popaviator
Well-Known Member
Its the Seneca I.....Seems like an awesome bird to fly:rawk:
Seminole VS Seneca
- Thread starter popaviator
- Start date
Its the Seneca I.....Seems like an awesome bird to fly:rawk:
scooter2525
Very well Member
LoadMasterC141
Well-Known Member
My very first Multi training was in a Seneca 1. Thing felt like a Sherman tank. Also, no interconnected rudder and aileron and that thing has big rudder. Consequently, it kind of dutch rolls the whole time you are flying. It does have counter rotating props, so your kneee should not hurt too bad after a few approaches on single engine.
After flying Senecas and Twin Comanches for my CMEL and MEI, getting into the Seminole was extremely easy.
What school are you flying the Seneca from?
popaviator
Well-Known Member
US Flight Academy has 3 Seneca's, I'm trying to get ready for the next class of commercial students so I can get some multi time or at least get out of the 152 from time to time. 
I miss flying the Seminole...
I miss flying the Seminole...
LoadMasterC141
Well-Known Member
I do like the Seminole, but enjoyed the challenge of the first planes I flew more.
Congrats, you seem to have the right attitude. It's not about making it easy, it's about learning how to fly the plane and anticipate how it will bite you in the ass and you not letting it happen.
Can't specifically address the Seneca, only had a few hours in one. Did my multi in the Aztec. It made you work and think well ahead. I still remember the engine out procedures 28 years later. But in terms of teaching good technique and learning how to think ahead, I'd take the Seneca over the Seminole any day.
I did my ATP in the Seminole because it was cheap. But I also was flying F/O in a SD3-30 at the time and had a lot of solid multi time, so it was really just a "box checker."
Tough part was the landings. I was so used to sitting way off the ground in the 'pig, that I kept thinking I hadn't put the gear down...
Enjoy the experience.
Can't specifically address the Seneca, only had a few hours in one. Did my multi in the Aztec. It made you work and think well ahead. I still remember the engine out procedures 28 years later. But in terms of teaching good technique and learning how to think ahead, I'd take the Seneca over the Seminole any day.
I did my ATP in the Seminole because it was cheap. But I also was flying F/O in a SD3-30 at the time and had a lot of solid multi time, so it was really just a "box checker."
Tough part was the landings. I was so used to sitting way off the ground in the 'pig, that I kept thinking I hadn't put the gear down...
Enjoy the experience.
TUCKnTRUCK
That guy
My first hand experience with the aztec is that it does bite... but crashes well
I found the Sen.II to be slightly underpowered for a turbocharged plane... but nice to fly. In understand the 1 had complaints though.
My closest reference beyond the sen. were aztec and colemill chieften, which both seemed to carry more power.(aztec had a prop change netting better performance)
Way back when?
Most baron owners I know (all two of them) budget over $350/hr.
-mini
R
Roger, Roger
Guest
Agreed. I'm a big fan of the Duchess.
SFCC/UND
Well-Known Member
except for the two engine failures with the prop stuck in the feathered position and the hydraulic fluid leaking out during flight. Other than that great plane.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
This was 2006/2007 at an air carrier. In house MX (cheap), buying engines from Lycoming in bulk (the largest TIO-540 operator in the world), blah blah blah. In other words I think they get their parts, fuel and everything else on the cheap simply because of the bulk of business they do with their vendors.
Yes, that would certainly reduce operating cost. I seriously doubt that a flight school (or even private owner) could expect to:
1) get insurance inexpensive enough to operate in the $300-$400/hr range.
2) get fuel cheap enough to operate in the $300-$400/hr range
3) get maintenance inexpensive enough to operate in the $300-$400/hr range.
I agree though, at a large operator like that, getting fleet discounts with the planes paid for....$350/hr is probably purdy darn accurate.
-mini
WacoFan
Bigly
Place I worked when I was 15-21 offered multi in the following airplanes over that time:
1) Aztec
2) Beech Travel Air
3) Cessna 310
4) Seneca
Of those airplanes my favorites were the 310, Aztec, Travel Air and Seneca in that order. We didn't take any longer in the 310 than we did in the Seneca and we never had problems with the 310 and Aztec being higher performance vs. the other two. After flying the 310 around for a bit it was easy to upgrade someone into a 340 or 414. I have always been of the belief that easier airplanes are not necesarily the best trainers though. Probably the best trainers in my mind would be my Grandpa's succession of trainers:
1) Porterfield (CPT program)
2) Stearman
3) BT-13
4) AT-6
5) Beech AT-10 (Multi)
6) B-25
When I win Lotto, I am going to open a flying school that will create the same progression listed above.
1) Aztec
2) Beech Travel Air
3) Cessna 310
4) Seneca
Of those airplanes my favorites were the 310, Aztec, Travel Air and Seneca in that order. We didn't take any longer in the 310 than we did in the Seneca and we never had problems with the 310 and Aztec being higher performance vs. the other two. After flying the 310 around for a bit it was easy to upgrade someone into a 340 or 414. I have always been of the belief that easier airplanes are not necesarily the best trainers though. Probably the best trainers in my mind would be my Grandpa's succession of trainers:
1) Porterfield (CPT program)
2) Stearman
3) BT-13
4) AT-6
5) Beech AT-10 (Multi)
6) B-25
When I win Lotto, I am going to open a flying school that will create the same progression listed above.
scooter2525
Very well Member
Thats not terrible. I figured in a training situation (go arounds, maneuvers etc) that they would be burning a lot more fuel and the operation costs would be higher. I could understand in a 135 setting it would be somewhat cheaper to operate because most flights are 1 hour blocks a leg and you lean out to 16 gph.
I'm certainly not going to sit down and crunch the numbers like I'm sure they have...
popaviator
Well-Known Member
We also have a DA-42....but I don't really know what think about the Single Lever operation. Seems like a cool airplane but I'd rather stick with the Seneca for now.
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
....but I don't really know what think about the Single Lever operation. Seems like a cool airplane but I'd rather stick with the Seneca for now.
Single lever? Less work. Always a good deal man. Less work for the same money is the way to go.
I had a bit of seneca time. I liked it. Everything I read from the other guys seemed to jog a memory or two. And with the interconnect, it's like a free trip to gym on crosswind day. But after watching your scrawny butt hold that beer mug up at HB LAS for that long, you shouldn't have a problem.
popaviator
Well-Known Member
Thanks Martin :buck: ..... although I have gotten stronger from lifting the Remos around the hangar
. I wonder how many of those suckers you could fit in a 74