Should I buy a Piper PA-32R-301 Saratoga SP ii?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: RAF Suffolk
Age: 61
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Buying my Saratoga is the best thing I ever did! I had a similar amount of experience as you. Don't rush the transition training I spent probably 15 hours with my instructor going through everything until I was totally happy including all instrument approaches. I'm based at Shoreham if you are ever down that way let me know happy to talk with you. Alex
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: RAF Suffolk
Age: 61
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you planning any long distance trips? Do you need the space?
If so the PA 32 is a nice aircraft.
Easy to fly and very stable with loads of power.
Yes the speeds are a bit fast coming from a Warrior but nothing that can not be sorted in a few hours checkout.
The PA32 is a go places aircraft...are you planning to go places?
If so the PA 32 is a nice aircraft.
Easy to fly and very stable with loads of power.
Yes the speeds are a bit fast coming from a Warrior but nothing that can not be sorted in a few hours checkout.
The PA32 is a go places aircraft...are you planning to go places?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: RAF Suffolk
Age: 61
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you do much over water and night flying...I guess that's why I'm thinking of a twin.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: RAF Suffolk
Age: 61
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many thanks to all of you who have taken time out to reply. It's evident there are many years of experience responding much of it on type, so I have the confidence that buying a Saratoga will be the right decision as long as I complete a 15-20 hour conversion course. I have see one or two good examples around the c. 2000 vintage; lets hope they're there come Autumn.
C.2000 is much heavier than older - do a good analysis of who/what you'll be carrying and for how far. Mine is a 1980s, I can (just) take six adults about 400nm with reserve. The latest versions could barely take off with six adults...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: RAF Suffolk
Age: 61
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect that 4 adults in comfort is my aim, but 2 plus 3 retrievers to the Channel Islands will be the norm and 200-300 miles.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: london
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An early 1980's normally aspirated Saratoga with mechanical flaps is likely to have a useful load of circa 1,300lbs. A very late Saratoga with electric flaps is likely to be 1,000-1,100lbs useful load. Full fuel is about 600lbs, and bear in mind that below 70% fuel is out of sight of the filler apertures - and you cannot dip the tanks to check what is there - so you will have to be certain of your calculations (and that no-one has stolen any fuel) to take off with little enough fuel to seat 4 people or more.
These aren't insurmountable problems, but it does mean that you are operating a 6 seater with the same useful load as an Arrow.
These aren't insurmountable problems, but it does mean that you are operating a 6 seater with the same useful load as an Arrow.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Welwyn
Age: 55
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd agree with Sam R and wsmempson an 80's one will give you more flexibility mine is an 89 with elec flaps and air con which add weight but fixed gear which reduces weight and useful load is about 1250 lbs, comfortably got 5 adults and a red setter to Lands End for hols last year. The ladies were not over impressed with their luggage allowance of 7kgs each though 
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: RAF Suffolk
Age: 61
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An early 1980's normally aspirated Saratoga with mechanical flaps is likely to have a useful load of circa 1,300lbs. A very late Saratoga with electric flaps is likely to be 1,000-1,100lbs useful load. Full fuel is about 600lbs, and bear in mind that below 70% fuel is out of sight of the filler apertures - and you cannot dip the tanks to check what is there - so you will have to be certain of your calculations (and that no-one has stolen any fuel) to take off with little enough fuel to seat 4 people or more.
These aren't insurmountable problems, but it does mean that you are operating a 6 seater with the same useful load as an Arrow.
These aren't insurmountable problems, but it does mean that you are operating a 6 seater with the same useful load as an Arrow.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: london
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that in terms of operating costs, you'll find that over a 10 year period, a Seneca V operated on the G-reg will cost you just over double what it costs to run a Saratoga. Based on 120hrs p/a, think £250-300 per hour, as opposed to £140-180 per hour for the Saratoga.
Bear in mind that the fuselage is common to the two aircraft, and there are no size differences; the major difference is that a Seneca V is likely to be de-iced and is a really good IFR machine for most weathers but, with a full fuel load, will also necessitate a number of trade-offs in terms of load when fully fuelled.
If you run the aircraft on the N-reg, you'll probably find that the regime is more proportionate to private flying, but the long term future of N-reg in EASA-land is an unknown right now.
Bear in mind that the fuselage is common to the two aircraft, and there are no size differences; the major difference is that a Seneca V is likely to be de-iced and is a really good IFR machine for most weathers but, with a full fuel load, will also necessitate a number of trade-offs in terms of load when fully fuelled.
If you run the aircraft on the N-reg, you'll probably find that the regime is more proportionate to private flying, but the long term future of N-reg in EASA-land is an unknown right now.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: RAF Suffolk
Age: 61
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that in terms of operating costs, you'll find that over a 10 year period, a Seneca V operated on the G-reg will cost you just over double what it costs to run a Saratoga. Based on 120hrs p/a, think £250-300 per hour, as opposed to £140-180 per hour for the Saratoga.
Bear in mind that the fuselage is common to the two aircraft, and there are no size differences; the major difference is that a Seneca V is likely to be de-iced and is a really good IFR machine for most weathers but, with a full fuel load, will also necessitate a number of trade-offs in terms of load when fully fuelled.
If you run the aircraft on the N-reg, you'll probably find that the regime is more proportionate to private flying, but the long term future of N-reg in EASA-land is an unknown right now.
Bear in mind that the fuselage is common to the two aircraft, and there are no size differences; the major difference is that a Seneca V is likely to be de-iced and is a really good IFR machine for most weathers but, with a full fuel load, will also necessitate a number of trade-offs in terms of load when fully fuelled.
If you run the aircraft on the N-reg, you'll probably find that the regime is more proportionate to private flying, but the long term future of N-reg in EASA-land is an unknown right now.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: london
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've only ever run aircraft on the G-reg, so will let someone with direct experience of N-reg operation answer this in more detail. but the executive summary seems to be that the FAA maintenance regime is more pragmatic and proportionate and based on condition, rather than arbitrary timed life than the EASA regimes, and therefore costs less.
However, in terms of putting a N-reg aircraft on to the G-reg, whilst in theory that should be simple, needless to say it isn't always so. Many of the UK part M subpart G outfits are quite sensitive about back to birth paperwork trails, and gaps are viewed with suspicion and intransigence. Also, any work that has been done with an American STC needs EASA paperwork, otherwise it can necessitate paperwork for a major or minor mod - depending on the work.
All these things should be utterly simple, but in practice aren't.
However, in terms of putting a N-reg aircraft on to the G-reg, whilst in theory that should be simple, needless to say it isn't always so. Many of the UK part M subpart G outfits are quite sensitive about back to birth paperwork trails, and gaps are viewed with suspicion and intransigence. Also, any work that has been done with an American STC needs EASA paperwork, otherwise it can necessitate paperwork for a major or minor mod - depending on the work.
All these things should be utterly simple, but in practice aren't.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: RAF Suffolk
Age: 61
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've only ever run aircraft on the G-reg, so will let someone with direct experience of N-reg operation answer this in more detail. but the executive summary seems to be that the FAA maintenance regime is more pragmatic and proportionate and based on condition, rather than arbitrary timed life than the EASA regimes, and therefore costs less.
However, in terms of putting a N-reg aircraft on to the G-reg, whilst in theory that should be simple, needless to say it isn't always so. Many of the UK part M subpart G outfits are quite sensitive about back to birth paperwork trails, and gaps are viewed with suspicion and intransigence. Also, any work that has been done with an American STC needs EASA paperwork, otherwise it can necessitate paperwork for a major or minor mod - depending on the work.
All these things should be utterly simple, but in practice aren't.
However, in terms of putting a N-reg aircraft on to the G-reg, whilst in theory that should be simple, needless to say it isn't always so. Many of the UK part M subpart G outfits are quite sensitive about back to birth paperwork trails, and gaps are viewed with suspicion and intransigence. Also, any work that has been done with an American STC needs EASA paperwork, otherwise it can necessitate paperwork for a major or minor mod - depending on the work.
All these things should be utterly simple, but in practice aren't.
Re your gun dogs, how do they get on in the air? Do you protect their hearing at all?
Reason I ask is I am thinking of taking the pup along sometime but not sure how she will cope (small terrier cross).
Reason I ask is I am thinking of taking the pup along sometime but not sure how she will cope (small terrier cross).
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so I have the confidence that buying a Saratoga will be the right decision as long as I complete a 15-20 hour conversion course.
So I would like to suggest that when you bought the airplane and had your conversion, do yourself a favor and plan it so as to fly a lot right after the conversion to let things sink in deeply.
Happy landings !
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gone
Posts: 1,665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"how do they get on in the air?"
I imagine they love a poodle.
"Do you protect their hearing at all?
I can't imagine gun dogs wearing ear protection. I could be wrong.
I would love to see them with Ray Bans and life-jackets though. :-)
I imagine they love a poodle.
"Do you protect their hearing at all?
I can't imagine gun dogs wearing ear protection. I could be wrong.
I would love to see them with Ray Bans and life-jackets though. :-)
Last edited by Jetblu; 18th Jun 2016 at 19:26. Reason: add