Piaggio p180
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Italy
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Piaggio p180
Hallo Guys,
I am evaluating the aircraft for a far-East client.
He falled in love with shape of the aircraft and it's speed.
I am studying chart, but as a pilot I would like to receive human feedbacks.
I would like to receive comments from P180 drivers about positive and negative aspects of the plane and what about client think of once flyied.
Thanks for help
I am evaluating the aircraft for a far-East client.
He falled in love with shape of the aircraft and it's speed.
I am studying chart, but as a pilot I would like to receive human feedbacks.
I would like to receive comments from P180 drivers about positive and negative aspects of the plane and what about client think of once flyied.
Thanks for help
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Italy
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...I already studied all the chart, I am looking for Pilot feeling of the machine
Handling, feeling, REAL performances,turbulence behaviour ecc ecc
You can PM if you like
Tks
Handling, feeling, REAL performances,turbulence behaviour ecc ecc
You can PM if you like
Tks
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It flies about like any other airplane. It's got a bigger cabin than a King Air 200, but flies about 100 knots faster on the same fuel burn, and goes up to FL410. It's quieter inside than some airplanes; the passengers can hear the pilots talk, so some restraint is in order. It's a fairly simple airplane. Flies more like a turbojet airplane, with the operating economy of turboprop. Plan on jet distances and landing speeds.
Pilot impressions...just another airplane.
Pilot impressions...just another airplane.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Sweden
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Impressive? Isn't jet speed at Tp consumption w larger, quieter cabin impressive? As for just another airplane that would sound pretty good to me. You don't want something so odd it requires lengthy discussions about drawbacks vs highlights. Considering SNS3Guppy's track record "just another airplane" sounds like a positive comment.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know how impressive Piaggio says the airplane is. It's an airplane. It goes from A to B. It has benifits and it has drawbacks. It has no antiskid, and carbon brakes that heat up and begin to grab...and which don't work well until they're warm. A lot of pilots flat spot the tires at some stage.
The airplane is fast, but has a small wing; it's total surface area between the three lifting surfaces (forward wing, main wing, and horizontal stab) is about the same as a cessna 182. Whereas most airfoils on light airplanes experience airflow separation around 25% chord, the piaggio sees it near 50%. While not a true laminar airfoil, it has laminar characteristics. Any disruption of airflow over the wing, including flying through a cloud, causes an airspeed loss and a loss of lift with airflow separation. the airplane doesn't fall out of the sky by any means, but the control column moves back and forth about two inches when flying through fair weather cumulous clouds, and it can lose about fifteen knots when in sustained visible moisture (or with any leading edge or upper wing contamination, from rain to peeled paint, insects, frost, etc).
It's an airplane. Most who fly in it seem to like it very much. Make up your own mind; go check one out.
The airplane is fast, but has a small wing; it's total surface area between the three lifting surfaces (forward wing, main wing, and horizontal stab) is about the same as a cessna 182. Whereas most airfoils on light airplanes experience airflow separation around 25% chord, the piaggio sees it near 50%. While not a true laminar airfoil, it has laminar characteristics. Any disruption of airflow over the wing, including flying through a cloud, causes an airspeed loss and a loss of lift with airflow separation. the airplane doesn't fall out of the sky by any means, but the control column moves back and forth about two inches when flying through fair weather cumulous clouds, and it can lose about fifteen knots when in sustained visible moisture (or with any leading edge or upper wing contamination, from rain to peeled paint, insects, frost, etc).
It's an airplane. Most who fly in it seem to like it very much. Make up your own mind; go check one out.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: 3 rock of the moon
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pro
great cabin, noise level, speed vs fuel burn
con
maintenance, maintenance and support
Also the problem is that it is an unforgiving aircraft to land for the inexperienced....
great cabin, noise level, speed vs fuel burn
con
maintenance, maintenance and support
Also the problem is that it is an unforgiving aircraft to land for the inexperienced....
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Italy
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about the canard. It has to be a significant safety feature IE, impossible to stall the mainplanes?
Tipical stall is very flat, with almost no picth change and very controllable on yaw and roll. Very "soft" entry, so soft in fact that it can be dangerous (can't really "feel" the airplane stalling)
Join Date: May 2002
Location: dubai
Posts: 942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By stall I am referring to a fully developed stall, IE full departure.. Aren't you referring to prestall sink?
I have always believed that apart from stability, the canards were there to ensure the prevention of a fully developed stall. This would be achieved by having the angle of incidence of the canard set higher than the main planes, therefore ensuring the canards enter prestall sink and allowing the nose to drop before the main planes stall.
I stand to be corrected on the above of course.
I have always believed that apart from stability, the canards were there to ensure the prevention of a fully developed stall. This would be achieved by having the angle of incidence of the canard set higher than the main planes, therefore ensuring the canards enter prestall sink and allowing the nose to drop before the main planes stall.
I stand to be corrected on the above of course.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 3,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The airplane doesn't have a canard. It has a forward wing. It has no primary flight control surfaces, and isn't variable. It has flaps, but no primary pitch functions, doesn't change in incidence, or sweep. It's just a forward wing.
The airplane can be stalled with a stable, nose up descent at around 2,000 fpm and full aft controls. Rudder is still available and aileron control is still possible.
The Piaggio doesn't rely upon a download on the horizontal stab, and doesn't experience a drop in the nose during a stall; in other words, no traditional stall break. It doesn't geneally suffer from the same potential deep stall characteristics of other aircraft that use canard or forward wing surfaces.
Contrary to what some may believe, it's a very simple airplane to land. It lands like any light jet. The whole airplane is simple, from fuel management to flaps (which have three positions, despite several independent sets and a complex flap scheduling arrangement...for the pilot it's just up, mid, or down). If you can fly a king air, you can fly a piaggio. It just lands a little faster. It handles like any other airplane in the air. It's ground handling characteristics take a little getting used to, but if you can taxi a twin commander, you can certainly taxi a piaggio. It's just another airplane. It looks different, but it doesn't handle differently.
The airplane can be stalled with a stable, nose up descent at around 2,000 fpm and full aft controls. Rudder is still available and aileron control is still possible.
The Piaggio doesn't rely upon a download on the horizontal stab, and doesn't experience a drop in the nose during a stall; in other words, no traditional stall break. It doesn't geneally suffer from the same potential deep stall characteristics of other aircraft that use canard or forward wing surfaces.
Contrary to what some may believe, it's a very simple airplane to land. It lands like any light jet. The whole airplane is simple, from fuel management to flaps (which have three positions, despite several independent sets and a complex flap scheduling arrangement...for the pilot it's just up, mid, or down). If you can fly a king air, you can fly a piaggio. It just lands a little faster. It handles like any other airplane in the air. It's ground handling characteristics take a little getting used to, but if you can taxi a twin commander, you can certainly taxi a piaggio. It's just another airplane. It looks different, but it doesn't handle differently.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: edge of reality
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I found it maybe the easiest aircraft to land that I've encountered... just keep the nose pointing down to a reasonable flare height... ease the power levers back and the CofG appears to move aft placing the a/c into a perfect nose high attitude to be greased on... made me feel almost adequate... did find that it was a bit sensitive in pitch in my early circuits..
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: edge of reality
Posts: 792
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
youngskywalker "If you can taxi a twin commander"...now that was a bugger to taxi!
The P180 was no problem after the TwinCommander.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: 3 rock of the moon
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The main issues the airplane has had was the aircraft getting off the runway after touchdown... most embarrising the one during the deliveryprocess at the factory (yes it was landing 
)
)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the fuselage of a DHC-7 in a junkyard
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Consider that the actual Vmc with propeller unfeathered (5 blade prop) is about 125kias. Other than this it is the sweetest turboprop a pilot can enjoy... and a passenger as well
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Italy
Posts: 593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...Just got flight ride and just one word: superb!
I really enjoied room in cabin and interior noise.
Good performances ( what a climb!) and quite good handling.
circuits and Landing have been uneventful.
Bad things: Not really rock solid in turbulence ( in clouds) but I suppose it is just like any small plane.
Really difficult to get in pilot seat ( I am almost 180 cm 90 kg)
I really enjoied room in cabin and interior noise.
Good performances ( what a climb!) and quite good handling.
circuits and Landing have been uneventful.
Bad things: Not really rock solid in turbulence ( in clouds) but I suppose it is just like any small plane.
Really difficult to get in pilot seat ( I am almost 180 cm 90 kg)