Mooney_Driver wrote:
You should have the POH’s so some comparison in book values should be possible. The Dakota is one airplane which is underestimated a lot.
I’d appreciate a view of the performance section of the POH as well ;-)
PA-28-236 Flight Test from Flyer 1996
Dakota_236_pdf
PA-28-236 POH
Dakota_Information_Manual_pdf
WilliamF wrote:
PA-28-236 Flight Test from Flyer 1996
Dakota_236_pdfPA-28-236 POH
Dakota_Information_Manual_pdf
Thank you a lot!
lovely, thanks!
Just noticed that lovely Turbo Dakota you are offering… I suppose that one will do even better in terms of speed than the “normal” one?
The Turbo Dakota is a really special and rare bird. With its small engine, it is quite unlike the NA Dakota. It’s more like a version of the low tail
Turbo Arrow, yet, I assume doing almost the same speed. Cool.
Also, Dakotas (unlike the Arrows) seem to be unaffected by the upcoming wingspar AD.
Here’s a flight test from the Turbo Dakota from 1979
Dakotas are like trucks, useful payload is incredible. One of few actual 4-seaters.
Turbos less so, but faster.
boscomantico wrote:
Also, Dakotas (unlike the Arrows) seem to be unaffected by the upcoming wingspar AD.
Is that something which has to do with the aftermath of the Embry-Riddle PA28 accident 2018?
Yes.
I see, thanks a lot for that report.
So the Turbo Dakota has the same engine as the original Turbo Arrow had and somewhere close to the M20K engine.
Makes me wonder why they never made an Arrow with an IO540.
