Best Jump planes (small dz)

[Jskydiver22 0]

I figured that this would be the best place for a question like this.

Ok, so were a small dropzone, our runway is 2400 ft. field elevation is 750 ft. What would be the best jump plane for us to have that would get us to at least 12,500 to 13,000 quickly? Currently we only have 3 182's.

Probably can't be a turbine of any kind. Were too small for that. I'm thinking that a 6-8 place airplane would work best.

Anyone know anything about the lockheed AL-60? Availibility for parts for it and stuff like that?

Thanks for any info given!

--I don't even know enough to know that I dont know--

[ccowden 0]

NOT a Turbo 207.

[AggieDave 6]

Well, if you have pilots that have the turbine time and a tail wheel endorsement, a Porter sounds perfect. The biggest problem is having pilots that are not just qualified to meet insurance requirements, BUT are competent enough to fly with out ground looping the plane. Last I looked about $400k gets you a sweet Porter.

Other then that you're looking at something like a 205/206/207, but they have their pluses and minuses. Personally I'd rather be in a 182 then any of those.

Are yall running 3 182's non stop back to back? If so it sounds like yall are ready for something like a 208 Caravan, BUT you're gonna spend over a million on one of those.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[PhreeZone 20]

Porter insurance is skyhigh. I've heard it was cheaper for one airport to send an Otter up with only 5-6 on it then it was to keep the Porter insured all winter and fly it instead. They lose money on the Otter slots, but they lose it at a slower rate then if they were to fly the Porter instead. Tail wheel, turbine is expensive to insure.

The PAC750XL might make sence here . At 7 fun jumpers it turns a profit I think. There is always the option of TwinBo's.

Look up the list of planes approved to fly with a door removed, its not that large of a list.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Tail wheel, turbine is expensive to insure.

Most definately, thank you for bringing that up as well.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Jskydiver22 0]

Yeah, trust me, ive tried to talk our DZO into getting a porter many times. haha, but he just wont go for it. I want to see how this season goes. We kind of had a bad year last year. Things just wern't that busy so i think it kind of discouraged him from getting any bigger.

If we run 3 182's non stop this year, im sure he will get something bigger.

He really doesnt want to spend any more than about $100,000 though. I found a really nice plane made by lockheed. Its the AL-60, it almost looks like a big cesna 182 or 206. Its got a nice big door on it that would work for skydiving.

--I don't even know enough to know that I dont know--

[AggieDave 6]

Interesting AC.

A small list of things to think about:

1. climb rate and fuel consumption
--how does it climb and is it economical to fly?
2. Parts
--you will need spare parts, are they available or do you have to custom fabricate them?

3. ADs
--Are you going to have to go through hoops to make it legal to fly?

You may want to do some running around to check on these things. I'm sure that people with more experience will add to this list I've started.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[Dumpster 0]

If you're running 3 182's back-to-backyou may really want to consider Caravan, also. We ran one last year with great success are we are also considering a PAC 750 for next year.

Our year-round jump plane is a turbo 182.

Easy Does It

[pilotdave 0]

Only 2 Al-60 prototypes were made in the US (lockheed 402s actually)... the rest were made in mexico, argentina, and under license in italy. Not many were made. Big 400 horse piston engine.... big bucks to operate and overhaul i'm sure. I bet you're better off with a couple 182s, just cause it's so rare. Interestingly, it was designed by Al Mooney. Ok that's probably not so interestng to most people.

Dave

[LearningTOfly 0]

Quote

BUT are competent enough to fly with out ground looping the plane. Last I looked about $400k gets you a sweet Porter.

Is a $400k porter going to work?! Such a deal may be for an aircraft minus a servicable engine... i.e. with an engine in need of O/H. ...the one you speak of is the pink one in Germany or somewhere over the pond?

does anyone use 185's these days?... they are tailwheel, so the main deterrent I suppose is that the insurance mins. are off the wall. But they can go like stink...

In my experience, though, the 'goundloop' is really nothing more than a word that scares most pilots out of learning tailwheel... the key (as always) is to stay ahead of the plane ...they don't groundloop on their own- rather it's due to lack of proper attention on the pilot's part... but I digress...

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Is a $400k porter going to work?! Such a deal may be for an aircraft minus a servicable engine... i.e. with an engine in need of O/H. ...the one you speak of is the pink one in Germany or somewhere over the pond?

It was the price of the one I found to show my DZO when we started this process a bit over a year ago. It didn't have the -34 conversion, that's about all I remember about it, though.

For the same reasons listed above, we (the DZ) have put the Porter off our list of possible AC.

The ones with the conversions are $600+, right?

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[EBSB52 0]

If you have 100k plus the 182's, prolly worth another 100k, then 200k won't buy ya crap. Obviously a PAC750 is the dream machine and I think they want 200k down, so that might be the way to go. You won't have maint for 2 or 3 years, so go for it.

[diverdriver 7]

C-206 converted to an IO-550 engine. That's your ticket for the "next step". It will go to 12-13K MSL in a resonable amount of time and you can shut it down unlike turbines that don't like shutting down over the life of the engine. If you 100K to spend then this will come in way under that mark. Take the extra money and use it to upgrade the engines on the other remaining two 182s. You'll have a bad ass piston fleet capable of doing 12 ways.

I've done 5 plane Cessna formations (3 182s and 2 206s). Keep the upgrades smooth and steady. Once you make the leap to turbine you need to have someone who has an extensive background in turbines in charge of your operation. Otherwise you could be messing up your engine(s) and not even know it. Pistons are way cheaper to overhaul that turbines.

Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125

[white_falcon 0]

Im a really new jumper, 23 jumps, and not a pilot, but why has no one mentioned a King Air? Its what we use at our DZ, 14 pax, and our runway is only 2900 feet (i dont believe we have ever used all of it either) so is 2400 feet not enough for this plane?

Anyway, just my $.02, for what it's worth.

Scott

[AggieDave 6]

The King Air has its own issues as well.

Firstly, 2 engines, twice the maintance and cost.
Secondly, SMALL door, a lot of jumpers don't like King-Airs.
Retractable gear means even more maintance and a chance of a gear up landing.

AND

Last but not least.

Due to the problems with insuring skydiving king airs, its actually pretty hard to get insurance on them right now. Same thing with the varients like a Beech 99.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[riggerrob 643]

Quote

The King Air has its own issues as well.

Firstly, 2 engines, twice the maintenance and cost.
Secondly, SMALL door, a lot of jumpers don't like King-Airs.
Retractable gear means even more maintenance and a chance of a gear up landing.

AND

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Agreed, however you can purchase 1960s vintage King Airs for a fraction of the cost of any other turbine-engined jump plane.
For example, we can purchase 3 old King Airs for the same price as one old Caravan.

• Quote

[riggerrob 643]

When I visited the Herd - back in 1984 - I expressed interest in their Italian-built AL-60. Herd members discouraged me form jumping it as it climbed much slower than their Cessna 185s.

The modern equivalent of the AL-60 is Gippsland Aeronautics' Airvan. While it has the same "numbers" as a Cessna 206, the cabin is much larger and more comfortable. I enjoyed my single jump out of the Canadian demonstrator, but concluded that while it would be great for a static-line DZ, it does not climb fast enough to hold the attention of relative workers or tandem instructors.

The whole dilemma here is that piston engines top out at about 300 horsepower from 6 cylinders. Sure you can turbo-charge them, but that only increases maintenance costs. And yes Lycoming has built a few 400 horsepower, 8-cylinder engines, but they also proved to be maintenance hogs.

[white_falcon 0]

Thanks Dave for the insight, and Rob brings up and interesting point as well.

Always an education on here.

• Quote

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Always an education on here.

For us all as well!

I never had heard of an AL-60 until this thread.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[jumpwally 0]

Hey what are the going rates for Caravans and twin otters anyway? wally

smile, be nice, enjoy life
FB # - 1083

[PhreeZone 20]

I've seen Otters going from 800k - 1.2 Mil. CASA's are going for 1 mil and up. Caravans are going from 900k-1.75 mil.

Yesterday is history
And tomorrow is a mystery

Parachutemanuals.com

[diverdriver 7]

Quote

Im a really new jumper, 23 jumps, and not a pilot, but why has no one mentioned a King Air? Its what we use at our DZ, 14 pax, and our runway is only 2900 feet (i dont believe we have ever used all of it either) so is 2400 feet not enough for this plane?

Anyway, just my $.02, for what it's worth.

Scott

Your pilots have to have more ratings and training to safely fly it. 2,900 feet isn't exactly a lot of runway. Doubt you could loose one engine at rotation and get it stopped on the runway. 2,400 feet would have less of a chance.

It's not "using" all of the runway to take off in normal conditions. It's a matter of being able to get it stopped on the runway if you lose one at rotation or soon after. It's called "accelerate-stop distance".

Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125

[diverdriver 7]

Quote

I've seen Otters going from 800k - 1.2 Mil. CASA's are going for 1 mil and up. Caravans are going from 900k-1.75 mil.

That's about right and you get what you pay for. So, getting a ragged out Caravan for 800K is not really a good idea. Remember, you're gonna try to run it hard to make money. Be ready to do some major overhaul work if you pick one up for that cheap. You pay for it now or pay twice as much later. Your choice.

Chris Schindler
www.diverdriver.com
ATP/D-19012
FB #4125

[Jskydiver22 0]

Thanks for all the information! I have actually looked that the airvan. But i saw that the climbrate on it was only 750 feet per minute. That wouldn't be so bad if it climbed that way all the way to 13000. How fast did u get to altitude in it?

--I don't even know enough to know that I dont know--

[bob.dino 1]

Is a turbine beaver (or conversion) a sensible option?

We have one that takes 10 folk to 13.5 in double-quick time. Lovely aircraft, if a little noisy. Not sure of the economics of operating it, but it'll take off with 7 on board.