King Air 90

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

Post Reply
E-Flyer
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 985
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:43 pm

King Air 90

Post by E-Flyer »

Hey, I notice that the service ceiling is well above 13 000 feet, my question is, how come this plane isn't pressurized? is it required for 10% of the pax to actually wear oxygen in this plane after 30min above 10 000 feet and look like ww2 pilots?

Also, if you want to buy a Single Pilot Multi Turboprop airplane like the B90 but want to throw two pilot's in there, I am right to say that you need an SOP correct?

And the captain does not have to hold an ATPL because he/she isn't commanding a multi crew airplane, but would writing an SOP make this a multi crew airplane and thereby require the captain to have an ATPL?

Also, if I am paying my pilots for their PPC on the plane, would I have to designate a Chief Pilot to carry out their recurrency rides every 6 months? or would I just have to send them back to where they got their initial PPC training?

Last but not least, if I wanted to throw two commercial pilot's into this plane where one of them acts as F/O on one of the legs and acts as Captain on the second leg, would there have to be a special legal requirement for that or is it just mentioned in the SOP that pilots will switch legs accordingly and log PIC time on one of the 2 legs?
---------- ADS -----------
 
whiteguy
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1059
Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 1:33 pm
Location: YYC

Re: King Air 90

Post by whiteguy »

It is pressurized!
---------- ADS -----------
 
jetflightinstructor
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 5:13 am

Re: King Air 90

Post by jetflightinstructor »

Hey, I notice that the service ceiling is well above 13 000 feet, my question is, how come this plane isn't pressurized?
It is pressurized. Get it fixed if not. Thats criminal to burn fuel at 10000 feet on a turbine airplane.
is it required for 10% of the pax to actually wear oxygen in this plane after 30min above 10 000 feet and look like ww2 pilots?
and the 90% remaining die?

And the captain does not have to hold an ATPL because he/she isn't commanding a multi crew airplane, but would writing an SOP make this a multi crew airplane and thereby require the captain to have an ATPL?
The PIC doesnt need an ATPL. (on a medevac flight, the government could ask one though).

Also, if I am paying my pilots for their PPC on the plane, would I have to designate a Chief Pilot to carry out their recurrency rides every 6 months? or would I just have to send them back to where they got their initial PPC training?
No the chief pilot is not automatically entitled to conduct the renewal. And thats each year.
Also, if you want to buy a Single Pilot Multi Turboprop airplane like the B90 but want to throw two pilot's in there, I am right to say that you need an SOP correct?
yes approved by TC.

Last but not least, if I wanted to throw two commercial pilot's into this plane where one of them acts as F/O on one of the legs and acts as Captain on the second leg, would there have to be a special legal requirement for that or is it just mentioned in the SOP that pilots will switch legs accordingly and log PIC time on one of the 2 legs?


Then they have to be checked on both seat.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
square
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 951
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 4:36 pm

Re: King Air 90

Post by square »

With under 10 passengers, you operate under 703 regs and so I don't think you need SOPs, those are a legal requirement for 704 and up only. If you want the cojoe to be able to log time though, it has to be in your COM. And swapping captains is fairly common, they're called co-captains. Jetflightinstructor, E-Flyer is correct that you only need oxygen for 10% of the passengers above 10,000 feet for > 30 minutes, it's when you go above 13,000 unpressurized that they all need oxygen. There's enough oxygen below 13,000 for pax to listen to their ipods and sleep in the back.
Thats criminal to burn fuel at 10000 feet on a turbine airplane.
You better incarcerate those hoodlum Caravan/BE99/etc drivers then!
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
Cat Driver
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 18921
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 8:31 pm

Re: King Air 90

Post by Cat Driver »

What is the big deal about being able to fly from either seat?

What happens when you get in a tandem seat airplane, do you get a split personality tugging you both left and right? :mrgreen:
---------- ADS -----------
 
The hardest thing about flying is knowing when to say no


After over a half a century of flying no one ever died because of my decision not to fly.
jetflightinstructor
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 5:13 am

Re: King Air 90

Post by jetflightinstructor »

You better incarcerate those hoodlum Caravan/BE99/etc drivers then!
well... those driver are not given the choice.... :wink: Good point though.
---------- ADS -----------
 
E-Flyer
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 985
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:43 pm

Re: King Air 90

Post by E-Flyer »

jetflightinstructor wrote:
Hey, I notice that the service ceiling is well above 13 000 feet, my question is, how come this plane isn't pressurized?
It is pressurized. Get it fixed if not. Thats criminal to burn fuel at 10000 feet on a turbine airplane.
is it required for 10% of the pax to actually wear oxygen in this plane after 30min above 10 000 feet and look like ww2 pilots?
and the 90% remaining die?

And the captain does not have to hold an ATPL because he/she isn't commanding a multi crew airplane, but would writing an SOP make this a multi crew airplane and thereby require the captain to have an ATPL?
The PIC doesnt need an ATPL. (on a medevac flight, the government could ask one though).

Also, if I am paying my pilots for their PPC on the plane, would I have to designate a Chief Pilot to carry out their recurrency rides every 6 months? or would I just have to send them back to where they got their initial PPC training?
No the chief pilot is not automatically entitled to conduct the renewal. And thats each year.
Also, if you want to buy a Single Pilot Multi Turboprop airplane like the B90 but want to throw two pilot's in there, I am right to say that you need an SOP correct?
yes approved by TC.

Last but not least, if I wanted to throw two commercial pilot's into this plane where one of them acts as F/O on one of the legs and acts as Captain on the second leg, would there have to be a special legal requirement for that or is it just mentioned in the SOP that pilots will switch legs accordingly and log PIC time on one of the 2 legs?


Then they have to be checked on both seat.
I thought it wasn't pressurized cause I read it on the dynamic aviation website, wasn't able to find the info on the beech website. Anyway thanks !

Another question, since I don't need an SOP under 703, would I just need a COM that is approved by TC if I want to have two pilots in there?

Who would designate that the pilots are okay to fly from both right and left seat if there's no CP?

Can't I just buy the airplane as private and not make it a commercial op? or would it be mandatory to make it a Commercial Operation if I am paying pilots? Cause couldn't a person get himself a plane and pay two pilots to fly it for him?


Thanks !
---------- ADS -----------
 
tired of the ground
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 344
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2004 5:38 pm

Re: King Air 90

Post by tired of the ground »

ANY operation that runs 2 crew needs "appproved" SOP's. If you aren't taking credit for the co-jo being there and they are in fact just along for the ride then it's not required.

I believe the dynamic aviation 90's are a65 models which where queen airs fitted with pt6's, square windows and all. They may not be pressurized at all.
---------- ADS -----------
 
E-Flyer
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 985
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:43 pm

Re: King Air 90

Post by E-Flyer »

okay ... so who has the legal right to write up the SOP and COM? or could our COM be the SOP that we write with the only difference being TC's approval on it? How does that work? I heard elsewhere where the COM is a TC Approved SOP, so when you go against the SOP to put flaps down 10 miles away from final, you're going against TC as well.
---------- ADS -----------
 
SAR_YQQ
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 665
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2007 6:03 pm
Location: CANADA

Re: King Air 90

Post by SAR_YQQ »

FWIW C90A/B service ceiling is 26,000'
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
oldtimer
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2296
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:04 pm
Location: Calgary

Re: King Air 90

Post by oldtimer »

Unless the airplane is a weirdo one of built for the US Army or an oldie that has exceeded it's service life, a B90 King Air is pressurized to 4.6 PSID by a supercharger on the right engine. Oxygen requirements are basically a "bailout bottle" so you can get down to a breathable altitude in case of a pressurization failure. You are obviously a private operator because if you have a commercial OC, you would know the answers to the questions. Either way, you cannot just buy the airplane and start operating. A commercial operator will have to have the airplane added to the OC, you will have to be in a higher weight category, you will require an Ops Spec to operate the airplane, and man, you have a bunch of homework to do. If you are a private operator, contact the CBAA and they will lay out the requirements.
But what I think is happening here is you are a rampie with dreams just fishing, otherwise you would know most of the answers.
---------- ADS -----------
 
The average pilot, despite the somewhat swaggering exterior, is very much capable of such feelings as love, affection, intimacy and caring.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
E-Flyer
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 985
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:43 pm

Re: King Air 90

Post by E-Flyer »

Actually, I am not dreaming of anything. My friends boss is planning on adding a plane to his company for business trips and I am asking all these questions on his behalf. I should have mentioned that earlier. And nope, I am not a rampie... you probably were just assuming that I was.

You aren't by any chance the janitor i had a disagreement with at the airport a few days ago are you? Seriously, don't just jump to conclusions, I know it's easy behind a computer. :|

SAR, I know it's 26 000 feet, I was refrencing 13000 to the pressurization requirements that's all. Thanks otherwise ! :wink:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Mode C
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 11:01 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: King Air 90

Post by Mode C »

Actually I think I saw a 90 in Baker Lake last year run by a survey company with big square windows that wasn't pressurized.
---------- ADS -----------
 
AuxBatOn
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3283
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 6:13 pm
Location: North America, sometimes

Re: King Air 90

Post by AuxBatOn »

Might have been a Beech 99?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Going for the deck at corner
Mode C
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 90
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 11:01 pm
Location: Toronto

Re: King Air 90

Post by Mode C »

Nope not a 99.

it was a king air, looked exactly like the 200 i was flying but smaller and without a T-tail.

I thought it was weird too, first time I've seen the square windows on a beech other than the 99. I guess this one was never built to be pressurized.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Howitzer
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 241
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2004 3:32 pm
Location: north south and everywhere in between

Re: King Air 90

Post by Howitzer »

As mentioned in a few posts above, the US Military had ordered several King Air 90's that are not pressurized, and have a cargo door on them. That probably what you seen up there, as many of them have been sold off as surplus.
---------- ADS -----------
 
pontius
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 2:22 am
Location: Norway

Re: King Air 90

Post by pontius »

Mode C said.................




"Actually I think I saw a 90 in Baker Lake last year run by a survey company with big square windows that wasn't pressurized."



Could that have been a Beech Queen Air?
---------- ADS -----------
 
Esse quam videre.
Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”