Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
- Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
- Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
- Share the passion for aviation
- Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun
Duchess v. Seneca v. Seminole for Multi
- Thread starter daddysquared
- Start date
- Watchers 12
Welcome to Flightinfo.com
- Register now and join the discussion
- Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
- Invite your friends
- Share the passion of aviation
- Friendliest aviation community on the web
CapnVegetto
The Prince of all Saiyans
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2005
- Posts
- 1,981
ATP is OK, but it's a ratings factory. They don't train you to be a multi-engine pilot, they train you to pass a checkride. That being said, if you just want the rating, it'll probably be easy. However, I would recommend finding a good instructor and doing it at your flying club. You'll learn a lot more, and it'll make you a better, safer pilot.
As for the planes, I've flown all 3. Here's my insights.
Duchess: Danm good airplane. Climbs well, performs well, easy to handle single engine, great weight capabilities. Cons: hard to grease a landing in, next to impossible to taxi single engine, (but most light twins are), and they don't make parts for them anymore, so if it breaks, chances are you'll have to wait a while for it to be back up again, plus it'll probably more expensive to rent than a brand new Seminole or Seneca for this reason.
Seneca: 1 is an underpowered piece of crap. Climbs like a brick, won't do a danm thing single engine, REALLY REALLY REALLY nose heavy. Not hard to fly, though, whoever told you that is full of crap. It's easy to fly. However, the old 1's are soooo nose heavy, that you almost have to have to yoke at the stops for landing. The fixed that in the II's though. That's a GREAT airplane. Good speed, performance, easy to fly. However, it's turbocharged, without automatic waste gates, so the power is a handful to manage, and it's really easy to overboost the engines. It might be a bit of a handful for a brand new multi pilot, but it'll make you better.
Semenhole: (umm, I mean Semenole). A good mix of the other 2. Cheaper to operate than a Duchess, as Piper supports them well. Easy to fly, handles well, lands well. Doesn't seem to perform as well as the Duchess, but a helluva lot better than a Seneca I. No major issues, and the new ones are NICE.
Minitour, 2.9 hours??? Danm, I can't believe that you found someone to sign you off for a checkride with that little training. I know I sure wouldn't have. No offense or anything, but that doesn't sound like very good training to me.
As for the planes, I've flown all 3. Here's my insights.
Duchess: Danm good airplane. Climbs well, performs well, easy to handle single engine, great weight capabilities. Cons: hard to grease a landing in, next to impossible to taxi single engine, (but most light twins are), and they don't make parts for them anymore, so if it breaks, chances are you'll have to wait a while for it to be back up again, plus it'll probably more expensive to rent than a brand new Seminole or Seneca for this reason.
Seneca: 1 is an underpowered piece of crap. Climbs like a brick, won't do a danm thing single engine, REALLY REALLY REALLY nose heavy. Not hard to fly, though, whoever told you that is full of crap. It's easy to fly. However, the old 1's are soooo nose heavy, that you almost have to have to yoke at the stops for landing. The fixed that in the II's though. That's a GREAT airplane. Good speed, performance, easy to fly. However, it's turbocharged, without automatic waste gates, so the power is a handful to manage, and it's really easy to overboost the engines. It might be a bit of a handful for a brand new multi pilot, but it'll make you better.
Semenhole: (umm, I mean Semenole). A good mix of the other 2. Cheaper to operate than a Duchess, as Piper supports them well. Easy to fly, handles well, lands well. Doesn't seem to perform as well as the Duchess, but a helluva lot better than a Seneca I. No major issues, and the new ones are NICE.
Minitour, 2.9 hours??? Danm, I can't believe that you found someone to sign you off for a checkride with that little training. I know I sure wouldn't have. No offense or anything, but that doesn't sound like very good training to me.
BoilerUP
Citation style...
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2003
- Posts
- 5,311
Did my COM multi add-on in a Seminole, then did my MEI in a Seneca I about a year later. The Seneca is a piece of cake to fly, but even on a standard day, it won't climb single engine with 2 160lb pilots and full tanks. Its also relatively slow, at a 155-160kt cruise at typical power settings. IMO, it was a great airplane to do MEI training in, as SE ops were cake and it flew like the big dump truck any 6 place, straight wing Piper does.
The Seminole flew like a twin Arrow IV. The elevator isn't as powerful as a Dutchess so I often used the electric trim to help me flare, but that was initial multi training. I always managed to land it well, and its systems are very simple and straightforward. Easy, easy multi airplane to learn in, and quite forgiving.
I've never flown a Dutchess, so I can't comment about it.
I'd say fly whichever one is cheapest, but keep in mind you might pay a bit more for a FBO/flying club airplane, but you'll more than likely be checked out to rent it once you get your rating. Which is more than can be said for ATP. This is why I did my MEI training at an FBO, and it only cost me about $100 more.
The Seminole flew like a twin Arrow IV. The elevator isn't as powerful as a Dutchess so I often used the electric trim to help me flare, but that was initial multi training. I always managed to land it well, and its systems are very simple and straightforward. Easy, easy multi airplane to learn in, and quite forgiving.
I've never flown a Dutchess, so I can't comment about it.
I'd say fly whichever one is cheapest, but keep in mind you might pay a bit more for a FBO/flying club airplane, but you'll more than likely be checked out to rent it once you get your rating. Which is more than can be said for ATP. This is why I did my MEI training at an FBO, and it only cost me about $100 more.
Yellow Snow
never eat the yellow snow
- Joined
- May 15, 2005
- Posts
- 110
Seneca is very easy to fly and very hard to land well. If you can land a seneca 1 well you can probably land anything. The trick to the Seneca landings is to keep rolling in trim as you come down final. If you try to land trimmed for a typical approach above blue line you can't haul the nose up no matter how strong you are. I did my multi and multi comm in the seneca and had no problems. It has a single engine service ceiling realistically about 2500 to 3000 ft. It basically has no vmc above 2500 ft so you will never get to see what really happens when you loose one. All the acft on your list are this way. I went up in an apache with a friend and did a vmc demo just so I could see what it was like to truly loose control. I recommend this as it is really an eye opener. The pipers are simple and stable so either would be fine, never flown a dutchess so can't offer an opinion on that one. The best advice I can offer is to find an instructor with a ton of experience and try to really learn how to fly it not just pass a ride.
If you're in a plane that doesn't lose directional control on a Vmc demo at the normal altitudes, do a demo with full flaps. It lowers the stall speed so much that the student can really see what Vmc is like. In terms of the airplanes, I did my ME in a Seminole, just finished my MEI in a Seneca I. The Seneca is tough to land well, but that's my biggest complaint about it. I dont imagine Piper still supports the Seneca I, especially with their recent hurricane damage, but I might be mistaken. Seminole was a nice trainer, especially coming out of something like an Arrow. Neither one was particularly bad, I thought. Haven't touched a Duchess.
In terms of where to do it, I'd say keep use your vacation time for your family and do it at your club, especially if you can rent the twin afterwards. Now that we're in daylight savings time, maybe you can go there every day after work for a couple hours and knock it out in a week or two.
And about having 2.9 multi for your checkride, don't you need 3 hours within 60 days for any checkride? The examiner I had for my CFI said 2.9 wouldn't cut it. But if you passed with it, all the more power to you.
In terms of where to do it, I'd say keep use your vacation time for your family and do it at your club, especially if you can rent the twin afterwards. Now that we're in daylight savings time, maybe you can go there every day after work for a couple hours and knock it out in a week or two.
And about having 2.9 multi for your checkride, don't you need 3 hours within 60 days for any checkride? The examiner I had for my CFI said 2.9 wouldn't cut it. But if you passed with it, all the more power to you.
flyer172r said:
I was worried about that, but I guess 61.63 doesn't say anything about "3 in 60" like 61.129(A)(4)(ii) does, so it's I guess it's kosher. If it was your initial CFI, I'd think that's right...if it was an addition, it should have been okay.
In hind sight, I wouldn't have done it that quick if I could do it again...I was taught the checkride and I really need some more time with a MEI on some stuff (Short field T/O and crosswind landings OEI specifically) before I'm going to think about soloing...luckily no insurance company in their right mind will cover me to solo a twin yet so there's no temptation...
-mini
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
