T Tail Turbo Lance
Ignacio Romero
me to stay away from that plane, I'm looking at one and would like some more
opinions, specially on the maintenance side, is the engine a problem on
maintenance? unreliable? very "fragile"?
Thanks in advance,
Ignacio Romero
Pat Barry
installation that Piper used - nothing wrong with any of that side of it.
The plane is the basic Cherokee Six/Lance/Saratoga type with changes here and
there along the way. I almost put in Comanche, but the Comanche was a superior
plane with a lot more parts and was more expensive to build - and when they made
it the Lance they added a hershey bar wing and made it less costly to build.
The thing people criticize about the Lance is the lousy unstable flying
characteristics of the plane. The T Tail lance is a lousy flying plane with a
stabilator stuck up there which is too small.
Piper built the T Tail for sex appeal - the Boeing 727 was the rage, and that
sleek T tail of the 727 was tried by Piper. While Piper praised the one virtue
of the T tail being the fact that it is not affected by the propwash and the
lowering of gear and flap (no rough air), the downside is that the stabilator is
too damn small, and is unresponsive at slow airspeeds.
I have quite a few hours in a turbo Lance, and while I got used to it, I never
lost sight of the fact that a little windshear on takeoff and that crappy
stabilator would stall right away from you.
I sold one to a businessman from Palos Verdes in SoCal, and he wanted it to
travel to pinball arcades he had set up all over Mexico. I set him up with a
pilot who flew him, and then flew with him as he became better on the plane, so
by the time he killed himself in the plane he had over a hundred hours pic in
the plane. However one day he was coming in for a landing at the GA airport at
mexico City (an airport known for its winds, and the altitude is 10,000 feet)
and he had to do a go around, and couldn't in the lousy T tail turbo lance. The
plane isn't responsive enough at low airspeeds, and you're all over the sky with
it - I can almost picture the scene, trying to go around at 10,000 feet - the
engine being responsive but the plane slopping all over the place like an obese
cow - and he hit trees off to the end of the runway and barbecued himself and
his passenger, the teen son of his neighbor from Palos Verdes.
While this is tragic, the point is that if he had been flying a plane that was
better designed he would have been okay.
The T lance provides good horsepower for the money - because it's a piece of
crap airplane - nobody in his right mind would want to own something like that!
If you want a plane in that class, look at the C210, or the regular tail Lance,
or the 250 or 260 Comanche (wow, what a plane the Comanche is - now there's a
plane!!!) But stay away from the T Tail Turbo Lance. Maintenance wise it's no
big story - it's like any Piper (straightforward, no big deal if you stay on top
of it).
There are so many good planes out there - don't get stuck with a pig like the T
tail Lance.
Pat
Bill Coltharp
Ignacio Romero <irom...@bigfoot.com> wrote in article
<37f03...@news1.prserv.net>...
> I've heard many things about the turbo Lance (T-Tail), most of them
pushing
> me to stay away from that plane, I'm looking at one and would like some
more
> opinions, specially on the maintenance side, is the engine a problem on
> maintenance? unreliable? very "fragile"?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
>
> Ignacio Romero
Ignacio: I suppose thats what makes horseraces. (Pat Barry's reply). I
have
been flying a '79 turbo T-tail lance since 1985 and have about 2000 hrs in
it
in both VFR and IFR. I have yet to find a problem with the airplane and I
fly it regularly from an airport on top of a hill that is well known for
its gusty
winds (5R3). I have made numerous trips to Colorado where I have operated
it
out of high altitude, high density altitude airports (such as Creed and
Durango)
with gusty winds and find no lack of elevator authority. I consider the
airplane
reliable, safe and a good buy.
Bill Coltharp
N2138K
Scott D. Isaac
Pat Barry <p...@ktb.net> wrote in message news:37F077DF...@ktb.net...
| The T Tail lance is a lousy flying plane with a
| stabilator stuck up there which is too small
...
| a little windshear on takeoff and that crappy
| stabilator would stall right away from you.
...
| The T lance provides good horsepower for the money - because it's a piece
of
| crap airplane - nobody in his right mind would want to own something like
that!
...
Roger Long
horizontal tail is in the wake of
very turbulent slow moving air coming off the wings. Pitch control then
vanishes just when you need it
most. I read somewhere about two guys who recovered a spinning Tomahawk by
unhooking their seatbelts
and climbing up on the glareshield. Now, that is presence of mind!
I think you could spin a T tail a lot and have no problems. Then, you do it
just a little differently, the tail gets into
the wing wake, next thing is your wake. Unless maybe your as smart, quick,
and heavy as those two guys.
Don't try this at home, kids.
HLAviation
>me to stay away from that plane, I'm looking at one and would like some more
>opinions, specially on the maintenance side, is the engine a problem on
>maintenance? unreliable? very "fragile"?
Nah. Nothing particularly wrong with this plane. TIO 540 is is a good reliable
engine as any other, I personaly prefer it to a Cont TSIO 520. The Lance is a
bit of a runway hog at gross and if you try to climb out too steep it gets a
bit hot but I believe if you get the Lo Presti cowl for it, it takes care of
that problem and also makes it look a little better. Either way you get a real
6 person and luggage plane. Gotta like that big back door. Pull out the seats
and you can haul stiffs or whatever you want. Lotta room and capability for
the money.
Barney Lum
>> pushing me to stay away from that plane, I'm looking at one and
>> would like some more opinions, specially on the maintenance side,
>> is the engine a problem on maintenance? unreliable? very "fragile"?
The P32T I occasionally fly is a 1978 T-Tail and the following are
some of my experiences.
Being intercooled, one needs to pay special attention to what your max
manifold pressure can be when considering OAT vs standard. It's easy
to overboost - monitor the MP and annunciator light during the takeoff
roll.
> HLAviation <hlavi...@aol.com> wrote:
> [nothing particularly wrong... TIO 540 is a reliable engine...]
Our club (and its owner) has had the plane now since late 1997. About
a year (and 200 hours) later at 2000 hrs, its engine was overhauled.
Some of the "unexpected" problems found were nicks in the turbo's
compressor intake vanes, a small exhaust leak (fortunately facing away
from a nearby fuel line), and worn fuel pump. The overhaul ran around
$34k; the exhaust system replacement another $3k.
Other than that, we've seen no trend of maintenance problems with the
engine or aircraft that's out of the ordinary... it's another Cherokee
that's larger. We've now got (only) about 120 hours on it since the
overhaul; 300 since getting the aircraft.
> The Lance is a bit of a runway hog at gross [...]
Oink! Whenever I'm within 400 lbs of gross at takeoff, I'll use 25
degs of flaps and soft-field technique. That helps a LOT in getting
the beast off of the surface and accelerating. Last year (before the
overhaul) at near-gross, sea-level, 90F, and flaps, I think I used
about 2000' of our 4000' runway.
This past May (after overhaul) in 110F and 300 lbs under gross, the
plane performed significantly better.
> [...] Either way you get a real 6 person and luggage plane.
With a useful load of 1240 lbs, six "FAA" persons on board will leave
about 220 lbs for fuel and "stuff". In cruise, our plane burns about
16gph at ~140 kias.
If only two persons are on board (in the front), be aware that you
might be forward of CG with full fuel. You just might need to bring
that dead-head in the back afterall :).
Speaking of fuel, there are four 25 gallon tanks (~94 total usable).
The two on each side are interconnected and filled through the
outboard. Since you can't visually check the inboard tanks, there's a
gauge on it that's visible from the top of the wing - I hate not being
able to see inside. When fuel does become visible on the floor of the
outboard tank, you've already got about 25+ gallons.
> Gotta like that big back door. Pull out the seats and you can haul
> stiffs or whatever you want. Lotta room and capability for the
> money.
Yeah - the passenger/baggage combo door really makes getting loaded :)
a breeze. I usually limit my passengers to 4 (five total). With club
seating for the rear, it's a great 4-place aircraft comfort(and
baggage)-wise.
That T-tail thing.
Because it's out of the prop wash, it'll take a bit longer for it to
"bite" during the takeoff roll. You may find that an early rotation
will cause your nose to rise a bit then drop, repeating until the
stabilator can actually fly... that's about 5 knots after it starts
bobbing on its own.
If your landing round-out speed is a bit fast (90+), you may encounter
small pitch oscillations that lasts a couple seconds as you try to
slow down (not sure how much the T plays in that).
Tiny Rudder.
Don't expect to sustain a sideslip while landing in xwinds more than
10 knots even though the max demo is 17. You may need to use the
crab-then-kick method.
I'd be curious to try a Saratoga to check its feel for comparison...
Barney
Dick Reeves
HLAviation <hlavi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990929010713...@ng-co1.aol.com...
> >I've heard many things about the turbo Lance (T-Tail), most of them
pushing
> >me to stay away from that plane, I'm looking at one and would like some
more
> >opinions, specially on the maintenance side, is the engine a problem on
> >maintenance? unreliable? very "fragile"?
>
reliable
is a
> bit of a runway hog at gross and if you try to climb out too steep it gets
a
> bit hot but I believe if you get the Lo Presti cowl for it, it takes care
of
real
> 6 person and luggage plane. Gotta like that big back door. Pull out the
seats
> and you can haul stiffs or whatever you want. Lotta room and capability
for
> the money.
I second what's been said. I have a Turbo Saratoga, the successor to the
Lance, but have many hours in a '78 Lance T tail. Cooling is a problem
above 12,000 and 65%. Get a set of Turbo GAMIjectors for it and you'll be
able to do 165 knots at 15,000 on 15 gph.
Dick
Pat Barry
Barney Lum wrote:
> >> I've heard many things about the turbo Lance (T-Tail), most of them
> >> pushing me to stay away from that plane, I'm looking at one and
> >> would like some more opinions, specially on the maintenance side,
> >> is the engine a problem on maintenance? unreliable? very "fragile"?
>
> > Gotta like that big back door. Pull out the seats and you can haul
> > stiffs or whatever you want. Lotta room and capability for the
> > money.
>
> Yeah - the passenger/baggage combo door really makes getting loaded :)
> a breeze. I usually limit my passengers to 4 (five total). With club
> seating for the rear, it's a great 4-place aircraft comfort(and
> baggage)-wise.
>
> That T-tail thing.
> Because it's out of the prop wash, it'll take a bit longer for it to
> "bite" during the takeoff roll. You may find that an early rotation
> will cause your nose to rise a bit then drop, repeating until the
> stabilator can actually fly... that's about 5 knots after it starts
> bobbing on its own.
>
> If your landing round-out speed is a bit fast (90+), you may encounter
> small pitch oscillations that lasts a couple seconds as you try to
> slow down (not sure how much the T plays in that).
>
> Tiny Rudder.
> Don't expect to sustain a sideslip while landing in xwinds more than
> 10 knots even though the max demo is 17. You may need to use the
> crab-then-kick method.
>
> I'd be curious to try a Saratoga to check its feel for comparison...
>
Saratoga and a Lance are like night and day.
Better wing, better performance, better airplane. Same type - but better
handling and safety.
>
> Barney