Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Piper Turbo Arrow III

I transitioned from my C172M to my TR182 (turbo retractable constant speed complex high performance) in 1.5h. First airwork and a few circuits with the instructor, then a few circuits myself. Profound systems knowledge was acquired before even entering the aircraft.

What I found much more difficult than not forgetting the gear (well, maybe I will have to revise that statement one day) is to not overboost the engine. On go arounds — especially the unplanned ones — I have gotten the habit of “pedal to the metal” and this is not allowed in a manual wastegate installation. This took some training but having added an EDM 830 with a MP/RPM etc. warning also helped a lot.

The gear has a loud warning horn and the aircraft behaves very differently on final without the gear retracted. I think you have to be under a lot of stress to overlook the gear. However, these are also the situations where you tend to skip the checklist. I fly IFR with checklists, VFR without.

Last Edited by achimha at 06 May 15:22

Over boosting at low level ( typically the take off run) is just as much an issue with auto waste gates, due to turbine lag, and probably the easiest mistake to make.

Egnm, United Kingdom

Callum,

questions like “how many flying hours stepping from type x to type?” pop up fairly often on aviation forums. It’s really a useless question because

1. it obviously depends on the candidate
2. one can do a checkout and one can do a checkout. Some people are happy with the very minimum to satisfy the instructor/owner; others really want to learn the fine points of a particular aircraft type and model.
3. As has been pointed out, the big part is not in the flying (like 80 years ago, when there were no “systems” but the actual flying was quite difficult); nowadays, it is mostly about awareness, systems knowledge, the POH (and things not written in the POH) and so on…i.e. “ground stuff”.

Having said that, a few notes on the Turbo Arrow. I don’t know, but I have something of a love / hate relationship with it.

There are actually a lot of “bad” things about them:

  1. They are not really good at anything. Not really fast in cruise, a poor climber, a mediocre short field performer (unless overboosting ), medriocre payload, pretty poor handflying characteristics.
  2. Also, for what it does, it’s a relatively expensive airplane to operate (relatively high fuel consumption, a relatively expensive engine to operate, retractable gear, contstant-speed prop….)
  3. Not a particularly elegant aircraft.

On the other side, I still somehow always liked it (apart from its rental prices ). With it’s turbocharged, six-cylinder Continental engine, it feels like a very “mature” and venerable aircraft.
I especially like those with the three-blade prop; makes for almost turbine smooth sensations and sounds in cruise flight.

My former aeroclub also happened to have one with a two-blader and it felt a little more crude. That one also had the low tail (one of the very rare examples after the Arrow IV, built in the early 90s), but I never found it really going any faster than the T-tail one with the three blader.

Enjoy your flights!

Last Edited by boscomantico at 06 May 18:50
Mainz (EDFZ) & Egelsbach (EDFE), Germany

questions like “how many flying hours stepping from type x to type?

My suggestion is to be conservative in the answer. For example a new PPL transitioning from a 152/Warrior to a 182/Arrow I would suggest at least three to four hours – some may be able to do it in two or three hours and be happy with the earlier sign off – others actually want a more thorough check out.

PFL in heavier complex SEP is a key CPL standard, and there is no reason why a PPL should not practice to the standard, in addition to learning the nuances of, for example, landing a 182 with a forward CG condition; some hood time, or practicing performance take offs and landings with the aircraft close to MAUW.

Reviewing the ASF safety reviews on some of the types also helps.

Oxford (EGTK), United Kingdom

From the air, 150kt doesn’t look any different to 100kt and (I flew the TBM850) 300kt doesn’t look any different to 100kt.

So the “conversion issue” is not one of speed.

It is to learn a different way of thinking: flying by numbers.

If you are flying say a C152, you fly everywhere at about 100kt and, dare I say it, in the UK PPL scene, at 1500-2000ft So if you want to fly to some airport, you just fly there, descend a little bit, join the circuit, pull the throttle back, and land it. And that is what they teach you in a PPL.

If however you are flying something more complex, you fly everywhere at say 150kt but as I say above that isn’t the point. Unless you are the type who can’t even drive a car with a manual gearbox, your brain will quickly get used to everything happening 1.5x faster. The difference is that you are likely to be flying at say 5000ft. It is much more peaceful up there and, on a summer day, it often gets you above the fluffy white stuff underneath which flight is very turbulent. The problem is when you arrive at your destination, still doing 150kt and still at 5000ft. In full view of the mob sitting outside the restaurant, it’s going to be embarrassing And you can’t just close the throttle, because you will probably crack the cylinders…

So you need to think ahead, and that is the real change. Let’s say you have 20nm to go and 4000ft to lose, at 120kt (GS, not IAS or TAS) that will need 400fpm rate of descent. At 150kt GS, a quick guess is about 500fpm ROD. You need to be able to work that out, quickly.

It’s easy, but it’s different.

Then you might have better avionics than you had in the PPL spamcan. Even if you have a basic GPS like a GNS430, you need to get the manual out and learn how to program waypoints into it. If there is an autopilot, you must learn all its modes. You really do not want to be pushing buttons and wondering which one does what. This needs an instructor familiar with the actual aircraft.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

(and not some BRRRUUUMMMFT stuff where you never remember that one of the "U"s stands for “undercarriage”)

Why? What’s so bad about an acronym? In the circuit I don’t want my head inside reading a checklist, I want to be maximising time spent looking outside (and ATC does not substitute for that – I’ve seen more than one near-collision at airports with a control tower, and I’ve personally experienced someone cut in front of me with very very little room to spare despite being instructed to follow me. A windscreen full of Cherokee with a student pilot on their first or second solo that was number 2 and supposed to be following you really gets your attention)

Since I did all my retract flying when I lived in the US, we used the “GUMP” check.

The GUMP acronym does not stand for gas, undercarriage, mixture, prop as you may think, but “Gear down, Undercarriage down, Main wheels down, Put the gear down”.

Last Edited by alioth at 08 May 10:25
Andreas IOM

bq: Why? What’s so bad about an acronym? … The GUMP acronym does not stand for …

You answer your own question: It is ambiguous. And it’s very easy to skip one of the letters, especially with long acronyms. On a (long) paper checklist, you can hold a finger on the line you are currently working on. But checklists don’t need to be long anyway.
Another issue I have with these acronyms is that not every human being is a native English speaker. As a flying instructor in Germany, I teach students from Turkey, Greece, Switzerland, Netherlands, Luxemburg. We usually communicate in German between us and ATC, use English terms when talking about the aeroplane, but think in out native language. This means, we not only have to remember the words behind the acronym, but translate them in the same time, adding another ambiguity and error source.

In the circuit I don’t want my head inside reading a checklist…

But you have to look inside from time to time anyway, ASI, altimeter, flap position indicator, gear indicators, … In our flying school, we have printed the three checklists that are required inflight (After Takeoff, Approach, Final) on a small laminated card that can be clipped to a sun visor or the glareshield, where it is in the same field of vision of either the instrument scan or the view outside.

If acronyms for checklists would be such a perfect thing, than every airline and commercial operation would include them in their SOPs. But how many actually do?

EDDS - Stuttgart

To quote from “Firefox” the epic Clint Eastwood movie:

“You must think in Russian! Can you do that Mr Gant?”

ESSB, Stockholm Bromma

I did my complex endorsement (FAA) in one of these Pipers. Was a long time ago, but what I do remember was the issue of potentially overboosting during the t/o run and a rather weird thing to do with the landing lights. Memory is a bit hazy (these two hours were the only ones I ever flew that type), but IIRC there is a day/night switch that can dim the gear lights to a point where you cannot make out if they’re illuminated or not in broad daylight. Can really scare you when you drop the gear – and no greens in sight!

…but IIRC there is a day/night switch that can dim the gear lights to a point where you cannot make out if they’re illuminated or not…

This is done by the nav-lights switch, common to all retractable Pipers. On some, nav-lights and panel lights are controlled by the same rotary dial which has no markings that show whether it is on or off, so whenever you don’t see the gear lights, you can start fiddling around on the panel…

Which brings up an important point, that applies to many other retractables as well: Whenever there is a (suspected) gear malfunction, perform no immediate action! If on approach, go around, climb to a safe altitude and follow the instructions in the manual. The Pa28 manual will tell you first thing to check the position of the nav-lights switch. It will then give figures for speeds at which the emergency gear extensions will work best, and what circuit breaker(s) to check or pull so that the half functioning mechanism won’t interfere with the manual extension. Abnormal systems operation like a manual gear extension are not supposed to be performed from memory. On no aeroplane. It is not safety or time critical in itself. But a hastily performed manual gear extension that fails (on some aircraft you have only one attempt, not so on the Pa28) will leave the gear in an undefined position and turn your abnormal condition into an emergency situation. (I write this because not long ago a student started to pull circuit breakers right away when I gave him a gear malfunction in the procedures trainer.)

Last Edited by what_next at 09 May 06:16
EDDS - Stuttgart
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top