Want to purchase PA34-200 Seneca

Has anyone owned or flown a Seneca I or Seneca II? If so, please share
thoughts on the aircraft. I want to purchase an aircraft with optional 7th
passenger seating so I can take my whole family places.

--
____________________________
Ah, Young Grasshopper.
Sometimes it is eyes that blind a man.

If you fill 7 seats, you will have little fuel left. The Seneca V
that I fly is over gross with full fuel and 2ea. 240# crew.




On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 16:01:23 GMT, "Grasshopper"
wrote:

Has anyone owned or flown a Seneca I or Seneca II? If so, please share
thoughts on the aircraft. I want to purchase an aircraft with optional 7th
passenger seating so I can take my whole family places.

Bill Zaleski wrote:
If you fill 7 seats, you will have little fuel left. The Seneca V
that I fly is over gross with full fuel and 2ea. 240# crew.


Thanks for the response, Bill.

I have young kids, so I figure the total weight for us is about 1,000 lbs
(2 adults and 5 children). Or does having a Seneca I or Seneca II
configured for optional 7th seat force you to reconfigure with smaller
tanks? I saw that both the Seneca I and Seneca II have optional 122 gallon
capacity. Would having the 7 seat configuration make the optional long
range fuel no longer an option?

--
____________________________
Ah, Young Grasshopper.
Sometimes it is eyes that blind a man.

Just stay at gross with a reduced fuel loading.


On Sun, 04 Jul 2004 16:36:36 GMT, "Grasshopper"
wrote:

Bill Zaleski wrote:
If you fill 7 seats, you will have little fuel left. The Seneca V
that I fly is over gross with full fuel and 2ea. 240# crew.


Thanks for the response, Bill.

I have young kids, so I figure the total weight for us is about 1,000 lbs
(2 adults and 5 children). Or does having a Seneca I or Seneca II
configured for optional 7th seat force you to reconfigure with smaller
tanks? I saw that both the Seneca I and Seneca II have optional 122 gallon
capacity. Would having the 7 seat configuration make the optional long
range fuel no longer an option?

"Grasshopper" wrote in message ...

I have young kids, so I figure the total weight for us is about 1,000 lbs
(2 adults and 5 children). Or does having a Seneca I or Seneca II
configured for optional 7th seat force you to reconfigure with smaller
tanks? I saw that both the Seneca I and Seneca II have optional 122 gallon
capacity. Would having the 7 seat configuration make the optional long
range fuel no longer an option?


You might want to expand what you are looking at to the Aero Commander
5/6 series. As an example. a 680 has a usefull load around 2600
pounds....7 seats and full fuel plus baggage. Sure, it's an older a/c,
but properly taken care of and handled (if you have a model with
geared engines) they will outlast you and your family.
Besides, if you ever hope to travel much distance without frequent
stops with the whole family, it would work out better in the long run.
Also, as the kids grow and the travel needs change (increasing the
required stuff to go anywhere) you won't be as worried as what can go
and what has to stay and how fine is the margin between fuel on board
and what we can load...

Craig C.

Craig wrote:
"Grasshopper" wrote in message
I have young kids, so I figure the total weight for us is about
1,000 lbs (2 adults and 5 children). Or does having a Seneca I or
Seneca II configured for optional 7th seat force you to reconfigure
with smaller tanks? I saw that both the Seneca I and Seneca II have
optional 122 gallon capacity. Would having the 7 seat configuration
make the optional long range fuel no longer an option?


You might want to expand what you are looking at to the Aero Commander
5/6 series. As an example. a 680 has a usefull load around 2600
pounds....7 seats and full fuel plus baggage. Sure, it's an older a/c,
but properly taken care of and handled (if you have a model with
geared engines) they will outlast you and your family.

I looked at the Aerostar, but the 500B twin commander from the mid 60's is
like $200K. I want to try and stay under $100K, which I can do with a
Seneca I or Seneca II. What are your thoughts in my purchase price
constraints?


--
____________________________
Ah, Young Grasshopper.
Sometimes it is eyes that blind a man.

"Grasshopper" wrote in message ...


I looked at the Aerostar, but the 500B twin commander from the mid 60's is
like $200K. I want to try and stay under $100K, which I can do with a
Seneca I or Seneca II. What are your thoughts in my purchase price
constraints?

The Aerostar is a whole 'nother ball of wax. What I know of them makes
them low in my book for a family machine.

I think that you are going to have to balance load vs space vs
distance you can fly vs upfront money. Right now, with just my wife
and I and our three year old, we end up with about 100 pounds of
stuff and baggage for a weekend trip. Right now we do all our
traveling via road as our Commander is out west just coming out of
long term storage.

One of our biggest criteria for selecting the AC, was that we did not
want to isolate the flight deck from the cabin area.....in other words
we wanted ready access to the back seats without having to climb over
seats. Also, we did not want to isolate someone in the back with a
seperate door to worry about....kids will get into stuff they
shouldn't....

Load capacity vs flight time was another item we looked at. I'm just
at 6' and 275#. Put me, the wife and the son in the airplane and a
little bit of day gear and we are pushing rapidly towards 700#. With
the AC, that leaves me about 1900# for whatever else we want to drag
along and fuel while we cruise at nearly 200kts. With your case, just
a rough estimate would put you at somewhere north of 600#, but
remember kids will gain weight rapidly as they grow. Depending on
their ages, you could be pushing towards 1000# of people within a
short time. With that in mind, how much room for fuel and baggage
does that leave you in the Seneca series?

One other thing is the AC is probably the biggest pussycat in the
world to fly on one engine. Lose an engine and it's a pretty ho-hum
thing...dial in a little trim, cage the bad one and plow on. No
critical engine, V speeds are reasonable and it won't work you to
death if you do lose one. Remember Bob Hoover flew a great show in an
AC for 20+ years and will attest to it's handling characteristics.

Cost shoudln't be that big of a thing. Consider what your expenses are
going to be if you do by the Seneca and end up outgrowing it within a
couple of years, vs spending a bit more upfront. Good AC's can be
found within your price range with a little paitents and putting the
word out with the right people.

BTW, I do know of a AC 680E that is coming out of a long term overhaul
that will be as good or better than it was new, and the owner's price
isn't way out of the figures you are looking at.

What ever aircraft you narrow your focus down to, be sure and lay out
a side by side comparison of all the specs. Take a realistic look at
the family now and what it will look like over the next 5 years. Do a
practice trip and see where you really come out on the scales and then
do a weight and balance for each of the aircraft. Do a flight plan far
enough to figure all the stops necessary for the average trip you will
be making. Then once you settle on paper what aircraft you want, find
some way to fly one and see how you like it.

An aside here....the Twin Commander type club is having their annual
meeting and conference in September in Kansas City . Bob Hoover is
supposed to be there as well as all the AC gurus. It might be worth
the trip if you are not in a hurry to make a decision on what to buy.

Craig C.

"Grasshopper" writes:

Has anyone owned or flown a Seneca I or Seneca II? If so, please share
thoughts on the aircraft. I want to purchase an aircraft with optional 7th
passenger seating so I can take my whole family places.

A 7th seet for a Seneca?! Wow, that's gotta be tight. The Seneca
always seemed cramped to me and I never flew with more than a
couple other people.

Incidentally, I recently received a postcard about an (ancient) STC
for a third seating position in the back of an Aztec. That also
seems like a tight squeeze, but for small children it might work.

--kyler

I got my MEL in a Seneca I and flew factoy Seneca IIIs (virtually the same as a
Seneca II) back when I worked at Piper in FL. There is a *BIG* difference
between a I and the later models. The Seneca I has simpler, more reliable
engines than later models, but it is severely underpowered. Single engine rate
of climb and ceiling is just plain bad in the I. It gets better with the II and
later with their somewhat more powerful turbocharged engines. But with turbos,
you have more maintenance issues. In any case, none of these planes can carry 7
plus bags plus a useful amount of fuel. For those sorts of loads, you need a
Navajo or equivilent Cessna/Beech/Aerocommander/etc. We're talking big money
here. Sorry to give you the bad news.

Best regards,

Steve Robertson
N4732J 1967 Beech A23-24 Musketeer Super III

Grasshopper wrote:

Has anyone owned or flown a Seneca I or Seneca II? If so, please share
thoughts on the aircraft. I want to purchase an aircraft with optional 7th
passenger seating so I can take my whole family places.

--
____________________________
Ah, Young Grasshopper.
Sometimes it is eyes that blind a man.

Steve Robertson writes:

In any case, none of these planes can carry 7
plus bags plus a useful amount of fuel. For those sorts of loads, you need a
Navajo or equivilent Cessna/Beech/Aerocommander/etc.

Or...
http://www.aerocompinc.com/NEW/index-air.htm
Those will reach places I wouldn't even take my Aztec.

We're talking big money here.

Take a look at the bottom of the page ("Used Aircraft"). Still seems like a
lot to me.

--kyler