Multi-Engine, Which Plane?

Vyse

BirchJet CA
If one had the choice of going for their multi-engine in a Seneca or a Seminole, which would be a better choice?

Thanks in advance,
-hank
 

EatSleepFly

Well-Known Member
Seminole's cheaper, and probably more forgiving. But if you do it in the Seneca, you can get your high performance endorsement at the same time.
 

cime_sp

Well-Known Member
You can only get your high performance in a Seneca if it is a Seneca III or higher. The earlier ones had 200hp per side and were therefore not high performance.

If price is the same (or nearly) I would go for the Seneca. It's a little more complex with the turbochargers and extra power and all, but not too much different. If I were doing my training in any mountainous areas I would definately opt for te Seneca....much better single engine performance.
 

Eagle

New Member
[ QUOTE ]
Seminole's cheaper, and probably more forgiving. But if you do it in the Seneca, you can get your high performance endorsement at the same time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dosen't the High Performance work by adding both engines HP? two 180hp, is over 200hp?
 

EatSleepFly

Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
You can only get your high performance in a Seneca if it is a Seneca III or higher. The earlier ones had 200hp per side and were therefore not high performance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, thanks. I wasn't aware the older ones were under 200 HP.

[ QUOTE ]
Dosen't the High Performance work by adding both engines HP? two 180hp, is over 200hp?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope, its per engine.
 

Jason

Well-Known Member
I tried to find my FAR's but have other things more pressing going on this morning - but does it matter when it comes to multi engine airplanes??????


Jason
 

Mr_Creepy

Well-Known Member
High Performance requires greater than 200 hp in each engine.

There for a Seneca II doesn't qualify. Even though it is capable of much more than 200hp Piper "derated" it to 200.

I am not familiar with hp on Seneca III - V
 

Buzo

Well-Known Member
The Seneca II is actually a HP airplane. It is rated at 200hp, but can produce 215hp at 12,000ft, therefore requires the endorsement.
 

Richman

Well-Known Member
Hey there,

If you have a choice, I would go with the Seminole for the following reasons:

1. Cheaper. PA-44s are always less/hr than a PA-34. You ticket looks the same if you did it in a Seminole or a Seneca so save your $$$. If the Seminole is $20 cheaper, over a 8 hour course thats $160, enough to buy another hour (every hour counts!).

2. Less complicated. Starting with the II, the Seneca's were turbocharged, and that's just one more thing to hassle with on a checkride. The II's especially had fixed wastegates on the turbochargers, and it was more of a challenge to fine tune the MPs, especially when dealing with SE ops. Not that you couldn't handle it, but why not stack the deck in your favor? With Seminole you push the power to the stop and forget about it.

3. If you want a HP endorsement, take the money you saved by flying the Seminole and go fly a 182 for .5.


JMHO,
Richman
 

cime_sp

Well-Known Member
Buzo...are you sure about that. The FAR's state that the endorsement is required for aircraft with an engine rated at more than 200 horsepower. All performance figures I have seen always state sea level power. Would HP at altitude matter?
 

Buzo

Well-Known Member
The Seneca POH shows a HP rating of 215hp at 12,000ft. Since the POH shows a rating above 200 it fulfills the requirement for the endorsement.
 

Mr_Creepy

Well-Known Member
Just because the POH says it doesn't mean the FAA accepts it. In the T-Tail Arrow IV it shows 204hp at 5500 ft. The FAA still doesn't accept it, even though the aircraft is a PA-28/201.

Of course if you ask 5 FAA guys one question you'll get 5 different answers
 

Buzo

Well-Known Member
I realize that the FAQ's are not regulatory, but they are published as a guideline from the FAA. As for the PA28-201, the 201 just means it has the tapered wing.

QUESTION: What if you have an airplane with a 185 HP engine that is rated for 205 HP on take/off. Someone
mentioned that a Navion qualifies for this. I realize that it also would be a complex aircraft. If I had a complex
sign-off but no high performance am I legal?
ANSWER: Ref.§61.31(f)(1)(ii); You'll need to have ". . . (ii) Received a one-time endorsement in the pilot's
logbook from an authorized instructor who certifies the person is proficient to operate a high-performance airplane."
As for whether a Navion that is rated for 205 horsepower on takeoff and that qualifies it, as per the definition of a
high performance airplane, the rule § 61.31(f) just says a high performance airplane is ". . . (an airplane with an
engine of more than 200 horsepower) . . ." If someplace in the airplane's flight manual if the engine specifications
says "more than 200 horsepower" it qualifies as a high performance airplane. Section 61.31(f) doesn't qualify the
definition of ". . . more than 200 horsepower . . ." it just says ". . . (an airplane with an engine of more than 200
horsepower) . . ."
28
FAQs Part 61 With Chg #18, 12/05/2002
All Q&A’s from #1 through #540
If Navion's engine specifications show ". . . more than 200 horsepower . . ." it meets the definition of a high
performance airplane per §61.31(f) and the appropriate endorsement is required unless the provision of §61.31(f)(2)
is met.
{Q&A-413}
 

Derg

Cap, Roci
Staff member
I've never flown a single over 200 hp and did all of my ME training in BE76's and PA44's.

The high performance thing isn't really an issue -- if you want to get checked out in a HP single or multi, your CFI can probably do that on the spot.
 

cime_sp

Well-Known Member
The way it was explained to me was that it was rated HP at sea level on a standard day....in which case the Seneca I/II would not qualify. This way all aircraft are standardized as to how they are classified. Again I could be wrong....perhaps we need some clarification from the FSDO. Although as previously stated we will probably all get different answers!

You just have to love the FAA and all their clarity on subjects
Good debate though!
 
Top