The 200 is an older version of the top of the line. The 350 is the hottest
corporate turboprop out there. Akk the King airs are noted for their
suitability for shorter stage lengths, suitability for unimproved fields, and
low cost of operation. And they have a reputation for being built like a tank.
The 200 and 350 both have T tails. the 90 is the smallest and oldest of all.
The 90 was an outgrwoth of the QueenAir, an early pressurized piston twin that
was fitted with a pair of PT6's. The 90 has been made better in many ways over
the years, and is good for smaller needs. The 90 is distinguished by its
conventional tail.
In other words, there are a whole lot of them out there.
And don't forget the 1900, a stretched and blown up King Air that served as a
19 passenger airliner when those were common. It wasn't the best, but it sure
beat a Swearingen Metro.
And I am in no way associated with the aircraft or it's manufacturer in any
way, just standing up for the home boy.
----- Original Message -----
From: "ChrisB" <ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2019 2:20:34 AM
Subject: Re: [OM] IMG: The Bone Yard
I know them only as King Air aircraft, Bill. It seems that the RAF used the
B200 for training, now superseded by the Phenom. But one our ISTAR aircraft is
the King Air 350:
https://www.raf.mod.uk/aircraft/shadow-r1/
Chris
C M I Barker | Gamlingay
> On 24 Sep 2019, at 19:00, Bill Pearce <billpearce@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The RAF used King Air 90's as trainers? You guys must have had some money.
> Those were original luxury corporate aircraft. I have always heard that they
> are a joy to fly.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Chris Barker" <ftog@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Olympus Camera Discussion" <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2019 4:07:44 AM
> Subject: Re: [OM] IMG: The Bone Yard
>
> Nice shot, Jim. I’m glad that I never flew one of those, mainly because it
> would have meant that I was training to be a truck driver (they were
> multi-engine trainers in the RAF), but also for all the procedural instrument
> flying I would have had to do :-)
>
> Chris
>
>> On 24 Sep 2019, at 06:16, Jim Nichols <jhnichols@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Propeller strikes can be expensive. This skydiver hauling King Air 90 sits
>> on a remote corner of the airport ramp, minus its engines and propellers.
>>
>> http://www.gallery.leica-users.org/v/OldNick/20190923-P9230216.JPG.html
>> <http://www.gallery.leica-users.org/v/OldNick/20190923-P9230216.JPG.html>
>>
>> E-M1 with Pentax Takumar 135/3.5 at f/5.6
>>
>> --
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
>
> --
> _________________________________________________________________
> Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
> Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
> Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|
