Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

That ended much better than their last one. I wonder why the insist on sticking with the 333?

  • Like 1
Posted

Well, I'm no expert on the 333, but I spoke with a guy who operated one for a while and said it was nothing but trouble. Unexpected maintenance up to and including an engine failure. Also, SAPD bent their last one due to an engine failure while flying around straight and level.

 

I dunno, maybe they just got some lemons.

  • Like 1
Posted

Long ground run. Might not be a bad idea in active traffic. Great job.

Posted (edited)

That ended much better than their last one. I wonder why the insist on sticking with the 333?

Couldn't have seen this one ending any better under the circumstances, I'm a little young on the forums to know, but what's the story behind the last one going down before this?

 

EDIT: I just took a look around and it seems that the SAPD is expanding a little from the 333 roots since there is some evidence of an AS350 in their possesion:SAPD AS350

Edited by Auto-Rotation-Nation
Posted

Is there something wrong with the 333? I know next to nothing about it.

 

Great video. I only flew the 333 once, however it had some, ok, lots of issues of unexpected maintenance items from what I heard. The only issue I had with it (besides being rather slow for a turbine ship)was you had to mail a postcard to your co-pilot. You sure heck couldnt reach over and tap him on the shoulder!

 

Great landing

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...