Matrix test ride today

[flyersfan31]

Took a test spin in an '08 Matrix. Here are my observations...

Rear accomodations are comfy. Lots of headroom and legroom. Far superior to Saratoga/Seneca and Bonanza/Baron. The fold out table is big. 110v power plug included. Rear baggage has to be loaded over fold-down rear seats, somewhat of an annoyance, but no less convenient than the mail-slot baggage door on my 182 I suppose. Airstair doors say "first class." Cupholders, reading lights, ventilation and 02 for every seat. Aft-facing seats recline comfortably - not sure if there is room for that in the PA32/BE36/BE58.

Cockpit is roomy, ONCE you're in it. I had forgotten how annoying that wingspar climb-over is, combined with maybe a 7" aisle. Minor gymnastics required, but certainly no more than scooching over a front pax seat is in the competition. You sit high - my first reaction was "Jeez, I'm in an airliner!" Controls are convenient, 'cept the switches on the ceiling by the right seat - takes some craning to see. Everything is standard Piper. If you've flown an Archer, you'll know your way around a Matrix.

Startup is smooth and quiet. Hitorque starter spins that prop like a banshee, but cabin noise is low. Taxi is good for a Piper (meaning not that great, but better than the rest of the product line, thanks to those stupid rudder/aileron interconnects).

Takeoff -- MP to 30, check instruments, then slowly advance to 42" Speed builds smoothly, rotate at 75, takes a bit to build momentum then that baby climbs. 1100fpm at 110kias, after gear up and takeoff flaps up. Easy 20deg turn to the north, very nice handling, not like the other Pipers I've flown that have a lot of slop (of course, those Archers and Seminoles are older and flight school planes). This felt solid and smooth. Kept full MP in climb to 9500, (42gph in climb) then back to normal cruise 30"/2400 for 185ktas at 19ish GPH. (All numbers approximate based on recollection). Didn't do any steep turns, but 30deg turns were smooth and easy, no problem maintaining altitude. Popped speed brakes for the descent -- whoa, Nelly - 1000fpm down without touching the throttle! Nice feature.

Pattern is fast -- 120kts around the horn, drop gear and 1 flaps at midfield, don't descend until on base, 2 notches, full flaps on final when landing assured, 90 down final and aim at the numbers. No real flare, just bleed off speed til touchdown. Smooooth landing, thanks to the struts, a bit of float from grond effect. In all, very pleasant flight. As Aviation Consumer found, I also experienced some tail waggle in low altitude turbulence, but nothing extreme.

I liked the Avidyne/GNS430 combo much more than I expected. The Avidyne system is more integrated with the STEC55x than my KrAP140/G1000 setup (ANY integration is more than that combo.) You can use altitude, VSI and heading bugs to drive the A/P, which is nice. TCAS is worlds better than TIS - I spotted every bogey within maybe 5-10secs of looking, unlike with TIS, for which location is far more approximate. Avidyne is very intuitive, and my time flying GNS430s and G1000s made the transition very easy.

Pros:
- cabin space
- speed - easy 185kts at <20gph , without aggressive leaning or LOP ops.
- avionics - nice package (assuming Avidyne maintains better reliablility than in the past)
- comfort - smooth ride, quiet, nice seats, good views, a/c works like a dream
- FIKI
- insurable
- pay overnight fees for a single, not a twin.

Cons:
- wriggling into pilot's seat
- small 02 capacity, need to plan ahead if you're going to fly high and refill on the road down South, where it's usually a Mx item, not line service.
- cost - new airplanes aren't cheap
- 2 turbos = 2x complexity in the engine bay
- long wingspan = be verrrry careful taxiing it

 

[AdamZ]

Where did you fly it Andrew?

 

[jason]

Very cool, Andrew. I, for one, am totally jealous.

I can't believe that I'm the first one to say it but...

 

[flyersfan31]

Took it from Wings up to LVZ and back. Just a little get-acquainted flight, some maneuvering and lots of system workouts. I have pix, but they're basically the same thing you'll get from the brochure....

I'll tell you, the thing that impressed me the most was the view from the pilot's seat. You're up so high, relative to most GA planes, that it really does feel like an airliner. No surprise, the mains touched down on landing long before I expected them to. Sweet ride.

 

[Rob Schaffer]

All that extra payload space wasted,... shame on you. Could have taken a few good buddies from Wings,....

Sounds cool though to be able to test a new plane out.

 

[flyersfan31]

All that extra payload space wasted,... shame on you. Could have taken a few good buddies from Wings,....

Sounds cool though to be able to test a new plane out.

Not everyone shares my flexxxxxxxxxxxxxible schedule.

 

[gprellwitz]

What, you couldn't be bothered to wear pants for the test flight?

Actually, I hadn't realized they were using Avidyne. Who else is using them now?

 

[flyersfan31]

What, you couldn't be bothered to wear pants for the test flight?

Actually, I hadn't realized they were using Avidyne. Who else is using them now?

Negative, no pants til November. Shorts only. One of the perks of my job.

I'm not sure if anyone EXCEPT Piper is using Avidyne anymore. I think Cirrus has gone 100% Garmin, and they are about the only A customers I can think of. They got kicked off the Eclipse program IIRC.

AFAIK, it's a cost-saving measure by Piper. I have to imagine Avidyne needs someone, anyone, to sell their stuff, so Piper probably gets a good price.

All that being said, the system works nicely -- far better than you might think. I was pretty negatively inclined toward it -- A pair of 430s and some big screens, what are you, joking???!!!! -- but it actually works well. The buttonology is in many ways better than Garmin. Certainly, far fewer nested menus.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Took a test spin in an '08 Matrix. Here are my observations...

Thanks for the write-up, Andrew.

Rear baggage has to be loaded over fold-down rear seats, somewhat of an annoyance, but no less convenient than the mail-slot baggage door on my 182 I suppose.

Interesting - I'd have thought that without the pressurization they could cut another hole pretty easily.

Taxi is good for a Piper (meaning not that great, but better than the rest of the product line, thanks to those stupid rudder/aileron interconnects).

What has rudder/aileron interconnects?

I liked the Avidyne/GNS430 combo much more than I expected. The Avidyne system is more integrated with the STEC55x than my KrAP140/G1000 setup (ANY integration is more than that combo.)

What, you don't like having to change your altimeter setting in three different places?

The Garmin autopilot is a big improvement, I'm sure.

Cons:
- small 02 capacity, need to plan ahead if you're going to fly high and refill on the road down South, where it's usually a Mx item, not line service.

Don't forget that the wife and kids probably aren't partial to nose straws. Any thoughts of getting the pressurized version instead? More economy and speed up high, no nose straws.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Actually, I hadn't realized they were using Avidyne. Who else is using them now?

That would be... Well, pretty much nobody.

Cessna and Mooney have been Garmin-only all along.

Columbia and Diamond offered either/or. Let's just say the Avidyne has not been popular when Garmin is offered, even when Garmin is more expensive (about a $14,000 price difference in the Diamonds IIRC). Diamond has built ONE airplane with the Avidyne. (The original owner put it up for sale, too.)

Piper and Cirrus started out all-Avidyne. Cirrus introduced the G1000-based Cirrus Perspective system a few months ago, and word so far is that despite the $48,000 price premium, every person has opted for Garmin over Avidyne. The SR20, however, is still Avidyne-only.

Piper started offering the G1000 as an option on the Saratogas last year. Don't know how that's going.

The Eclipse's original Avio suite had some parts by Avidyne. They were the first supplier to get nixed. Avidyne also has an STC or two for older turbine equipment, King Airs and maybe another.

So, Avidyne pretty much has the SR20 and most of the Piper line left, and that's it for the full suite.

Oh, and one other story I don't think I've related yet... I ran into a couple of Citation pilots in Chicago right after OSH. Their jet had gotten the Avidyne MFD installed, with all the bells and whistles. They never could get it to work properly, despite help directly from Avidyne. $200,000 plus to the avionics shop and they ended up buying a 496 to get a more reliable weather datalink.

(I guess you could say I'm not a big fan of Avidyne. )

 

[flyersfan31]

Don't forget that the wife and kids probably aren't partial to nose straws. Any thoughts of getting the pressurized version instead? More economy and speed up high, no nose straws.

Actually, that was my thought as well. We did a flight on O2 recently, and wife and kids didn't mind it at all. I was pushing pressurization, but my wife said she didn't care about using the mask or cannula. So, there you go!


RE: rudder/aileron interconnects -- Archers have it, Seminoles, Sundowners. Makes coordinated turns a piece of cake, leave the feet on the floor. Fly a Cessna and you've got some learning to do, as I have found. Plus, the interconnects make slips much more work, since you really have to fight the bungee on the interconnect. Same goes for ground steering.

 

[Teller1900]

Actually, that was my thought as well. We did a flight on O2 recently, and wife and kids didn't mind it at all. I was pushing pressurization, but my wife said she didn't care about using the mask or cannula. So, there you go!


RE: rudder/aileron interconnects -- Archers have it, Seminoles, Sundowners. Makes coordinated turns a piece of cake, leave the feet on the floor. Fly a Cessna and you've got some learning to do, as I have found. Plus, the interconnects make slips much more work, since you really have to fight the bungee on the interconnect. Same goes for ground steering.

Beech has 'em too. PITA on the ground (push the rudder and the yoke flops over to the stop if you don't hold it tight) but makes turns a breeze...until you have a cross wind, then you get a work out for free. I didn't remember the Seminole having it? It must have been a much looser bungee than in the Beech.

 

[sba55]

Beech has 'em too. PITA on the ground (push the rudder and the yoke flops over to the stop if you don't hold it tight) but makes turns a breeze...until you have a cross wind, then you get a work out for free. I didn't remember the Seminole having it? It must have been a much looser bungee than in the Beech.

Yep. Surprisingly, they're exactly the same in the 1900 as they are in the Bonanza/Baron.

Personally, I really like them. Yes, they are a bit annoying on the ground, but flying an ILS with just the rudder is a LOT easier than using ailerons.

I mostly just ignore them on the ground....

-Felix

 

[Teller1900]

Yep. Surprisingly, they're exactly the same in the 1900 as they are in the Bonanza/Baron.

Personally, I really like them. Yes, they are a bit annoying on the ground, but flying an ILS with just the rudder is a LOT easier than using ailerons.

I mostly just ignore them on the ground....

-Felix

I remember you telling me about it in your Bo. I don't know, it annoyed me a bit at first in cross winds, though I got used to the heavier control forces and didn't notice it after a while. The only time it really bothered me was when taxiing; if I made a turn in one direction, then quickly the other way...the yoke tended to get in the way of my knee if I forgot to hold it (the yoke, not my knee). I guess that's a pretty small issue to have with it.

 

[flyersfan31]

I still think they're a PITA on a crosswind landing. Plus, I feel kinda bogus flying around with my feet on the floor.

 

[AdamZ]

So Andrew the guys at wings say your getting the Matrix

 

[flyersfan31]

Me likey.

 

[Ted]

Definitely sounds cool if you can get it, Andrew. When the Matrix was first announced, it seemed that a lot of people were saying it made no sense, but it's turned out to be really logical for a number of people. I was talking to someone at Fight Safety who said that their Malibu/Matrix classes have been booked solid because of the popularity of the Matrix.

Thanks for the write-up, and let us know if you get one! A bunch of us will be bugging you for rides.

 

[gismo]

Yep. Surprisingly, they're exactly the same in the 1900 as they are in the Bonanza/Baron.

Personally, I really like them. Yes, they are a bit annoying on the ground, but flying an ILS with just the rudder is a LOT easier than using ailerons.

I mostly just ignore them on the ground....

-Felix

Felix, there are no aileron/rudder interconnects in the Barons AFaIK and definitely none in my B55. All the Bonanzas have them although I never found it much of an issue when slipping my E35.

One thing I'm wondering about is the cabin heater's ability to keep the rear part of the cabin liveable in the winter especially up high. According to a friend who used to own a Malibu this was a problem with them and I would expect that the unpressurized version would be worse.

 

[sba55]

Felix, there are no aileron/rudder interconnects in the Barons AFaIK and definitely none in my B55. All the Bonanzas have them although I never found it much of an issue when slipping my E35.

One thing I'm wondering about is the cabin heater's ability to keep the rear part of the cabin liveable in the winter especially up high. According to a friend who used to own a Malibu this was a problem with them and I would expect that the unpressurized version would be worse.

Oops, sorry, I forgot that the Barons don't have them. They seem like such similar airframes, so I always get them mixed up...

 

[gismo]

Oops, sorry, I forgot that the Barons don't have them. They seem like such similar airframes, so I always get them mixed up...

Don't feel bad. Even though I owned a 1954 Bonanza for 10 years before acquiring a Baron, a couple years ago I had completely forgotten that even the early model Bonanzas had the "bungee" and had to see one for myself to believe it.

 

[flyersfan31]

One thing I'm wondering about is the cabin heater's ability to keep the rear part of the cabin liveable in the winter especially up high. According to a friend who used to own a Malibu this was a problem with them and I would expect that the unpressurized version would be worse.

Interesting. I noticed a switch for an aux heater -- it's there specifically to generate more hot air for the rear cabin. IIRC it's an electric heater. I thought that sounded like overkill, but given what you say, I guess Piper is addressing a problem!

 

[Ted]

Interesting. I noticed a switch for an aux heater -- it's there specifically to generate more hot air for the rear cabin. IIRC it's an electric heater. I thought that sounded like overkill, but given what you say, I guess Piper is addressing a problem!

I've noticed that a number of aircraft seem to have poor rear seat heating. The Mooney is a great example. The heater in there will hard boil an egg... for the front seat passengers. The other night I was flying it back to Williamsport from Lancaster with some friends. My friend and I in front were very warm. His girlfriend in back was freezing, and was happy to have the blanket we keep in the plane for rear seat passengers. Apparently there's something about the design that has significant air flow back there.

The Aztec I flew in was similar - the heater was going strong up front, but in back I was very glad to have my leather jacket, and was tempted to crawl around in search of a blanket. The flight back in front, the heater was great... once we got it turned on, anyway (those were a cold 15 minutes until it started working...). Reportedly the Navajo is similar - I recall my ex complaining about a very expensive flight I paid for because she was cold back there, even though we were toasty up front.

So, I would definitely have good things to say about auxiliary rear seat heaters. I just can't figure out why automotive manufacturers figured out how to do it decades ago but aircraft manufacturers haven't. I'd also wonder if pressurized airplanes do a better job than unpressurized, since those cabins have to be sealed?

Actually, now this poses a question to me Malibu vs. Matrix. What changes did they make from the Malibu to make the Matrix, regarding the pressurization? Did they leave the cabin pretty well sealed? I'm curious now. Although the Archer II is very well sealed, at least as far as the planes I've flown.

 

[SCCutler]

My Bonanza (a '69 V35A) has separate front and rear heat controls, with rear heat ducts near the feet of the rear seat pax. Seems to work fine.

 

[jesse]

RE: rudder/aileron interconnects -- Archers have it, Seminoles, Sundowners. Makes coordinated turns a piece of cake, leave the feet on the floor. Fly a Cessna and you've got some learning to do, as I have found. Plus, the interconnects make slips much more work, since you really have to fight the bungee on the interconnect. Same goes for ground steering.

Uhm--are you sure? I've never flown an Archer with a rudder/aileron interconnect. At least, I didn't notice it when I did fly them? Is it something on the new archers?

I also flew a Beech Sierra for awhile (Sundowner with retractable gear) and I don't remember it having an inter-connect.

 

[gismo]

Actually, now this poses a question to me Malibu vs. Matrix. What changes did they make from the Malibu to make the Matrix, regarding the pressurization? Did they leave the cabin pretty well sealed? I'm curious now. Although the Archer II is very well sealed, at least as far as the planes I've flown.

I'm pretty sure they pulled quite a bit of weight out of the Malibu when making the Matrix and I would expect that much of that was related to the lack of a pressure vessel.

 

[flyersfan31]

Uhm--are you sure? I've never flown an Archer with a rudder/aileron interconnect. At least, I didn't notice it when I did fly them? Is it something on the new archers?

I also flew a Beech Sierra for awhile (Sundowner with retractable gear) and I don't remember it having an inter-connect.

Archer IIIs definitely have one, as do Seminoles. I don't know about Archer IIs.

AFA changes for pressurization, or lack thereof, I believe they use thinner windows, and they don't seal the rivets. Other than removing most of the plumbing, that's about it. They tried to change as little as possible - a little automotive-style platform engineering! They dropped about 200lbs from the airframe.

 

[AdamZ]

Heck the back of a Tiger is cold!

 

[flyersfan31]

Heck the back of a Tiger is cold!

Oh hell, now you've done it. You've insulted the Tiger. I can hear the Grumman crowd coming for your scalp now....

 

[skyflyer8]

Archer IIIs definitely have one, as do Seminoles. I don't know about Archer IIs.

Seminole, ah, no. At least not in 1979. Maybe the new ones.

The Ercoupe has rudder and aileron interconnect

 

[flyersfan31]

Seminole, ah, no. At least not in 1979. Maybe the new ones.

The Ercoupe has rudder and aileron interconnect

I looked in my Seminole handbook - hmm, no mention, but it sure flew like it had one. As it turns out, the Cirrus SR20 (and maybe 22) has one.

 

[SCCutler]

I have never flown an Archer III; the Archer IIs I flew (4 or 5 of 'em) did not have interconnects or, if they did, they were so weak as to be undetectable.

In the Bonanza, when I mash the rudder pedal (this on the ground, I do not routinely "mash" the pedal in flight), the yoke flops over.

 

[sba55]

I have never flown an Archer III; the Archer IIs I flew (4 or 5 of 'em) did not have interconnects or, if they did, they were so weak as to be undetectable.

In the Bonanza, when I mash the rudder pedal (this on the ground, I do not routinely "mash" the pedal in flight), the yoke flops over.

I'm not so sure about that

 

[Teller1900]

I looked in my Seminole handbook - hmm, no mention, but it sure flew like it had one. As it turns out, the Cirrus SR20 (and maybe 22) has one.

I certainly don't remember one from the Seminole (I've flown the '79, '02, '05-'07 models). It's been well over a year since I've been in a Seminole, but I still think I'd remember it. I think it just didn't need much (any) rudder input to stay coordinated.

 

[Skip Miller]

I have never flown an Archer III; the Archer IIs I flew (4 or 5 of 'em) did not have interconnects or, if they did, they were so weak as to be undetectable.

No interconnect on the Archer II.

-Skip

 

[jason]

Looks like this test ride was a good use of Piper's time.

 

[Ted]

Sure seems it.

 

[mikea]

Looks like this test ride was a good use of Piper's time.

Piper can report it met its sales goal for 2008(?) by selling one.

We get to say we know whose that was.

 

[Ted]

Piper can report it met its sales goal for 2008(?) by selling one.

Actually, Piper has been doing way better than everyone else thought they would. When I talked to SimCom a few months back, they said that there was a significant backlog for Malibu training due to the popularity of the Matrix.