Going from a PA38 to a PA28-161?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Lancs, UK
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Going from a PA38 to a PA28-161?
I'm hoping to do a checkout in a Warrior II in the near future. The only aircraft I've flown is a PA38 and I've only got just over a hundred hours in that. What sort of differences in handling can I expect (apart from the obvious difference in cruise speed)?
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Age: 61
Posts: 1,272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Handling is pretty similar, it's an easy conversion going from one Piper to another. The Warrior is a little more stable however what you do have to consider is the weight and balance if you're going to load up the rear seats. You'll find you can't fill up and take 4 people and still get off the ground, and it's possible to get the C of G out of limits which can lead to some interesting handling. And the view isn't so good either.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cat.S
Much like DB6 says, however I would add the following caveat:
Unlike the Tomahawk flap selection on the Warrior leads to a significant pitch change, also full flap (40) is really quite draggy.
If you pull flaps to two stage quickly (25) the nose will pitch up quite violently so be careful and look ahead when you select flap. The reverse is true if you panic in a go-around type situation and attemp to select flap to zero too quickly.......the aircraft will drop into freefall with a very nose down attitude (great fun at 5000 ft tho!).
Otherwise the Warrior is nicer and easier to fly than a Tomahawk. With a good instructor the checkout should only take an hour and a half or so.
Enjoy
JWF
Much like DB6 says, however I would add the following caveat:
Unlike the Tomahawk flap selection on the Warrior leads to a significant pitch change, also full flap (40) is really quite draggy.
If you pull flaps to two stage quickly (25) the nose will pitch up quite violently so be careful and look ahead when you select flap. The reverse is true if you panic in a go-around type situation and attemp to select flap to zero too quickly.......the aircraft will drop into freefall with a very nose down attitude (great fun at 5000 ft tho!).
Otherwise the Warrior is nicer and easier to fly than a Tomahawk. With a good instructor the checkout should only take an hour and a half or so.
Enjoy
JWF
- Expect smaller control deflections in pitch, similar in roll.
- Fuel controls and gauges are less visible, tucked away under the control yoke.
- Much less wing drop at the stall.
- More need to trim as flaps are selected.
- Much better power to rate than you'll be used to, the climb rate after take-off will be a pleasant surprise.
- Only one door, and that's on the starboard side.
- Seats are height adjustable (small catch forward outside corner).
- There's a rudder trimmer on the floor in front of the flap lever.
- Visibility rearwards and upwards is much worse than you'll be used to.
Otherwise, very similar aircraft, if you're okay in a PA38 then you'll find the cockpit environment of the 28 very similar, the handling is different but probably slightly better, performance a marked improvement, main deficiency is lookout after the superb bubble canopy in the 38.
G
- Fuel controls and gauges are less visible, tucked away under the control yoke.
- Much less wing drop at the stall.
- More need to trim as flaps are selected.
- Much better power to rate than you'll be used to, the climb rate after take-off will be a pleasant surprise.
- Only one door, and that's on the starboard side.
- Seats are height adjustable (small catch forward outside corner).
- There's a rudder trimmer on the floor in front of the flap lever.
- Visibility rearwards and upwards is much worse than you'll be used to.
Otherwise, very similar aircraft, if you're okay in a PA38 then you'll find the cockpit environment of the 28 very similar, the handling is different but probably slightly better, performance a marked improvement, main deficiency is lookout after the superb bubble canopy in the 38.
G
Dir. PPRuNe Line Service
I've found that with practice, coordinating elevator input with lowering or raising the flaps means that the pitch change is very slight and I no longer get that sinking feeling when raising the flaps in the climb. It's now all nice and smooth... usually!
Mik
Mik
The Warrior has a significantly higher aspect ratio wing compared to the PA38 which means the glide performance is better.
I have seen quite a few pilots end up "hot and high" on finals on a "powered" approach.
Although she will cruise quite nicely at 110 kt (give or take) I would recommend a circuit speed of 90 kt (2100 rpm) as a) you won't be catching up the PA38 in the circuit ahead but b) more significantly you have 20 kt less airspeed to lose when you start the approach.
Generally speaking I recommend/teach to initially close the throttle completely on base leg (whether powered or glide), take two stages of flap and aim for 70/75kt. When you have got the speed/attitude pinned then you might need a little power (circa 1300 rpm) to maintain the profile. Take full flap on final and fly the approach at 60-65 kt plus or minus wind increments.
Hope this helps - she's a great a/c to fly so enjoy!
I have seen quite a few pilots end up "hot and high" on finals on a "powered" approach.
Although she will cruise quite nicely at 110 kt (give or take) I would recommend a circuit speed of 90 kt (2100 rpm) as a) you won't be catching up the PA38 in the circuit ahead but b) more significantly you have 20 kt less airspeed to lose when you start the approach.
Generally speaking I recommend/teach to initially close the throttle completely on base leg (whether powered or glide), take two stages of flap and aim for 70/75kt. When you have got the speed/attitude pinned then you might need a little power (circa 1300 rpm) to maintain the profile. Take full flap on final and fly the approach at 60-65 kt plus or minus wind increments.
Hope this helps - she's a great a/c to fly so enjoy!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Go with all what fireflybob says with just a small add, watch the flare as she will tend to float along the runway due to those efficent wings, all good fun and your hour or two with the instructor will show all.
Great plane to fly, so enjoyourself and why not let us know how you get on.
Great plane to fly, so enjoyourself and why not let us know how you get on.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Lancs, UK
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks a lot for all the advice guys. I'm really looking forward to flying the Warrior and the extra 20% cruise speed should help offset the extra 20% hire costs too.
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Lancs, UK
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One thing I have discovered reading the manual is that I'm going to have some balance problems. I'm not exactly light and I was hoping the Warrior would allow me to take some of my heavier friends flying, but working out the weight and balance sums, it looks like I'll have to put 100lb ballast in the baggage compartment to stay within forward c of g limits when I take anyone over 14 stone in the front, 2 up, especially as the fuel reduces. Anyone else encountered this?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forward CofG is a problem on Warrior II's and III's when they moved the battery from the back to the engine compartment (amongst other things)
See if you can find a decent Warrior I or Cherokee, else do what we do and fill up some 5 litre water bottles for the baggage area, or a life raft or, as we were forced to do once, 3 cases of Carlsberg (not to be confused with in flight catering!!)
See if you can find a decent Warrior I or Cherokee, else do what we do and fill up some 5 litre water bottles for the baggage area, or a life raft or, as we were forced to do once, 3 cases of Carlsberg (not to be confused with in flight catering!!)
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Lancs, UK
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I went ahead and flew it. Everything said was on the button, especially about the nose-down attitude when pulling all three stages of flap up in one go! (This was done at 4000'). I wonder how many times this characteristic has featured in fatal accident reports? On the whole, the experience was a massive disappointment. I'm not exactly small and found the cabin just too narrow to fly comfortably, ie. bum over to the right, therefore legs angled left as hip room too little. Chest angled right as shoulder room not enough and left elbow somewhere level with the centre line of my body- looked like Quasimodo was flying it! The armrests and lack of dished door trim on the PA28 actually mean that I've got 4-5" less room on my side of the cockpit. Guess I'll have to find a TB9/10 if I want to take some of my larger friends flying!
I also found the turning circle, on the ground and in the air, noticeably greater than the Pa38, the brakes less effective and a lot less responsive on the controls. I didn't find the higher speed much of a problem as there is less of a workload flying it than the PA38. It needs far less trimming than the PA38 and the trim is very powerful, but disliked the lack of feel in the electric trim, preferring to use the wheel between the seats. Being tall, 6' 2", I actually found forward visibility better, but obviously less to the side, rear and above. I find it comforting in the PA38 to be able to see above and behind to each side in the circuit, especially at airfields, such as Sleap, when there is no-one on the radio mid-week. It is more stable than I'm used to, but I've got used to the twitchiness of the Terrohawk, although having just begun an IMC course in one, an extra pair of hands would come in useful, especially as there is only 1 VOR fitted!
I also found the turning circle, on the ground and in the air, noticeably greater than the Pa38, the brakes less effective and a lot less responsive on the controls. I didn't find the higher speed much of a problem as there is less of a workload flying it than the PA38. It needs far less trimming than the PA38 and the trim is very powerful, but disliked the lack of feel in the electric trim, preferring to use the wheel between the seats. Being tall, 6' 2", I actually found forward visibility better, but obviously less to the side, rear and above. I find it comforting in the PA38 to be able to see above and behind to each side in the circuit, especially at airfields, such as Sleap, when there is no-one on the radio mid-week. It is more stable than I'm used to, but I've got used to the twitchiness of the Terrohawk, although having just begun an IMC course in one, an extra pair of hands would come in useful, especially as there is only 1 VOR fitted!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Cat.S
Sounds as if you mught benefit from hiring a Cherokee 6 (PA32) - fixed gear, CS prop (no big deal), heavier even more stable and bags more space - about 5" wider in the cabin.
Costs more to hire, but great VFM - also, I converted at 75 hours TT, after /4 hours tuition/safety pilot assistance I was confident.
Not a 6 place aeroplanew with big guys, but a very useful load carrier nonetheless.
Sounds as if you mught benefit from hiring a Cherokee 6 (PA32) - fixed gear, CS prop (no big deal), heavier even more stable and bags more space - about 5" wider in the cabin.
Costs more to hire, but great VFM - also, I converted at 75 hours TT, after /4 hours tuition/safety pilot assistance I was confident.
Not a 6 place aeroplanew with big guys, but a very useful load carrier nonetheless.
