Pelican Parts Forums

Air,

There are discrepancies somewhere. Just look at the rudder loading. Part of the -130J was decreasing the max loading from 400lbs to 180 then 100 for supposed FAA compliance. We won’t go into everything else the -130J isn’t in compliance with.

I called up a couple of friends, one who did work at Pax and another who did the TacEval on the -130J for some input on specifications. They confirmed the requirement was for full control deflection with the other two axis neutral (or as close to) and full control movement to the opposite stop followed by movement to the neutral position. The only axis to achieve a stabilized condition was yaw. Note differences. These were referencing the FAA standards. Dig into performance standards and find out hwo much is interpolated data. More than once the FMF or Fleet aviator has raised the BS flag, not always winning as in the MV-22 asymmetric ring vortex crash but sometimes.

Point being that the -130J is supposed to be meeting FAA standards and that is what was supposedly used. Now the -130J doesn’t meet standards in it’s pitot static system, yaw dampening, pitch phugoid, and some other stuff.

Does it surprise me that different places present disparate standards? I would be surprised if they all agreed. As most pilots flying something more complex than fixed gear bug smasher have probably found inconsistencies in the various manuals.

MFAFF,

The -19 A-D have similar aero performances. There are A models that are more updated than some Cs, etc. What I am driving at is the mission differences driving cultural differences. Add in service cultural differences and they add up.

450,

100%.

S/F, FOG