Budget Buy: Fly yourself
I really enjoyed reading your article on Jim Juneau's beautiful 1983 Piper Turbo Arrow IV (" Budget Buy: Fly Yourself," September Pilot). I've been looking for an article like this for a while. Prior to your article, I basically wrote the Turbo Arrow off as a potential purchase because I was under the impression that the Turbo Arrow is essentially a 155-KTAS bird.
You mentioned, "Juneau often flies in the 15,000-to-17,000-foot altitude range, and at those altitudes he routinely gets true airspeeds of 175 knots." Is the stock Turbo Arrow really capable of 170 to 175 KTAS? If so, that's faster than many Beechcraft Bonanzas. In fact, there are basically no four-seaters as fast as a Turbo Arrow except for certain later-model Mooneys. I wanted to confirm with you that 175-KTAS Turbo Arrows are realistic and that these figures are not confused with groundspeeds.
Boise, Idaho
Jim Juneau writes: In the 15,000-to-17,000-foot altitude range, I do get cruise airspeeds in the mid-170s KTAS on a fairly regular basis, which I measure by using the knob on my airspeed indicator to make the adjustment to account for altitude and temperature, then read the true airspeed from the window in the bottom of the dial. I have heard from other Turbo Arrow owners who say that they cannot achieve similar results in their own aircraft. I attribute the difference primarily to the fact that my airplane has some important advantages over a stock Turbo Arrow. I have six brand-new Teledyne Continental Motors cylinders following a top overhaul, which produce like-new engine performance. My airplane benefits from several added LoPresti speed mods including wing-root fairings, Speed-Spat wheel-well fairings, Hubba Caps, and Zip Tips. I use the EDM-700 engine analyzer to lean the engine in cruise flight to about 75 degrees rich-of-peak exhaust gas temperature for best power, and I fly at 75-percent power (35 inches manifold pressure at 2,300 rpm). The Merlyn upper deck controller (automatic wastegate) gives me more turbo boost at high altitude than a stock Turbo Arrow can achieve with the standard fixed wastegate, and allows me to maintain full engine power at the stated settings as high as I've ever flown the aircraft.
The Piper Arrow is truly a good value in a used aircraft. However, I am puzzled by the negative comments concerning the normally aspirated Arrows. I have owned a 180-horsepower model for the past 15 years and am continually pleased with the airplane's performance, utility, and economy. And at less than half the Vref price of the turbo-charged example in the article, it really is a budget buy!
Slow speed? I think 135 knots is pretty good for a four-cylinder airplane, and I see this speed at real-world density altitudes in the Desert Southwest. Yes, the Mooney M20 is marginally faster but you pay the price in terms of cabin dimensions and engine cooling. The Arrow is 15 knots faster than the Cessna 172 or Piper Archer and the same speed as the six-cylinder Cessna 182, and delivers significantly higher miles per gallon than any of them.
Limited payload? My IFR-equipped Arrow has 1,000 pounds' useful load, and 700 pounds' payload with four hours and 45 minutes of fuel — better than the Cessna 172 and even superior to early Cessna 182s or Bonanzas. High used price? Well, I believe demand sets pricing for used aircraft.
Every airplane is a combination of design compromises, and although the Arrow cannot be considered outstanding in any one category, it is above average in all categories with absolutely no serious faults.
Phoenix, Arizona
I must offer a correction regarding the statement that the Arrow profiled is "the best Arrow in the nation." Mr. Juneau's very nice and well-equipped Arrow received only the "Best Interior" award at the 2005 Cherokee National Fly-In and Convention. There are two Best Arrow awards — a 1981 Arrow IV, N8383S, won "Best Arrow from 1972 through present" and the "Best of Show." It appears the author located the second-best Arrow in the nation, but it was a well-written article about a very nice airplane.
Cincinnati, Ohio
King Air
After reading John King's article in the September issue (" Flying Together: King Air"), I was captivated by his open and honest discussion of the trials and tribulations of having a full-time "flying companion" in his wife, Martha. His description of getting along with an equally qualified pilot and co-pilot rings true for many of us who share left-seat time with friends, partners, and instructors.
As a co-owner of an airplane, I've enjoyed the camaraderie of my partner for almost 10 years, and we've both benefited from sharing flight time and pilot-in-command responsibilities. But, as is true with most pilots, even those whose flying styles are remarkably similar, we tend to crave the responsibility and control for the flight, and this tendency can be evidenced from both the left and right seat. King's method for limiting friction between flying partners is simple, is effective, and is the result of using one simple word — captain. From now on, when I'm in the right seat, I'll be addressing my partner as "captain" and letting him know that I respect his ability and control, while reminding myself that my role is to offer requested or necessary "information" only and not an "opinion." Maybe there are other areas that can benefit from John's advice. After 23 years of marriage, maybe I ought to give some serious thought to calling my wife "supreme commander"!
Atlanta, Georgia
I read with interest the piece that John King wrote, "King Air." Much of the wisdom that John shared with the pilot community also can be applied to flight instructors to enhance their teaching techniques. His tips on how to remind his flying soul mate, Martha, on a need to make a correction to altitude or other flight condition when she is the captain make for a valuable lesson in human relations. To provide only the required information in a professional manner and not offer an opinion is a great way for a flight instructor to approach a flight lesson as well. The method in which King reminds his captain of an off-target flight parameter by stating, "Altitude 3,400 feet, and descending" surely is a better way than saying, "You're too low!"
The flight instructor always is the ultimate authority while giving flight instruction in an aircraft; however, the method of using more precise phrases such as King suggests can make for a more relaxed cockpit environment during a flight lesson. I have found that this same method of nudging my flight clients to get where they belong on heading or altitude is a highly productive teaching technique that other flight instructors might need to be reminded of.
Stuart, Florida
Speak up
After reading " Never Again: Speak Up" in the September issue, I realized how important safety is as opposed to showing off. I'm an 18-year-old pilot, and I know from previous experiences that paying attention to the weather is very important; one should always expect the worst and prepare for it when flying. I'm originally from California, where the weather is always nice; now I live in New England and understand the meaning of weather changing every few minutes. On top of knowing the surrounding conditions, knowing the airplane and everything about it should be at the top of the pilot's list. This article really made me think about my close calls in the aircraft and notice the significance of safety. It was good that the more experienced pilot from the piece took control over the situation, even if it meant risking his friendship. But it was better that he saved his friend's life and let him know that what he was doing was wrong.
Nashua, New Hampshire
Facing down fuel costs
I enjoyed Peter A. Bedell's article (" Facing Down Fuel Costs," September Pilot) and would like to offer a couple of comments. The A36 Bonanza I fly from Santa Barbara Municipal Airport is always clean and its paint and finish are smooth and protected by a hangar. Another of N2270L's fuel-saving features is the EDM-700 engine analyzer by J.P. Instruments, which allows precision leaning, precise fuel flow management, and postflight data retrieval. The EDM-700 is a money- and engine-saving device, which easily pays for itself. Additionally, it's a good idea to close the cowl flaps.
Santa Barbara, California
Miles O'Brien
Phil Scott is right. I can't count the times I've rolled my eyes at some mangled bit of aeronautical news in the press (" Pilots: Miles O'Brien," August Pilot). I enjoyed the story about CNN's Miles O'Brien; I knew there had to be a reason I liked the guy so much. But I did have to roll my eyes at Scott's statement that the Air Force Thunderbird F-16 seat "tilts back at an extreme angle." The F-16 seat is fixed at an angle of 30 degrees, instead of the standard 13 degrees in earlier fighters, to give the pilot additional help withstanding the jet's ability to snap into a 9-G pull. There's nothing extreme about it; in fact, it's about where you would put a sports-car seat, and is far more comfortable than the usual bolt-upright position in other fighters. It does mitigate the effect of those Gs, but, as O'Brien learned, it puts the pilot's head at a precarious angle, and can be tough on his neck if he isn't careful.
Atlanta, Georgia
We welcome your comments. Address your letters to: Editor, AOPA Pilot, 421 Aviation Way, Frederick, Maryland 21701. Send e-mail to [email protected]. Include your full name, address, and AOPA number on all correspondence, including e-mail. Letters will be edited for length and style.
Related Articles
