Seneca 2
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nah, no news, just looking ahead!!
Its back in the MF and they are looking at it.
I'm using Wiz's 310 for the next month so I still have wings.
Time will tell!!
NAP
Its back in the MF and they are looking at it.
I'm using Wiz's 310 for the next month so I still have wings.
Time will tell!!
NAP
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Not the beach
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seneca II !!!!!!!!!!!
A shocker - nothing but a Lead Sled. No performance, no comfort, no safety, in short - a real lemon. Always plenty for sale and by comparison to the Seneca 1, the Seneca II is a high performance aircraft.
A shocker - nothing but a Lead Sled. No performance, no comfort, no safety, in short - a real lemon. Always plenty for sale and by comparison to the Seneca 1, the Seneca II is a high performance aircraft.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Still in Paradise
Age: 60
Posts: 861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ackcherly they ain't all that bad - depending what you want them for o'course.
Easy to fly, easy to land (although they have a very high score in the NTSB database for landing prangs). The engines are fickle and to misquote George Braly 'Not even God can start a hot (Seneca II) easily'. The turbos are touchy and subject to a bunch of ADs (as is everything else of this vintage). Oh yeah, and they're contrarotating, which has pluses and minuses as well. They spew oil out the engine breathers all over the trailing edges and it comes out the tops of the flaps in flight which is not very confidence inspiring for the pax - unless the engines have the oil recovery system fitted. The priming system - you push and hold a button for a length of time as determined by a graph in the PoH - and watch the fuel piddle all over the ground directly under the exhausts. Also bound to comfort nervous pax, the stink of fuel through the cabin on a hot day.
If you go over 40" boost on T/O, the wastegates open and drop power by at least a third - bad news on a not-overpowered ship.
They have a very restrictive ZFW and max LNDG WT, as well as touchy CoG. Without the aux nacelle tanks, they're short-legged. With them, the fuel system sux. For one or two pax - maybe three tops - they're OK. The back doors are nice - even if they do leak like a sieve in rain. There is limited or no effective ventilation.
Gimme an Aztec anyday - more room, more comfort, more range, same speed or better, less complex systems and the best fuel setup in the business. Ask nice an' I'll even rent you one at the right price
Easy to fly, easy to land (although they have a very high score in the NTSB database for landing prangs). The engines are fickle and to misquote George Braly 'Not even God can start a hot (Seneca II) easily'. The turbos are touchy and subject to a bunch of ADs (as is everything else of this vintage). Oh yeah, and they're contrarotating, which has pluses and minuses as well. They spew oil out the engine breathers all over the trailing edges and it comes out the tops of the flaps in flight which is not very confidence inspiring for the pax - unless the engines have the oil recovery system fitted. The priming system - you push and hold a button for a length of time as determined by a graph in the PoH - and watch the fuel piddle all over the ground directly under the exhausts. Also bound to comfort nervous pax, the stink of fuel through the cabin on a hot day.
If you go over 40" boost on T/O, the wastegates open and drop power by at least a third - bad news on a not-overpowered ship.
They have a very restrictive ZFW and max LNDG WT, as well as touchy CoG. Without the aux nacelle tanks, they're short-legged. With them, the fuel system sux. For one or two pax - maybe three tops - they're OK. The back doors are nice - even if they do leak like a sieve in rain. There is limited or no effective ventilation.
Gimme an Aztec anyday - more room, more comfort, more range, same speed or better, less complex systems and the best fuel setup in the business. Ask nice an' I'll even rent you one at the right price
Yeah Wiz, but you wouldn't be biased now would you?
Right now is the time to steer poor old NAP in the "right direction". The poor b*ggar needs a bit of "direction" about now.
Nap, I've been following your advice and given coke the flick out of the drinks, problem now is the other bottle's depletion rate is now somewhat astounding..... Seriously Napster, the purchase price of a baron/C310/etc might be somewhat higher, but the normal ongoing maintainance costs per hour wouldn't be much higher than a seneca. Where the "hidden" costs exist are in such things as what problems are normally associated with a particular a/c type, ie; some a/c are very hard on certain components, other types are hard on other specific things. The best bet here, a LAME with some reasonable experience on the type/s and year models of what you might be interested in purchasing.
It might pay to also look at the costs of new props and engines at around a 50% split in time between like components on the other side of the airframe. The cost of an I0-520/ prop combo couldn't be all that pretty these days, and I'm aware Wiz had some difficulty with getting hold of a prop for Daisy at one stage.
Regards,
OpsN.
Jamair, long time no see/speak! How's the Piper going?
Right now is the time to steer poor old NAP in the "right direction". The poor b*ggar needs a bit of "direction" about now.
Nap, I've been following your advice and given coke the flick out of the drinks, problem now is the other bottle's depletion rate is now somewhat astounding..... Seriously Napster, the purchase price of a baron/C310/etc might be somewhat higher, but the normal ongoing maintainance costs per hour wouldn't be much higher than a seneca. Where the "hidden" costs exist are in such things as what problems are normally associated with a particular a/c type, ie; some a/c are very hard on certain components, other types are hard on other specific things. The best bet here, a LAME with some reasonable experience on the type/s and year models of what you might be interested in purchasing.
It might pay to also look at the costs of new props and engines at around a 50% split in time between like components on the other side of the airframe. The cost of an I0-520/ prop combo couldn't be all that pretty these days, and I'm aware Wiz had some difficulty with getting hold of a prop for Daisy at one stage.
Regards,
OpsN.
Jamair, long time no see/speak! How's the Piper going?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay, time for a re-think, perhaps.
I want a small turbo twin to cart myself around! Now and then Mrs NAP and the NAPlets (2) as well.
My requirements are:
Twin
Turbo
175kn+
700nm+ range
IFR (as most would be)
$200,000.00 or less
What am I looking for folks?
NAP
I want a small turbo twin to cart myself around! Now and then Mrs NAP and the NAPlets (2) as well.
My requirements are:
Twin
Turbo
175kn+
700nm+ range
IFR (as most would be)
$200,000.00 or less
What am I looking for folks?
NAP
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Downunder USA
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For a private ship that will not be carrying 6 fullsized pax around the country side a Seneca 11 would not be that bad. From a commercial point of view a seneca would be useless, not even comparable to a Baron, 310 or Aztruck.
However for a private a/c the Seneca 11 is cheap to run, as long as its looked after properly. Reasonable quick and quite roomy. We all know that Pipers are nicer to sit in than Cessnas. $200,000 would pick you up a nice Seneca 11. I am only going on my exp, only have about 40 hours in them, however i have to agree with Jamair, people to tend to prang them on landing. Never really had a problem myself.. So if you havent already, hire one, fly one, speak to engineers and owners. Otherwise would highly recommend a baron, but then your running cost increases by about 40%. Good luck.
However for a private a/c the Seneca 11 is cheap to run, as long as its looked after properly. Reasonable quick and quite roomy. We all know that Pipers are nicer to sit in than Cessnas. $200,000 would pick you up a nice Seneca 11. I am only going on my exp, only have about 40 hours in them, however i have to agree with Jamair, people to tend to prang them on landing. Never really had a problem myself.. So if you havent already, hire one, fly one, speak to engineers and owners. Otherwise would highly recommend a baron, but then your running cost increases by about 40%. Good luck.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: North son, I say go North..........
Posts: 599
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great Plane.
Seneca II is a great plane however limited.
They carry a decent load, use ****** all strip and are like a cherokee 6 to fly.
They fly 100kg overweight like you wouldn't notice. How do I know this cause I flew one overweight for 6 months. The ship I had had long range tanks and it wasn't in the flight manual! Only found out when we did an ADInst9!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So basically I tankered heaps of fuel for a while!!!!!!!!
They carry a decent load, use ****** all strip and are like a cherokee 6 to fly.
They fly 100kg overweight like you wouldn't notice. How do I know this cause I flew one overweight for 6 months. The ship I had had long range tanks and it wasn't in the flight manual! Only found out when we did an ADInst9!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So basically I tankered heaps of fuel for a while!!!!!!!!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Still in Paradise
Age: 60
Posts: 861
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geez HA; whadid ya reckon all those extra drains was for? Or the extra caps on the nacelles?
OK, so you want a turbo - the Sneaker - like I said - ain't that bad, but the engines ARE twitchy so unless you're buying one with run out donks and putting 2 x newies in (at about $50K per) you will probably be buying someone elses problems. The TSIO 360 is a small, hot, hardworking engine that does break. If you buy any turbo, (or any piston engine aeroplane for that matter) put aside $15K for a JPI EDM 760 and some GAMIs.
If however, you want a LARGE loafing engine, and turbos, then check the latest traitor - oops, Trader. There's a low time Turbo Aztec loaded with goodies for a good price - its more than $200K AUD but he wants it gone so you never know. Tom Block got one - check out past issues of 'Flying' (US).
Or how about a c340? Prob'ly spend 20 min in the shed with the covers off for every hour its in the air, but gets along OK, turbos, pressurised, carries 2 + 2 with a decent range. There's a few on the market at the moment.
Or there a C310T....good performance and load but no pressurisation woes........(no, not the C320, the T310 - there's one on the market in Melbourne at the moment)
The Aerostar? Hard to find a good one but - I tried, maybe you could get lucky.......
Gidday OpsNorm - bl**dy GOOD is the answer, thing just LOVES to fly and is everything I expected and more. Happy? Damn tootin!! I even gave Chimbu Chuck a drive recently; he kept mumbling about Bonzas but I think he liked it. I just got the GAMIs in today - 10% less fuel burn even RoP - gotta like that. I'll make a point of gettin out to Alice to give you a blat if the opportunity arises (ie if someone ELSE is paying!) Hows yer 310? Drop me a PM with your email & I'll send you some pix - new PC, lost your address, sorry
OK, so you want a turbo - the Sneaker - like I said - ain't that bad, but the engines ARE twitchy so unless you're buying one with run out donks and putting 2 x newies in (at about $50K per) you will probably be buying someone elses problems. The TSIO 360 is a small, hot, hardworking engine that does break. If you buy any turbo, (or any piston engine aeroplane for that matter) put aside $15K for a JPI EDM 760 and some GAMIs.
If however, you want a LARGE loafing engine, and turbos, then check the latest traitor - oops, Trader. There's a low time Turbo Aztec loaded with goodies for a good price - its more than $200K AUD but he wants it gone so you never know. Tom Block got one - check out past issues of 'Flying' (US).
Or how about a c340? Prob'ly spend 20 min in the shed with the covers off for every hour its in the air, but gets along OK, turbos, pressurised, carries 2 + 2 with a decent range. There's a few on the market at the moment.
Or there a C310T....good performance and load but no pressurisation woes........(no, not the C320, the T310 - there's one on the market in Melbourne at the moment)
The Aerostar? Hard to find a good one but - I tried, maybe you could get lucky.......
Gidday OpsNorm - bl**dy GOOD is the answer, thing just LOVES to fly and is everything I expected and more. Happy? Damn tootin!! I even gave Chimbu Chuck a drive recently; he kept mumbling about Bonzas but I think he liked it. I just got the GAMIs in today - 10% less fuel burn even RoP - gotta like that. I'll make a point of gettin out to Alice to give you a blat if the opportunity arises (ie if someone ELSE is paying!) Hows yer 310? Drop me a PM with your email & I'll send you some pix - new PC, lost your address, sorry
Last edited by Jamair; 5th Apr 2003 at 07:07.
C310 or Baron for the speed/range/payload.
Why turbo? You can fly C310s and Barons into the Flight Levels on long trips. Used to fly a non-turbo 310 regularly up to FL180 on survey work.
Having flown around 15 different 'twins' from Cessna, Piper (yes Seneca 1 & 2), Aerocommander, Beechcraft & BrittenNorman, (no turboprops unfortunately), I found they all had their positives & negatives, depending on what you are using them for.
All comes down to the 'mission' and the costs I guess.
Queenair, C310 & Baron were my favourites.
Why turbo? You can fly C310s and Barons into the Flight Levels on long trips. Used to fly a non-turbo 310 regularly up to FL180 on survey work.
Having flown around 15 different 'twins' from Cessna, Piper (yes Seneca 1 & 2), Aerocommander, Beechcraft & BrittenNorman, (no turboprops unfortunately), I found they all had their positives & negatives, depending on what you are using them for.
All comes down to the 'mission' and the costs I guess.
Queenair, C310 & Baron were my favourites.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have about 500 hours on them in the far past. They are just like all aircraft and have their limitations. I've never flown an aircraft that I wished didn't have more range and or payload at some point and I've been flying commercially for 30+ years.
They are relatively fast and economical and the few times will you want to fill it up, your up for a landing somewhere. They also come with different tankage on the mains and may also have nacelle tanks. If possible try and get at least the long range main tanks if you end up chasing a sneaker down.
They tend to want to three point on landing. One technique is to land with only two stages of flap or slowing down a bit so that you have a positive flare on to the ground. I've found most fly them a bit fast on short final.
What they do have is a good cross section in the cabin certianly better than a Baron and are particular nice with the club seating in the back. They also have a good baggage area in the nose and behind the back seats so balancing the aircraft isn't too bad but needs to be done.
There's not a lot of leg room for the centre seats with them all facing forward.
Hope this helps.
They are relatively fast and economical and the few times will you want to fill it up, your up for a landing somewhere. They also come with different tankage on the mains and may also have nacelle tanks. If possible try and get at least the long range main tanks if you end up chasing a sneaker down.
They tend to want to three point on landing. One technique is to land with only two stages of flap or slowing down a bit so that you have a positive flare on to the ground. I've found most fly them a bit fast on short final.
What they do have is a good cross section in the cabin certianly better than a Baron and are particular nice with the club seating in the back. They also have a good baggage area in the nose and behind the back seats so balancing the aircraft isn't too bad but needs to be done.
There's not a lot of leg room for the centre seats with them all facing forward.
Hope this helps.
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey it's only a Cherokee 6/Lance/Saratoga with two engines and doesn't do as good 
a job as any of those, just costs more.
They are not, nor were intended to be, in the same class as the Baron or C310.
a job as any of those, just costs more. They are not, nor were intended to be, in the same class as the Baron or C310.
