Anyone who has owned a Seneca I? Any tips about what it’s operation is like? What to look at when buying?
Search is your friend.
https://www.euroga.org/forums/flying/5772-let-us-now-praise-the-seneca-1/post/103971#103971
Vladimir a relatively straightforward aircraft so shouldn’t present problems when doing a pre buy inspection, but do take an engineer that is familiar with the type.
Because they are used in a training environment check for signs of hard landing repairs. In addition to log book entries, or lack thereof, you might look at the rivets behind the engines for sign of replacement or stretching. Also any wrinkling under the wing – you would be surprised how many pilots actually don’t look, I mean really look, for signs of abuse on their walk around. Dragging of re fuelling steps leaves its mark under the outer panels.
The nose gear is also subject to abuse, and poor technique can lead to wheelbarrowing.
A flight test will usually reveal if the airplane has been well looked after – the workhorses tend to fly straight and level with the rudder trim in unusual settings.
They are practical, prosaic buses, with more predictable maintenance than the more popular, better handling turbo charged versions.
Most are very long in the tooth hours wise, and I would not consider a high time version.
Thank you, RobertL18C. What do you consider a high time version? How does 5300 hours (airframe) measure on that scale?
Sorry for any stupid questions but going for a first airplane and after reading a lot about bad experiences, I prefer to ask twice than be sorry later.
5300TT if supported by complete logs is a low time airframe – the aircraft hopefully sat unused in a hangar for many years. Ideally someone has overhauled the engines and props for you in the last few years.
They should be good value. A couple of years ago, what must have been the lowest time Seneca I in the world (1500TT) sold for around EUR15k – it did need engine and prop overhauls for going on commercial work, but was in pristine, time warp, condition.
Another area that will require some TLC is the wiring to the engine accessories and out to the wings (pumps, starters, lights, etc). This old electrical wiring usually requires replacing by now if it hasn’t been done already.
Both engines have 10+ years or 2000+ hours TBO according to the documentation (the airplane is flown about 120 hours per year, so the 10 years will probably be reached first). Props have 6+ years. I have to check about the wiring, I don’t have any information on that.
Another area that will require some TLC is the wiring to the engine accessories and out to the wings (pumps, starters, lights, etc). This old electrical wiring usually requires replacing by now if it hasn’t been done already.
I’ve never heard of that being a Comanche issue, and they should be older than the Seneca 1. The wiring harness to the microswitches on the landing gear I would have said yes all day long, it could be tatty. Was it an issue in other Piper twins you’ve seen @RobertL18C ?
Vladimir you should have a nice print out with all the SB/AD and timed components (hoses, pumps, magnetos, etc), take a morning off and review with an engineer and go through the logs ensuring they match up.
While I am normally a fixed gear, fixed pitch ideologue, a well presented Seneca I is about the closest to a reasonably predictable maintenance schedule for a legacy piston twin. Hope it works out and you get some productive years out of the aircraft. Its also a nice passenger aircraft.
William, yes the low time one that was bought needed some re wiring – nothing like a deal stopper but does require taking the leading edge off at the wing roots to fix an issue with intermittent electric fuel pumps.
I have no experience flying Senecas, but I was called upon to assist in getting one airworthy again, and it was a massive effort. The wing spar to fuselage spar carry through is an aluminum plate with a somewhat irregular shape, and some machined features. These machined features, including a feather edge, were poorly thought out. This resulted in a service letter, which was even more poorly thought out, and seemingly long ago forgotten.
The Seneca I asked to assist with suffered corrosion to these plates, which rendered them unairworthy, and unrecoverable. The owner, then I, phoned Piper, to be told that these parts were no longer available. I reminded the Piper Tech Rep, that the affect of this was grounding the plane. She said to me that that was Piper’s preference, and the parts would not be made available. I found this attitude worrisome. Refer to Piper SB No. 437A (sorry, I don’t have a copy).
Consider what you would do if that inspection revealed a defect in the spar strap, and a replacement part were needed….
