PDA

View Full Version : Seneca III effective range


Mark
October 30th 03, 05:52 PM
Can anybody tell me what a realistic cruising range is for a Seneca
III with long range tanks a a full load (i.e. six people including
pilot)?

Steve Robertson
October 30th 03, 09:20 PM
A realistic range with full fuel is about 500 - 600nm. You can go
further with a very economy power setting, but somebody's bladder won't
last as long as the fuel.

As with most light aircraft, with full fuel, six occupants, and the
usual baggage, you will be overgross at takeoff.

Best regards,

Steve Robertson
Former Piper employee and Seneca III pilot

Mark wrote:

> Can anybody tell me what a realistic cruising range is for a Seneca
> III with long range tanks a a full load (i.e. six people including
> pilot)?

BTIZ
October 31st 03, 03:55 AM
I'm not sure about the Seneca III, but with the Seneca II, you can either
fill the seats or fill the tanks.. can't do both.. and those in the way back
seats better be kids..

BT

"Mark" > wrote in message
m...
> Can anybody tell me what a realistic cruising range is for a Seneca
> III with long range tanks a a full load (i.e. six people including
> pilot)?

Nathan Young
October 31st 03, 04:02 AM
(Mark) wrote in message >...
> Can anybody tell me what a realistic cruising range is for a Seneca
> III with long range tanks a a full load (i.e. six people including
> pilot)?

Not sure about the III, but my Seneca II POH is as follows:

Assumptions. Max T/O weight. No wind. Max rate climb. 1000fpm
descent. 4.2gal fuel at start, t/o, taxi. 10000ft. standard temps.
45 minute reserve

93 gallons (normal tanks): 550-630nm depending on power setting (75%
to 45%)
123 gallons (long range tanks): 770-880nm (75% to 45%)

Range increases about 5% by flying at 20000ft.

Payload for a Seneca II is about 1700lbs. Which leaves 1140 or 960
lbs depending on short/long range tanks options. Not enough to load
(6) 200lb'ers but better than most.

-Nathan

M.E. Borner
October 31st 03, 02:53 PM
I fly a Seneca V but I don’t expect much difference between the
III and the V except the empty weight. I can legally carry about 1,000
lbs. Of people, fuel or some combination. With a burn rate of about 24
gph you figure how the desired balance within the limitations.

(Mark) wrote in message >...
> Can anybody tell me what a realistic cruising range is for a Seneca
> III with long range tanks a a full load (i.e. six people including
> pilot)?

Nathan Young
November 1st 03, 01:18 AM
(M.E. Borner) wrote in message >...
> I fly a Seneca V but I don’t expect much difference between the
> III and the V except the empty weight. I can legally carry about 1,000
> lbs. Of people, fuel or some combination. With a burn rate of about 24
> gph you figure how the desired balance within the limitations.
>
> (Mark) wrote in message >...
> > Can anybody tell me what a realistic cruising range is for a Seneca
> > III with long range tanks a a full load (i.e. six people including
> > pilot)?

Is the useful load on a Seneca V really ~1000lbs? That's nearly
700lbs less than a II. I know the interiors/air condition/avionics
can take up weight but that's obscene.

-Nathan

Mike Rapoport
November 1st 03, 03:59 PM
Piper lists the useful load at 1337 lb

http://www.newpiper.com/fleet/spec_sheet/pdf_new/senecaV.pdf

Mike
MU-2


"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
om...
> (M.E. Borner) wrote in message
>...
> > I fly a Seneca V but I don’t expect much difference between the
> > III and the V except the empty weight. I can legally carry about 1,000
> > lbs. Of people, fuel or some combination. With a burn rate of about 24
> > gph you figure how the desired balance within the limitations.
> >
> > (Mark) wrote in message
>...
> > > Can anybody tell me what a realistic cruising range is for a Seneca
> > > III with long range tanks a a full load (i.e. six people including
> > > pilot)?
>
> Is the useful load on a Seneca V really ~1000lbs? That's nearly
> 700lbs less than a II. I know the interiors/air condition/avionics
> can take up weight but that's obscene.
>
> -Nathan

M.E. Borner
November 3rd 03, 02:53 PM
The 1,000 is an approximation used for "back of the envelope"
calculations on max. gross weight. In actuality on my A/C the basic
empty weight is 3576.5 lbs. and the max. gross wt. is 4750 lbs.
leaving 1173.5 lbs. useful load (10% margin of error between the book
figures and the estimated figures). You also need to remember that the
zero fuel weight is about 300 lbs. below the max. gross. not that that
is really an issue because you can't go too far on less than 50 ga. so
you would not likely hit that limitation.

The 1337 lbs. on the Piper website probably does not count certain
options. Oxygen? Addit'l. avionics?

These figures that limit the carrying capacity are a real shame. I
would expect that in fact the A/C can carry way over these limits but
since it would raise the stall speed over the max. for the utility
category the max. gross was lowered for certification.



Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message >...
> Piper lists the useful load at 1337 lb
>
> http://www.newpiper.com/fleet/spec_sheet/pdf_new/senecaV.pdf
>
> Mike
> MU-2
>
>
> "Nathan Young" > wrote in message
> om...
> > (M.E. Borner) wrote in message
> >...
> > > I fly a Seneca V but I don’t expect much difference between the
> > > III and the V except the empty weight. I can legally carry about 1,000
> > > lbs. Of people, fuel or some combination. With a burn rate of about 24
> > > gph you figure how the desired balance within the limitations.
> > >
> > > (Mark) wrote in message
> >...
> > > > Can anybody tell me what a realistic cruising range is for a Seneca
> > > > III with long range tanks a a full load (i.e. six people including
> > > > pilot)?
> >
> > Is the useful load on a Seneca V really ~1000lbs? That's nearly
> > 700lbs less than a II. I know the interiors/air condition/avionics
> > can take up weight but that's obscene.
> >
> > -Nathan

Mike Rapoport
November 3rd 03, 04:06 PM
"M.E. Borner" > wrote in message
m...
> These figures that limit the carrying capacity are a real shame. I
> would expect that in fact the A/C can carry way over these limits but
> since it would raise the stall speed over the max. for the utility
> category the max. gross was lowered for certification.
>
>
>
> Mike Rapoport" > wrote in message
>...

I didn't know that there was a max stall speed for multi engine aircraft.
What is it?

Raising gross weight is normally not as simple as writing a larger number in
the book. There are many potential issues, climb rate, single engine
performance and strength among them. We can be assured that the designers
gave us as high a gross weight allowance as they dared..

Mike
MU-2

Google