What is their plan for an engine failure when they can longer stop or fly in that distance?

It is a relatively small window of time, but it exists none the less.

Now, as for an PC-12, that window of time is MUCH longer...

Mike C.

What is their plan for an engine failure when they can longer stop or fly in that distance?

It is a relatively small window of time, but it exists none the less.

Now, as for an PC-12, that window of time is MUCH longer...

Can the P.180 or MU-2 or C.V depart from KPAO with *any* payload if a true balanced field length is required? I can leave with me, one 170 lb passenger, and enough fuel for about a 250 mile flight with VFR reserves. That's 3,000 lbs under gross.

A friend operates out of KPAO, 2450’. I have personally gone in and out of KSQL, 2600’. Albeit not at gross. But I figure I could operate ok with 800 lbs payload for 800 nm before I really needed to run the numbers more carefully.

They don’t need 5000’. Unfortunate myth.

Yes, performance wise.

Citation V, ISA, 0 MSL, no wind:

Takeoff: 13,500 lbs (4,300 lbs useful load). That's 4 people, bags, flown 800 nm, with reserves.

Landing: 12,900 lbs (3,700 lbs useful load). That's well over my typical landing weight.

The takeoff is with engine failure at V1 and either stopping on the runway or continuing takeoff and clearing end of the runway by 35 ft.

Landing is 50 ft threshold crossing height.

The 35 ft takeoff clearance and 50 ft landing clearance means the actual ground roll for the airplane is about 1000 ft less (~1450 ft).

Warmer temps will cut down my weights some. At 25 C, a fairly common temp at KPAO, I'd be down to 12,500 lbs (3,300 lbs useful). Give me 10 knots wind and 25 C, I'm back up to 13,500 lbs.

The runway performance of the V is amazing, the thing that surprised me the most after I bought it. The book numbers are legit, maybe even conservative.

But I can't use KPAO since the airport says no aircraft over 12,500 lbs max weight. But then, so does KSQL and Larry uses his CJ4 (heavier than a V) all the time there. When I asked KSQL airport about that, I got the silent treatment. You get the sense Larry gets special consideration.

As for the MU2, there are no published accel stop, accel go numbers using the modern takeoff profile, and the normal (no engine failure) takeoff charts are bogus. They say you can't use KPAO generally. The numbers in the chart have been "adjusted" for political reasons so that noting under 2500 ft works.

I don't know much about the P.180, but doubt it can do much if you require balanced field at KPAO.

Mike C.

I'm surprised! That's quite a capable jet.

But this surprised me the most:

It's called beta mode, reverse prop thrust.

In the MU2, it was fairly normal to come in pretty hot and land short. Beta would eat that speed right up.

Not so in the jet. I'm about 30 knots slower on short final than the MU2 was. It seems rather sedate in comparison.

Mike C.

Little to no braking required. Landing distances are not an issue. They stop well using some reverse. The PAO based one is on the original set of (carbon) brakes and (from memory) I think he told me they were at something in the vicinity of 3000 hours.

Based on published performance data for the Avanti Piaggio P180, under standard sea-level conditions on a paved runway, the accelerate‑stop distance at maximum gross weight is typically in the range of approximately 2,800 to 3,000 feet.

For the Pilatus PC-12 under standard conditions (sea level, standard temperature, paved runway), the performance data indicate that the accelerate‑stop distance at maximum gross weight is roughly around 2,900 feet.

Under standard conditions (sea level, standard temperature, paved runway) at maximum gross weight, the Citation V’s accelerate‑stop distance is typically around 3,500 feet

ChatGPT

The cost of a landing gear overhaul for an Avanti Piaggio P180 can vary widely depending on factors such as labor rates, parts pricing (original versus aftermarket), extent of repair needed, and regional factors. Although exact figures aren’t published publicly, some operators have reported that overhaul costs can be in the rough range of $200,000 to $300,000 USD.

ChatGPT

Wow! The P.180 numbers are really short!

Does changing to the cheaper brakes change that?

I'm trying to figure out how it's shorter than a similar weight airplane (B200 @ 3250 feet) when it has a higher V1 speed. B200 is 94 kts in my tables - P.180 is over 100, correct?

Wow! The P.180 numbers are really short!

Does changing to the cheaper brakes change that?

I'm trying to figure out how it's shorter than a similar weight airplane (B200 @ 3250 feet) when it has a higher V1 speed. B200 is 94 kts in my tables - P.180 is over 100, correct?

I completely missed the ChatGPT signature....

That makes MUCH more sense. I'm reading 5750 off that chart. I feel comfortable saying that compared to the B2000, the P.180 is a runway hog. I'll still buy the dinner.

I suspect if you run an apples-to-apples comparison, eg, 500-lb payload and 1,000nm of fuel, you'll find the Piaggio is much closer.

The revised gross wt chart also messed around with a raised Vr. Here's the one for the original gross wt. Note the difference between 11,550 lbs on this chart and 11,551 lbs on the other chart, you will see the effect of the Vr change.