The school, located at Page Field Airport (KFMY), is reporting student enrollment is at an all-time high.

According to company president Chris Schoensee, enrollment for the first quarter of 2024 was record setting, creating a backlog of clients who will begin their flight training in September, with other student start dates extended to spring 2025. 

“Clearly, the demand for pursuing a career as a commercial pilot remains exceptionally strong,” Schoensee said. “And it’s not just at Paragon Flight. I’m hearing of positive growth trends in other peer flight academies as well.”

The school predicts it will conduct 40,000 hours of training in 2024, up from 26,000 in 2023.

• READ MORE: Paragon Flight Training Continues to Grow

Paragon now has 50 full-time flight instructors to meet the demand. The school is also increasing its number of maintenance technicians to eight and adding more aircraft to the fleet.

According to school officials, Paragon Flight is on track to add 50 Piper aircraft by the end of 2027. This year, the company is expected to take delivery of nine Piper P100i’s with the first arriving on-site this month. The Piper P100i is the backbone of the Paragon fleet, as the school owns approximately 15 percent of the Piper P100i’s in existence.

• READ MORE: Commercial Airline Flight Schools in Florida

Paragon Flight is also adding to its simulator training offerings, planning to take delivery of two more ALSIM devices and a Redbird Xwind simulator within the next 12 to 15 months.

“Advanced simulator training is an absolute must for leading pilot training programs,” Schoensee said. “The ALSIM simulator matches the cockpit of the Piper P100i button for button, and the Redbird Xwind simulator is essential for maximizing student training in crosswind conditions, which are the most difficult conditions for student pilots to master in the first stages of their pilot training experience.”

The post Paragon Flight Training Reports Record Enrollment appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1972 Piper PA-32-300 Cherokee Six.

Piper’s Cherokee Six appeals to pilots for some of the same reasons that other Cherokee models are popular, including stability, predictable handling, and reliability. But the Six offers bonuses, including a larger cabin, more horsepower, and room for six. This is a utility airplane that few others can match in terms of all-around capability.

Certified in 1965, the PA-32 Cherokee Six is largely the same as the later model Saratogas that have retractable landing gear and typically offer luxury interiors. The Six is clearly more utilitarian and tends to carry fewer adornments and interior upgrades.

This 1972 Piper PA-32-300 Cherokee Six has 5,226 hours on the airframe and 790 hours on its 300 hp Lycoming IO-540.

The panel features dual Garmin G5 electronic flight instruments, Garmin GTN 650 touchscreen GPS/Nav/Com, MX 170C digital Nav/Com with glideslope, Garmin GMA 345 audio panel, GTX 320 transponder, uAvionix TailBeacon ADS-B, Auto Control III autopilot with Nav coupling, S-Tec 30 PSS altitude hold, and Electronics International digital CHT/EGT gauge.

Additional equipment includes electric pitch trim, rudder trim, Flightcom six-place intercom, cabin ventilation fan, auxiliary power receptacle, and aileron gap seals.

Pilots looking for a large piston single with generous interior space and useful load that is ideal for family travel should consider this 1972 Piper PA-32-300 Cherokee Six, which is available for $244,900 on AircraftForSale.

You can arrange financing of the aircraft through FLYING Finance. For more information, email info@flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: The Practical Endurance of the Piper Cherokee Six
• FLYING Magazine: Getting Sucked into Aviation with a Piper Cherokee Six Owner
• FLYING Magazine: Best Used Six Seaters
• FLYING Magazine: Air Compare: Piper Lance vs. Saratoga
• Plane & Pilot: New Piper‘s Saratoga II TC
• Plane & Pilot: Piper Cherokee Six 260/300
• The Aviation Consumer: Piper PA-32 Cherokee Six/Saratoga

The post This 1972 Piper PA-32-300 Cherokee Six Is a Sturdy, Reliable ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1981 Piper PA-44-180T Turbo Seminole.

Piper’s PA-44 Seminole received its type certificate in 1978, arguably at the height of niche formation in general aviation. Aircraft makers were determined to fill every perceived gap in their lineups, and demand for light twins with easier handling, simple systems, and economical operation was strong.

The Seminole readily checked those boxes while its counter-rotating propellers gave pilots relief from worries about the possible failure of a critical engine and the resulting handling challenges.

It is no surprise that Seminoles became popular multiengine trainers and are still common on the ramps at flight schools across the country. The airplane can also perform well as a personal mount, especially for travelers who appreciate the redundancy of two engines when flying at night, over water, or while traversing remote, forbidding terrain. The turbocharged version, like the aircraft for sale here, provides the added flexibility of flying easily at higher altitudes to take advantage of favorable winds or escape traffic.

This 1981 PA-44-180T has 6,141 hours on the airframe, 1,647 hours on its left 180 hp Continental TSIO-360 engine, and 632 hours on the right since overhaul. There are 1,626 hours on the left Hartzell propeller and 3,294 hours on the right.

The panel features a Garmin GNS 430W GPS/Nav/Com, King KY-197 TSO Com, King KN-53 TSO Nav, KMA-24 TSO audio panel with three-light marker beacon, Sandel SN3308 digital EHSI, Garmin GTX 330 transponder, King KN-64 DME, Bendix weather radar, Century 41 autopilot, and dual ECI graphic engine monitors.

Additional equipment includes a uAvionix ADS-B solution, Bob Fields inflatable door seal, 60-amp alternators, propeller synchronizer, oxygen system, front-seat shoulder harnesses, and four-place intercom.

Pilots looking for an economical twin with forgiving handling for training, travel, or time-building should consider this 1981 Piper PA-44-180T, which is available for $189,900 on AircraftForSale.

You can arrange financing of the aircraft through FLYING Finance. For more information, email info@flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: Piper Seminole Certified for Garmin GFC 700
• FLYING Magazine: Piper Seminole Goes G1000
• FLYING Magazine: Piper Introduces Diesel Seminole DX
• Plane & Pilot: Our 2021 Roundup of Light Twin Aircraft
• Plane & Pilot: Piper PA-44 Seminole/Turbo Seminole
• Plane & Pilot: Used Light Twins Roundup
• AVweb: Used Aircraft Guide: Piper Seminole

The post This 1981 Piper PA-44-180T Turbo Seminole Is a Versatile ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

This is something I see fairly regularly, albeit more commonly in reference to more basic and affordable types. A prospective buyer polls a general audience for specific advice about a major purchase, and the replies are both predictable and suspect. All too common is the warning that parts for anything other than Cessna, Piper, or Beechcraft are impossible to find. While certain aircraft (and engines) do indeed present some difficulty with regard to parts availability, the vast majority are entirely possible to own and operate without too much trouble.

There are far better ways to become informed about a given aircraft type, and my favorite, by far, is type clubs.

• READ MORE: Going to the Birds, And How Not To

For a nominal fee, one can purchase an annual membership to a type club and instantly gain access to a treasure trove of virtually any mass-produced type out there. Good clubs offer online libraries chock full of scanned documents, manuals, diagrams, and literature. Additionally, many club websites are home to online forums with comprehensive prepurchase inspection checklists, airworthiness directive (AD) lists, and firsthand knowledge crowdsourced from current and former owners. Best of all, membership is almost always made available to shoppers who aren’t yet owners, offering an extremely affordable education about a type under consideration. 

As someone who creates spreadsheets and compiles detailed documentation for purchases as minor as a toaster, I joined The International Cessna 170 Association early in my shopping process, years before actually purchasing one. I spent hours soaking up as much info as I could about the type. Of particular note was a pinned thread in its forum that listed approximately 30-40 items to address immediately upon purchasing a 170. The list was detailed, and the reasoning behind each item was provided.

When I finally bought a 170 and dropped it off for its first annual inspection, I presented that list to my mechanic. Before long, he completed approximately a dozen various mods, many of which I’d never have discovered without entering the 170 community. I learned that the parking brake has a history of becoming partially engaged after a rudder pedal is pushed to the stop during crosswind landings or taxiing, and we followed the advice to disconnect it entirely. We proactively replaced the tailwheel leaf springs and old copper oil pressure gauge lines. I also had him perform multiple specific inspections that weren’t called out in any manufacturer materials.

• READ MORE: When It’s Better to Have It and Not Need It

Without question, my $45 annual membership had just paid for itself, and I hadn’t even tapped into any of the scanned documentation. Neither had I posted many of my own questions in the forum or engaged with any of the all-knowing 170 owners and their decades of experience maintaining the type. With such informed and helpful people at my disposal, happy to help tackle problems and lend their expertise, this membership is one that I don’t think twice about renewing.

Type clubs like this are also an excellent source of events. Many hold refresher and currency clinics aimed at sharpening the skills of the owner group as a whole. Some even negotiate special rates with insurance companies for owners who have demonstrated an ongoing effort to undergo recurrent training. And even if a club hasn’t arranged for formal discounts, I’ve spoken with one insurance broker who acts as an owner advocate, presenting underwriters with proof of such training and negotiating lower rates as a result.

Other clubs do an excellent job with social events. At face value, many of them appear to be little more than excuses to devour vast amounts of cheeseburgers and ice cream. But if such temptations are what it takes to motivate owners to preflight their airplanes and get into the air regularly, well, that’s good for airplane and pilot alike.

It’s possible rare types benefit the most from a vibrant, active type club or owner’s association. The Meyers Aircraft Owners Association is a textbook example. With a small fleet size to begin with, airframe parts can occasionally become difficult to source. So when the original factory jigs and tooling were located by a Meyers owner, he purchased everything and stored it all in a secure location for preservation. Due to his efforts, the entire Meyers community will be able to source brand-new airframe parts if and when they are required. 

• READ MORE: 5 Things I Wish I Had Known Before Buying My First Airplane

To determine whether your type has a corresponding club, simply Google your aircraft  along with the words “club” or “association,” and you’ll likely find any that exist. Additionally, the EAA Vintage Aircraft Association maintains an excellent list of type clubs.

Finally, if your time and workload permit, consider getting involved and giving back to your community of owners. Help to organize a fly-out or two during the summer. Contribute some of your newfound knowledge in the forums. And lend a helping hand to others who are navigating the steep learning curve of ownership for the first time. 

The post Navigating the Aircraft Ownership Learning Curve Through Type Clubs appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

In contrast, all light sport aircraft (LSA), experimental amateur-built airplanes, and warbirds are issued special certificates. In my view, the rule can be divided into two main parts: airplane descriptions and capabilities, and pilot certificates, technician privileges, and operating limitations. In short, airplanes or people.

For airplanes, the NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) felt like Christmas in July, granting many capabilities industry and pilot member organizations had sought over some years of negotiation. The people part describes who gets to fly and maintain these MOSAIC LSAs and under what rules. This latter section inspired greater concern.

Airplanes: What We Gained

Here’s the list of what FAA offered and how each changed:

Gross weight: LSAs have been limited to 1,320 pounds (land) or 1,430 pounds (water). Under MOSAIC, the weight limit is removed and clean stall constrains size so the aircraft remains what FAA sought: those “easy to fly, operate, and maintain.” It is expected that weight can rise to 3,000 pounds depending on the design.

Stall speed: Presently, LSAs cannot stall faster than 45 knots. This will be raised 20 percent to 54 knots, but this is clean stall, the purpose of which is to limit aircraft size and difficulty. It has no relation to landing speed or slow-flight qualities. This more than doubled the potential size, hence a new term, “MOSAIC LSA.”

Four seats: LSAs are presently limited by definition to two seats. This rises to four in a MOSAIC LSA, but if operated by someone using sport pilot certificate privileges, then only one passenger can be carried. A private certificate with medical may fill all four seats, assuming weight and balance allows.

Retractable gear: Light sport aircraft have been fixed gear only, except for amphibious models. Now any MOSAIC LSA can be retractable. Several imported LSAs already offer retractable options in other countries.

Adjustable prop: LSAs were allowed only ground-adjustable props. Now a MOSAIC LSA can have an in-flight adjustable prop. Such equipment on similar aircraft is common in other countries.

250 knot max speed: An LSA was limited by definition to 120 knots at full power. Now the speed limit matches all other aircraft below 10,000 feet: 250 knots. No one expected such a large expansion, but now retractable and adjustable props make more sense.

Rotary expansion: After 20 years of waiting, fully built gyroplanes will be allowed. That followed years of advocacy effort, but when the opposition finally yielded, the FAA also granted helicopters.

Electric or hybrid: Because the FAA did not want turbine LSAs in 2004, it specified reciprocating engines, unintentionally knocking out electric motors that few were considering at the time. In fixing the definition to allow electric, the agency will also permit hybrids. Examples are already flying in Europe.

Turbine: Perhaps turbine engines were harder to operate 20 years ago when LSA were defined, but today they are seen as simpler, and the FAA will allow them. Turbine-powered MOSAIC LSA candidates are already flying in Europe.

Multiple engines/motors: The LSA has been limited to a single engine by definition. That constraint is removed, although no language was given to address how the pilot qualifies.

Aerial work: The Light Aircraft Manufacturers Association (LAMA) lobbied for MOSAIC LSAs to be permitted to do forms of aerial work, although not passenger or cargo hauling. The FAA has granted this opportunity to the manufacturers, which can specify what operations they will permit. A commercial pilot certificate will be required.

One downside to all these goodies? Each will increase the price. The good news? Present-day LSAs offer lower prices and have proven enjoyable and dependable. Many LSAs are fine as they are and have no need to change.

A lot of LSA producers already meet higher weights in other countries where permitted. They are merely reduced on paper to meet U.S. standards. It should be straightforward for them to redeclare meeting all MOSAIC-level ASTM standards to qualify for higher weights.

The only question is how far backward compatible they can go for aircraft in the field over which they have had no control for some time. It’s an industry question to resolve, and it will swiftly be handled to aid sales.

People and Areas of Concern

Medicals: Lots of questions surround one of the principal benefits of LSA operation: the lack of requirement for an aviation medical if operating as a sport pilot. More specifically, pilots want to fly larger aircraft using these privileges, meaning no medical certificate, or BasicMed, instead using the driver’s license as evidence of their medical fitness.

To keep within their budget, many pilots wish to buy (or keep flying) legacy GA aircraft such as the Cessna 150, 172, 177, and some 182s, plus certain Pipers, Diamonds, Champions, or other brands. Many of the latter aircraft are too heavy to allow such privilege today. MOSAIC appears to change that, but without presenting compelling evidence that possession of a medical assures a flight proceeds safely, the FAA nonetheless clings to this premise. Many assert the occurrence of medical problems sufficient to upset a flight or cause an accident are incredibly small in number.

Stall speed: Most NPRM readers agree that it was a worthy solution to use 54 knots clean stall as a means to limit the size of the airplane and to keep it within the FAA’s mantra of LSAs being “easy to fly, operate, and maintain.”

However, many respondents note that adding just a couple knots to that limit will allow several more airplanes that some wish to buy and fly under MOSAIC rules. Note that the 54-knot reference is not related to landing speeds or slow flight, where lift-enhancing devices like flaps would normally be used.

Some pilots asked if adding vortex generators could reduce stall speed enough to qualify. The problem lies in proving a slower stall speed was achieved. Stall (V_S1) printed in the POH will be the standard about compliance.

Several pilots have complained about use of calibrated versus indicated airspeed for the stall limit, but this is another matter that might be clarified after the comment period.

Endorsements: One of the significant lessons learned in 20 years of pilots operating LSAs is the so-called magic of endorsements. Instead of asking pilots to receive training, take a knowledge test and possibly an oral exam, followed by a practical flight test, they can just go get trained for added skills from an instructor who then endorses their logbook accordingly, and they’re good to go. This puts a significant burden on flight instructors to do their jobs well, but that’s already the situation.

The NPRM already refers to the use of endorsements for retractable gear training or adjustable prop training, and many believe that expanding endorsements to all privileges described in the MOSAIC proposal has merit.

Noise: For the first time, the NPRM introduced noise requirements that encompass several pages. Coincidentally, the LSA sector is already one of the quietest in the airborne fleet.

This is partly because of European noise regulations that have been in place for a long time, motivating quieter engine and exhaust system development. However, LSAs are also quieter because the powerplants are modern, thanks to the faster approval process implied by industry consensus standards.

The industry was not pleased about the noise proposal, as these requirements add burden without identifiable benefit. Nonetheless, the situation might be handled through the ASTM process more quickly and still satisfy political demands.

Night: MOSAIC’s language invigorated many readers when the NPRM expressed support for a sport pilot to fly at night—with proper training and a logbook endorsement. Then the proposal refers to other FAA regulations that require BasicMed or a medical. If you must have a medical, you are not exercising the central privilege of a sport pilot. Why suggest that a sport pilot can do things that are blocked by other regulations? This conflict should be resolved.

This is one of several aspects of the NPRM that many describe as “inconsistencies,” where one part of MOSAIC appears to restrict another part, often for unclear reasons. Such observations lead many to declare the NPRM looks “rushed to market.” Hopefully, most problems can be addressed in the post-comment period.

When surveyed about why night privileges are valued, most pilots wanted to be able to complete a cross-country flight with a landing after dark.

IFR/IMC: Contrary to what many think, the FAA has never prohibited LSAs from IFR/IMC operation. It is the lack of an ASTM standard to which manufacturers can declare compliance that prevents such sales. (Some special LSA owners elect a change to experimental LSA status and can then file IFR, assuming they have a rating, are current, and the airplane is properly equipped.)

However, as with night operations, many LSA owners report higher-level pilot certificates often including instrument ratings, and they would like to be able to use their LSAs to get through a thin cloud layer.

Maintenance and TBOs: The maintenance community has found several objections within the NPRM. It appears that changes could cause a loss of privilege for LSA owners who have taken training to perform basic maintenance on their own LSAs.

In addition to altering the privileges of light sport repairman mechanic (LSRM) certificate holders, MOSAIC adds capabilities such as electric propulsion, hybrid, turbine, and powered-lift devices, which leaves the mechanic-training industry guessing where to start. Some organizations wonder if it’s worth the investment to create appropriate courses with uncertain privilege at the end.

Indeed, eight training organizations suggested they would petition for an extension to the comment period. It was successful, so the extension will delay the expected arrival of the finished MOSAIC regulation. Absent any extension, the FAA has repeatedly said 16 months were needed, equating to the end of 2024 or early 2025.

One group creatively suggested using add-on training modules to solve the problem in much the same way that endorsements can be used to solve pilot training enhancements.

Lack of sector expertise: The FAA knows a great deal about conventional, three-axis airplanes but far less about so-called “alternative LSAs.” For machines that use different control systems or operate substantially differently than airplanes—weight shift and powered parachutes come to mind—some industry experts believe a better system is to authorize an industry organization to manage these sectors. This has been common throughout Europe for many years and could work well in the U.S.

In a document of its size, some errors will arise and some clarifications will be needed. It is only a proposal after all. Pilots can comment on certain aspects but will have little idea how the FAA can or will solve various points, even if they offer solutions.

This frustrates some readers and can cause uncertainty about a pending or planned airplane purchase. In turn, purchase-decision delays frustrate airplane manufacturers. That’s the precarious terrain surrounding new regulations. Such comments on regulation are part of the American way, where the citizens can be part of the process. Here’s your chance to speak and be heard.

This column first appeared in the November 2023/Issue 943 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post Pilots Have Questions When It Comes to MOSAIC appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1946 ERCO 415-D Ercoupe.

Flying has always involved risk, but it was a particularly dangerous endeavor in its early days. As the decades progressed, so did aviation safety. Still, taking to the sky in small airplanes remained far from a safe activity, largely because loss-of-control accidents have always been common. Aviation history includes a number of designs and features aimed at making small airplanes safer, and the ERCO Ercoupe is among the more successful examples.

Designed during the 1930s by Fred Weick, who would later be instrumental in developing the Piper PA-28 Cherokee, the Ercoupe essentially combined an inherently stable airframe with limited control movements that prevented stalls and spins. The control arrangement also eliminated rudder pedals and the “footwork” that the manufacturer felt was confusing to many pilots. Relatively low power also kept pilots out of trouble. Ercoupes generally ranged from 40 to 75 hp, though a few examples received larger powerplants and many owners upgraded to more powerful engines over the years. The aircraft for sale here has an 85 hp engine.

This 1946 Ercoupe has 2,871 hours on the airframe and 305 hours on its  engine since overhaul. Avionics include a Garmin 250XL GPS/Com, GTX 321 transponder, PMA 4000 intercom, and uAvionix AV-30-C instrument.

Pilots who understand the appeal of traveling in a historically significant antique aircraft that is equally at home at vintage fly-ins or on modern airport ramps should consider this 1947 Ercoupe, which is available for $39,000 on AircraftForSale.

You can arrange financing of the aircraft through FLYING Finance. For more information, email info@flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: Approachable Aircraft: Ercoupe
• FLYING Magazine: Hawaii Lessons in an Ercoupe
• FLYING Magazine: The Process of Obtaining a Medical Certificate
• Plane & Pilot: Ercoupe
• The Aviation Consumer: Used Aircraft Guide: Ercoupe and Cadet

The post This 1946 ERCO 415-D Ercoupe Is an ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick Built For Safety appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The OEM’s latest turboprop contender breaks 300 knots, and clocks in at $4.1 million, it announced on Tuesday afternoon in a livestream event. The change instigating the new model number? The introduction of a 700 hp Pratt & Whitney PT6A-52 engine—replacing the flat-rated 600 hp PT6A-42A in the M600. Piper anticipates FAA type certification by the end of the first quarter of this year.

The M700 stays at its 6,000 pounds maximum takeoff weight to comply with Basic Med, as well as retaining the Garmin G3000 integrated flight deck and Halo emergency autoland system—which secured the Collier Trophy as well as FLYING’s Innovation Award in 2021.

READ MORE: We Fly: Piper M600/SLS Halo

Pushing past the specs on the M600/SLS it will replace, the M700 is projected to meet the following targets:

• Maximum range: 1,149 nm at the 301-ktas maximum cruise speed and 1,424 nm at normal cruise speed
• Takeoff distance: 1,994 ft over a 50-ft obstacle, at sea level on a standard—-a 24 percent improvement from the M600 at 2,635 ft under the same conditions
• Departure climb: 2,048 fpm—a 32 percent improvement over the M600—at MTOW
• Time to climb: 13.9 minutes to FL250, covering 34 nm and burning 97 pounds of fuel, all 25 to 35 percent improvements over the M600
• Landing distance: up to a 26 percent reduction in ground roll over the M600
• Garmin’s PlaneSync technology, adding remote aircraft status capability using the Garmin Pilot app, and database downloads while the aircraft is powered down

“The M700 Fury is a beautifully efficient, cross-country thoroughbred that gives our customers a performance-based flight experience with economics never seen before,” said Piper Aircraft’s president and CEO, John Calcagno. “We listened, and we delivered. The M700 Fury encompasses power, performance and the most advanced safety measures available today and an overall value proposition that is extremely compelling to individuals and corporate flight departments alike.”

Customers can choose from six interior schemes with updated leathers and design elements.

Following certification, U.S. deliveries will begin immediately, according to Piper, with validations with Canada, EASA, the U.K., and Brazil on the horizon next. With the sunset of the M600, the M-series now encompasses the M700, M500 turboprop retaining the PT6A-42A at 500 hp, and M350 piston-powered high-performance singles.
Look soon for FLYING’s We Fly pilot report on the M700.

The post Piper Lifts the Veil on the M700 Fury, Its Fastest Single Yet appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 1981 Piper PA-28-236 Dakota.

Piper rolled out the original PA-28s in part as a response to Cessna’s popular 172. Over the decades, a series of stretches, reshapings, and engine changes transformed that basic airframe into a fleet, including four-place and six-place singles and twins often designed to compete with specific rivals in the GA market. This PA-28-236 is one such example, having arisen from a need to compete with Cessna’s no-nonsense, heavy-lifting 182 Skylane. For pilots who trained in PA-28s or simply prefer low-wing aircraft, this big-engine version of the PA-28 could be an ideal vehicle. For those wondering, the Dakota is the follow-on to the Cherokee 235 Pathfinder, with the addition of the tapered wing.

I recall seeing a photograph of a pilot standing next to a PA-28-236 with a huge pile of luggage, apparently representing the aircraft’s cargo capacity. Indeed, the collection of stuff looked like the typical load for a student heading off to college. I am sorry that I do not recall whether the photo was part of a promotion or flight review article, but either way, the message was clear. This was one of those airplanes that supposedly could lift whatever you could fit through the door. That might be an exaggeration, but these Pipers are good haulers.

This Dakota has 2,860 hours on the airframe, 850 hours on its Lycoming O-540-J3A5D engine and 1,360 hours on its Hartzell propeller. The panel includes a Garmin GTN 650 GPS nav/com, GTX 345 transponder, King KMA 24 audio panel, KX 170B VHS nav/com, FR 86 ADF, KN 62A TSO DME, Century 21 autopilot, ACK 406 ELT with GPS interconnect, Sigtronics SPA-400 4-place TSO intercom, and Davtron M877 digital clock.

Pilots who need a flying utility vehicle to complete their typical mission should consider this brawny 1981 Piper PA-28-236 Dakota, which is available for $219,000 on AircraftForSale.

You can arrange financing of the aircraft through FLYING Finance. For more information, email info@flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: AeroGuard to Acquire 90 Archers from Piper Aircraft
• FLYING Magazine: EarthX Obtains STC for 12-Volt Lithium Battery Install
• Plane & Pilot: Piper Cherokee 235 Pathfinder/Dakota
• Plane & Pilot: Garmin Gets Green Light For Piper Autopilot STCs
• Plane & Pilot: Piper Cherokee 180 Archer
• Plane & Pilot: Plane Facts: Piper PA-28s

The post This 1981 Piper PA-28-236 Is a Strong-Shouldered ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Among the best at turning out new aircraft quickly and on a budget was Piper, which evolved its 1960 PA-28-140 into a range of models from basic trainers to high-performance and complex machines. In 1965 the company stretched the four-place PA-28 into the six-seat PA-32 initially known as the Cherokee Six, designed to be a sort of fixed-gear flying station wagon for growing families with lots of baggage.

Using the same fuselage and wing, Piper next developed the twin-engine PA-34 Seneca. The use of recycled materials clearly was helping the company in its mission to respond to pilots’ varied needs.

Developing a Six-Seater

By the mid-’70s, Piper wanted an airplane to compete with more-capable six-seaters like the Beechcraft A36 Bonanza and Cessna 210 Centurion. The company turned to the PA-32 design. All it really needed to do was modify the airframe for retractable gear. The resulting PA-32R Lance went on sale for the 1976 model year.

• READ MORE: Beechcraft A36 Bonanza vs. Bonanza V-tails

Over the next 30-plus years, the Lance continued to develop, sprouting a T-tail to become the Lance II and offering turbocharging as the Turbo Lance II. In 1980 the conventional tail returned, but the aircraft’s signature constant-chord “Hershey bar” wing had a new shape, with an attractive outboard taper. Its marketing name also changed to Saratoga, which the company produced, on and off, through 2008.

The PA-32 remains a popular model on the used market for the same reasons that made it a hit decades ago. For many people, it strikes the right balance of load-carrying utility, comfort, and speed. It is also stable and easy to fly. Pilots who trained in smaller Pipers will find the larger Lance and Saratoga familiar and comforting, but the design also has features that may convince high-wing pilots to give low-wing flying a try.

A Varied Market

Perhaps the most attractive thing about the PA-32 today is the number of versions available and the wide range of prices. Early “straight-tail” Lances generally come in under $200,000, and Lance IIs can also be bargains, in part because their T-tail design received poor reviews for pitch response—and many pilots simply dislike their looks.

The T-tail turbos also gained a reputation for running hot and other problems, but those tend to have been worked out on the aircraft that are still flying today.

While many pilots avoid the early turbo models, the Lances also have a following. They can be a good option for pilots seeking increased speed over long distances at higher altitudes. As usual, the mission influences our choice of aircraft, and some missions can be very specific.

Jim Barrett, a photographer who regularly shoots gorgeous air-to-air images of aircraft for FLYING, said he seriously considered buying a T-tail Lance several years ago, mainly because the horizontal stabilizer would cause less visual interference when shooting pictures with the airplane’s side doors removed. To Barrett, the tail on traditional aircraft is always in the way. Working around it is a perennial problem for aerial photographers.

Saratoga Moves Upmarket

Most potential PA-32 buyers prefer the standard tail and are therefore happy that Piper returned to that design when it rolled out the Saratoga SP in 1980. The new longer, tapered wing improved the aircraft’s appearance and performance by most accounts while a range of upgrades, including cabin appointments and cockpit equipment, meant buyers viewed the Saratoga as a cut above the Lance.

Saratogas are all over the map pricewise, but the nice ones are expensive, and the newest models from the 2000s typically land in the $300,000-to-$500,000range. The surge in used-aircraft pricing over the last few years seems to have affected Saratogas more than some other types, with even earlier models commanding surprisingly high prices. This could reflect the fact that many people regard them as aviation’s version of the large SUV, with three rows of seats and a wide cabin that families love.

Most PA-32s have club seating that makes it easier for passengers to converse, or for nonflying parents or older siblings to keep small children entertained. The aircraft has front and rear baggage compartments, which significantly ease loading for proper weight and balance. For passengers, the extra space means you can bring more stuff. Another feature that passengers appreciate is the left-side, double-door entry into the cabin. The opening is huge and appears to have been designed as a passenger door, not a cargo hatch that people can crawl through.

“It’s a great airplane for carrying passengers, which is how I fly much of the time,” said Michael Teiger, a retired physician with 3,200 flight hours who keeps his Saratoga at Brainard Airport (KHFD) in Hartford, Connecticut. His is a classic case of the machine matching the mission. He flies regularly between Hartford and Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts (KMVY), and said his 1986 Saratoga, a fixed-gear version, has been a steady, reliable transport and a good instrument platform.

Bill Gennaro, a friend based at my home airport in Sussex, New Jersey (KFWN), owned a Saratoga for many years while his sons were growing up and recalled how it brought a degree of ease to long family trips.

“It was a Chevy Suburban with wings,” Gennaro said. He also described its handling as somewhat truck-like, not “harmonious” or “fluid” or other adjectives people often use when talking about their favorite high-performance aircraft. However, when it came to traveling with a family and lots of gear, the Saratoga was a winner.

“I wasn’t looking to bore holes in the sky,” Gennaro said. “It was just a great traveling airplane. You could basically set the autopilot, put your feet up and know you would get there soon.”

Which One Is for You?

While many shoppers will be able to find Lances with affordable purchase prices, they will need to look deeper into the ownership equation to determine which aircraft best suits their budget and mission. Saratogas cost more but might offer features that make them a better buy for certain pilots based on how they plan to use the aircraft. Because year-to-year model changes were few, most variations among different vintages of PA-32 are slight. Powered from the beginning by a 300 hp Lycoming IO-540, the PA-32 did not vary much in performance during its decades on the market.

Most owners say their aircraft cruises at a true 150 to155 knots. Piper continued to make fixed-gear Saratogas as well, which cruise about 10 knots slower. Newer models reportedly consume less fuel but do not fly any faster. Turbos can cruise in the 170s but are still considered slow for the category. Pilots generally do not buy PA-32s for speed.

Short-field operations in most cases are not part of their repertoire, either. Indeed—my instructor, Rich Bartlett, who flew a late-model Saratoga for several years, said the only downside of the design is that it “uses a lot of runway.” I recall a particular summer departure from Sussex with five on board.

I watched the takeoff run from the ramp, about halfway down the runway. All seemed well, and the airplane certainly looked like it had reached rotation speed as it lifted off and floated briefly in ground effect before settling back onto the pavement. For a moment, the airport’s 3,500-foot runway appeared that it might not be sufficient, but after another 100 feet or so they were off and climbing normally.

Focusing On Useful Load

Other than price, useful load can be the most notable difference between early Lances and later Saratogas. A Lance could carry more than 1,600 pounds, and overtime that figure generally decreased to just more than 1,100 for the last years of the Saratoga. Owners often talk about this downward trend in lifting capacity as a factor that influenced their buying decision.

“I think the Saratogas lost some of their useful load over time as Piper added more luxury features and equipment,” said Craig Barnett, owner of Scheme Designers, a Cresskill, New Jersey, company that designs paint schemes for aircraft and other vehicles.

Barnett moved from a Cessna 177RG Cardinal to a 1978 straight-tail Lance in the late 1990s, mainly because he wanted a bigger cabin and a boost in useful load to accommodate his growing family more comfortably on long trips. He also used the airplane to travel to trade shows and wanted more space to carry his displays. About the only complaint he had with the Lance was that it seemed like it should be faster given its 300 hp.

“When you are taking off, you feel the power. You know it’s there,” he said. However, the resulting acceleration and speed are always slightly disappointing. “You can tell the airplane is trying to get out of its own way, but it can’t quite do it.”

There was one other minor squawk with the Lance: its appearance. Barnett has spent his career obsessing over aesthetics and crisp, beautiful designs—areas in which the Lance comes up short, especially with its wide body and older-style Hershey-bar wing. “It was the chunkiest airplane I had ever gotten my hands on at the time. Not pretty, but it had what I needed,” he said.

Today, Barnett flies a Cirrus SR22 which, he said, has an embarrassingly low useful load compared with his old Lance. But the Cirrus is beautiful, he said, and his mission has changed. That said, few come on the market—even though Piper built 1,940 Lances and 1,621 Saratogas. Aircraft For Sale listed two Saratogas at the time of this writing—one 1994 Saratoga PA-32-301 with1,085 total airframe hours listed for $289,000, and one 1994 Saratoga SP with 1,952 hours total time was on the market for $319,500. For our sample table, we surveyed a total of 24 Saratogas and 13 Lances on the market at press time, with a fluctuating number for sale. So keep a careful watch if either mount suits your mission.

A Considerable Portion of the Business…

“What are you gonna to do with an outfit that has the audacity to compare its six-place, single-engine, 300-horsepower, high performance retractable with a couple of classics like the Centurion and the A36 Bonanza, when the airplane in question cruises at least 10 to 15 knots more slowly?” asked FLYING editor Robert B. Parke in his feature on the Piper Lance II in the June 1978 issue. “Well, for one thing, if you’re Cessna or Beech, you’d better keep your eye on this upstart; for in spite of its lower speed, the new Piper Lance II is walking away with a comfortable chunk of the six-place business.”

“Whatever you may think about the Lance II’s lack of svelteness, you must raise a few huzzahs for the gallant efforts made to give the airplane a look of distinction. The paint schemes are pleasing, and the new T-tail suggests a revolutionary change in the basic design.”

This article first appeared in the August 2023/Issue 940 print edition of FLYING.

The post Air Compare: Piper Lance vs. Saratoga appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 2010 Piper PA-46-350T Matrix.

Piper’s PA-46-350T Matrix traces its lineage to the early 1980s, when the company developed and launched the first PA-46 Malibu. At the time, the new aircraft was a departure for Piper and the GA industry overall. There just were not many big, pressurized piston singles available, so the Piper, which also had big-airplane features, such as an airstair door, stood out on the ramp. It remains an attractive step-up aircraft with an impressive presence today.

The Matrix variant of the PA-46 series is unpressurized, but most, including the aircraft for sale here, have supplemental oxygen systems built in and are constructed to fly high where their turbocharged engines and high aspect ratio wings can make the most of the thin air for generating higher cruising speeds. For years I have looked longingly at the generous cabins of PA-46s, which remind me of a small corporate jet, and thought about how much my family would love traveling in one.

This 2010 Piper Matrix has 1,442 hours on the airframe, engine, and propeller. The panel includes the Garmin G1000 avionics suite with synthetic vision, dual 10-inch PFDs, a 15-inch MFD, GDL69A XM Satellite Radio and Weather, dual GIA63W Nav/Com/ILS/WAAS GPS, dual GRS77 Altitude and Heading Reference System (AHRS), dual GDC74A Digital Air Data Computers with Dual Probe System, GTX345R ADS-B Transponder, GFC700 Digital Autopilot with Yaw Damper, WX500 Stormscope, Honeywell KTA-870 Traffic Advisory System, and Garmin TAWS B Terrain Awareness System.

Pilots who wish to step up from a high-performance, four-place retractable to a larger, higher-performance machine with a cabin that will please their passengers should consider this 2010 Piper PA-46-350T Matrix, which is available for $679,900 on AircraftForSale.

You can arrange financing of the aircraft through FLYING Finance. For more information, email info@flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: Piper Matrix Flies with the Big Boys
• FLYING Magazine: Garmin Upgrades G1000 to NXi in Piper Meridian
• FLYING Magazine: Piper Aircraft Reports Growth in Q2 Deliveries, Revenue
• Plane & Pilot: Piper Aircraft Announces New Parts Manufacturing at Oshkosh

The post This 2010 Piper PA-46-350T Matrix Is an ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick Tailor-Made for Pilots Who Are Stepping Up appeared first on FLYING Magazine.