[Username Protected]

My Phenom 300 recently developed a pressurization system issue and the AOG team was not able to find the root cause on the field. They recommended we move the plane to a maintenance facility with a ground pressure cart for further troubleshooting. Embraer had no issues with the flight as it was allowed per the MEL provided that the Operational Limitations and Procedures below were followed. So this morning I flew the plane from North Carolina to Florida at 10,000 MSL unpressurized. A few lessons to share.

The flight is conducted unpressurized at or below 10000 ft mean sea level (MSL). The flight is not conducted in known or forecast icing conditions.

NOTE: Placard Pressurization Panel "AUTO/MAN INOP".

Unpressurized Configuration:

Outflow Valve............................................. .. OPEN
Outflow valve may be kept open through one of the following ways:
Pressurization Dump Button................................ PRESSED
OR
Pressurization Mode Switch............................. MAN
CAB ALT Switch........................................... UP

Confirm that the valve is open on the ECS synoptic page.
ECS Knob.............................................. ..... BOTH

1) Before take-off I decided to use the first recommended option and simply dump the cabin, but I obviously didn't remember from ground class that dumping the cabin also turns off the recirculation fans! That wasn't going to work, way too hot with no air blowing. So used option 2 instead.

2) Your ears don't love climbing out at the regular climb rates 3000-5000 ft/min. I had to come back on power to both not overspeed 250 knots and avoid climbing too fast for comfort. For the descent I asked early for lower, so I didn't need go down faster than 700-1000 ft/min.

3) You go through approach sectors really fast at TAS 370 kts! Felt like I got a new altimeter setting every few minutes.

4) I think there is an error with ForeFlight's default 'Max Speed Cruise @ 10000' profile at ISA+10. Typically ForeFlight is spot on so I didn't have any reasons to validate the performance data, but after leveling off I noticed the Enroute time was a half hour less than filed. I checked my NavLog and it showed TAS 294 knots and 1400 lbs/hr (this was used for the filed flight plan time and fuel burn). In the plane I actually saw TAS 369 knots and 2040 lbs/hr. This matches the POH pretty closely, which has TAS 368 knots and 2028 lbs/hr. I emailed ForeFlight the details. Will report back what they say.

[Username Protected]

That made my ears pop just reading it. I hope it's an easy fix!

[Username Protected]

The excellent team at Naples Jet Center found the issue quickly, ducting around the Ram Air check valve had cracked and was leaking badly. Now the wait for parts begins, should have an update next week.

[Username Protected]

(Username Protected), it looks to me that firelight is set for IAS 250KTS at 10,000

[Username Protected]

Thanks (Username Protected), let us know what ForeFlight says.

[Username Protected]

>I think there is an error with ForeFlight's default 'Max Speed Cruise @ 10000' profile at ISA+10.

I can confirm there is an error for the 10k line (and yes, I'm back at FF...). Some of our aircraft were modeled with the 250 KIAS restriction for 10k ft altitude, even though I believe the restriction applies to below 10k. Thanks for reporting this. The team is looking at it and will update the model with a 10k fix.

[Username Protected]

The relevant regulation (14 CFR 91.117) indeed specifies below 10k "no person may operate an aircraft below 10,000 feet MSL at an indicated airspeed of more than 250 knots". I understand jets frequently used to level off exactly at 10,000ft going much faster than 250k to bleed off speed from descent, but it's less common now with continuous descent or vnav profiles that have you hitting 250kts right at 10,000. I sometimes get leveled off on departure climbs at 10,000 and it's nice to accelerate there and pick up some extra climb rate going into the rest of the climb. I think (Username Protected) is the first level FL100 flight at 370TAS flight I've ever heard of!!!

[Username Protected]

As a follow-up, the replacement part arrived from Brazil after about a week and a half. Could have been much longer, it is an obscure part..

The maintenance team at Naples thinks that Embraer didn't use enough adhesive during the original assembly process back in 2011. There is a one-way valve inside the duct that was practically loose (it is supposed to be glued in), which probably vibrated over time causing the attachment points to weaken. The connecting tubing also had insufficient adhesive (compared to what that AMM calls for). If you have a serial around mine (50500068) I would recommend you take a look at this area during the next major inspection to see if this was a one-off manufacturing issue or a broader "quality-escape".

[Username Protected]

Thanks (Username Protected), my serial 44 goes in for maintenance in a couple weeks. How difficult was it to remove this part for inspection?