Today’s Top Pick is a 1983 Piper PA-32R-301T Turbo Saratoga.

A friend and former Piper Saratoga owner used to say it’s the best airplane for family trips. What he meant, I believe, is that it reminded him most of a large, comfortable car or SUV. “Turn on the autopilot, put your feet up and forget it,” he said.

Of course, he was exaggerating, and you would never take such a casual approach to flying. At the same time, most of us know what he is talking about. The Saratoga is a big, stable and user-friendly aircraft that loves to take the straight-and-level route to your favorite destinations.

The Saratoga evolved from the fixed-gear Cherokee Six and retractable Lance, both of which are versions of the PA-32 airframe. Several key features came together in the later Saratoga, including club seating for rear passengers, a 300 hp engine, and a partially tapered wing that performed better than the constant-chord “Hershey Bar” wing on the Lance and Six.

The aircraft for sale here adds the benefits of turbocharging, which allows the airplane to fly at higher altitudes while losing less power than a naturally aspirated engine. On long trips, the extra speed and favorable wind conditions available up high can cut travel time significantly.  

This 1983 Turbo Saratoga has 5,610 hours on the airframe and 910 hours on its 300 hp Lycoming TIO-540-SiAD engine since overhaul. Its Hartzell three-blade propeller has also logged 910 hours since overhaul.

The panel includes a Garmin GNS 430 WAAS, Garmin G5 HSI, Garmin GDL 88 ADS-B receiver, GTX 330ES transponder, PS Engineering 1000 II intercom, King KMA 24 audio panel, KNS 80 RNAV/DME, KY 197 Comm, King FCS function board, KFC 200 autopilot, 3M WX-10A Stormscope, JPI EDM-700 engine monitor, digital tachometer, and Aerospace Logic fuel gauges.

Additional equipment includes LoPresti gear door speed mod, Knots 2 U gap seals, LED landing light, Reiff engine preheater, factory air conditioning, built-in oxygen system, and Rosen visors.

Pilots seeking a piston single with six seats as they cross-shop Beechcraft Bonanzas and Cessna 210s should make a point of checking out this 1983 Piper PA-32R-301T Turbo Saratoga, which is available for $249,000 on AircraftForSale.

If you’re interested in financing, you can do so with FLYING Finance. Use their airplane loan calculator to calculate your estimated monthly payments. Or, to speak with an aviation finance specialist, visit flyingfinance.com.

• FLYING Magazine: Air Compare: Piper Lance vs. Saratoga
• FLYING Magazine: Piper Saratoga Avionics Install: Part 1
• Plane & Pilot: Piper Saratoga II TC: It’s All About Comfort
• Plane & Pilot: Piper Pillán: A Saratoga With Top Gun Dreams
• The Aviation Consumer: Used Aircraft Guide: Piper Saratoga/Lance
• The Aviation Consumer: Six-Place Shootout
• AVweb: Intercoolers: Turbo Enhancement

The post This 1983 Piper PA-32R-301T Turbo Saratoga Is a Long-Haul ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

It was about 1 o’clock in the morning. The air on the surface was warm and humid. If he checked the weather—there was no evidence that he did—he would have expected to find widespread but patchy cloudiness over the route of flight and at the destination. In some places clouds were broken or scattered with tops at 3,000. Elsewhere buildups climbed into the flight levels. Ceilings and visibilities under the clouds were good, at worst 700 feet and 5 miles. The temperature and the dew point were only 3 degrees apart, however, and there was a slightly increased risk of fog formation owing to, of all things, particulate pollution from dust blown in from the Sahara.

During the short flight, he climbed to 3,600 feet, probably to get above some cloud tops. It was pitch-dark as the crescent moon was far below the horizon. As he neared his destination he descended to 1,500 msl, 1,300 feet above the terrain, and reduced his groundspeed from 175 knots to 100 knots.

The airstrip at which he intended to land was 3,500 feet long, 40 feet wide, and had a light gray concrete surface oriented 4/22. Other than a hangar on an apron at midfield, there were no structures on the airport and no edge lights along the runway.

The only lights were red ones marking the runway ends. The surrounding area was largely dark. Sam Rayburn Reservoir sat close by to the north and east, a vast region of uninterrupted black. Parallel to the runway, about half a mile north, was State Highway 147, lighted only by the headlamps of infrequently passing cars.

• READ MORE: Two Fatal Cases of the Simply Inexperienced

For almost an hour, the pilot flew back and forth over the airstrip, tracing a tangled path of seemingly random right and left turns. His altitude varied between 350 and 1,100 feet agl and his groundspeed between 65 and 143 knots. His ground track, as recorded by ATC radar, suggested no systematic plan, but it was broadly centered on the northeast end of the runway.

The last return from the Saratoga, recorded 54 minutes after it arrived over the field, put it 9,700 feet from the northeast end of the runway on a close-in extended left downwind leg for Runway 22 at a height of 350 feet agl and a groundspeed of 94 knots. The Saratoga was below radar for the remainder of the flight.

Its burned wreckage was found at the southern edge of the clear-cut area surrounding the runway, several hundred feet short of the threshold. A trail of parts led back across the clear-cut to its north side, where the airplane had clipped a treetop at the edge of the woods. From the orientation of the wreckage path, it appeared that the Saratoga may have overshot the centerline on base and was correcting back toward the approach end lights when it struck the tree.

In the course of the accident investigation, it emerged that the airplane was out of annual, its last inspection having occurred in 2017, the registration had expired, and the pilot’s medical was out of date. The pilot had 400 hours (estimated) but did not have an instrument rating and, in fact, had only a student certificate. The autopsy turned up residues of amphetamine, methamphetamine, and THC (the psychoactive component of cannabis), but investigators did not rule out the possibility that the drugs could have had a therapeutic purpose.

• READ MORE: Three-Mile Limit: Novice Pilots Succumb to the Perils of Total Darkness

The National Transportation Safety Board’s report on the accident declines to speculate on whether the drugs impaired the pilot in any way. In fact, the NTSB report concedes that “the pilot’s aircraft handling was not deficient relative to his limited experience of flying in night instrument conditions and the prolonged period of approach attempts.” The finding of probable cause cited only the pilot’s “poor decision-making as he attempted to land at an unlit airstrip in night instrument conditions.”

The pilot bought the Saratoga in 2016 and then took flying lessons, but he stopped short of getting the private certificate. His instructor said he had never given him any instrument training. The pilot’s wife said that he “normally” flew to the airport at night and circled down until he could see the runway.

The airport was in Class G airspace. What the cloud conditions were we don’t know—the nearest automated reporting station was 24 nm away—and so we don’t know whether the Saratoga was ever in clouds and, if so, for how long. Maneuvering around at low level for nearly an hour in darkness and intermittent IMC would be taxing even for many instrument-rated pilots, and so it seems likely that if the pilot was in clouds at all, it was only for brief periods.

• READ MORE: Fatal Cirrus Accident Shows That Some Knowledge Doesn’t Translate

Two things strike me about this accident. First, how close it came to not happening: If the pilot hadn’t clipped the tree, he might have made the turn to the runway successfully and landed without incident, as he apparently had done in the past. Second, that he had ever managed the trick at all. I can only suppose that the contrast between the runway clear-cut and the surrounding forest was discernible when there was moonlight and that he was able to use GPS and the runway’s end lights to get himself to a position where his landing light would illuminate the runway.

Rugged individualism being, supposedly, an American virtue, I leave it to you to applaud or deplore the nonconformist aspects of this pilot’s actions. Perhaps a certain amount of freelancing is inevitable in an activity like flying. But I deprecate his persistence. One of the essential arrows in every pilot’s quiver should be knowing when to quit. He set himself a nearly impossible goal, and after flying half an hour to his destination, he spent an hour trying to figure out how to get onto the ground.

If it was that difficult, it wasn’t worth doing. There were other airports—with runway lights—nearby.

At the time of the crash, the pilot was awaiting the decision of a Houston court in a wrongful  termination lawsuit that he had filed against a former employer. Five months later, the court found in his favor to the tune of $143 million. Thanks to a terminal case of “get-homeitis,” however, he wasn’t there to enjoy it.

Note: This article is based on the National Transportation Safety Board’s report of the accident and is intended to bring the issues raised to our readers’ attention. It is not intended to judge or reach any definitive conclusions about the ability or capacity of any person, living or dead, or any aircraft or accessory.

This column first appeared in the May 2024/Issue 948 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post A Cautionary Tale About Pilot Freelancing appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today’s Top Pick is a 2001 Piper PA-32RT-301T Turbo Saratoga.

Private pilots who spend a lot of time carrying their families on long-distance journeys know that stable flight characteristics and a spacious cabin can be far more valuable than sporty handling and category-leading cruising speed.

When it comes to carrying passengers, it is best to make the trip as much like traveling in the family car as possible. Your spouse, children, and friends are interested in reaching their destination in a brisk, uneventful fashion, not learning about or experiencing side slips or steep turns. Making sure your flights are straight, level, and smooth will keep your loved ones coming back.

Saratogas truly are set up to make long trips as comfortable as possible, with club seating and one of the widest cabins in the GA piston fleet. Turbocharging gives the airplane for sale here an advantage of more power at higher altitudes than non-turbo models. It can take advantage of higher speeds in the thin air of the flight levels. This aircraft also comes with factory air conditioning and a supplemental oxygen system. 

This Turbo Saratoga has 2,750 hours on the airframe and 941 hours since new on its 300 hp engine. The panel features a GMS 340 audio panel, Garmin GTN 750 and GTN 650 GPS Nav/Comms, S-Tec 55x autopilot, GDL 88 with ADS-B In and Out with weather and traffic, Flight Stream 210 Bluetooth and a graphic engine monitor. 

Pilots interested in an aircraft that is well-suited for transporting family, friends, and business associates in relaxing comfort over long distances should consider this 2001 Piper Turbo Saratoga, which is available for $379,000 on AircraftForSale.

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

• FLYING Magazine: Air Compare: Piper Lance vs. Saratoga
• FLYING Magazine: The Practical Endurance of the Piper Cherokee Six
• FLYING Magazine: Piper Saratoga Avionics Install: Part 1
• FLYING Magazine: Piper Mirage
• Plane & Pilot: New Piper’s Saratoga II TC
• Plane & Pilot: Piper Saratoga II TC: It’s All About Comfort
• AVweb: Garmin Adds GFC 500 Autopilot Applications for Pipers
• The Aviation Consumer: Used Aircraft Guide: Piper Saratoga/Lance

The post This 2001 Piper Turbo Saratoga Is a Spacious, Comfortable ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

In the manufacturing boom of the Industrial Revolution, inexpensive goods flooded the market, and advertisers beckoned us to drop the old and replace it with the new. This seemed to work well until the 1970s when certain people despaired over the landfills filling up, and a new age of convenient curbside recycling emerged.

A subset of the population kept the old frontier spirit alive in America, and that would be the general aviation airplane owner. Reduce, reuse, and recycle is not just a slogan for these men and women: It is a mantra. I have personally witnessed the repair of a $45 flight bag handle using CherryMAX blind rivets (I may or may not have had a hand in that, depending on who’s asking).

Out with the Old

When researching this article, I wished to find the origin of the phrase “one man’s trash is another man’s treasure.” As it turns out, the inter-webs attribute it to no less than seven individuals on the first page of search results alone. Given that, it is most likely that no one is exactly sure who initially said it. For all we know, Fred G. Sanford said it at some point on the 1970s sitcom Sanford and Son. Oh, and the G stands for “Get up to the hangar and get this stuff.”

Do you remember Corey Sampson and his project airplane, a 1966 Cessna 172H? Well, Sampson and I are back at it again. 2024 is a new year with a fresh set of maintenance evolutions. In October, we spoke with Sampson about his maintenance plan, and one of the projects highlighted was an instrument panel upgrade.

Sampson’s current setup is a throwback to days gone by. His audio panel is a King KMA 24, with Narco MK12D comm radios, King KN 64 DME, and Arc RT-359A transponder. As an A&P mechanic, I leave the avionics stuff to the experts, but I recall seeing these components throughout my 35-year career. Functionally, everything works fine, but Corey is ready to upgrade.

Used Serviceable Material (USM)

According to aerospace powerhouse Oliver Wyman, there is a tsunami of used serviceable material (USM) coming with regard to aircraft parts. Estimates show that the current USM “represents 11 percent of total aftermarket materials spending versus 9 percent in 2019.” While airline fleets command a majority of the USM headlines, GA operators have utilized these repurposed parts for years.

Enter Stephen Mercer and his 1982 Piper PA-32R-301T Saratoga. We are tracking Mercer’s installation, which is in the works at Gardner Lowe Aviation Services in Peachtree City, Georgia, outside of Atlanta. Stephen and Corey, until recently, were hangar mates and often helped each other whenever necessary. GA owners are a tribe that relies on each other for advice, support, and friendship.

Corey worked a deal to obtain the avionics panel from Stephen after Gardner Lowe removed it from his Saratoga. The details have yet to be completely ironed out, but to date, the components included are:

• Garmin GMA 340 audio panel
• Garmin GNS 530W GPS
• Garmin GNS 430 GPS
• Garmin GTX 330 Transponder 
• JPI 700 engine monitor 
• Garmin GI 106A VOR/ILS/GPS Indicator

Next on the schedule for removal are the antennas. The Saratoga is also undergoing its annual inspection, and the avionics installation remains active. I intend to document these maintenance evolutions in real time. Given that, everyone knows that plans are fluid, especially in aircraft maintenance. More on that later.

Preparing for Installation

I feel I’m invoking my inner Charles Dickens, but we have “A Tale of Two Airplanes” instead of A Tale of Two Cities. While Stephen is going full flat panel with a factory-new install, Corey is repurposing USM but also upgrading his Cessna’s panel.

Yes, much of Corey’s installation will come from Stephen. There is also an element that is brand new. As part of the conversion, Corey procured two Garmin G5 electronic flight instruments for certificated aircraft and picked them up this week. According to the product’s website, this “replaces traditional electromechanical instruments; can be configured in attitude, DG/HI/HSI, and turn coordinator positions.” Approval to install comes from a supplemental type certificate (STC), and this model is applicable to 560 aircraft.

Another late-breaking development in the avionics swap plan emerged this week. Garmin recently released service advisory No. 23018 Rev B, stating in part that “effective immediately, display repairs for the WAAS and non-WAAS GPS 400, GNC 420, and GNS 430 are no longer available and have been discontinued.” How does this affect the decision to continue flying the GNS 430 Corey is getting from the Saratoga?

That’s how it goes with aircraft maintenance. You have a maintenance plan in place, obtain material, and schedule downtime when Murphy’s law checks in and says, “Not so fast.” We are still unpacking what this means for the continued airworthiness of the GNS 430. An OEM like Garmin withdrawing support for products is a key driver in the parts manufacturing approval (PMA) and designated airworthiness representative (DER) repair world. At press time, it is too soon to tell how this ball will bounce, but rest assured, the industry will find a solution.

Just like an airplane trims the controls to meet the wind, so shall we adjust to the changing winds of the aviation aftermarket. Thanks for reading, and stay tuned to see what happens next!

The post Part 1: Cessna 172 Skyhawk Avionics 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 1998 Piper PA-32R-301 Saratoga SP

Piper’s Saratoga often winds up on the shopping lists of pilots looking for a piston single with room for six and typically competes with the Beechcraft A36 Bonanza and Cessna 210 Centurion. For families with more than two children or a combination of children and relatives, friends, dogs or cargo, the extended cabin can offer an extra measure of payload and flexibility over four-place models.

The Saratoga is a hit with most passengers for many of the same reasons that large, three-row SUVs are popular. People love a little extra space in which to stretch out and the Saratoga’s club seating arrangement forms a living-room-like conversation pit that many find comfortable.

This 1998 Saratoga has 1,960 hours on the airframe, and 91 hours on its engine following an overhaul in 2018. The panel includes a Garmin G500 touchscreen PFD and MFD with traffic and weather displays, Garmin GTN 750 with Intellivoice Command, King KFC 150 autopilot, and JPI-700 engine monitor.

Pilots looking for a family or utility aircraft with a roomy cabin that can accommodate up to six people or lots of cargo should consider this 1998 Piper PA-32R-301 Saratoga SP, which is available for $473,000 on AircraftForSale.

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

• FLYING Magazine: Piper Saratoga Avionics Install: Part 1
• FLYING Magazine: The Practical Endurance of the Piper Cherokee Six
• Plane & Pilot: Piper Pillán: A Saratoga With Top Gun Dreams
• Plane & Pilot: Piper Saratoga II TC: It‘s All About Comfort
• The Aviation Consumer: Used Aircraft Guide: Piper Saratoga/Lance

The post This 1998 Piper PA-32R-301 Saratoga SP Is a Roomy, SUV-Like ‘AircraftForSale’ Top Pick appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Time to Upgrade

I recently wrote an article in FLYING in which I cited the average age of automobiles in the United States was 12.1 years in 2021. It may surprise you that the average age of general aviation aircraft is 30 years. A sizable portion of airplanes are more than 40 years old or older. Some are keen to keep an airplane stock just as if it rolled off the factory floor. Others make minor adjustments, replacing what is mechanically necessary while striving to maintain originality. Then a subset of the population presses the limits of what the feds allow and goes full custom, much like a flying Chip Foose.

Most owner-operators fall somewhere in between. As opportunity is born out of necessity, one must seek the counsel of others when embarking on such endeavors. Even owners like my colleague Corey Sampson, who possesses an A&P and is ATP-certificated, still need support for specialized services. Sampson is more than willing to “phone a friend” when he needs a second set of eyes. That is one of the top “best practices” you can deploy.

This brings me to why we are here. Sampson introduced me to Stephen Mercer and his 1982 Piper PA-32R-301T Saratoga. I spoke with Mercer concerning the recent acquisition of his Saratoga. “The Saratoga is a great airplane, but we are looking to add a little redundancy and some enhanced safety features,” Mercer said. That is pilot-speak for “it’s time to up-do the panel.” Now comes the exciting part: Let’s talk flat panel. But which one to choose? And who can install it? The journey is just beginning.

Find Your Installer

Turning onto Atlanta Regional Airport-Falcon Field (KFFC), I pass through the open gate and park in the gravel lot. I enter the Gardner Lowe Aviation Services (GLAS) lobby and go to the customer service counter. I am here to see Karl Gardner, the company president, and talk airplanes.

Gardner has been in the aircraft maintenance business for 30-plus years, specializing in avionics. After starting, growing, and selling several business entities, he gave it one more trip around the pattern and merged with legendary Lowe Aviation, the cornerstone of middle Georgia aviation since 1946. We catch up and soon get down to talking shop.

Gardner and I have known each other for years, and I even did a few engines for him during my stint as an aircraft engine shop owner. Remember my story about my guys forgetting to torque seal the through-bolts of a 470? Yeah, that was Karl who called me out on it. I’m just glad he called me and not the FAA!

I asked how things were going, and although Gardner is doing well and the shop is busy, life is not devoid of challenges. When asked to elaborate on the headwinds facing general aviation today, Karl matter-of-factly stated spare parts scarcity and cost. He relayed a quick story referencing the cost of a bellcrank for a Cessna 170, which is well more than $3,000 now. It appears they added a leg for autopilot, which is hardly justification for the cost. 

With the cost of ownership skyrocketing, I inquired as to some strategies folks are trying to stay airborne. Gardner said he sees more partnerships in airplanes now. It is an excellent way to spread out the cost and keep the price per share low. Partnerships also help airplanes, as people are more apt to fly, and airplanes hate to sit. Aero clubs are another way to get your flight fix without breaking the bank.

Eventually, our talk landed on aircraft panel upgrades. As you probably guessed by now, Gardner Lowe is scheduled to do the installation on Mercer’s Saratoga in early November. The Saratoga is getting a new Garmin system. As a Garmin factory authorized installation and service provider, GLAS has the full support of the factory behind it. By sticking with the OEM and installing via supplemental type certificate (STC), GLAS can keep the process relatively simple, which is not easy in the world of avionics installs.

Like most small business owners, Gardner finds his clients through word of mouth and other customer testimonials. Some have even taken to the internet to show their appreciation. Some of you may be familiar with Mindy Lindheim, aka Schmiiindy on Instagram, and her 1957 Cessna 182 Skylane. Lindheim documented her experience in a two-part video series on YouTube. You can check part 1 here, and then head over to part 2 to finish up.

Get to Work

Once you have settled on a maintenance facility, picked out your hardware, and have a date, it’s time to get to work. Lane Mitchell of Mitchell Aviation Services works in conjunction with GLAS and is handling the logistics for Mercer and his Saratoga. November is right around the corner, and I am sure you are as eager as they are to see this get done. The good news is FLYING will be right there when it happens. I may even shoot some video of the process. Please tune in next time, sports fans, and watch us crack open the panel of this Saratoga. Part 2 is coming soon!

The post Piper Saratoga Avionics Install: Part 1 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

My wife and I recently fell hard for a 1990 Beechcraft F33A Bonanza after driving a couple of hours to visit the airplane at the Orange County Airport (KMGJ) in Montgomery, New York. We went almost on a whim. While we had talked frequently about the possibility of aircraft ownership, we had not gone so far as to line up financing. After all, we didn’t consider ourselves serious-enough shoppers yet.

We were surprised to find a Bonanza that checked nearly all of the boxes for us (new panel, beautiful interior, nice original paint, and flight logs that showed promise). On the drive home, we began the scramble that would lead to long discussions with mechanics, finance companies, and members of the American Bonanza Society. But ultimately, we lost that race as another buyer stepped in and closed the deal. This was a classic case of live and learn, plus a dose of heartbreak.

What we learned was something we kind of knew already. When buying our first home in a heated real estate market, we knew that being pre-approved for a mortgage meant we could be quick on the draw when we found the right house. But I think buying an airplane still seemed a bit outlandish to us, so we found ways to put off making all of the necessary arrangements.

Of course, there is nothing like the sting of lost love to strengthen one’s resolve. Since losing “our” Bonanza—we had started referring to it that way—we have focused on getting ready for the next time we fall in love with an airplane. We are also delving deeper into what we really seek in our eventual aircraft, because we do not want to buy our supposed dream machine only to realize shortly thereafter that we would be better-off with something else.

Years of window shopping have helped us determine the types of missions we want to fly and enabled us to narrow the field of contenders considerably. The Cessna 210 looked good for a while but fell out of favor. Piper Comanches and Saratogas have come and gone. And the beautiful Stinson 108 that surfaced on Trade-A-Plane? Well, that was never going to happen.

Indeed, we are down to the F33A Bonanza versus the A36. I am trying to view losing the 1990 F33A as an opportunity to find a really nice A36 of similar vintage. I think we could make use of the larger six-seat cabin and a few other things that set the later A36s apart from the F33A, like updated control yokes and the Continental IO-550 engine, which I prefer to the earlier IO-520.

With a target so specific, we realize that we might have to wait longer and travel farther than previously expected to find the right airplane. But we feel comfortable moving ahead, wiser, and better-prepared.

The post Finding Your Ideal Aircraft: Learning To Deal With Love Lost appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

I have been looking for an airplane that can haul my family of four at a decent pace over a long distance—a classic aerial traveling machine. We love landing at remote strips so our ideal fast airplane needs to slow down enough for short-field work. After checking off the things we want, we immediately have to step back and decide what we can do without.

While it is easy to blame high prices for the need to compromise, we also have to consider each aircraft’s capabilities, and our own, realistically. Are we willing to give up some speed for the ability to explore the backcountry? Will the comfort of a roomy cabin mean more to my family than saving 15 or 30 minutes on a 500 nm trip? Is range important when everyone wants a rest stop every two hours anyway?

Prices and conditions on the used-aircraft market are all over the map. Paring down your list of candidates will take consideration and research. However, I believe the sweet spot for many shoppers is between $100,000 and $200,000. The ideal six-seat speedster with a huge useful load might not exist in that range, but plenty of fine alternatives do.

The following aircraft could be attractive “Plan-B” options for pilots who can adjust their priorities while staying on budget.     

Piper PA-32 Cherokee Six/300

If you must have six seats and are willing to sacrifice some speed—and short-field performance does not mean all that much to you—the robust Cherokee Six is worth a look. Very much like a Chevy Suburban with wings, it will carry more people and baggage in its wide, comfortable cabin than many competing family haulers. Its Lance and Saratoga siblings have retractable gear that help them look sleeker in the air but they are not much faster considering their high horsepower. Let’s talk more about that cabin. Most PA-32s have club seating in the rear with access through large side doors. It is obvious even to casual onlookers that there is room to stretch out back there. If you have one of those families that votes on things like activities, restaurants, and big purchases, the Cherokee Six might win by a landslide.

By the Numbers

Beechcraft V35B Bonanza

The Beechcraft A36 Bonanza has long been the standard among traveling piston singles because of its speed, six-seat cabin, versatility and—let’s be honest— its lovely appearance. But those qualities tend to push A36 prices beyond many pilots’ budgets. It’s frustrating.

The classic V-tail version is a stylish alternative with the same Beechcraft design details people love, like those beautiful flush door hinges, and the cross-country speed for which Bonanzas are famous. The unusual tail design also gives the airplane an edgy individualism that will always be cool. All you really have to give up is that third row of seats—and any aversion you or your family might have to an aircraft forever associated (through no fault of its own) with the day the music died.

By the Numbers

Cessna 182 Skylane

Many pilots consider the Skylane the best all-around light piston single because it does many things well, even if it fails to dominate any particular category. For those who learned to fly in Cessna 172s or 152s, the 182 is a sensible step-up that outperforms its smaller relatives in just about every way.

If your missions often include short turf or gravel strips, the 182 will be more at home in those settings than the other aircraft listed here. Its rugged fixed landing gear, high-lift wing, and powerful engine mean you can start getting into fairly serious backcountry flying without expensive modifications—you’ll just want to remove any wheel pants. There are a whole lot of used 182s on the market, from Eisenhower-era relics to newer models built since the company resumed production in the late 1990s. It is safe to say your ideal 182 exists somewhere between those extremes.

By the Numbers

Mooney M20K 231

Speed seems to be the costliest trait among traveling aircraft. Or perhaps it is the combination of speed and six seats that drives prices so high for certain models. The good news is that if speed tops your priority list, Mooney has a range of four-seaters that can fly to your destination faster than most while often burning less fuel than other aircraft with similar performance.

This is the airplane most likely to overcome my wife’s predisposition to Bonanzas because of its efficiency and the fact that nice, newer models (I mean as new as the early 1990s) are available for about half the asking price of 36- or 33-series Bonanzas that might be 10 to 20 years older. I even found a 1983 M20K Rocket—a modified version with a 305 hp TSIO520 engine—that would be worth a look. Depending on the model—and the size of your people—the seats in the back can be a little tight.

By the Numbers

Rockwell Commander 114

A rare sight on the ramp, one might say that is where Rockwell Commanders perform best. When I visit a new airport in my club’s Commander 114, people often emerge from the FBO for a closer look. Other pilots walking to their airplanes will divert in order to chat me up about my machine. Usually they say nice things about its looks. It is handsome, sitting on tall trailing-link landing gear with a high-mounted cruciform tail and a sleek shape that must have seemed futuristic back in 1975 when it rolled out of the factory.

I know from experience that it will haul four large people long distances on high-density altitude days, but it will not do so from a short field, nor will it fly very fast once airborne. The wide cabin that makes the airplane so comfortable for passengers also adds drag. But if style and accommodation mean more to you than speed, the Commander can be a lot of airplane for the money.

By the Numbers

The post Shopping For A Family Airplane? Prepare To Compromise appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

But those suggestions might stem from a lack of creativity or a sense of adventure. The most thoughtful flying friends will probably ask three things: 

• Where are you headed? 
• Who is going with you? 
• How soon do you need to get there?

My own translation of range, cruising speed, and useful load as a pilot new to the ownership game makes for a good place to start towards characterizing the missions you plan to perform and finding the best aircraft for the job.

Speed Isn’t Everything

Pilots tend to obsess over speed. We want to reach our destination as soon as possible. But going fast usually requires trade-offs, like living with less interior space or giving up short-field performance and load-carrying capability. Models better suited to heavy lifting and backcountry exploration typically cruise at a “relaxed” or “steady” pace at best.

As my wife and I shop for our first airplane, the biggest challenge is finding one that is fast enough to get us from New Jersey to Deer Isle, Maine, in about two hours instead of the four it takes in a Cessna 172. But we’d also like to visit the short turf and gravel strips that dot the islands along the coast. Some are just 1,500 feet long. Suddenly, the 172 shines again.

I believe that deep down, many of us want to travel the world by air in our own airplane, on our own schedule. Or at least take a sizable bite out of the U.S., using its thousands of general aviation airports to access a vast range of attractions. The truth is that you can do it in whatever airplane suits you. 

Authors James and Deborah Fallows spent several years crisscrossing the U.S. in a Cirrus SR22 while researching and writing Our Towns, a sweeping 2018 exploration of the nation’s communities and cultures. In contrast, in 1966 teenage pilot brothers Rinker and Kernahan Buck flew coast to coast in a Piper Cub with no radio. Rinker recalled their experiences in a 1997 memoir Flight of Passage.

Whether you write about your adventures or just enjoy them, you’ll need an airplane that matches the mission. The following list includes categories of aircraft pilots might consider for personal or family transport, and what they can expect in performance from each. Of course, your budget will affect shopping strategy. But since aircraft pricing is itself a huge topic, we aren’t going to dwell on it here. The airplanes below probably cover a range from the price of a basic used car to more than you paid for your house.

Basic Two-Seater

If you are traveling solo or as a couple without kids, the vast world of two-place aircraft could be your oyster. The category includes the stalwart Cessna 150 and antiques like the Aeronca Champ and Piper Cub. Many older tube-and fabric airplanes such as the Champ qualify under today’s light sport rules. This has been a boon for many pilots who no longer want to deal with the hassle of a third-class medical certificate, which is not required for a light sport pilot certificate. While prices have risen lately across the light-aircraft market, the cost of many early two-seat Cessnas, Pipers, Luscombes, and Aeroncas are among the lowest in aviation. The tradeoff in most cases is a slow cruising speed and a back-to-basics flying experience—more like the Buck boys in 1966.

Basic Four-Seater

Cessna’s best-selling 172 is among the usual suspects in this category, with the Piper’s PA-28 and Beechcraft Musketeer typically joining it at airport tie-downs across the country. Many people learn to fly in these machines and later find that they are versatile enough to handle their personal transport needs, like the family car. If your travel plans include short runways and remote turf strips, it is hard to beat a 172, even if it is not particularly fast. Despite having four seats, many of these airplanes are more like two- or three-seaters from a practical standpoint if you want to carry luggage and fill the fuel tanks. Still inexpensive by aviation standards, these models have seen a jump in prices over the last year or two as more people have started flying.

High Performance Four/Six Seater

This is where speedsters like the Cirrus SR22 and Beechcraft Bonanza come in. With cruising speeds often reaching past 180 knots, these airplanes will get you to your destination appreciably sooner than, say, the 172. The Cirrus also comes with an airframe parachute that many buyers have used to convince family members they will be safe in a small airplane. This is a big category that includes familiar models from Mooney 201s and Piper Saratogas to the rare Meyers 200. Most have retractable gear—Cirrus is the exception. Few can comfortably work short strips like a 172. But if you stick mostly to paved runways of 3,000 feet or more, one of these aircraft could strike the right balance.  

Flying SUV

Between basic four-seaters and their high-performance cousins are the Piper Cherokee Six and Cessna 206, with powerful engines, sturdy fixed landing gear, and large cabins that adapt easily between passengers and cargo. Indeed, this pair of six-seat utility aircraft are in their own category. They parallel sport-utility vehicles in that they are designed not just around getting you to your destination, but making sure your stuff gets there, too. While many aircraft owners wind up disappointed over a lack of useful load, these airplanes are less likely than others to let you down. Like a large pickup truck, the 206 and Cherokee Six are known for using lots of gas but fuel economy isn’t a make-or-break factor for most pilots. Speed isn’t a priority, either, as this pair lives in the 140-knot neighborhood.

Turboprop

Sometimes while pushing the 172 out of our club’s hangar, I’ll spot our neighbor towing his Pilatus PC-12 to the ramp. We are both private pilots at a sleepy rural airport but otherwise the contrast is striking in so many ways. The PC-12 is huge and makes the Cessna look like a toy—a well-used toy. Aircraft like the Pilatus, Daher TBM series and Piper M600 represent a big step up in speed, range, load carrying and technology. And yes, we are getting into the luxury-home price range. Still, such aircraft offer a travel experience that invites comparison with airlines—only without crowds and security checks. They also demand more of a pilot than a typical piston single does. With more systems to operate, staying ahead of the airplane becomes more critical, and that’s not easy when you’re cruising at more than 300 knots. To stay current, you will have to train more. But think of the rewards… 

The post Which Aircraft Fits Your Traveling Plans? appeared first on FLYING Magazine.