Why the Piper PA-28 Arrow is Extremely Well Designed

Подписаться 72 тыс.

Просмотров 46 тыс.

50% 1

The Piper Arrow is one of the Piper PA28 ‘Cherokee’ aircraft, a whole family of fairly similar aircraft built by Piper, mainly designed for flight training and general aviation use. Despite that, the Arrow isn't the fastest, the roomiest, or the most stylish single-engine retractable available on the used market. But-just as all cross-country airplanes are compromises-it has enough of those qualities to give it enduring popularity. And it might be the most economical, if you don't mind giving up some cruise speed to others in its class, like a Mooney or Bonanza. It also has the advantage of not being an orphan-the Arrow is still being made.
Chapters
0:00 Introduction
0:46 Design Overview
1:26 Interior
1:51 Performance
2:56 Handling
4:15 Variants
5:59 Common Problems
7:16 Maintenance
7:45 Market Performance
9:23 Similar Aircraft
11:08 Conclusion
_________________________________________________
To contact me directly: Dashboardglobal@techie.com
_________________________________________________
Our channel is about Aviation.
We make the best educational aviation videos you've ever seen; my videos are designed to clear misunderstandings about airplanes and explain complicated aviation topics in a simple way.

Опубликовано:

31 май 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 72

@davidcollier3604 Год назад

"High performance" is stretch for this aircraft. But it is a complex retractable suitable for pilot looking to move up more economically and build retract hours.

@calvinnickel9995 Год назад

It’s the American definition of high performance. Anything above 200HP That’s why they made the Cessna 172XP with 195HP even though the Continental IO-360 can produce well over 200HP.

@Kevlux86 Год назад

@@calvinnickel9995 “OVER” 200 hp. 200hp doesn’t count as High Performance, but 201 does. None of the Arrows came with an engine nameplated above 200, yes, even the Arrow IV, PA-28RT-201T, still just rated at 200 HP.

@belizeaviators2026 Год назад

@@Kevlux86 The reason for the "1" in PA-28RT-201T instead of 200, has nothing to do with the engine...it indicates that the plane has the tapered wing instead of the older straight wing. This practice also goes for other piper single engine models. such as the PA-28-160 and PA 28-161... 160's had the "Hershey Bar wing, whereas the 161's had the tapered wing. I am usually surprised how many people have come to me insisting the pa28-201 is an HP aircraft..... and asking for a high performance endorsement in it...

@Kevlux86 Год назад

@@belizeaviators2026 yes yes exactly! (Re-read my comment, you'll see what I was/wasn't saying :) )

@rogersmart1766 Год назад

Arrows are only “Complex” NOT HIGH PERFORMANCE

@ericruggles4631 5 месяцев назад

My mother flew an Arrow in the 1976 Powder Puff Derby. Was in the top 10 the first day, finished 30th out of about 200 planes . Hights finshing rookie in the field. I miss her greatly.

@karrpilot7092 Год назад

I used to fly a Warrior with the 160 hp engine. It was a slug. But it handled well, was easy to fly, and the heater worked better than any Cessna I have flown. The single door is an issue. But from an operating standpoint, I liked it better than the Cessnas. And not having to get a ladder to fuel it is a wonderful thing.

@user-xt5oe2gm5v 3 месяца назад

Ha. I loved my PA 28-151. Cheap to keep, cheap to run, and fun in turbulence. What a sweet trainer.

@garyyoung4074 Год назад

My 1974 Arrow 2 was a pleasure to fly and maintain. Every annual I upped the speed a bit with gap seals and other speed mods. None of these detracted from useful load much, but stall/take off performance greatly improved. Would flight plan for 143 kts and be right on target. The Leopresti cowl and one piece thicker wind screen were all that were left to install when I sold her. 150 kts is possible at 75% I believe if you get a run out one and rebuild her with all the mods available. Great family personal airliner for us. No problems w/anything for 300 hrs.

@geoffspitfire5160 3 месяца назад

Many hours in a 1974 Arrow II 200 ZK-EBE. I always found it comfortable stable and easy to fly. At 23/24 settling it cruised at 125k no speed king but got you to where you were going without any drama.

@jakesimpson6365 Год назад

To give the Arrow some credit on climb performance, my '69 200 with the three blade Hartzell will climb at well over 700fpm at max gross weight on a warmer day. It's definitely economical and cruises around 130kt at 9gph. Great video!

@DWBurns Год назад

I have a 1973 with a new engine, 120 hours, maybe a few extra horses in the barn. Full fuel 50 gallons, 2 men in front, me 245 my friend 180 flying at 87mph it did 1500 feet all the way to 4000 feet. It was uncomfortable to climb like that. I climb at 100-105 to get 500-750 fpm.

@Peacewind152 7 месяцев назад

I just bought a '69 200. It also has the triblade Hartzell. The thing is a rocket on climb. Got it as a timebuilder. I suspect I will love it more than the Cessnas Ive flown.

@tomdavis1694 9 месяцев назад

Flew an Arrow out of KBED for approx 100hrs, had Robertson STOL kit and performed its mission very well

@bernardanderson3758 Год назад

The Piper Arrows are still available depending on no damage history and if it was a flight school commercial trainer then you might get it if the price is right

@stevemino142 6 месяцев назад

The Cessna 180 is also a good value airplane as well I own 2 of them a 1955 model and a 1968 model H the 470 265 hp engine in the 68 model was just recently rebuilt and the 55 model has a conversion 540B continental 285 HP both have many thousands of air time on them and in excellent condition... good video

@rickmidkiff9990 3 месяца назад

I did all my complex airplane in a PA-28 2005M before I moved up to the Seneca II and beyond

@3204clivesinclair Год назад

Unusually never touched a high wing aircraft till after I had gained my licence. My training was done on an Arrow II. With two people, performance was OK. But 4 up, performance wasn’t exactly ‘sprightly’.

@davidhofman4341 Год назад

I used to own PA28R 31063. It is a 1968 serial number. The plane was certified January 1970. The control yoke AD does not apply. I was an IA in the FAA FISDO that included Williamsport,Pa. The FAA said the airplane could have been used for the 180hp turbo test bed or for other items to be tested. There were several unused connectors under the pilots yoke. Flew it to Williamsport for Sentimental Journey, but never got any answers.

@woutersijtsma1232 Год назад

31063 was produced in 1969 as a 180hp aircraft. The one that was used for turbo testing was 30337. 30482 was used for testing the 200hp engine.

@OZAV Год назад

... piper's are stable, durable and safe, though in the video - the narrator makes an omission to mention enough about, and that above all mentioned - is the one and only: Archer 3, which we prefer to fly around - in the Lycoming engine configuration, and with the wing area that has, at top of that - is just enormous. It's all you want on the day, for a lot of a good and stable lift :).

@fjp3305 11 месяцев назад

Yes. The Archer is the best for your money.

@JamesLangford-Cosslett 7 месяцев назад

Interesting video, but I would like to point out a quick correction. You mention that the Arrow III came along in 1977 with the semi-tapered wing which a actually copy of the 140 wing. This incorrect. The the PA28-140 never had a tapered wing. It was the Piper Warrior - PA28-151 that had the semi-tapered wing, which the the Archer and the Arrow would have. All the designations of the semi-tapered wing had a 1 added to their designation, for example when the Piper added the semi-tapered wing to the Arrow it became the PA-28-201, the Arrow with the straight wing was the PA-28-200. The Archer with the straight wing was the PA-28-180 which became the PA-28-181 when the semi-tapered wing was added. The same with all the Piper single engine aircraft that adopted the semi-tapered wing. Another example is the PA-32-300 Cherokee Six became the PA-32-301 Saratoga with the semi-tapered wing.

@RealBucketman Год назад

I almost bought N2175F until I went through the logbooks and no only found 2 gear up landings but also discrepancies and gaps in the logs. Ended up passing on it.

@ccrider8483 Год назад

As the video outlines, the Arrow is not the best at any one thing, but a decent compromise. It is probably best suited as a complex trainer with its constant speed prop and retractable gear. Interestingly, the T-tail models tend to be rather heavy on the yoke with regard to pitch making the traditional tail my favorite. PA 28s are really good aircraft in the "Archer/Warrior" models with tapered wings and 180-150 HP, IMHO.

@chrisc161 Год назад

I can’t believe that you compared the Arrow to the Grumman .

@Flatspinjim 7 месяцев назад

Why? The Grumman Tiger can keep up with, and depending on year/configuration, surpass the Arrow in performance. Without the complexity/maintenance/insurance related to a retract. Read the Aviation Consumer article on the Tiger from a few years back. They made the comparison themselves.

@jimb4090 Год назад

Got my Bellanca Super Viking for $46k in 2008. 175kt cruise, 10gph lean of peak at 12k, calm. At today's Arrow price could still buy 2 Vikings.

@woutersijtsma1232 Год назад

True, but the Arrow doesn't have wood rotting away 🙂

@txkflier Год назад

The front seat passenger must enter last, and they must exit first. Then the pilot can exit, but the back seat passengers usually exit before the pilot. Our 1972 Cherokee Arrow II was great. It was way better than anything that was less expensive..

@bernardanderson3758 Год назад

The Musketeers are moving faster than I expected and cheaper than a Piper Arrow

@valmikabeneteau7229 Год назад

I bought an Arrpw 4 in 1981 for 42K and sold it in 1991 for 42K. Wish I still had it. probably worth over 100K now. Anybody know if 2110W is for sale?

@chrisanderson1543 Год назад

An Archer is four knots slower and saves a lot of expense and aggravation!!

@txkflier Год назад

There ain't no way an Archer is only 4 knots slower than an Arrow II. It's dragging the gear and has less horsepower..

@fjp3305 11 месяцев назад

I would rather get an Archer. Not much slower, but less complexity, maintenance, fuel and money. It's a very nice single engine piston airplane.

@shy8170 Год назад

What’s the name of the piper that’s small ?

@Defender9432 Год назад

Didn’t some arrows have a continental O-360 engine?

@jessegarman7899 Год назад

The turbo Arrows had a Continental six cylinder TSIO-360. I had a fixed wastegate and no intercooler which led to sorter longevity. All other varients were a 4 cylinder Lycoming.

@Defender9432 Год назад

@@jessegarman7899 ah, thanks for the clarification. I was only asking because I work on one and it had that engine

@tomedgar4375 Год назад

Great trainer, but high performance? NO. I have 25 hours in am Arrow II, 125 knots on its best day. I’d rather buy the Archer, more bang for the buck.

@ismaelsouza21 4 месяца назад

Very nice plane. The consumption data is not accurate. It burns less than this.

@bernardanderson3758 Год назад

The T-Tails models aren’t that good when it comes to approach to landing to flare and the turbo arrow conventional tail has great performance at high altitude above 10,000 feet

@yohanauguuste Год назад

Certainly does not automatically extend the gear. It will give an alarm.

@txkflier Год назад

No, it will actually drop the gear automatically unless the override lever is pulled up..

@yohanauguuste Год назад

@@txkflier Turns out you are right. There is an autoextend feature i had never heard of before.

@txkflier Год назад

@@yohanauguuste I have no reason to lie. I've had the gear drop automatically when I was about to turn base after forgetting to lower the gear on downwind. I've also had the gear refuse to retract after takeoff because I was climbing too slowly. This was in a 1972 Cherokee Arrow II in about 1976..

@yohanauguuste Год назад

@@txkflier I have only flown Pipers newer retracts. Never heard of the system. Certainly is cool. What was your experience. Beneficial or a nuisance?

@txkflier Год назад

@@yohanauguuste Well, it kept me from hearing the sound of scraping metal once. And there was one time where an idiot in a Grumman American went silent on the radio after passing over the windsock and then did right traffic at an uncontrolled airport. I assumed he was following me since I was already on downwind, but I found myself beside him as I turned final. To get the gear up and go around, I had to pull up the override lever between the seats. Had I forgotten to lower the gear on the next approach, it wouldn't have dropped out.

@063317Art 4 месяца назад

Piper PA28R200 is not a high performance aircraft, it is only a complex aircraft. It has to be over 200hp to be high performance. There for being only 200hp does not qualify it as high performance

@mikemazzola6595 22 дня назад

$150,000 for my Arrow III? I had better up the hull insurance, AGAIN!

@elmin2323 Год назад

But a bonanza 😊

@briank3754 Год назад

I think it’s a sexy flyer! A lot better looking than anything Cessna is making. Can’t stand those ugly high wings and struts. Had to endure 100 hours in a Cessna 172 before I got into a real plane and did my multi engine rating in a Seneca. Don’t get me wrong the Cessnas have their purpose, but flying a sleek low wing plane is a much better experience. I’m in the market now and will likely be getting an Arrow. 135 knot airplane for $30k less than an equivalent 172 slugging along at 110.

@fjp3305 11 месяцев назад

Why don't you get an Archer?

@briank3754 11 месяцев назад

@@fjp3305 because they are $30k more.

@fjp3305 11 месяцев назад

@@briank3754 $30k more than an Arrow?

@briank3754 11 месяцев назад

@@fjp3305 I know, it shocked me too. Plane prices are all over the place. Cheapest Archer right now on Trade a Plane is about $100k. I’ve been shopping for a year and have had to tell myself that paying $60k for a Cherokee 140 is the norm. If I want one that doesn’t have a run out engine. Not sure how close you follow the market, but most of the SE non-complex Pipers and Cessna have more than doubled since 2020. I can get a decent long body Mooney for around $80k and a beat up mid 70s 172 is the same price. I have my high performance and complex so might as well get something more capable for less money.