User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/17/2015 9:52:59 PM EDT
[#1]
Precip at 450? Supercooled rain in a Thunderstorm?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2015 10:24:52 PM EDT
[#2]
That certainly sounds exciting.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/17/2015 11:22:28 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Precip at 450? Supercooled rain in a Thunderstorm? Stator ice from some source, most likely. They flew through the top of a dissipating thunderstorm, which is pretty sporty. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2015 9:40:27 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Stator ice from some source, most likely. They flew through the top of a dissipating thunderstorm, which is pretty sporty. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Precip at 450? Supercooled rain in a Thunderstorm? Stator ice from some source, most likely. They flew through the top of a dissipating thunderstorm, which is pretty sporty.  |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2015 11:58:51 AM EDT
[#5]
Beechjet is not a plane I would want to be in at FL 450. That thing is underpowered at FL 350.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/18/2015 10:30:03 PM EDT
[#6]
I listened live while sharing airspace with a United 767 who was shooting the gap between two cells at FL410 over Mason City many years ago. It was not fun listening to them drift down, after an engine failure, into the cells and literally wondering if they would survive the flight.
Stay away from thunderstorm cells, even ones you are flying way over the top of... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2015 5:31:12 PM EDT
[#7]
Interesting. 400A. Good tough little airplane.
Sounds like they packed them full of ice like Southern Airways 242. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/20/2015 7:47:32 PM EDT
[#8]
must feel like it needs to be more sporting than its little brother the mu-2
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2015 1:00:50 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Beechjet is not a plane I would want to be in at FL 450. That thing is underpowered at FL 350. My immediate thought too...didn't even remember them being capable of flying that high (though my only experience is the T-1 variant, so the service ceiling may have been slightly different.) I sure as hell wouldn't want to be flying one at 450 over/through a thunderstorm. This doesn't sound like an aircraft problem to me, based on the limited info available. It sounds like a poor piloting decision problem. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2015 5:24:15 PM EDT
[#10]
I took one to 450 a couple of times on dead heads. Topping weather is usually a bad idea.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2015 6:53:15 PM EDT
[#11]
Ugh, flying fucking anything at FL450 give me the creeps.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2015 7:49:53 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ugh, flying fucking anything at FL450 give me the creeps. Can't be as creepy as flying machines with large rotating pieces of metal being the only source of lift, while at 1000' agl all the time 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/22/2015 7:51:46 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can't be as creepy as flying machines with large rotating pieces of metal being the only source of lift, while at 1000' agl all the time Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ugh, flying fucking anything at FL450 give me the creeps. Can't be as creepy as flying machines with large rotating pieces of metal being the only source of lift, while at 1000' agl all the time My rotating bits are fiberglass, and I prefer to stay under 500AGL, but I have flown her to 10,000 ft
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2015 2:39:46 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Ugh, flying fucking anything at FL450 give me the creeps. You get used to it pretty fast when you're trying to make range. Typical long range profile in the GV/ 550 is to start out at 410 and step climb up to 470. Going any higher 510 was pretty much pointless other than something to talk about later but the plane will do it with around 8k pounds of fuel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2015 2:43:02 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You get used to it pretty fast when you're trying to make range. Typical long range profile in the GV/ 550 is to start out at 410 and step climb up to 470. Going any higher 510 was pretty much pointless other than something to talk about later but the plane will do it with around 8k pounds of fuel. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Ugh, flying fucking anything at FL450 give me the creeps. You get used to it pretty fast when you're trying to make range. Typical long range profile in the GV/ 550 is to start out at 410 and step climb up to 470. Going any higher 510 was pretty much pointless other than something to talk about later but the plane will do it with around 8k pounds of fuel. Are people using the nose hose? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/23/2015 4:28:51 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Are people using the nose hose? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ugh, flying fucking anything at FL450 give me the creeps. You get used to it pretty fast when you're trying to make range. Typical long range profile in the GV/ 550 is to start out at 410 and step climb up to 470. Going any higher 510 was pretty much pointless other than something to talk about later but the plane will do it with around 8k pounds of fuel. Are people using the nose hose? Oh yes absolutely every time above FL350 for 135 guys and above FL410 for 91. Yup, every time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2015 1:13:40 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Oh yes absolutely every time above FL350 for 135 guys and above FL410 for 91. Yup, every time. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Ugh, flying fucking anything at FL450 give me the creeps. You get used to it pretty fast when you're trying to make range. Typical long range profile in the GV/ 550 is to start out at 410 and step climb up to 470. Going any higher 510 was pretty much pointless other than something to talk about later but the plane will do it with around 8k pounds of fuel. Are people using the nose hose? Oh yes absolutely every time above FL350 for 135 guys and above FL410 for 91. Yup, every time. Truth.   |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2015 5:56:34 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh yes absolutely every time above FL350 for 135 guys and above FL410 for 91. Yup, every time. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ugh, flying fucking anything at FL450 give me the creeps. You get used to it pretty fast when you're trying to make range. Typical long range profile in the GV/ 550 is to start out at 410 and step climb up to 470. Going any higher 510 was pretty much pointless other than something to talk about later but the plane will do it with around 8k pounds of fuel. Are people using the nose hose? Oh yes absolutely every time above FL350 for 135 guys and above FL410 for 91. Yup, every time. There's a limitation from Gulfstream that the O2 mask must remain in the quick donning position above FL350 so that's where it stays. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/24/2015 6:02:05 PM EDT
[#19]
Link to report?
Tail number? BeechJet or Nextant? Nextants will make 450 without many issues. BeechJets not so much. Edited to add: If no tail number do we know the RK number? Another edit to add: http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2015-08-17/fourth-beechjet-400a-flameout-mirrors-past-issues |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/27/2015 8:51:46 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There's a limitation from Gulfstream that the O2 mask must remain in the quick donning position above FL350 so that's where it stays.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ugh, flying fucking anything at FL450 give me the creeps. You get used to it pretty fast when you're trying to make range. Typical long range profile in the GV/ 550 is to start out at 410 and step climb up to 470. Going any higher 510 was pretty much pointless other than something to talk about later but the plane will do it with around 8k pounds of fuel. Are people using the nose hose? Oh yes absolutely every time above FL350 for 135 guys and above FL410 for 91. Yup, every time. There's a limitation from Gulfstream that the O2 mask must remain in the quick donning position above FL350 so that's where it stays.
I'm trying to remember Air Force rules here (which I believe mimic FAA ones) but O2 is only required to be "immediately available" from FL350 to FL410 as long as both pilots are seated at the controls, I believe. Not until above 410 that one pilot has to be on O2. Is that the same in the civilian world? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 1:22:42 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh yes absolutely every time above FL350 for 135 guys and above FL410 for 91. Yup, every time. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ugh, flying fucking anything at FL450 give me the creeps. You get used to it pretty fast when you're trying to make range. Typical long range profile in the GV/ 550 is to start out at 410 and step climb up to 470. Going any higher 510 was pretty much pointless other than something to talk about later but the plane will do it with around 8k pounds of fuel. Are people using the nose hose? Oh yes absolutely every time above FL350 for 135 guys and above FL410 for 91. Yup, every time. Most violated FAR in the book. Maybe not the dumbest, but definitely the most inconvenient. I think it's hilarious, because you never see the FO on a jet crew sitting at the FBO with the red ring around his face like he's actually been wearing the thing all day. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 7:53:17 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Most violated FAR in the book. Maybe not the dumbest, but definitely the most inconvenient. I think it's hilarious, because you never see the FO on a jet crew sitting at the FBO with the red ring around his face like he's actually been wearing the thing all day. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ugh, flying fucking anything at FL450 give me the creeps. You get used to it pretty fast when you're trying to make range. Typical long range profile in the GV/ 550 is to start out at 410 and step climb up to 470. Going any higher 510 was pretty much pointless other than something to talk about later but the plane will do it with around 8k pounds of fuel. Are people using the nose hose? Oh yes absolutely every time above FL350 for 135 guys and above FL410 for 91. Yup, every time. Most violated FAR in the book. Maybe not the dumbest, but definitely the most inconvenient. I think it's hilarious, because you never see the FO on a jet crew sitting at the FBO with the red ring around his face like he's actually been wearing the thing all day. Nah, don't think it is. TUC at 450+ with a rapid-D is what, maybe 5 seconds? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/28/2015 8:26:11 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Nah, don't think it is. TUC at 450+ with a rapid-D is what, maybe 5 seconds? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Oh yes absolutely every time above FL350 for 135 guys and above FL410 for 91. Yup, every time. Most violated FAR in the book. Maybe not the dumbest, but definitely the most inconvenient. I think it's hilarious, because you never see the FO on a jet crew sitting at the FBO with the red ring around his face like he's actually been wearing the thing all day. Nah, don't think it is. TUC at 450+ with a rapid-D is what, maybe 5 seconds? Exactly. I understand the reg and see why the FAA thinks its a good idea. That's why I said it's not the dumbest. It's still the most violated. We A certain operator go goes up to FL450 pretty much every leg longer than 1.5 hours (about a third of our their flights, any more). It's probably a very good idea to be on the mask above FL410, but can you perform your duties that way? How about single-pilot, talking on the radios? Back in my earlier days, I tried to wear the mask and work the radios, and actually wound up with controllers asking me 1st grader math questions to determine if I was hypoxic. I think a good compromise would be for the FAA to allow you to wear it around your neck or in your lap. Which is what some pilots actually do. The majority probably don't care, and leave it in the quick don mount. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/29/2015 2:18:38 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Exactly. I understand the reg and see why the FAA thinks its a good idea. That's why I said it's not the dumbest. It's still the most violated. We A certain operator go goes up to FL450 pretty much every leg longer than 1.5 hours (about a third of our their flights, any more). It's probably a very good idea to be on the mask above FL410, but can you perform your duties that way? How about single-pilot, talking on the radios? Back in my earlier days, I tried to wear the mask and work the radios, and actually wound up with controllers asking me 1st grader math questions to determine if I was hypoxic. I think a good compromise would be for the FAA to allow you to wear it around your neck or in your lap. Which is what some pilots actually do. The majority probably don't care, and leave it in the quick don mount. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Oh yes absolutely every time above FL350 for 135 guys and above FL410 for 91. Yup, every time. Most violated FAR in the book. Maybe not the dumbest, but definitely the most inconvenient. I think it's hilarious, because you never see the FO on a jet crew sitting at the FBO with the red ring around his face like he's actually been wearing the thing all day. Nah, don't think it is. TUC at 450+ with a rapid-D is what, maybe 5 seconds? Exactly. I understand the reg and see why the FAA thinks its a good idea. That's why I said it's not the dumbest. It's still the most violated. We A certain operator go goes up to FL450 pretty much every leg longer than 1.5 hours (about a third of our their flights, any more). It's probably a very good idea to be on the mask above FL410, but can you perform your duties that way? How about single-pilot, talking on the radios? Back in my earlier days, I tried to wear the mask and work the radios, and actually wound up with controllers asking me 1st grader math questions to determine if I was hypoxic. I think a good compromise would be for the FAA to allow you to wear it around your neck or in your lap. Which is what some pilots actually do. The majority probably don't care, and leave it in the quick don mount. Yea I hear ya...everything's weighing risk/reward in flying. I think having it around the neck/in the lap would be a pretty good compromise, too. Better to have a requirement that's moderately inconvenient but will be complied with versus a very inconvenient reg that people will simply ignore. Though I'm on a mask every time I fly so running the aircraft single pilot and working the radios with pressure breathing is certainly possible. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 11:28:59 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Though I'm on a mask every time I fly so running the aircraft single pilot and working the radios with pressure breathing is certainly possible.
Oh, I agree. But there's a big difference in comfort between the military mask and the civilian quick-don like Eros. The civie masks aren't designed for long-term comfort at all. And the oxy mask mic sucks on all the ones we have. If we had decent flexible masks like the .mil has, it'd be no issue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 12:24:42 PM EDT
[#26]
Why not the little nose tubes?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 12:53:13 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why not the little nose tubes? Have to be able to deliver positive pressure in an emergecy. Tubes can't do that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 1:19:28 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why not the little nose tubes? Canulas are only good for operations below FL180. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 8:13:17 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Have to be able to deliver positive pressure in an emergecy. Tubes can't do that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Why not the little nose tubes? Have to be able to deliver positive pressure in an emergecy. Tubes can't do that. Yup. The purpose is not only to provide oxygen, but also prevent smoke inhalation, fumes from burning plastic, etc. Further, positive pressure breathing is required to remain conscious above 30,000 feet, due to the partial pressure of oxygen being insufficient. The masks in the back aren't effective above 25k. Cannulas aren't even allowed for 135 or 121 commercial operations. Even the crew masks in emergency mode (pressure breathing) won't keep you conscious above 40,000 feet, but they'll do well enough to give you time to make an emergency descent. Here's a pretty good read with pretty much everything you ever wanted to know about aviation supplemental oxygen use: http://www.aopa.org/Pilot-Resources/PIC-archive/Pilot-and-Passenger-Physiology/Oxygen-Use-in-Aviation |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 8:19:41 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why not the little nose tubes? Plus it'd make passengers nervous, wondering why this guy with emphysema is flying them to Tuscon.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/31/2015 8:38:26 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Have to be able to deliver positive pressure in an emergecy. Tubes can't do that. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Why not the little nose tubes? Have to be able to deliver positive pressure in an emergecy. Tubes can't do that. Not to mention smoke/fumes in the cockpit ETA: Senoj got it |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
