Lee Loader

I learned to fly in a tri-pacer, It didn't need much rudder except on takeoff because of the spring interconnect.

farmerjim wrote:I learned to fly in a tri-pacer, It didn't need much rudder except on takeoff because of the spring interconnect.

I have a lot of time in the PA22, even taught in one, but rudder and aileron input against the interconnect is still really important. I've seen a couple run off the runway in crosswinds because the pilots did not keep it on the centerline with the rudder and didn't keep the upwind wing down with aileron. I've also seen them flip over when exiting the runway because aileron input vs. wind direction was not observed. My dad also owned a metalized Tri-Pacer.

Here is my PA22/20. I used it to commute to work, 1200 hours worth of commute. I was a great airplane, equipped for hard IFR in convective weather as we have here on the Gulf Coast. I have flown it to all four corners of the lower 48 and across the Carribean Islands. I believe my longest overwater leg was about 300nm.



Here is a picture of the panel, not your grandma's PA22!



It was a cool machine; HSI, StormScope, engine analyzer. chip detector, standby battery, standby vacuum system, and certified for GPS approaches. I even had the FAA certify a non-public GPS approach for the airport I flew in at out of. They named the final approach fix after my dog! Half of the 1200 hour commute was between midnight and one in the morning.

It took the fellow that bought it just a few hours to roll it up in a ball.

Michael,
That was a beautiful and very interesting PA22/20! There is something timeless about the exterior design. I always wanted to fly one, but never had the opportunity.

CAVU,
Dan

Dan 444 wrote:Michael,
That was a beautiful and very interesting PA22/20! There is something timeless about the exterior design. I always wanted to fly one, but never had the opportunity.

CAVU,
Dan

Thank you! My only problem with the airframe was the lack of leg room both front and back. Mine was a '59 model so it had the wider fuselage, but it was not enough as well. If I were to buy another airplane, it would be a Maule. Maybe this model!

[BBvideo 560,340][/BBvideo]

Ranch Dog wrote:If I were to buy another airplane, it would be a Maule.

He said "if"...

Yes Sir.. Take off & land in 2 1/2 feet..

My instructor was very strict on ground handling. He did not want his plane banged up. 3122Z was a metal wing tri-pacer with a full IFR panel and a 12 gallon aux fuel tank under the back seat. It did not have GPS because it had not been invented yet.
That Maule could get you into almost any back country field.

That's not a short field landing this is a short field landing .

I'd say with scale this makes about a 12' roll , total runway about 45' .

RBHarter wrote:That's not a short field landing this is a short field landing .

I'd say with scale this makes about a 12' roll , total runway about 45' .

Yeah, that short. Carbon Cub with a lot of wind. Trouble is that it is very slow getting anywhere and only carry about 400 pounds, plus you have to build it yourself. The Maule, just about any of the models, will carry over 1,000 lbs.

Here is a good one of a Maule at work from the cockpit.

[BBvideo 560,340][/BBvideo]

Michael,

I LIKE the Maule. With the STOL, you could keep it in your back yard.

Dan