Now THIS is the airplane we SHOULD be flying...

[blackrain]

Anyone know if their are any OV-1 Mohawks out in the desert at AMARC we could get our hands on? GREAT downward visibility.

Turbine engines and CAP do not go together. Period.

Just in case anyone missed it........I was joking about the Mohawk. With the possible exception of the O-2, twin engines, piston or turbine are generally too expensive to justify for most of our missions. I'm not sure how we would budget for the maintenance on the ejection seats either joke. POSSIBLY a turbine single like the Caravan or Questair Kodiak could be useful for some missions. When I used to live in east Arkansas many AG operations used there used turbine single taildraggers so there really no magic where turbines are concerned. I know we don't fly as much as AG operations but they do offer atvantages.

Most definitely we need to upgrade our remote sensing capability regardless of our platform. THAT will keep us viable and relevant.

[heliodoc]

SA3b

DEA had problems with this bird.......  read it on landings .com

Being cannibalized after problems

So yes we need relevant and capable aircraft

yes, there are a number of CAP folks that are turbine operators.....but more that are not

Nothing wrong with the C182 / C206 airframes

Think 1 AF is "gonna" buy us some turbine powered aircraft??    Debatable

NHQ "gonna" provide training and repair???   Better get your best grant writers on duty 'cuz I do not think 1AF is going to hand us keys to turbines just 'cuz we are Civil Air Patrol

[Flying Pig]

Gentlemen....start your engines.   The Turbine Soloy Cessna 206 Mark II.

Since 1983 Soloy has produced more than 60 FAA STC approved Cessna 206 conversions using the 418 HP Rolls-Royce / Allison 250-C20S Turboshaft engine combined with Soloy's Patented Turbine-Pac gearbox drive system. The conversion adds extreme reliability, versatility and performance to the already tough Cessna 206 airframe. It is also one of the quietest high-performance singles available giving the Soloy 206 high marks as a neighbor-friendly aircraft. The Soloy Cessna 206s are used world-wide for a variety of applications ranging from Police surveillance to skydiving. Here are some of the outstanding features of this great aircraft:

Proven Rolls-Royce 250-C20S engine with worldwide parts and service support system. 3500 hour TBO.
Soloy Turbine-Pac gearbox and installation.
Reverse air inlet flow for great FOD protection in bush flying environments.
Slow 1810 RPM prop speed for quiet vibration-free operation.
Installs in U206G, TU206G, 206H & T206H from 1977 models to present.
Dependable 3-blade Hartzell 95 inch propeller. (Full feathering, constant speed).
Jet fuel capacity: 1977-1979 models 76 gal useable, 1979-present 88 gal useable with sierra 52 gal and Flint 30 gallon auxiliary fuel systems available. Fuel burn about 25 GPH in normal cruise mode.
Direct-reading turbine instruments with digital fuel flow and TOT systems. (Not compatible with Garmin glass panel)
Standard cabin heater with arctic bleed air supplement optionally available.
Airframe requirements: 28 volt electrical system, Cessna HD Landing gear, Cessna floatplane rudder system on all conversions, no interfering aftermarket kits or accessories.
Compatible with Wipaire, Edo, PK floats with separate STC installation kits.

[heliodoc]

Forgot about the Soloy conversion , Flying Pig

Yes it has been around awhile especially in the horse and wild burro corralling in N CA and NV to include some piston operators

But I forgot the cost of a Soloy conversion..... wasn't it approaching 100K+??

Be a great conversion to our fleet BUT the dinero

CAP would have to ADD FOD walks to their FLM FL taskbook...which in my mind, is no big deal

What say u??

[Flying Pig]

Again, I dont see a need.  I would say buying Turbo Charged aircraft would be my first option.  But if someone really wanted to.  I think they are about $150K to convert.  So for a 206 your probably looking at $500k just for the plane.  I looked into the switch for the plan at work.  We fly a lot of SAR about 10,000ft. and I thought it would be nice to have the umpf. 

[aveighter]

I have spent many hours (in fact learned to fly) in the eastern mountains where elevations reach a bit over  6000'.  Mountain flying definitely has it's special challenges and techniques.

Given the nature of our operational flying I would think it very important that our BIG mountain brethren out west had the most appropriate tools for the job.  I would think that includes turbine equipment.

Do those of you flying out west feel that 182/206 normal air breathers are adequate?

[aveighter]

Just as I hit the post button, FP kind of answered my question with his Turbo preference.

Makes good sense.

[Flying Pig]

The 206 I fly regularly is a Turbo.  I routinely fly it between 8,000 and 15,000 on SAR operations.  Topped off with 2 crew members and survival gear in the back and a 2000lb O2 bottle built in, we do pretty good.  Of course, the times I have had to hop over the mountain to Bishop for gas, Its a pain to try and climb to 16000 ft. before I can come back over the the Fresno side.

[Mustang]

I have spent many hours (in fact learned to fly) in the eastern mountains where elevations reach a bit over  6000'.  Mountain flying definitely has it's special challenges and techniques.

Given the nature of our operational flying I would think it very important that our BIG mountain brethren out west had the most appropriate tools for the job.  I would think that includes turbine equipment.

Do those of you flying out west feel that 182/206 normal air breathers are adequate?

While I think the performance of non-turbocharged aircraft are adequate--barely--in serious mountains, the safety margin is clearly not.  Turbos definitely help, but in the case of the new T182Ts, they have become so heavy with all the added stuff like 24-G seats, shoulder harness airbags, O2 systems, etc that they are effectively a two-person airplane.

The 206--especially the turbocharged variant--is a superb option. CAP has 15 of these, distributed amongst AK, CA, NV, WA and the treacherous mountains of NY, FL and PA.  Exactly zero are assigned to wings within RMR.  A couple of years ago I made the case to Andy Skiba that RMR needs turbo 206s, but the argument fell on deaf ears.  This is what we get when people from sea-level flatland regions call all the shots, and when regions like RMR have zero political clout within CAP.

[heliodoc]

Easy on us flatlanders, Mustang 

It is true you folks have issues that would require turbo equipment

But seeing as this is my second time around in CAP

Common sense, in and above unit level, isn't so common.

I 'd would have to agree about the C182T .......burning off 1 hour + of fuel to land 'cuz of weight is pretty lame.  We get what we get, tho

[Flying Pig]

I didnt realize we had any Turbo Charged planes?

[sardak]

It appears we have 10 Turbo 182s and 2 Turbo 206s.
182s in CO, UT, MD, NV and 206s in WA and AK.

Mike

[Mustang]

UT has 3 turbo 182s (two glass, one '79-ish). Used to have a turbo 182 RG, but it was sold after the engine hit TBO.  CO still has a turbo RG.

[CadetProgramGuy]

I didnt realize we had any Turbo Charged planes?

Is the need for the Turbo's due to high altitude environments they operate in?

[PHall]

I didnt realize we had any Turbo Charged planes?

Is the need for the Turbo's due to high altitude environments they operate in?

Yes.

[Mustang]

It appears we have 10 Turbo 182s and 2 Turbo 206s.
182s in CO, UT, MD, NV and 206s in WA and AK.

And why MD has a turbocharged aircraft is as big a mystery as why NY, FL and PA have 206s.

[FW]

PA has a 206 because it "paid" for it with state appropriated funds.  It needs the extra hauling capacity for the wing staff, none of whom weigh less than 200 lbs

[NIN]

One of those 206s in NER winds up in NH often.. Pretty often.

We have small mountains.  Not that we fly in them.

[Flying Pig]

Hmmmm.....I guess the 13,000ft Sierras, requiring your to fly over at 16,000+  don't qualify.

[Gunner C]

I have spent many hours (in fact learned to fly) in the eastern mountains where elevations reach a bit over  6000'.  Mountain flying definitely has it's special challenges and techniques.

Given the nature of our operational flying I would think it very important that our BIG mountain brethren out west had the most appropriate tools for the job.  I would think that includes turbine equipment.

Do those of you flying out west feel that 182/206 normal air breathers are adequate?

The 206--especially the turbocharged variant--is a superb option. CAP has 15 of these, . . . and the treacherous mountains of NY, FL and PA.  Exactly zero are assigned to wings within RMR.  A couple of years ago I made the case to Andy Skiba that RMR needs turbo 206s, but the argument fell on deaf ears.  This is what we get when people from sea-level flatland regions call all the shots, and when regions like RMR have zero political clout within CAP.

When I get my first star things will be different.     Sorry, had to be said.  CAP just doesn't learn.  I really like Andy, but everyone looks out for #1 instead of the big picture.