Re: [OM] IMG: Workhorses, Past and Present

[Jim Nichols]

For me, I would prefer the reliability of that single Pratt & Whitney to 
that of any piston-driven twin that I know.  Of course, the King Air 
series take it up another notch.
Jim Nichols
Tullahoma, TN USA

On 4/26/2015 9:30 AM, Ken Norton wrote:
> > The Cessna looks pretty sleek, for a workhorse.  I was surprised to note that 
> > it costs over $2m to buy, according to the Wikipedia entry.
> As Jim mentions, the cargo pod makes it look like the
> committee-designed brick that it is. The Caravan is one of the most
> perfect winged vans ever made. It doesn't fly bad, either. Cessna
> nailed it.
>
>
> > A former colleague of mine flies for the British Antarctic Survey and I was 
> > sure that he told me that he had used a Caravan down south.  But according to 
> > the BAS website they use only Twin Otters and a Dash 7.  Mind you, the website 
> > also tells me that they never fly without a copilot, and I know that not to be 
> > true.
> The Caravan's only real limitations is the single-engine, speed and
> lack of pressurization. For that, the King Air 200 and 350 rules the
> roost.
>
> AG
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/