of things on Google maps Johnston Atoll would be a more likely stop if you were taking that route, but man that's a lot of water. There is nothing but Ocean between North America and Hawaii. I think it was over 5 hours in WestJet's 737.

Hello Robert???

It appeared that you were answering my post, which you did very well. Exactly correct and I am glad you pointed it out, that with the installed ferry tank system, the trip could not be carried out to Hawaii, and with that system, that routing would be both illegal and foolish. I never used more than 50% of a predicted forecast of tailwinds when making fuel calculations and add to headwind predictions.... And even then, I liked a 3 hour reserve when I landed.

Of course, when I fly the Challenger, my "daily" ride, we don't have fuel like that....but I started ferrying when my best friend, colleague and mentor still carried almanacs and a sextant across the ocean! But heh, he never got lost too bad or painted into a corner, as opposed to the ADF and dead reckoning lot!

Just had a ferry flight to India, and over Scotland, I saw that we would arrive in Denmark with "only" 1:20 minutes of fuel, which most would find fine, but the weather was not the best, and I just stopped in Wick for the night. Who needs pucker factor at all for the last hour of the day? ...and the 1:20 was predicated on the tailwinds continuing.

Nope....

So we agree on everything it seems except my name, which is James. Unless you were answering someone else's post!

Fly safe! Ciao and greetings from Tunis!

Do you move many Twin Otters Derryaero? What else do you ferry?

I have to be honest though and it might just be ingnorance with the beast. That sounds like a long trip over water with wheels. I'd be pretty nervous for at least the first couple times.

This post got really quiet, really fast......?????
I was really enjoying the banter and the wrong names getting thrown into the fray ...... ??

I am curious Michael ..... How many ferry trips have you actually done? It would appear that there are some very experienced ferry pilots out there that have some valuable and real experience to pass on.

Just askin.....???

MacStork wrote:This post got really quiet, really fast......?????
I was really enjoying the banter and the wrong names getting thrown into the fray ...... ??

I am curious Michael ..... How many ferry trips have you actually done? It would appear that there are some very experienced ferry pilots out there that have some valuable and real experience to pass on.

Just askin.....???

I've only ferried the twin otter extensive distances four times.. Ohh... right.. You're asking PanEuropean Michael

Cheers,
The other Michael

This was probably the best thread hijack ever. Normally I would have split the topic. But, reading about a Twin Otter ferry flight while I was doing one myself... Priceless!

Good to see you haven't lost your instructor ability Micheal. Somewhere in my Otter time there is a couple thousand hours of ferrying to and from Antarctica. Generally we learn something new every trip. It was nice to be able to learn from someone else.

I will try to see if I can't make a few notes and describe ours.

Cheers,
J C

Beefitarian wrote:Do you move many Twin Otters Derryaero? What else do you ferry?

I have to be honest though and it might just be ingnorance with the beast. That sounds like a long trip over water with wheels. I'd be pretty nervous for at least the first couple times.

Hi Beef....
Too me, water is water ...... the end result if you go in will probably be the same, if you survive the initial impact. And it doesn't matter if it on wheels or floats. If it is cold water and 60-100 foot swells..... ie., the Drake Passage ..... you will die in about 4 minutes. If it is warmer water and there is no one around to pull you out, then obviously it will take longer.
Also.....it doesn't matter if you are 2 miles from shore or 1000 miles from shore. There is not going to be anyone around to help you.
I was always pretty nervous too ...... but I trusted those beautiful PT6 engines.
I also found it a tad easier at night ...... I could not see the swells.
I remember meeting two Danes in REK one time. They were each ferrying one of those old Dorniers with the engines on the pods. We were heading east bound and they were heading west bound. They each had their sons (about 12 or 13) with them. I will never forget that. It must have been a hell of a trip! Not one I would want to do though.
Great post....I love to hear about other ferry trips. There is always a good story somewhere on a ferry trip!

If the water is rough I guess floats won't help, so I understand that but I'd have a nice false sense of security.

If I survive impact fairly unharmed and am 2 miles from shore, I am floating, not going to freeze and there's nothing about to eat me, I'm going to try to get there. Slow and steady is the key for me to float that distance, the days of me making a swim for it and cramping up are behind me.

1000 miles? I suppose I talk to God until he sends help or I finally stop wondering if he's there.

Going over all that snow the long way on wheels may not be much better. I have been fortunate to always have made it to pavement, gravel or nice smooth grass every landing so far. My biggest water crossing was Chilliwack to Qualicum via Texada in a mighty Warrior II, summertime. Swells did not look bad that day.

Hey Michael!

I am the air traffic controller you spoke with going through the Seattle airspace! Can't wait to hear more about your trip! I appreciate the info about this web site and will now be able to keep up with your flight!

Have a great trip and stay safe!

Karen

MacStork wrote:This post got really quiet, really fast......?????

Perhaps that is because I have ceased to post here on AvCanada (this will be my last post) because a Canadian freelance ferry pilot who chooses to fly direct from North America to Hawaii in the same type of aircraft sent a letter to my employer complaining that my posts in this thread were slanderous to him, and that he was losing business as a result of my posts. That was certainly not my intention, I have only posted about the ferry flights I made in order to provide information to others who might have to follow the same routes in other small aircraft in the future.

That notwithstanding, because I don't post anonymously (it's not hard to figure out who I am or who I work for), I'm out of here. That's not my employer's decision, it is mine. I have enjoyed being a contributor here over the past few years, and I wish all of you well in the future.

MacStork wrote:I am curious Michael ..... How many ferry trips have you actually done?

About 25 inter-continental ferries since 1989. Antarctic to Europe via Canada, Canada to Seychelles (described in another post here on AvCanada last year), various African countries to Europe and vice-versa, Europe to Asia, Canada to Asia, Canada to South America, etc. Right now I am in the middle of a Canada to Tahiti ferry. I am also the author of the AFMs for the Series 300 and 400 Twin Otter.

Best regards to all,

Michael

(this will be my last post)

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

I enjoyed reading your stories very much! Thanks a lot for that.

Someone is claiming they are losing business because you wrote about flying a longer route that is more expensive?

That is just silly.

Beefitarian wrote:Someone is claiming they are losing business because you wrote about flying a longer route that is more expensive?

That is just silly.

Agreed - damn silly.
Michael, I'm sorry you'll no longer be contributing. I am nowhere near remotely qualified to undertake the kind of work you do, but I enjoyed reading your postings and found them hugely informative. You'll be missed.

Michael,

Sorry to hear about your companies decision, your contributions will be greatly missed.

The reader who chose to send a letter to your employee has done a great disservice to the rest of the readers of this thread. Aviation is a business that continues to get safer by the sharing of information throughout the industry. There has to be a balance between the passing of ideas and the protection of our own personal and corporate interests.

Thank you Michael for your contributions, and a great big thumbs down to the person who wrote the letter to your employer. I'll be interested to see if he has the guts to post his explanation for his actions on here, I suspect not.

amraam

I'll be interested to see if he has the guts to post his explanation for his actions on here, I suspect not.

The internet has some real down sides.....anonymity is the biggest downside on these forums.

Cat Driver:::

. .

Cat Driver wrote:

I'll be interested to see if he has the guts to post his explanation for his actions on here, I suspect not.

The internet has some real down sides.....anonymity is the biggest downside on these forums.

Cat Driver:::

. .

I hate to say it Cat, but this is a strong case where remaining anonymous is of some advantage to the use of the forum. If Michael had remained so, we would still have his input. What is the advantage to knowing who the speaker is? So they can be censured if you don't like what they have to say? It is a public forum after all, not a private one, or at least the mods have not tried to make it so, which would be the only other alternative to protect speakers like Michael or yourself.

Anyhow, thanks for the time and the story Michael, it was appreciated.