The first Seneca was introduced in 1971 at the height of the general aviation boom to serve as a lower cost and larger companion to Pipers successful but aging Aztec and replacing the even older Twin Comanche in the Piper lineup. The Seneca is basically what you get when you turn a Cherokee Six into a twin, sharing the trademark Hershey-bar wing, the stabilator empennage and fuselage of the Cherokee Six and the same spacious cabin, with available club seating. The Cherokee line begat the Cherokee Six, the Six the Saratoga and the Saratoga the Seneca. The Seneca is suitable for both a twin-engine trainer and step-up two-engine ride for an owner who needs the power and wants the redundancy of a pair of motors.įew manufacturers have gotten as much mileage out of similar airframes as Piper has.
(The Raytheon/Beechcraft Baron and Piper Seminole are the other two.) And therein lies its popularity and the explanation for why its one of only three piston twins still in production. In short, the Seneca doesnt excel at anything but does everything reasonably well at an affordable price. The venerable Seneca is available in several models so theres wide price stratification, its got decent if not blistering speed and it carries a fair load on a reasonable fuel burn. But putting a sharp pencil to the equation usually points the would-be twin driver at something more realistic and often, a Piper Seneca fills the bill.Īs well it should. It does have the advantage of being suited for lower time pilots, which for an entry level job works well for the employer, too.When the owner of a single-engine airplane starts thinking about twins, hes liable to begin not in the cheap seats but with something pricey and fast, perhaps a Baron or a cabin-class Cessna. We flew it with hot props, windshield, and wing boots.and I never considered them known ice.just tools for quickly getting out of ice. It's a big, thick wing, and while it does have boots, I'd have some reservation about spending any significant amount of time in ice. It's easily maintained, however, and did just fine. It does have the ridiculously poor piper door, and the gear and spar leave somewhat to be desired for design and strength. It handles nicely, is forgiving, and reasonably economical. For a light twin, it's got one of the better single engine service ceiling's and performance.which isn't stellar (considering it's a light twin), but better than most. We did a lot of rough field work, mountainous terrain, night, etc. I flew some years ago doing ambulance work and freight.
0 kommentar(er)
