Piper Matrix

[Ken Ibold]

Got to fly a Matrix today. I hereby officially take back most of my misgivings about the idea. It's actually a delightful airplane and it does not have two of the major Achilles heels of the Mirage. Payload is decent and climb CHTs are dramatically lower.

 

[tonycondon]

interesting ken. it seems that one of the guys from Flying had the same feelings of retraction after flying the airplane.

 

[rpadula]

Phew, when I saw the headline I thought it might've been the new purchase you had alluded to recently.

What's the cause of high CHT's in the original Mirage design? Poor cooling design or lotsa heat from the turbos?


-Rich

 

[flyersfan31]

I'm silly enough to have thought that the idea had merit from the get-go. What worried me, and still does, is the reputation for fragility of the basic airframe/components. A cabin-class non-press makes sense for my mission, with fuel burn way (well, slightly) below a twin. However, heavy mx expense makes the Matrix a questionable replacement for the Seneca, unless you really need the speed.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Sucks!!! Oh wait.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Phew, when I saw the headline I thought it might've been the new purchase you had alluded to recently.

Who says it's not? Oh, wait, the wife says it's not.

What's the cause of high CHT's in the original Mirage design? Poor cooling design or lotsa heat from the turbos?

Poor cooling design was the result, I'm told by Dr. Bruce, of a miscalculation by the original designer. The Piper folks attribute the reduced heat load to the fact that the twin turbos don't have the additional task of driving the pressurization system. I did a direct climb from sea level to 17,600 feet (yes, I overshot 100 feet) at 41 inches/2500 rpm (full throttle/prop) at Vy, climbing ~1200 fpm, standard OAT, and the hottest CHT I saw was 426 on #5 for about the last 3 minutes of the climb. All others were 400-415. It was sucking 40+ gph during the climb. I'm trying to get the engineers to calculate for me exactly what the power load of the pressurization system is, but the proof was in the flight. A Mirage would have been running at least 60-80 degrees hotter under those conditions.

edit: We were about 200 pounds under gross.

 

[Ken Ibold]

I'm silly enough to have thought that the idea had merit from the get-go. What worried me, and still does, is the reputation for fragility of the basic airframe/components. A cabin-class non-press makes sense for my mission, with fuel burn way (well, slightly) below a twin. However, heavy mx expense makes the Matrix a questionable replacement for the Seneca, unless you really need the speed.

It's a matter of useful load, too. The new Seneca's can barely carry two people and a toothbrush with full fuel, (OK, not quite that bad), while a Matrix can carry 800 pounds 900 miles at 180 knots at 12,000 feet, and 195 knots at 17,500 feet.

The MX issue does remain. The nose gear issue is still hanging out there, and though Piper calls it a "pilot error" thing, that's a matter of debate.

 

[bbchien]

Old Senecas can carry 950 in the cabin, and travel 1000 nm in 6 hours, and bring you down an ILS on one blower throught the clag, all on 20 gph (63% power). They can carry you above the clag. Maintenence- is not such a big deal, if you don't fly 75% power.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Old Senecas can carry 950 in the cabin, and travel 1000 nm in 6 hours, and bring you down an ILS on one blower throught the clag, all on 20 gph (63% power). They can carry you above the clag. Maintenence- is not such a big deal, if you don't fly 75% power.

No argument there.

The question really is starting to become whether the hassle factor in keeping an old plane flying is worth it. As you know, that hassle goes up as the airplane gets more complex. For airplanes closing in on 35 or 40 years old, this is becoming ever-more significant. However, new airplanes tend to be severely useful load challenged. That, and there is a class of buyer for whom something not new (or nearly so) is out of the picture, regardless of capabilities.

Plus, reading between the lines at Piper, the end of production and parts support for the PA-32 and PA-34 will be here sooner rather than later.

 

[sba55]

I did a direct climb from sea level to 17,600 feet (yes, I overshot 100 feet) at 41 inches/2500 rpm (full throttle/prop) at Vy, climbing ~1200 fpm, standard OAT, and the hottest CHT I saw was 426 on #5 for about the last 3 minutes of the climb. All others were 400-415.

Yeah, no wonder that the engine in this plane doesn't last long.

415 is still too hot. If that happens in most climbs, it's going to be a struggle to reach TBO, yet alone go beyond it. Scary.

-Felix

 

[sba55]

Old Senecas can carry 950 in the cabin, and travel 1000 nm in 6 hours, and bring you down an ILS on one blower throught the clag, all on 20 gph (63% power). They can carry you above the clag. Maintenence- is not such a big deal, if you don't fly 75% power.

Of if you fly LOP, 75% is about the same as 65% ROP as far as the engine is concerned.

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Old Senecas <snip>

Bruce, Define "old" please.... how far back does one need to go? And what's the pick of the litter in that vintage (year/model)?

 

[tonycondon]

415's not bad for a full power Vy climb... typically you will climb at reduced power and higher airspeeds which should provide adequate cooling to the cylinders.

 

[sba55]

415's not bad for a full power Vy climb... typically you will climb at reduced power and higher airspeeds which should provide adequate cooling to the cylinders.

You're right, I missed the fact that this was at Vy....

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Yep, that caught my attention too, but I don't climb a Vy unless I have to. It would be interesting to see what a cruise climb would be. 380 is my target. I will accept slightly higher for a short period, but 400 is tops even briefly.....and, we made TBO in our plane. Still running it (it had been topped before we purchased it at 900 hours which is not at all unusual for the P-Baron.).

Sounds more interesting that before. How 'bout handling and feel? To what would you compare it? How much fuel? Range at 180 to 190 knot cruise?

Best,

Dave

 

[Trapper John]

No argument there.

Plus, reading between the lines at Piper, the end of production and parts support for the PA-32 and PA-34 will be here sooner rather than later.

Sounds like a nice bird. But if they drop support for the Six/Saratoga, the Seneca and the rest of the Cherokee line, wouldn't they alienate a lot of potential move-up buyers? All they would have left is the Matrix/Malibu/Meridian plus the small jet and the jet is going to be facing a lot of competition that has a jump on them...


Trapper John

 

[Ken Ibold]

Sounds like a nice bird. But if they drop support for the Six/Saratoga, the Seneca and the rest of the Cherokee line, wouldn't they alienate a lot of potential move-up buyers? All they would have left is the Matrix/Malibu/Meridian plus the small jet and the jet is going to be facing a lot of competition that has a jump on them...

You can certainly make that argument. However, the more expensive airplanes are selling much better AND they have more margin. Plus, I believe Piper wants to cut down their tooling and spare parts requirements by having fewer airframe types. And by, say, moving Saratoga buyers over to the Matrix, they reduce costs on the Matrix, Mirage and Meridian by increasing the volume of whatever common parts those airframes have.

So far, more than 3/4ths of Matrix buyers are Cirrus owners.

Actually, I could see a potential acquisition of Piper by Cirrus.

 

[Ken Ibold]

Sounds more interesting that before. How 'bout handling and feel? To what would you compare it? How much fuel? Range at 180 to 190 knot cruise?

Range at that cruise is about 900 nm with 45 min reserve if you have 100 gals on board and 800 pounds in the cabin. If you go full fuel (120 gal), payload drops to 680 pounds and range goes to 1050 nm.

It flies kind of like an A36 -- nicely balanced. Very solid. We flew on a very smooth day, so I don't know about how it handles turbulence. On landing, the nose gets a bit heavy but trims out nicely. From a fit and finish standpoint, I didn't see anything to gripe about. Much better than the early Malibus, which is my point of reference on this model. Even so, it's no Beech in that regard, but if Beech built this the price would be x 1.6, so you have be comfortable with balancing the two issues, just like you always have when comparing a Beech and a Piper.

 

[Trapper John]

You can certainly make that argument. However, the more expensive airplanes are selling much better AND they have more margin. Plus, I believe Piper wants to cut down their tooling and spare parts requirements by having fewer airframe types. And by, say, moving Saratoga buyers over to the Matrix, they reduce costs on the Matrix, Mirage and Meridian by increasing the volume of whatever common parts those airframes have.

So far, more than 3/4ths of Matrix buyers are Cirrus owners.

Actually, I could see a potential acquisition of Piper by Cirrus.

Good points. But I hope they would keep parts available for the discontinued models. It would be a low blow to current owners if they just said, "We're done with them, you're SOL." Or, at the very least, sell the type certificates to someone who would make spares available.


Trapper John

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Range at that cruise is about 900 nm with 45 min reserve if you have 100 gals on board and 800 pounds in the cabin. If you go full fuel (120 gal), payload drops to 680 pounds and range goes to 1050 nm.

It flies kind of like an A36 -- nicely balanced. Very solid. We flew on a very smooth day, so I don't know about how it handles turbulence. On landing, the nose gets a bit heavy but trims out nicely. From a fit and finish standpoint, I didn't see anything to gripe about. Much better than the early Malibus, which is my point of reference on this model. Even so, it's no Beech in that regard, but if Beech built this the price would be x 1.6, so you have be comfortable with balancing the two issues, just like you always have when comparing a Beech and a Piper.

That range and payload mix is excellent IMO. My A-36 with tip tanks carried 120 pounds. With the TAT gross weight increase, payload was 800 with full fuel. That range is also comparable. Where does the plane true out at Fl180 for instance? 190 or so? My A-36 trued between 180 and 190 at FL180 on 17 gph LOP. Climbed at over 30 gph. Sounds very interesting for someone with a mission that calls for this.

Best,

Dave

 

[flyingcheesehead]

So far, more than 3/4ths of Matrix buyers are Cirrus owners.

Not surprising - But it doesn't bode well for Piper when the Cirrus jet arrives.

Actually, I could see a potential acquisition of Piper by Cirrus.

So could I, but I'd bet there'd be a bankruptcy court in the middle unless it happens very soon.

 

[mikea]

Old Senecas can carry 950 in the cabin, and travel 1000 nm in 6 hours, and bring you down an ILS on one blower throught the clag, all on 20 gph (63% power). They can carry you above the clag. Maintenence- is not such a big deal, if you don't fly 75% power.

Funny. I can do 700nm in 5.5 hours and a single blower, carrying 1400 lbs.

OK, I'd be biting my nails at the end of the trip.

 

[rpadula]

And by, say, moving Saratoga buyers over to the Matrix, they reduce costs on the Matrix, Mirage and Meridian by increasing the volume of whatever common parts those airframes have.

So far, more than 3/4ths of Matrix buyers are Cirrus owners.

Have they shortened the Matrix's wingspan to fit in a normal-sized hangar yet?

-Rich

 

[bbchien]

No argument there.

The question really is starting to become whether the hassle factor in keeping an old plane flying is worth it. As you know, that hassle goes up as the airplane gets more complex. For airplanes closing in on 35 or 40 years old, this is becoming ever-more significant. However, new airplanes tend to be severely useful load challenged. That, and there is a class of buyer for whom something not new (or nearly so) is out of the picture, regardless of capabilities.

Plus, reading between the lines at Piper, the end of production and parts support for the PA-32 and PA-34 will be here sooner rather than later.

Airplane manufacturers are always going bankrupt. Look at Mooney. Grumman Tigers. Piper.

The difference is that for a $6,000 difference in hull value premiums I get to annual my aircraft for free.

 

[Ken Ibold]

415's not bad for a full power Vy climb... typically you will climb at reduced power and higher airspeeds which should provide adequate cooling to the cylinders.

I should add that the airplane only had 8 hours on it, so the CHTs would run slightly high until the engine gets broken in.

Still, this is a classic example of SELLING an airplane as opposed to OWNING an airplane. Keeping the CHTs below 400 would have increased time to climb considerably, perhaps doubling it.

 

[taters]

Yeah, no wonder that the engine in this plane doesn't last long.

415 is still too hot. If that happens in most climbs, it's going to be a struggle to reach TBO, yet alone go beyond it. Scary.

-Felix

Roger that...anything over 400 is too hot IMO. Forget Vy , go with a cruise climb...%75 Lop done proper is amazing, CHT EGT stay cooler that ROP. Really does prolong the life of a high load/power engine.

 

[sba55]

Roger that...anything over 400 is too hot IMO. Forget Vy , go with a cruise climb...%75 Lop done proper is amazing, CHT EGT stay cooler that ROP. Really does prolong the life of a high load/power engine.

Absolutely. Most importantly, ICPs are a lot lower LOP since the mixture burns more slowly. A lot of people ignore ICPs and think they're ok because their CHTs are below 400.

Ken is right, though. They're trying to sell the airplane, so they're not concerned about engine longevity.

-Felix

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Ken is right, though. They're trying to sell the airplane, so they're not concerned about engine longevity.

Note to self: the "deal" on the factory demo aircraft may not be such a good "deal".

 

[kmead]

Red line CHT is 500 degrees. I see that # 5 is still the hot one on the Matrix, it can be 20 degrees hotter than the next. My comfort level on Mirage CHT is 425 max. The CHT always gets a lot hotter above 20K in the climb. Don't think Gami nozzles will help, but you would be amazed at the change you can make with a tube of silicone and Gee Bee baffle seals. On new airplanes I spend some time sealing up the large cooling leaks. Some of the lucky people that made TBO flew the aircraft below 20 K and 300 hrs a year.

Regards, Kevin

 

[sba55]

Red line CHT is 500 degrees. I see that # 5 is still the hot one on the Matrix, it can be 20 degrees hotter than the next. My comfort level on Mirage CHT is 425 max. The CHT always gets a lot hotter above 20K in the climb. Don't think Gami nozzles will help, but you would be amazed at the change you can make with a tube of silicone and Gee Bee baffle seals. On new airplanes I spend some time sealing up the large cooling leaks. Some of the lucky people that made TBO flew the aircraft below 20 K and 300 hrs a year.

Regards, Kevin

Hi Kevin,

Have you tried the Gami lean test? It'll give you a good idea if Gami injectors are needed and if they would work for your engine.

In any case, Gami does help (sort of) if you can't already run LOP. For maybe 3-7 knots less airspeed, you'll see CHTs and ICPs that are a LOT lower than what you're seeing right now, maybe lower by 30 or more degrees. The engine in the Mirage is a prime candidate for LOP operations, IMO, because of the temp. problems. There's no reason that that engine shouldn't make it to TBO and beyond.

425 for longer than a few minutes is way too hot. At that temp, damage to the cylinders is likely, especially the cylinder head.

-Felix

 

[bbchien]

Jim Griswold long ago confessed that he used improper assumptions in designing the Malibu w/o cowl flaps.....

 

[kmead]

Many operators are running lean of peak, but Textron tries to scare them from this. The TIO 540 AE2A has a balanced induction system and normally runs fine LOP without GAMI nozzles. For many Mirage owners I feel it's a waste of money. The full rich climb is where you encounter the highest CHTs on this aircraft. I have factory nozzles on my TCM malibu engine and it runs straight across on the EGT line and is smooth 75 degrees LOP. Until TCM introduced their "matched" nozzles we had some uneven EGT lines on many engines.

I really wish there was a way to get this engine reliably to TBO, some engines can handle high altitude better than others. Its hard to tell an owner that we have to tear down his perfect running engine.

Regards, Kevin

 

[sba55]

Interesting. Are you aware of people doing LOP cruise climbs? If the temps are kept under control, I would think that TBO+ would be possible on this engine...

 

[kmead]

I don't know of any owners trying LOP cruise climbs. The TCM fuel system can be set to the max. unmetered (nozzle) pressure which helps on the cruise climb, but the fuel servo on the Textron has no external adjustment means. As the Textron engines age the climb fuel flow tends to drop off.

I think is was the 3rd convention that I heard Jim speak about the Malibu project, it was really good. Two things he or sales people hoped for showed up like cooling mods and a 3 blade propeller. Most owner forced into early (pre TBO ) overhauls was caused by problems other than heat damaged cylinders

Regards, Kevin

 

[sba55]

Interesting stuff...didn't know that about the other pre-TBO issues...

-Felix

 

[Dave Siciliano]

I'm not a thermal engineer, but one on the Beech list had an in depth discussion of where different metals begin to lose strength and where they lose elasticity. If I recall correctly, under 425 in his expert opinion, no way the metals being used in our engines will last. If you'd like, I can try to dig that post up again. I don't know how anyone has gotten comfortable with those temps, but I sure wouldn't bank on TBO running them. The P-Baron POH allows CHTs that high, but none were making TBO without being topped. Just my opinion, but 380 is my target and 400 is absolute max. TAT seems to be of that opinion also based on many tests on their engine test stand in Ada.

Best,

Dave

 

[sba55]

I saved this post a while ago. Looking at aluminum alloy strength at 420 degrees, the pistons have lost about 50% of their original strength.

300 deg F 50 ksi tensile strength
400 deg F 32 ksi
500 deg F 13 ksi
600 deg F 8 ksi

http://lists.kjsl.com/pipermail/beech-owners/2007-October/052251.html

I think there's plenty of evidence out there that running above 380 for an extended period of time will cause long-term damage and fatigue. I usually run around 330-350 degrees in cruise, and we're TBO + 300 right now with compressions in the 70s on a IO520.

-Felix

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Thanks Felix. We're at TBO on the P-Baron also, but it was topped at about 900 hours by the folks we purchased the plane from. My old A-36 is still running with about 1,200 hours on cylinders I put on. I had to top it when I purchased it about six years ago. Unfortunately, the turbos are a bit harder on cylinders. The cert. test used to be the plane had to sit on the ramp in 90 degree temps for one full hour, then, climb directly to FL180. Higher up is where the CHT temp issue got to be a real issue.

In each plane I did a cruise climb which gave me about 700 fpm at 120 in the Bo and 140 in the Baron. CHTs are much more manageable that way.

Best.

Dave

 

[sba55]

Couldn't agree more about the cruise climb LOP.

I've also found that building up speed to about 120 in ground effect before climbing out does wonders at keeping CHTs down in the subsequent climb. Whereas I used to see 390 for the first 5 minutes on at least cyl #2, it's down to only 370 now. I think you explained this technique to me a while ago. Thanks

-Felix

 

[Dave Siciliano]

Nothing new under the sun; John Deakin explained that in an article on AvWeb; then, again at the APS. That is what I do if the runway length is available. I've had to explain that to more than one examiner/CFI. They each agreed and understood after I talked through it.

Best,

Dave