PA32-300 (B+) v PA32R-300 v PA32R-301
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA32-300 (B+) v PA32R-300 v PA32R-301
I'm struggling to find a definitive answer on the web about the following specific types and specific questions about them
I know it depends on optional extras etc but would appreciate real world examples of:
1) takeoff and landing ground run
2) takeoff and landing distance to 50'
3) useful load
4) pilot operating handbook.
I've seen one of each model available and want to make an informed choice before deciding whether to proceed.......
I know it depends on optional extras etc but would appreciate real world examples of:
1) takeoff and landing ground run
2) takeoff and landing distance to 50'
3) useful load
4) pilot operating handbook.
I've seen one of each model available and want to make an informed choice before deciding whether to proceed.......
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hi
I've flown the later cherokee 6
I've flown the early, LOW TAIL, non turbo lance
I've flown the later, T TAIL, turbocharged lance
and
I've flown the Saratoga SP (retractable but turbocharged).
I don't have the numbers but I flew all of them from a 2500' runway at sea level, with 10 foot obstacles on both ends.
I've flown them all at max gross weight.
The saratoga has the warrior type wing and is very nice.
The T Tail turocharged lance is a very demanding airplane to fly. I checked out other pilots ( I was a cfiimei) and it took them a good deal of time to get competent in it..
The other two are very nice , and the retractable gear low tail lance might be 20 knots faster than the cherokee six. But you have to included the gear in your mx cost, and checklist! (though as you know, the pipers will put the gear down for you if you forget, if you let it).
with the planes you mention, I would go for the latest model you can find for many reasons. the saratoga would be my choice if money was not a factor. I live near tall mountains and would use the turbocharged version, but if you are mainly a sea level pilot, that isn't needed.
sorry I don't have numbers. Watch out for anything like zero fuel weight as it is important to use it in your calculations. Some will tell you that it is not important, I THINK IT IS.
I've flown the later cherokee 6
I've flown the early, LOW TAIL, non turbo lance
I've flown the later, T TAIL, turbocharged lance
and
I've flown the Saratoga SP (retractable but turbocharged).
I don't have the numbers but I flew all of them from a 2500' runway at sea level, with 10 foot obstacles on both ends.
I've flown them all at max gross weight.
The saratoga has the warrior type wing and is very nice.
The T Tail turocharged lance is a very demanding airplane to fly. I checked out other pilots ( I was a cfiimei) and it took them a good deal of time to get competent in it..
The other two are very nice , and the retractable gear low tail lance might be 20 knots faster than the cherokee six. But you have to included the gear in your mx cost, and checklist! (though as you know, the pipers will put the gear down for you if you forget, if you let it).
with the planes you mention, I would go for the latest model you can find for many reasons. the saratoga would be my choice if money was not a factor. I live near tall mountains and would use the turbocharged version, but if you are mainly a sea level pilot, that isn't needed.
sorry I don't have numbers. Watch out for anything like zero fuel weight as it is important to use it in your calculations. Some will tell you that it is not important, I THINK IT IS.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: london
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the reply.
The saratoga certainly wins out for cruise speed and more recent creature comfort.
However I'm getting conflicting advise on its takeoff performance compared to a c6-300. If it's 10/20% more that's fine.
Essentially, 4 adults not max fuel - what would the minimum safe grass distance be?
The saratoga certainly wins out for cruise speed and more recent creature comfort.
However I'm getting conflicting advise on its takeoff performance compared to a c6-300. If it's 10/20% more that's fine.
Essentially, 4 adults not max fuel - what would the minimum safe grass distance be?
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
again, I don't have the manuals.
I would encourage you to find the manuals but do the calculations using a short field/soft field technique and numbers.
you may use two notches (25 degrees) of flaps for takeoff and really do quite well.
again I flew from a 2500' paved runway back then.
club seating is a plus. the saratoga can have an easier to manage fuel system than very early cherokee sixes.
good luck and happy landings.
do check many things as the 3 bladed prop on some planes lowers takeoff performance but is nicer in cruise.
I would encourage you to find the manuals but do the calculations using a short field/soft field technique and numbers.
you may use two notches (25 degrees) of flaps for takeoff and really do quite well.
again I flew from a 2500' paved runway back then.
club seating is a plus. the saratoga can have an easier to manage fuel system than very early cherokee sixes.
good luck and happy landings.
do check many things as the 3 bladed prop on some planes lowers takeoff performance but is nicer in cruise.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belgium
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't remember too much from my three years of PA32 ownership except this one: when you lower flaps, the nose will come up. If you do an approach to a short runway with flaps, the runway will be under the nose and will be invisible. You will be looking through the side window to do the landing.
Also, don't forget to properly close the nose baggage door, if you don't, it will open right during the landing flare and sit on the windshield. After the PA32, which was a nice load hauler, I moved to the BE36 which is a real pilots aircraft, much faster but with less useful load.
Also, don't forget to properly close the nose baggage door, if you don't, it will open right during the landing flare and sit on the windshield. After the PA32, which was a nice load hauler, I moved to the BE36 which is a real pilots aircraft, much faster but with less useful load.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
glendalegoon: Is there a Saratoga flying somewhere with the automatic gear extension still operating?
PA32R-301 average empty weights between 2250-2350lbs (3600MTOW), long enough runway and it will carry anything you can fit in there. It flies better with aft CG. CG envelope is very wide, it takes some serious effort (and pretty much over gross weight) to be off the CG envelope.
At max gross, it flies abt 145kts IAS at 15-16gph 50F ROP.
Fuel system is like on a Warrior, left right and off.
Its a really comfortable 4 seater, club seating in the back is great for two but for 3-4 it is a knee bending excercise.
Max gross, 700m of grass is enough.
PA32R-301 average empty weights between 2250-2350lbs (3600MTOW), long enough runway and it will carry anything you can fit in there. It flies better with aft CG. CG envelope is very wide, it takes some serious effort (and pretty much over gross weight) to be off the CG envelope.
At max gross, it flies abt 145kts IAS at 15-16gph 50F ROP.
Fuel system is like on a Warrior, left right and off.
Its a really comfortable 4 seater, club seating in the back is great for two but for 3-4 it is a knee bending excercise.
Max gross, 700m of grass is enough.
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: glendale
Posts: 819
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know that some guy lost an engine in an arrow and didn't engage the over ride to keep the gear up. lawsuit blamed the gadget instead of the engine or pilot.
I always thought it was a good idea. So, who knows what some guy has in his hangar.
oh, and to the OP
if you lose an engine (the engine) you can get better glide performance by pulling prop lever aft, but you propably (yes a joke) know this already.
I always thought it was a good idea. So, who knows what some guy has in his hangar.
oh, and to the OP
if you lose an engine (the engine) you can get better glide performance by pulling prop lever aft, but you propably (yes a joke) know this already.
