dudduddud

Good afternoon,

I am doing some writing and was wondering if anyone could tell me the reason the piper aztec has a max landing weight less than max all up weight? Is it to do with the landing gear or other?

I've got here 5200lbs MAUW and 4940lbs MLW. is that very accurate? what model would that be for?

Thanks in advance.

ps: the 'stalling trip' hasnt happened yet. i will keep you updated.

dragchute

Could be a structural limit or it could be certification such as landing climb performance.

Given that the Aztec is a derivative of the Apache it was probably certified to CAR 3 rather than FAR 23. Good question to research!

Islander Jock

I have an old Piper information manual for the Aztec E which also specifies the MTOW and MLW that you have. Can't find any specific reasoning but more than likely would be some structural limiation. Which part of the structure though is best answered by someone with more experience with this type.

Great planes to fly. I only have about 20 odd hours in one but enjoyed them greatly.

scrambler

Not uncommon for larger pipers. Lots of them have a max zero fuel weight that needs factoring as well. There may also be a max ramp weight which is to allow for fuel burn during taxi.
The Seneca comes to mind and I think that the Lance was in a similar situation.

craka

Im pretty sure that all the the light twins and larger singles I have flown ALL have a MLW lower than MCTOW - its a structural thing.

heywatchthis

early aztrucks/apaches have the same aerofoil as the cub.. No lie!

distracted cockroach

Wasn't it the most stolen aircraft in the US for ages? Something about enough gas to fly to Colombia (or back), enough luggage space for big bags of horticultural crops and small bags of white powder, and a slow enough approach speed to land at any rough desert airstrip or make ditching in the Gulf of Mexico a bit less than a suicidal proposition.

Spent most of my early twin hours in Aztruks flying 5 pax and their bags out of an 800m strip. Glad I never lost an engine and good job it was only on short flights. Don't remember ever filling the tanks right up...think that made it good for about 6 hours.

You don't want the door to come open in flight though. Gives you a nasty fright and is almost impossible to close again......latches were always dodgy and bloody passengers have to play with everything!

Ah, the olden days, best flying of my carreer

tinpis

Did my Pommy IR in an Apache at Stanstead.
Nice little jigger it were.

Had a bit to do with old roundy nose Aztruck.
As I recall it was loaded until no daylight came thru the windows it was then considered full.
Landing weight limit yer kidding?
The old boy that owned it told me..."think of it as a 182 son, wherever that fits so will this."

Jamair

Owned an Aztec for a while and liked it.

When I did my endo I literally stepped out of a twin turboprop and into the Aztec. Did two circuits and then had a simulated EFATO. I went through the phase 1 checks automatically - got to the 'autofeather check' and realised 'oops, wrong aeroplane'. The check guy (the late John Eglan at CDR) was leaning back in the RH seat looking at me while the left prop windmilled - and we were still climbing at 500'/min.

Land anywhere and take off again with a full load. Fly 6 hours plus reserves at 170kt.

Hasselhof

Forget the MLW. If your going to fly one of these the single biggest thing to be worried about is whether its got a second hydraulic pump installed. Won't be much fun if you lose the engine after takeoff that has the pump and have to clean up the airframe.

I always figured if I had a failure of either after takeoff with a reasonable load up north I was just going to just close both throttles and pretend it was a single.

Nice plane to fly though. Lots of good memories. Is DCQ still rusting on the Northern GA at YPDN? Such a shame.