What's hard to fly, what's easy?

[350DRIVER]

All the King Airs are "screw up" proof- very easy to fly, land, etc. The B100 was initially a tad tricky to land but not bad once you got the hang of it. I miss the 350, was a fun bird to fly and nice short field capabilities, the 15,000 mtow was an added bonus. Now flying the CJ1 with a mtow of 10,600 you are pretty limited with payload . We have the 2 on order and that is suppose to be the upside so we shall see.

3 5 0

 

[throttlejockey]

BAe Jetstream J31/J32 is the most difficult aircraft I have ever flown. It is like balancing on top of a bowling ball. It is heavy on roll, and relatively light on pitch and requires constant trimming, especially after any power or configuration change. The cockpit is very tight, and the A/C system stinks. The pressurization system is absolutely dismal and requires constant attention during takeoff and climbout or else you will blow everyones eardrums out. After 8 legs of flying in one day you are physically, mentally, and depending on the F/O you are with, emotionally drained as well.

The B737 is, on the other hand, the easiest transport aircraft I have flown. I especially like flying the B737-200 - very old school, the glass is nice but on the short hops its really not necessary.

The hardest GA aircraft I have every flown is the PZL Wilga 80. The propeller has such a long diameter that you can only do wheel landings. Add that to a very narrow main gear, tailwheel, and the long distance between the two, every landing was a crisis in progress. If I had to land in a crosswind, I would land in the grass next to the runway in order to avoid ground-looping the plane. I managed to ground loop the Wilga on several occasions and luckily did not break anything!

 

[JBcrjca]

There was a lot of EMB-120 bashing earlier, glad it calmed down a little. I guess I have a few screws loose, because I also miss flying the 120. I spent 6000+ hours in it, loved almost all of it. Last week was a year since my last flight in the 120.

It's a great airplane...yeah the systems are a tad complicated, but the type rating was straightforward. The elect. system requires some study, but it makes sense when you see what the designers were aiming for. The AC inverters always confused me...I could never remember which bus transferred automatically if one inverter failed. The constant use of rudder trim with every power change was annoying, but it became second nature...your hands automatically went from the power levers to the trim wheel without even thinking. The EECs failed occasionally, but they reset fine 99% of the time. Sometimes the packs were a little weak, but our maint. guys did a pretty good job of keeping the ACM compressors clean and the ducts in good shape. And we were flying them out of PSP, LAS, YUM, PHX, etc.... just wonderful in the summer! Ok, so the Brasilia does have a few faults.

But it sure was fun to fly. Heavy on the controls, but very honest...plenty of feedback. It climbed well unless you were grossed-out at 100 degrees. Love the APU, a big help on the ramp on a warm day...and of course on climbout we'd keep the bleeds closed for more torque and run the packs on NORM. I can't imagine doing bleeds-closed takeoffs on the Saab or ATR. A bit sweaty, I'd think. It has a good autopilot, very easy to use and very smooth...just don't use the NAV mode to track a radial. Landings were unpredictable...sometimes I'd pound every one for a week, and then I'd have a week of greasers. Every now and then we'd get one where you couldn't tell we'd landed. Each ship was different. I liked #288, always got good landings in that one. I remember two months where we had an F/A that would flash us for every smooth landing. Ahhh, those were the days! Visual approaches were a blast, almost impossible to be too high in the 120. Gear down, flaps 45, levers to max...incredible sink rates. Good short-field performance too...I've landed on 25R at LAX when light, made the C-3 turnoff, 1500' down. Man, I should have my head examined...but I really do miss the old beast.

The CRJ is fun, but it doesn't have as much character. It looks good, it's fast if you can ever get to cruise alt. and accelerate, the packs put out a good amount of cold air, and the EFIS/EICAS/FMS is cool, quite user-friendly. But there's no control feedback, harder to tell exactly what the plane is doing...climb rates suck, it shoots its wad in the low 20s in summer...after that, 500fpm. The temp control sucks, always fiddling to keep the pax/FA happy. But it is nice to see different parts of the country after all these years.

Why hasn't anyone mentioned the good old BE-58 Baron? There's a great airplane. I flew freight in those for three years...loved that airplane. Looks really good, climbs great, fast, rugged, comfortable, fantastic Beechcraft flying qualities. Sometimes the heater didn't work in the winter, vac pumps failed a few times, crankshaft threw a counterweight once and broke the crankcase during cruise, but hey....every airplane has its faults, hehehe.

Geez, I should shut up...I type too much. And how did the thread get so wide on the screen?

 

[Mookie]

EMB 120--as one captain told me..."with modern technology...this airplane should not exist." sorry, but i have to agree with him. you can always tell an emb pilot b/c of the massive forearms b/c of control forces to turn the thing. no one understands the logic for the electrical system.

CRJ--hard to learn...easy to fly. best ac out there hands down (if you like it cold). the GLD spoilers take some getting used too if you want to oil one on.

328 prop...best airplane in it's class out there (if of course you don't have 15 mel pumpkin stickers on the overhead). an absolute no brainer airplane to land, even for a low time dude like myself. x-winds were fun though.