PA32 Saratoga - short field

[Sam Rutherford]

Anyone regularly taking one of these into 400m strips?

Thanks, Sam.

[Jan Olieslagers]

Go to EBGB and inquire about N123-what-was-it ;)

[Big Pistons Forever]

From Pa 32 Saratoga POH "Maximum Perfromance Take Off" chart.

Sea level, 15 Deg C, MGTOW = 1700 feet or 518 metres......

[piperboy84]

From Pa 32 Saratoga POH "Maximum Perfromance Take Off" chart.

Sea level, 15 Deg C, MGTOW = 1700 feet or 518 metres......

518 meters, and that's on tar, I bet Sams talking about grass

[alex90]

I think Sam means grass too, if there were a clear area after your ground roll, maximum performance chart for ground roll only:

Hard, dry runway; SL; 15c = 1200ft at MGTOW so roughly 365m. You'd be looking at a minimum of 440m on groundroll on short dry grass (excluding CAA safety factor)

But then again - if you're flying super-light ie: no more than an hour of fuel and only you on board... A little 10kt headwind component, you might be able to do it - my chart says 1000ft groundroll - so including the short dry grass but not the CAA safety factor you'd be looking at 365m.

I think it might be safer to fly a Cub in there....

[Sam Rutherford]

Sorry, yes. Grass.

[piperboy84]

Sorry, yes. Grass.


Time for another Maule Sam, a 235hp nosegear would be the ticket.

[9 lives]

I cannot speak for the Saratoga, but I can say that repeated short runway ops become very un nerving. My home runway started out at 700 feet. My C 150 would do it, but warm days were simply scary. I have operated a C 182 at 3350 gross weight out of a 900 foot runway (40 feet longer than the takeoff distance table said is needed) Too short to relax!

It's not worth the worry, and possible explanation to the insurer - leave yourself some room whenever you can....

[piperboy84]

Sam, my farm strip is about 450 meters, on the odd occasion I've considered upgrading to a bigger plane I looked at the Saratoga, Cherokee 6 , DArrow, Pathfinder Dakota, C210 and a lot of others, some have book figures that may just make it but those figures are for a plane equipped with a new engine and prop and flown by a factory test pilot. Could they do it? probably, do I want to do it consistently with passengers? probably not the margins are to slim. Sooner or later you're going to have an overshoot.

[ChickenHouse]

PA32 Saratoga - short field
Anyone regularly taking one of these into 400m strips?
Thanks, Sam.
No. We frequently gather at a friends farm on his 1,300ft grass strip, but the one in the group with a Saratoga never flies there. We typically pick him up with C172 or PA18 at a bigger airstrip about 5 minutes away.

[wsmempson]

I have 300 hrs in Cherokee sixes and 450hrs in a n/a Saratoga. I would be very happy with a well drained 400m grass strip in the C6, if I wasn't heavily loaded, and the wind was 10kts down the runway. The Saratoga is quite different and whilst I am happy with grass strips, would be very wary of anything less than 600m - and would want to know that conditions were favourable before taking it on. The Hershey-bar wing and the later laminar-flow wings are very different animals...

[ETOPS]

Time for another Maule Sam, a 235hp nosegear would be the ticket

By coincidence ....

Maule MT-7-235 - AT Aviation (http://www.ataviation.uk/listings/maule-mt-7-235/)

[Big Pistons Forever]

A Robertson STOL converted Cessna 206 would work on a 400 meter grass strip at gross weight and under virtually any conditions.

[Arfur Dent]

Listen to Step Turn
I have 25,000+ hours on many things including Chipmunks, JP's, Gnats, Hunters, Whirlwinds, Harriers, Lightnings, Jaguars, 737's and all models of 747's - oh and PA28's.
Everything we did had "margins". Unless you really need to fly in and out of a VERY limiting strip with VERY FEW "margins", I suggest that you don't.
Old and Not too Bold

[Vilters]

This is a good video to set personal margins.

THIS IS A "MUST SEE" Video.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmEVwyMRYIY

[Vilters]

Another "Rotate and turn" video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1vSM49-U3ZM

[Arw82]

I have the graphs if you would like them Sam - PM me.

The shortest Tarmac runway I've been in and out of is 500m with low fuel and 2pob. The PA32 can be a ground hog! With the wind blowing down the runway and a nice cold day etc you might do a little better but who can guarantee those ideal conditions?!

I use Elmsett a few times a year 900m grass. The grass is perfect there, well maintained, rolled and mowed short like a bowling green. Landing is never a problem (there is an upslope on one runway) I can get down in half the distance easily If the approach speed is nice and stable. Takeoff I wouldn't want to push it in light wind and higer temps with fuller fuel and more POB it always feels tight!

[Vilters]

Not so lucky.
The guys got "locked in ground effect".
Vegitation, and turbulence around vegitation can change temperatures and density altitudes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVM3RRd1vf0

[Arfur Dent]

The guy suggests (or says) that in future he will add 50% to book performance. They very nearly hit those trees.....

[brentford77]

I did 400hrs in a PA32-301R. Wouldn't do anywhere below 500m.

[Sam Rutherford]

One last bit of info, it has a 3% gradient...

[piperboy84]

One last bit of info, it has a 3% gradient...

You need a John Deere not a Piper

[TheOddOne]

One last bit of info, it has a 3% gradient...

Let us know the reg so we can look out for it in the AAIB bulletins

TOO

[Sam Rutherford]

Not making a choice of right or wrong, but an observation:

The posts from UK based pilots are overwhelmingly 'against', the posts (elsewhere) from US based pilots are much more 'for'.

Not sure if there are any conclusions to be drawn from this, just interesting.

[Mike Flynn]

I watched on my home strip as a friend nearly killed himself and his family in this incident many years ago.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5422fb3540f0b61342000757/Piper_PA-28RT-201_Cherokee_Arrow_IV__G-BMKE_10-93.pdf

That was an Arrow. Having owned a low tail PA32 I would not risk it.

[Sam Rutherford]

"elsewhere" - not on this forum...

[27/09]

One last bit of info, it has a 3% gradient...

Simple, land up hill, take off downhill. Easy :)

[Jan Olieslagers]

It is well known to all aviation forum participants that both the air and gravity behave totally different the other side of the great pond.

Ahum ahum ;)

Or was that other forum about John Deere craft, perhaps? :)

[piperboy84]

Trying to visualize what the slope would look like, if my calcs are right it's 40 feet over 1300. That's a fair old rise.

[wsmempson]

Sam, the PA32 family contains a number of subtly different models, that all behave differently in the take-off phase. You might break them down at follows, based in their take-off performance;

1. PA32-300 - Cherokee 6, which will comfortably go out of the strips you're talking about, given the right conditions. Useful load circa 1,400lbs (although some late ones were certified at 1,600lbs)

2. PA32R-300 - Lance I, a straight tail lance, which is only just behind the C6 in terms of take-off performance. Useful load circa 1,250-1,300lbs

3. PA32R-301 - Saratoga, this needs more ground for the takeoff roll and the useful load is 1,300lbs MAXIMUM and often less (although very late Saratoga's with all the kit may have as little as 950lbs u/l)

4. PA32RT-300 - Lance II with the T-tail. Because of a lack of airflow from the prop over the elevator, you get no elevator authority until you approach take-off speed. This results in a 50% longer take off distance, over and above a C6, or Lance I, and probably 35-40% longer than a Saratoga.

You need to be absolutely certain that the other people speaking are remembering the right model, when they give you advice, as memory can be a funnily selective thing.

[Sam Rutherford]

Thanks WSM, interesting data and very valid point at the end!

[overandout]

Seriously Sam, Not a good idea. I took one round the world and had to dead stick it in an Alaska short dirt strip. too scary for comfort. Getting out was a drama

[Flyingmac]

Sam specified the Saratoga. If he'd said the Six-300 I'd have reacted quite differently.
He didn't. So it's a negative from me.

[winkwink]

I went into Connemara 2 years ago in a PA32-300. 600 mètres, and with a pronounced downward slope which we had to accept due to the wind. Lightish after a flight from London with two up front and one passenger. Pilot had about 150 hours and did a good job stopping. Plenty of runway left without flatspotting the tyres. Much heavier for take off, due to fuel to return to London. Standard short field, 2 stages, downward slope and wind assisted, and it was quite cold. It was again easy.
However, it was a hard runway, and I think it would have been marginal on a level one. 400 metre grass. Well, if you are really firm about acceptable conditions then fine. A Cherry 6 would be a better option. Lose about 15 kts in the cruise but infinitely better short field. Imagine you get comfortable with the landings, then one day there's a gusty crosswind.....I am a really good cross wind pilot, but it can burn up your runway. Take off in a Toga uses lots of grass. Fly in to White Waltham and give it a go

[Mike Flynn]

I have flown the Six, Lance 1 and T Tail plus the Saratoga.

I only ever bought one which I used in the USA and Australia.

The low tail 300HP Lance is the best.
https://s14.postimg.org/tjma0wfe9/image.jpg

With the wind and temperature on the right day you will get in an out one up in this.

However is it worth the risk?

I suspect you are planning to land at a small strip in a remote area Sam?

[Sleeve Wing]

Sam, the very best advice came from Arfur D. in #14. Unless you really have to, don’t do it !
I’ve been around for a while and wouldn’t look at less than 700m. in a Saratoga and that on a cold day with a bit of HW.
It’s always easy getting in…..it’s the getting out that’s the problem !

[wsmempson]

Bolt head airfield in Devon was a regular stop in my Saratoga, with 4 POB and (620m grass) was never problematic in the slightest - partly due to being well drained, a firm well tended runway and a pretty reliable sea breeze, and partly due to familiarity with the aircraft and short-field techniques.

On the other hand, departing Hilversham (700m grass, and not that well drained) on a still, damp day is not something that I'd be in a hurry to do again - and that was after I'd reminded the passengers that the laws on recreational drugs are not as lax in the UK as Holland, and seen 3 people head for a bin....

ILAFFT

[Mike Flynn]

I had fun with dirt strips in the Australian outbackhttps://s21.postimg.org/br6tekscn/image.jpg

[wsmempson]

JS, a Lance I looks like a lot of fun in that environment!

[alex90]

JS, where was that? Looks stunning!

Sam - you just need to run the numbers in the POH, and make your own informed decision. Interesting that people in the US are being more positive about a 400m grass strip.

You'd definitely land it in there - no problems. But perhaps struggle a little to take it off again!

[Mike Flynn]

Cobra Station in north western Australia.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobra_Station

[Sillert,V.I.]

This triggered a memory of a past accident (with sadly fatal consequences) in circumstances not much different to what the OP is proposing.

The link is here (https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwiW3aWF6pbSAhWCPhQKHQorDMgQFggyMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.publishing.service.gov.uk%2Fmedia%2 F5423026f40f0b61346000c0d%2FPiper_PA-32-301_Saratoga__G-BMDC_10-08.pdf&usg=AFQjCNGbPRUpMBm-tOXIaQfq5PHoKaOgZw&cad=rja) and contains some interesting and relevant performance data.

I can think of at least two other incidents in the UK where a PA-32 has gone through the far hedge on takeoff (and that's not counting the one that went through the side hedge attempting to takeoff at night from an unlicensed, unlit & wet grass runway :confused:).

[wsmempson]

Very interesting, Sillert, V.I.

The link you posted was of a 200 hr pilot, on his first solo flight in a PA32 (fixed gear saratoga) coming back from Dieppe, who chose to land at an un-manned un-designated private strip in the uk (as his first port of call) and then tried to take off again from a runway with 302m useable, with a 1.6% upslope.

Quite a lot of this story seems to exist between the lines.

The PA32 that went through the hedge at Wycombe was a T-tail lance, that was overweight, possibly on an informal charter flight, and grossly miss-handled by the 200hr pilot, who attempted to rotate early, and then held it nose-high behind the drag-curve but unable to get out of ground effect, until it went through the hedge at the end of a 735m tarmac runway.

Sadly, these and a few other similar incidents seem to have a factor in common, which is less to do with the aircraft, and more to do with the profile of pilot flying it.

But I very much agree with the principle of what you're saying, which is that Saratoga's are not really short strip aircraft.

[27/09]

Sadly, these and a few other similar incidents seem to have a factor in common, which is less to do with the aircraft, and more to do with the profile of pilot flying it.

How true. The PA32 is very unforgiving of poor technique. They will perform very well when flown correctly.

I'll also bet the 200 pilot had a significant amount of Cessna time, where raising the nose and holding it there works pretty well all the time, unfortunately this is an invitation for disaster on the PA 32 and some other aircraft.

Unless it was grossly over weight I would have thought 735 metres of sealed runway would have been an adequate take of distance.

[Mike Flynn]

The T tail Lance does not want to lift off as easily as the low tail model.

[27/09]

The T tail Lance does not want to lift off as easily as the low tail model.

I don't have any time in a T tail Lance, I've flown the low tail Lance and the Cherokee 6. Also I've flown the PA28R both low and T tail so I can imagine how the T tail Lance compares to the low tail Lance.

The T tail being up out of the prop wash needs a higher airspeed/groundspeed before it becomes effective.

The T Tail Arrow took longer to get the nose raised on the take off roll and on a grass surface this certainly increased the take off distance. The overall impact on a sealed surface wasn't anywhere near as great in my experience.

The T Tail is a double whammy for the unwary. Because it is initially less effective and they are not getting the expected response, they will pull back even further in an attempt to raise the nose, when it does become effective it is more effective than the low tail version as it has a longer lever arm.

Now with more up elevator than needed, the aircraft over rotates, and you end up in the high drag situation described above, where the pilot mushes through the hedge at the far end of the runway.

[Mike Flynn]

The T tail Pipers were a bit of a fashion statement that did zero for the aircraft take of performance. Hence the Saratoga.

[wsmempson]

Piper went for a common family look with the T-tail Tomahawk, Arrow IV and Lance two as it was fashionable amongst airliners of the time, with a theoretical speed gain of having the stabilator up in 'clean' air. Unfortunately, the speed gain for Piper was minimal and more than outweighed by some handling disadvantages.

In terms of the Wycombe Lance II accident

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5422f0f740f0b613420002fb/Piper_PA-32RT-300_Cherokee_Lance_II_G-RHHT_03-12.pdf

The pilot would have had enough runway, even though it was a warm day, he was at least 186lbs overweight (and it is thought that he had full tanks after fuelling, rather than 60usg) and an aft of rear c of g (which is a real no-no in a PA32) if he hadn't mis-handled the take-off.

That everyone walked away from this accident, was truly amazing!

[Mike Flynn]

Looking at the accidents in this thread none of the pilots bothered to do pre take off calcs.

The same applied to the guy who nearly killed himself on my airstrip.

[alex90]

JS - Do you think they went on PPRUNE or some American forum where people said "yeah go for it" and didn't run the maths themselves... Before getting in trouble and not realising 1/2 or 2/3rd of the way down the runway that they won't make it and need to stop?

[Mike Flynn]

Well if you look at my picture in the Australian outback on a gravel strip with midday temps in the cool around 40c then it would be foolish not to do calcs.

You don't fly in to places like that on empty tanks.

Good example here of a short field take off gone wrong

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VTnW2TXOacY

[alex90]

JS.

I think that even though the plane looks very heavy, and even considering the length of the strip, this is still pilot error. I think any pilot who was taught well would have been able to take off from that strip, with the same variables, or at least recover whilst in ground effect from earlier errors. (pitch down to fly level in ground effect, speed up then climb). I can't understand why the pilot opted to keep pulling hard on the yoke, it looks rather clear ahead, why stall it?

[27/09]

That's a 182 not a 172 as the video title suggests.

A 182 should have romped away under normal circumstances, unless it was down on power or grossly overloaded. What elevation was that airstrip?

[Sam Rutherford]

So, 500m tarmac. No worries. Stopped in 300m easy, off in about 350m.

Grass, been practicing with a 580m strip (trees at one end). Stopped in 350m, off in about 400m.

I think I can improve these as well.

All heavy. But, one thing is true, the margin for error is very small!

Fly safe, Sam.

[Jan Olieslagers]

I was sure to have posted this before but cannot find it right now, so here goes, at the risk of posting doubly:
There's a PA32, T-tailed, based at my homefield - 600 m grass. The owners take it to Spain a couple of times per year, on those occasions they fly it to a nearby field with a longer and hard runway, only there to take up the full load of fuel, people, luggage.

[Sam Rutherford]

That's ballsy in a T Tail, they need more (I've heard)…?

[Flyingmac]

That's ballsy in a T Tail, they need more (I've heard)…?

I've flown all three off grass. Six 300 , Saratoga and Lance. Given a choice. My first would be the Six. Then the Saratoga. T-tail a last resort.
Getting the Saratoga off the ground tends to use a fair bit less runway than getting it back on. Maybe I need to work at it. Maybe I can't be bothered.

[Sam Rutherford]

Take-off is broadly full throttle and hang on. Not a lot you can do to shorten the run (without 'popping flaps' and other exotic and not terribly effective tricks).

Shortening the landing roll has lots of variables that really make big differences. But yup, it's only practice that makes a difference! :)

[ChickenHouse]

Anyone regularly taking one of these into 400m strips?

Thanks, Sam.
One time IN may be doable under good conditions, but - does it have to be able to get OUT again?
I would easily do 400m gras with a C172, but never on a regular basis in a Saratoga ...

[Wide-Body]

So, 500m tarmac. No worries. Stopped in 300m easy, off in about 350m.

Grass, been practicing with a 580m strip (trees at one end). Stopped in 350m, off in about 400m.

I think I can improve these as well.

All heavy. But, one thing is true, the margin for error is very small!

Fly safe, Sam.

An accident looking for a grid reference.

[Sam Rutherford]

Hopefully not!

[Sam Rutherford]

@Wide-Body

Was thinking more about this comment. Really? I've noticed that my approaches on all landings have improved thanks to the short strip experiences of the last week. If you're not testing your flying then you're stagnating yourself and your skills.

Good luck with your comfort zone, but be aware that if you don't keep stretching it, it's vulnerable to natural shrinkage!

[Wide-Body]

An accident looking for a grid reference.







yep Sam , still stick by that. Copied your patronising comment. My comfort zone over the years has been pushed to the limits many time and beyond. In the consequence of doing so I have picked up the bits and pieces of those who pushed theirs to far and too often.

Bit of advice, if you want a stol weightlifter use the right kit. If there is little room for error as you suggest, perhaps their are wiser options.

[Sam Rutherford]

There are certainly more expensive options! At the same time, I've not been doing anything that's not within POH limits - just expanding my own.

We have a gig coming up next year, lots of rough strips in Greenland at +/- 600m length - keen to be on top of my game beforehand.

[alex90]

There are certainly more expensive options! At the same time, I've not been doing anything that's not within POH limits - just expanding my own.

We have a gig coming up next year, lots of rough strips in Greenland at +/- 600m length - keen to be on top of my game beforehand.


OOOOOH Are you going to be flying with bushwheels!?? I want to see pictures when this happens please!!!

[Sam Rutherford]

Hope so, trying to sort the field approvals now. There is an STC for big wheels for Cherry Six, but not for Saratoga (even though the FG hardware is identical)…

Compensating, me...? :)

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmforum.com-vbulletin/299x223/859706_614516201896318_1039410584_o_67ee5c71a384817682113697 b638ccbc0026a54e.jpg

[Magic90]

Shortly after buying my Saratoga TC ll, I decided to drop into Sywell EGBK for a bite to eat. I’d been in there several times before but in a PA28 Arrow. On arrival the runway had switched to the very short Rwy 23 grass just 603 mtrs. It was a fine dry day and so I elected to land, although I hadn’t considered departing.

had some lunch in the lovely Art deco terminal, uplifted a full load (102usg) of fuel and headed out to the still in use 23. As I lined up the tower informed that the main 21 hard was now available, however, I was lined up and ready to try my FIRST soft field takeoff in the 32. 25 flap, brakes on, full power and off we go…It’s amazing how quickly you can eat up 600 mtrs. I eventually reached 75 tks and back came the yoke, climb out was a little sluggish until the gear came up but it wasn’t really too much of a drama. However, my one lasting memory was how little grass was left, certainly less than 100 mtrs.

once back at EGSC I decided to look up the POH. 25flap: check full power: check, rotate at 70IAS: bugger! OK I did have 5 up my sleeve, but it could have gone very wrong if one of the very many variables had changed. I always regarded myself lucky not to have pranged my lovely ‘new’ aircraft and I’m now so aware of the aircraft’s limitations and mine. She’s great to fly and in the right hands short field grass takeoffs are very achievable. 600mtrs? Just about, but not for me. My minimum is 800 grass on a good day and a good surface. My Sywell adventure has had several outcomes; I now think really hard about where I land and go over the takeoff figures several times. Secondly, I now have an aversion to grass runways. Thirdly, my home plate has almost 2000 mtrs and this has made my approach (no pun) to short field operations quite lazy.

just one final point, I learned to fly my aircraft out of Fowlmere which is 704mtrs plus another 150 mtr takeoff run for rwy25. I never thought once it was too short…amazing what a very competent instructor sitting next to you can do for your confidence.

[340drvr]

Micro VGs might help (you probably already knew that).
PA-32-301 Saratoga - Micro AeroDynamics Inc (https://microaero.com/vgkit/pa-32-301-saratoga/)