The following Great Barrier Airlines aircraft appear this week on the CAA aircraft register as cancelled having been exported...
 |
| BN Trislander ZK-LOU at Auckland on 14 November 2008 |
 |
| BN Trislander ZK-LGC at North Shore on 12 March 2013 |
 |
| BN Trislander ZK-LGF at North Shore on 29 January 2014 |
 |
| BN Islander ZK-REA at Auckland on 26 July 2011 |
Also, according to Air Britain magazine BN Islander ZK-KTR, which was never officially registered as such, has been purchased for spares.
 |
| Unregistered BN Islander ZK-KTR at North Shore on 26 January 2009 |
For for more photos of Islanders and Trislanders and a full history of Great Barrier Airlines see :
 |
| Also withdrawn from use is Great Barrier Airlines' Piper Navajo ZK-NSN seen here at Kaitaia on 1 December 2010 |
Barrier engineers mentioned FVD has gone too? Unconfirmed though
ReplyDeleteFVD flies for Barrier Air...
ReplyDeletePiper Navajo ZK-NSN has appeared on the register today as have been withdrawn from use
Noooooooo! Not NSN! Sad sad day to have this ole girl put out to pasture. I wonder where she is grazing?? When did you last see it Steve??
ReplyDeleteWheels up landing last year at NZWP and soon after ferried to Ardmore. Around may 2015
ReplyDeleteShame Air Nelson can't grab it back as a display model (if nothing else) - first aircraft in their fleet and all...
ReplyDeletehttp://3rdlevelnz.blogspot.co.nz/2010/05/air-nelson-no-1.html
Could use the rego on Air Nelson's first Bombardier Q400 NextGen.
DeleteNow there's a laugh.
DeleteYes the navajo is gone but let's not forget, it was an old heap of junk well past it's use-by date. The Chieftain (RDT) has also found the same fate,- to be thrown in the bin. The recent media covered door incident being the final straw. I think this is a great thing, helping barrier air slowly move into 2016 with reliable proper equipment such as the grand caravan.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with you there. It is really time that the Chieftain and Nevrgo are relegated to the scrap bin. The travelling Public deserves better than those ancient piles. The Caravan and the PC12 are superior machines in every respect. The twin engine thing is over rated a a piston twin needs two engine because there reliability is poor.
Delete"The twin engine thing is over rated a a piston twin needs two engine because there reliability is poor"
DeletePlease explain then why pilots of conventional passenger aircraft, i.e multi engine turbines, spend a considerable amount of time every six months practising, and being checked on, single engine procedures?
Their is not spelt "there".
I have to agree with this comment.
DeleteAnd lucky the engine attached to the Q300 today wasn't attached to the front of one of these C208's/PC12's! That would have been awkward to return to Auckland after loosing their only engine..
Till the day comes when there is a failure..... Happened in Hawaii not long ago...
ReplyDeleteYes, statistically an extremely rare event and a great outcome considering... Now I wonder how many old piston twins have had engine failures in the 3 years since the van went for a swim... I should imagine quite a few.
DeleteGiven the choice between an engine failure in a gross weight PC12 or Caravan and a gross weight navajo, I'll choose the modern aircraft with it's vastly superior crash worthiness any day
"I'll choose the modern aircraft with it's vastly superior crash worthiness any day"
ReplyDeleteCrash worthiness-that's a new one.
It doesn't matter whether you're in a Caravan or a Navajo. If you crash, you're stuffed.
That is incorrect. You have a better chance in a crash with a Caravan than in a GA piston twin. Not only are the Caravan and PC12 designed to a much higher crash impact and survivability standard but if you have an accident at a lower IAS the energy to dissipate is less.
DeleteHow is that a new one?? Caravan and PC-12 certified to FAR 23 which has far more stringent standards including dynamic seats designed to withstand 18g etc etc
DeleteJust checked the FAR and it is 26g for front seats and restraints and 21g for the remainder of the seating.
DeleteEven better!Thanks
DeleteCrash worthiness to a twin is almost N/A.. If you lose an engine in the cruise or approach you continue flying, even at gross weight with a competent pilot. No point comparing chalk and cheese on that topic
DeleteI disagree. A well trained "lucky" pilot MAY be able to save the day. If they get it wrong then they are going to die due to the physics of mass times speed. Single engine speed in piston twins from Piper and Cessna are in the order of 110 knots. Hit the ground at that speed and it will be a miracle if you survive, especially in a prehistoric twin that has rudimentary survivability. Compare that to the Cessna Caravan that hits the ground at 61 knots with 26g survivability design standards, almost 1/4 of the energy of the twin. I know which one I would rather be in, and it does not burn avgas!
DeleteThe pilots I know that have had real but only partial failures in those piston twins have all said that it was lucky an airfield was close because the could not maintain height. One who had a real full engine failure in VMC on a no wind day just after take off with 5 on board a 10 seat aircraft made the runway with 60 feet to spare on the turn to the runway. The CHT on the remaining engine through the red line at max power. That remaining engine was replaced due to the damage from detonation at running at that power. The engineer that did the strip down was surprised that it managed to continue running.
The piston GA twin v single turboprop argument was lost by the twin last millennium with good design, survivability science and probability.
Very well said and many good points. Thanks
DeleteInteresting that this company is downsizing - the chieftan grounded in recent weeks and potentially the Islander too not flying?
ReplyDeleteMaybe a second C208 isn't too far away?
The Caravan is now available to do night operations now and they've let a few pilots go too
DeleteAny ideas on where ZK-NSN is at AR?
ReplyDelete