Spoilerons anyone??
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, North Shore, Rudder Bug
-
SuperchargedRS
- Rank (9)

- Posts: 1485
- Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:30 am
- Location: the stars playground
Spoilerons anyone??
I will be doing a considerable amount of flying in a PA34-200 with spoilerons. Seems very responsive at speed, lower speeds it lags a bit.
Anyone have any experience with these things?
Thanks
Anyone have any experience with these things?
Thanks
Re: Spoilerons anyone??
Spoilerons, the most deadly animal known to man.
Be extremely careful at low speed, as when you bank, you are destroying lift on one side. I don't have any experience with your a/c in question but I know of a few wrecks in the mu-2 caused by low speed/altitude turns.
Keep er shiny side up
Be extremely careful at low speed, as when you bank, you are destroying lift on one side. I don't have any experience with your a/c in question but I know of a few wrecks in the mu-2 caused by low speed/altitude turns.
Keep er shiny side up
Re: Spoilerons anyone??
Ah, you mean flaperons. big difference there, I have no piper experience but flaperons are standard kit for Robertson Stol and are employed on many a/c. You probably won't notice any difference until you let the flaps out but the r/stol kits also incorporate other changes like cuffs and drooped tips. Again, no pipers for me but it sure makes the 185 perform a hell of a lot better.
Cheers
Cheers
-
SuperchargedRS
- Rank (9)

- Posts: 1485
- Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:30 am
- Location: the stars playground
Re: Spoilerons anyone??
Nope, the entire trailing edge of the wing is just a flap and on the top portion of the wing the PA34 has spoilerons (similar to the MU2). However the Seneca does not have the double-slotted flaps which I believe was one of the contributing factors to the fatalities of the MU2 (retracting flaps at low speed thus reducing the amount of wing your flying with due to the double-slotted flaps).Heliian wrote:Ah, you mean flaperons.
I will try to remember to take a few pics for you guys, very strange kit on this PA34
- The Old Fogducker
- Rank (9)

- Posts: 1784
- Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 5:13 pm
Re: Spoilerons anyone??
The MU-2 was/is an excellent designed aircraft that has been flown into the ground by people who generally were without proper training on type, or suffered from a severe case of Pilot HUB Disease (Head Up Butt.)
Fly it the way the factory says to do it, and it is very good at what it was made to do. Go for a do-it-yourself checkout, or buckshee training as a step up from a Navajo, and do dumb stuff that shows the pilot knows little to nothing about flying higher performance aircraft, and it will .... rightfully so .... bite you.
Why anyone would chose to blame the aircraft when somebody retracts flap below appropriate speed when the Fowler Flap increases the wing area by almost 30% and then wonders why the stall characteristics change is the one with problems.
Incidently, that type of accident is exceptionally rare.
The typical MU-2 accident is to land short of the runway with a high sink rate because the pilot failed to fly with instrument reference.
Its like trying to forever call the Cessna Citation a piece of crap for Thurman Munson's "mistake" at the controls near Canton, Ohio in the late 70's.
Here's an article regarding the effect of proper training on MU-2 accidents.
http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-ne ... ate-23519/
Regards to all,
The Old (Former MU-2 Check Pilot) Fogducker
Fly it the way the factory says to do it, and it is very good at what it was made to do. Go for a do-it-yourself checkout, or buckshee training as a step up from a Navajo, and do dumb stuff that shows the pilot knows little to nothing about flying higher performance aircraft, and it will .... rightfully so .... bite you.
Why anyone would chose to blame the aircraft when somebody retracts flap below appropriate speed when the Fowler Flap increases the wing area by almost 30% and then wonders why the stall characteristics change is the one with problems.
Incidently, that type of accident is exceptionally rare.
The typical MU-2 accident is to land short of the runway with a high sink rate because the pilot failed to fly with instrument reference.
Its like trying to forever call the Cessna Citation a piece of crap for Thurman Munson's "mistake" at the controls near Canton, Ohio in the late 70's.
Here's an article regarding the effect of proper training on MU-2 accidents.
http://www.ainonline.com/news/single-ne ... ate-23519/
Regards to all,
The Old (Former MU-2 Check Pilot) Fogducker
Re: Spoilerons anyone??
Is the A/C reg GOMG?
Centennial used to use OMG for multi training in the nineties.
jj
Centennial used to use OMG for multi training in the nineties.
jj
Re: Spoilerons anyone??
I was not doggin the MU-2, i think it's a great plane and I agree with the lack of training issue. It's the only a/c that I personally know of that uses spoilerons that's all and now adding the rare seneca 2 with whatever weird kit is on it. Man, those garrett's are some sweet screamin devils.

-
200hr Wonder
- Rank 10

- Posts: 2212
- Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 1:52 pm
- Location: CYVR
- Contact:
Re: Spoilerons anyone??
double-j wrote:Is the A/C reg GOMG?
Centennial used to use OMG for multi training in the nineties.
jj
OMG was and still is at PFC, has been for years.
Cheers,
200hr Wonder
200hr Wonder
Re: Spoilerons anyone??
Roger that. It was at centennial in yxd for a long time. I did my multi ifr with it in '94.200hr Wonder wrote:double-j wrote:Is the A/C reg GOMG?
Centennial used to use OMG for multi training in the nineties.
jj
OMG was and still is at PFC, has been for years.
I know PFC and centennial were together, not too sure if they are still.
jj
-
Meatservo
- Rank 10

- Posts: 2581
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 11:07 pm
- Location: Negative sequencial vortex
Re: Spoilerons anyone??
Few people are aware that it was I who, long ago, invented "flapavators". Due to lack of specialized training, however, the one prototype aircraft crashed, and all information on the subject has been swept under the rug.
If I'd known I was going to live this long, I'd have taken better care of myself
Re: Spoilerons anyone??
While most Robertson STOL kits interconnect the ailerons with the flaps, like the Beaver, with the Seneca Robertson did away with the Ailerons altogether and extended the flaps from wing tip to wing tip. Then added spoilers as the only roll control.
Works great and allows for some very short take off runs. The spoilers make the roll a bit sensitive at slow speeds but is quickly overcome with a few hours flight time.
I flew these for a few years commercially out of YXS in the early 80's
Nothing dangerous about them at all.
Bob
Works great and allows for some very short take off runs. The spoilers make the roll a bit sensitive at slow speeds but is quickly overcome with a few hours flight time.
I flew these for a few years commercially out of YXS in the early 80's
Nothing dangerous about them at all.
Bob
-
iflyforpie
- Top Poster

- Posts: 8132
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 12:25 pm
- Location: Winterfell...
Re: Spoilerons anyone??
Been on Cessnas for years. Pull the Johnson Bar on an older 172 or 182, levitate off the runway. We tried one time to see how many 'touch and goes' we could do in one circuit just moving the bar up and down. I would imagine it would work the same for the 180/185 in wheel landing attitude. YRMV.Meatservo wrote:Few people are aware that it was I who, long ago, invented "flapavators". Due to lack of specialized training, however, the one prototype aircraft crashed, and all information on the subject has been swept under the rug.
I get this picture in my head when I hear about a Seneca with a Robertson STOL...beaverbob wrote:.... the Seneca Robertson....
Geez did I say that....? Or just think it....?



