Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
! / _____ / TAPE 26
power, size and weight for the general run of light plane
flying.
In the spring of 1963, both the 160 and 180 hp models
were approved as seaplanes \'lith Edo floats. Edo,
incidentally, stands for Earl Dodge Osborne, a notable man
whom I have known for many years, but unfortunately have not
come in contact with for some time. lie is several years
older than I am, but I understand that he is still alive.
This is August 1983, and he must be about 90 years old. He
and Casey Jones, whom I first met 60 years ago at the 1923
National Air Races in St. Louis, together \'lith three others
whom I did not know, founded the organization called the
Quiet Birdmen, of which I happen to be ,a member. It was
founded just after World War I and now has chapters or
"hangars", as the.y are called, throughout the entire country
and I get a great deal of pleasure "hangar-flying" with
pilots from all around.
The Cherokees did not make very good seaplanes, largely
because they had a single door on the right-hand side only.
When beaching or docking, a seaplane pilot may want to get
down on either the right-hand float or the left-hand float in
order to facilitate the operation. Getting to the left-hand
float required an impractical acrobatic maneuver. Very few
5
TAPE 26
Cherokees were purchased with floats and after a time the
models were dropped.
From the early 1930's until sometime after World War II,
most of the civilian training, primary training that is, was
done on first Taylor and then Piper Cubs. This of course
helped to influence the pilots trained on Cubs to buy the
more advanced Piper aircraft as they became available. As
the use of the tricycle gear became almost universal,
however, and as larger instrument panels were needed to
support radios and other navigation equipment as well as
gyroscopic instruments for instrument-type flying, the tail
dragger Cubs \vith their narrow tandem fuselages became
obsolete. Also, side-by-side seating vas found to be a
better arrangement for training.
Shortly after World War II Cessna came out with a small
high-\dng trainer \'lith side-by-side seating and an all sheet
metal fuselage, the model 120. As I remember it, it ,.,as
powered with a Continental 65 hp engine. Sometime later an
improved model called the Cessna 140 was produced and I
believe it had a somewhat more powerful engine, either the 75
or 85 hp Continental. These models still had fabric-covered
wings and tail-wheel-type landing gears. In fact, all of the
Cessna single engine models at that time were tail-draggers,
6
TAPE 26
although their twin-engine models were fitted with tricycle
gears.
In 1951, Piper put a tricycle gear on its Pacer model
and called it the Tri-Pacer. These were accepted immediately
by the flying public and far outsold the Cessna 170 tail
dragger. Cessna then put a tricycle gear on its 170 model
and .called it the 172. They then gradually fitted all of
their models \dth tricycle gears except one, the 180, which
is particularly suitable for bush ,.,.ork. By about the mid-
1950's they had put a tricycle gear on their 140-type model
and called ik the Cessna 150. This model and its successor,
the 152, have dominated the training field for many years and
still do in 1983.
In the mid-1950's Piper was in dire need of a modern
training plane so that more people would learn to fly on
Pipers and then continue with the Piper line. They even
considered taking over the Ercoupe and making a training
plane of it, but Bill Piper, Sr. wanted action more quicly
and so they stripped the /+-place Tri-Pacer down to a 2-place
trainer and called it the Colt. The Colt \vas fitted with a
115 hp Lyco.ming 0-235 engine, but it could be produced ldth
the same tooling and methods ns the Tri-Pacer, which was
already in production. It sold fairly well for a couple of
7
TAPE 26
lower powered all metal years, but it could not compete with the,ACessna 152 and the
model was dropped about 1962.
Shortly after the )evelopment (enter in Vero Beach was
started in 1957, and we were using fibreglass and plastic in
the Pawnee hoppers and other non-structural parts, Pug Piper
and I started thinking in terms of a possible trainer made of
fib~eglass and plastic composite construction. \vhen ,.,e had
our Pawnee and Cherokee projects well enough along so that we
could take on another project, we started on the composite
trainer in earnest. We used Sam Snyder, who had graduated in
aeronautical engineering from my alma mater, the University
of Illinois, as the project engineer, and Bob Drake, our
plastics specialist,
suitable for production.
to \-rork out construction methods I
The hope was that we would get a savings in cost and
possibly a savings in weight also. To facilitate getting a
lo,., cost \dth high quality, ,.,e decided to make the airplane
small, having a span of only 25' and a uing area of only 110
square feet. This would give a relatively high wing loading
for a trainer, but we decided to use full span flaps to give
acceptable minimum speeds. A simple form of construction was
used incorporating a very small number of major parts. The
flaps were deflected to a maximum of only 30° and then
8
TAPE 26
operated differentially as ailerons. A low wing monoplane
arrangement was used with side-by-side seating and a wide.
tread tricycle gear with a general configuration somewhat
like that of the Ercoupe. The wing \Y'as moderately tapered,
however, which helped
would not increase
construction.
in obtaining lower weight and which
the cost with a molded type of
The wing was one piece from tip to tip, with the
fuselage resting on top of it. Inside the fuselage the wing
became the bottom of the scats for the occupants. In
construction the wing was molded in two halves - a top half
and a bottom half and then they were cemented together. The
fuselage \Y'as molded in right and left ha~ves including the
fin and then they were ceflented together. By using female
molds, the outer surfaces of the wing and fuselage were
smooth and needed no additjonal finishing. In fact, by using
a suitable colored gel~coat against the mold, the final
finish could be obtained with any color desired and no
additional painting would be required. A great deal of
research was carried on so as to make use of the best
materials available at the time and the best details in
construction.
The wing skins were one-half inch thick and comprised a
9
TAPE 26
paper honeycomb with outer and inner surfaces of layers of
fibreglass in polyester plastic. The curing was done at
about 240°F, as I remember it. Polyester plastic was used, I
believe, partly because we knew how to handle it and partly
because epoxy was just coming into the Picture at that time
and we were uncertain about being able to handle it properly,
particularly in view of its highly toxic effects on the
wor~ers, which people had not learned to overcome at that
time.
The first airplane, which was really a prototype because
it was made from molds suitable for production, first flew in
April 1962. No trouble with the plastic structure occurred
during the next 6 months of exposure and 80 hours of flight I
testing. When the external wing and fuselage surfaces came
out of the molds, they were very smooth and we had
anticipated getting aerodyna~ically smooth surfaces and
substantial laminar flow if the wings were kept clean and
polished. As time went on, however, it was apparent that the
curing had not been absolutely completed in the molding
operation and the honeycomb pattern showed through on the
surface to a slight extent, spoiling the aerodynamically
smooth surface. This detail would have had to have been
taken care of by improving the curing process. During the
entire progress of the work we had been making aging and
10
TAPE 26
weathering tests by means of samples located on the roof of
our plant in Vero Beach, l·rith maximum exposure to the sun and
humidity conditions. It was soon apparent that the polyester
plastic lost a large proportion of its strength if exposed to
the sun in unprotected condition. A good solid coating of
paint \~as needed to protect it, preferably '~ith a black or at
least a dark undercoat next to the polyester itself.
The paper honeycomb had been treated with phenfl
formaldehyde and had a sort of Bakelite composition which was
resistant to water, but not entirely '~aterproof. This
condition needed improving because if a leak in the surface
should occur and water get inside, the strength would be
1 ost. Problems such as these could have been solved by I
further development without too ouch difficulty.
Two important factors, the weight and the cost, however,
were disappointing. The weight turned out to be greater than
that of comparable aluminum alloy structure. This was partly
due to making the first design somewhat over strength because
of the unknown quantities of the material, particularly with
regard to aging. It was apparent, however, that with the
materials which we used there was no likelihood of a saving
in weight. Over the past 20 years a great improvement in the
materials has been obtained and a substantial savings in
11
TAPE 26
weight now appears possible.
The material costs, as I remember it, were not greatly
different from those for a metal airplane. The labor hours,
h o '" e v e r , w o u 1 d p r o b a b 1 y b e g r e a t e r • I n a s m u c h a s t h e m o 1 d s
that we used were suitable for production, we were in a
position to make a fair estimate of the labor hours required.
It Hould seem offhand that molding only four large pieces and
bonding them together would take mucl1 less time than cutting
and fitting and riveting and forming all of the different
parts for the wing and fuselage of a metal airplane. In
order to take care of the weight and strength requirements,
however, it was necessary to cut to size and lay up in the
molds a very large number of pieces of f~breglass cloth of
different kinds. Thus, although only four large pieces came
out of the molds, a large number of smaller pieces went into
them and they had to be cut and placed in position very
carefully. A rather large amount of hand labor was required
and it appeared that there would be no savings in cost. The
project was then dropped, at least until some future time
when improved materials became available. They are available
now and several projects are going ahead Hith them, but none
in the light low-cost trainer airplane field, because the
materials are still quite expensive. The Papoose was, to my
kno'lolledge, the first airplane in \·lhich the major structure,
12
TAPE 26
including the wing, the fuselage and even the main landing
gear legs were made of composite fibreglass and plastic
construction.
It was painful to sec the project dropped, but it is now
displayed in the museum of the Experimental Aircraft
Association in Wisconsin. The arrangements for this were
made. by Piper aeronautical engineer Landis Ketner.
Piper was now in dire need of a training airplane and it \
\vas decided to repeat the Tri-Pacer-Colt experience by
stripping a Cherokee 150 4-place airplane down to a 2-place
airplane for a trainer. The rear seats w~re removed and the
baggage area and close-out panel were moved up to that area.
The same Lycoming 0-320 engine was used as in the 150, and
although it \vas still rated at 150 hp, a higher pitch
propeller was used with it which held the rpm and power down
some and the airplane was called the Cherokee PA-28-140. The
approved type certificate for the PA-28-140 was obtained in
February 1964 and the airplane was immediately put in
production.
It had gentle flying and stalling characteristics and
served well as a trainer. With its low-wing arrangement,
13
TAPE 26
providing both a low center of gravity and a low center of
drag, as well as support for a wide tread landing gear which.
gave good stable support when the airplane was on the ground,
students were able to operate it safely under substantially
higher wind conditions than with the narrow tread high-win8
trainers. Numerous reports came in that in many cases of
high and gusty wind conditions after the training had been
stopped in the Cessna 150's and 152's, the Cherokee 140
training had gone right on without difficulty. Also, with
the nose wheel tire • • •
End of Side 1
flow SIDE 2
Also with the nose wheel tire. the same large size as those
of the rear wheels, the airplane could be operated from
relatively soft grass fields. As was brought out by my
tricycle ski experiences in Minneapolis in 1945 unde~ high
drag conditions such as snow or soft ground, the nose ski or
wheel may get at least as large a load as that taken by
either of the rear 'l'rheels. Under those conditions the tire
should be at least as large as those of the rear wheels.
Also, the nose ,.,heel is the first to go over rough terrain
14
TAPE 26
and in general appears to get more punishment than the rear
>'lheels and I have been happy \vith the full-size nose ,.,.heels.
on the Cherokees in general.
Although the Cherokee 1Lf0 appeared to make a good
training airplane vrith its larger engine, it cost more than
the Cessna 152 and the cost of operating it >vith greater fuel
con&umption was more than with the 152. It was therefore not
used nearly so widely as the Cessna 152 and some years after
I retired, Piper replaced it vrith a smaller and lower-powered
design called the Tomahawk.
The next Cherokee model change was ~ade by fitting the
regular 4-passenger model with a LycominR 235 hp 6-cylinder
0-540 engine. To increase the fuel capacity with the larger
engine, the wing tips were formed into fuel tanks and
extended 1' on each side so that the span was increased from
the original 30' to 32'. Each vring tip tank held 17 gallons,
which increased the total fuel capacity from the original 50
to 84 gallons. The 235 hp model vras available with the same
type of fixed-pitch aluminum alloy propeller as was used on
all of the other Chero~ee models up to that time. The
maximum speed was 166 mph, however, which meant that the
propeller pitch was too high for best take-off and climb
15
TAPE 26
performance. \~hen airplanes such as the Lockheed Vega
reached that speed level in the enrly 1930's the manufacture.
of controllable-pitch propellers was commenced.
The 235 hp Cherokee \'las made available \'lith either the
fixed-pitch propeller or a controllable constant speed
propeller. The model does \.,rell in short field operations,
particularly fields at high elevations, in the high plains
and mountain areas. The approved type certificate for the
Piper Cherokee PA-28-235 was received in July 1963 and the
model was immediately put into production.
It was well received by the flying public and modern
versions of the model are still being prpduced in moderate
quantities. Modern versions of the 150 and the 180 hp models
are also still in production, 20 years later.
The user of the airplane is of course the final judge,
and as reports came in from the field, our engineering
kept a record of them and minor
improvements \vere made where it seemed ~that they
would help. Maintenance improvements were made as soon as it
appeared that they were needed, and items involving comfort,
performance and appearance were brought out in the yearly
model changes. An example of the latter was changing from
16
(
TAPE 26
the old push-pull type of controls for the throttle, the '\.·.
>
mixture controls and the propeller pitch control to a.
quadrant-type of control in \oJhich they are all grouped
together in one cluster as has been the practice in larger
military and commercial airplanes with piston engines.
As I have.mentioned previously, I had done this 20 years
before with the Ercoupe in order to avoid misuse of the
throttle control by automobile drivers, for the automobiles
at that time had push-pull throttles that operated on the
dashboard in the opposite direction.
The next Cherokee model to come out,was fitted with a
retractable landing gear and it was called the Arrow. It was
powered by the 180 hp Lycoming engine. The approved type
certificate for the Piper Cherokee Arrow PA-28-R-180 was
obtained in June in 1967. Except for the retractable gear
and a change in the 180 hp engine fuel system, the airplane
was essentially the same as the fixed giar Cherokee 180. The
latter had a Lycoming 0-360 engine with a carburetor which
hung below the engine. In the retractable version the engine
was changed to the Lycoming I0-360, which had a fuel
injection system and gave roo~ under the engine for
retraction of the nose gear within the cowling. Even with
17
TAPE 26
this extra room it was necessary for us to reduce the nose
wheel size from the regular 600 x 6 to the 500 x 5. This
\vould limit the soft field operation to some extent and I did
not like to do it, but by that time almost all operations
were from paved fields or well-prepared and firm grass
fields •
. By that time the use of the 500 x 5 nose \V'heel had been
established by the fact that the Deech Bonanza, which was now
heavier and more powerful, had been using it for many years.
The 180 hp Cherokee Arro,.,, incidentally, had about the same
size, weight and performance as the original Beech Bonanza
which was first manufactured about 20 years previously, 1947.
I h a v c a 1 '"a y s a d m i r e d t h e l3 o n a n z a d e s i g n ap d 1 i k e t o t h i n k o f
it and the North American Navion as the first 4-place light
airplanes to follo\·! the general arrangement of the Ercoupe
with its tricycle gear and low wing.
By the late 1960's the Bonanzas and the Cessna 210 4-
place retractable gear airplanes had become heavier and more
powerful and therefore more costly. It did not take long
before the Cherokee Arr0\-1 outsold all of the others in that
f i e 1 d • \H t h i t s r e t r a c t a b 1 e g e a r t he . 1 C 0 h p C h e r o k e e A r r o w
is slightly faster than the 235 hp Cherokee with a fixed
gear. The Arrow was therefore fitted with a constant speed
18
TAPE 26
propeller as standard equipment. The Arrow gives more
economical performance from a fuel standpoint, but the 235 hp
fixed gear Cherokee is more of a workhorse in that it will
carry heavier loads and operate better at high altitude
fields.
The most unusual feature that we brought out in the
Chevokee Arrow was the control of the retractable landing
gear. In the period before the Arrow came out, every year
several hundred retractable geared light airplanes were
landed with the gear in the up-position. This was quite
expensive, because it usually meant replacirig or repairing an
expensive controllable pitch propeller and repairing the
bottom of the airplane nnd possibly the f~aps which may have
been down.} It happened that Pug Piper had had two of those .... -.... --~·-·- ··~··· ....
experiences himself, and he asked me if we couldn't devise a
system that would take care of that situation by putting the
landing gear down automatically, even if the pilot forgot to.
N-t:I"L eo+ ~--h-.a-v-c·--me..n-.t--t-o-n ed-a--e-o·upl e-··of-··s-e-n~
~-~~--Th~se gear-up landings \ver'~1\riiJ~ even··~·~~~;;~--~~;; pilot had a great deal of warning by flashing red lights and
squawking horns to tell him that the gear was still up,
although the throttle was back and power off in preparation
for a landing.
19
TAPE 26
Such an automatic back-up system for the pilot would
have to sense both the airspeed and the engine power. With
our Cherokee Arro'"' which had a landing speed flaps down in
the low 60 mph range, this meant that if the pilot \olas coming
in approaching a landing in a power-off glide and the gear
was still up, it should come down automatically and lock when
the·airspeed got down to about 100 mph. On the other hand,
during a take-off run .,.lith full poloTer, the maximum angle of
climb occurs at about 85 mph and the landing gear should be
retracted and remain retracted throughout the climbing range,
that is at airspeeds of 85 mph and above. Previously the
Beech Bonanza had been fitted for a short time with a device
which would accomplish this type of purpose by sensing both
the airspeed and the en3ine @Bnifold pressure, but its use
had been discontinued.
It occurred to me that the propeller slipstream velocity
is increased by the application of pol'ler, and if I could find
a spot within the slipstream area which with the airplane
flying in full throttle climb at 85 mph "'ould nive a local
airspeed reading of slip,htly over 100 mph, I could get the -p\tot-s-t~tic.
e f f e c t i v e p o ,., e r w i t h a s i n g 1 e p..i.-t..o-s-t...a. t ~€ a i r s p e e d s e n s o r
alone, and have a very simple arrangement. The Arrow was
still in the design stage, so I then took a Cherokee 180 and
20
TAPE 26
,/
flew a number~ of tests with the aid of Clarence Monks,
ex p 1 o r i n g_ ~ u i t a b 1 e 1 o-c a t i on s f o r an a i r s peed s ens o r i n the .
slipstream. We were loo~ing for a place which would give the
same airspeed rea-ding on a separate indicator with the
airplane flying at 85 mph and full throttle, as with the
airplan~ flying in a glide with the propeller completely
throttled and a reading of 105 mph.
He found a couple of suitable locations, but selected
one that was lr:ell protected by being just outside the
lefthand side of the fuselage and a couple of feet above the
middle portion of the wing. The only door and the walkway
were on the right-hand side of the airplane.
I located a pitclstatic sensor at that point similar to
the one used for the indicated airspeed instrument for the
Cherokee airplane, but lar~er, so that a greater amount of
air could be used to move a diaphragm which opened or closed
a hydraulic valve. Yhen this valve was open, the gear would
fa 11 down by the p u 11 of gravity and 1 o c k in the "do,., n"
position suitable for landing. The usual retraction and
extension of the gear by the pilot is done by hydraulic
actuators which are operated by an electric motor driving a
gear pump which can be run in either direction. An electric
switch on the instrument panel, the handle being in the form
21
TAPE 26
4_f_ . ..u.H.!. ... {
of A. wheel and tire, is moved to an "up" position to force
the gear to retract and to a "do~;1n 11 position to force the·
gear to extend. The entire operation is carried on in the
standard way with blinkin3 light and squawking horn if the .. • • .J ·tJ ( ·. f d
throttle is moved back to the l~·~z~;i'~:~,~~~~-~~~~;~f':-~ i\~~:"~·h;•nt. ·I'
usua 1 sq ua~ switches arc n t tac hed to each of the \vhee 1 s and
will prevent the gear from being retracted while the airplane
is an the ground with its weight on the wheels.
Thus in ordinary operation, the pilot operates the gear
just as in the case of any ordinary retractable gear. In
case of malfunction and the gear will not go down when the
pilot calls for it by puttinu the switch down, the pilot has
an emergency control lever which will open the valve, the
hydraulic valve mentioned previously, and the gear will fall
down of its own accord and lock in place. If he is making an
ordinary landing and forgets to put the gear do\vn, ho\vever,
the automatic feature will open that valve and the gear will
come down and lock by itself.
There are t\oJO occasions under ,.,hich it is desirable to
override the automatic , . .~:
feature . .,. having the gear come down.
The emergency extension lever, which incidentally is located
between the forward portion of the two front seats, also
functions as an override lever to eliminate the automatic
22
TAPE 26
extension function. When placed in the downward position, as
mentioned previously, this lever causes the gear to extend.
and lock. When held in the upward position, it eliminates
the automatic feature and places the gear under electrical
control just as in the case of all ordinary retractable
landing gears. Hith the lever in the "up" position, stalls
and slow flight can be practiced with the gear retracted.
The . "up" position to ho 1 d the gear retracted is a 1 so used in
full power climbs at high altitudes, where the indicated
airspeed is lo\ver than the true airspeed and uith the
automatic feature, the gear may tend to come down within the
climbing range nnd to reduce the climb performance.
As the Arro\v \vas first produced, the, pilot had to hold
the lever up to keep the gear retracted under these
conditions or get a co-pilot or passenger to hold it up for
him. This \vas done so that \·rhen the maneuvers \vere finished,
the lever would go down to its neutral position again and the
automatic feature would be ready in case it was needed for a
landing in which the pilot forgot to lower the gear. The
airplane was produced with this arrangement for several years
and as I mentioned previous 1 y, soon became the best-se 11 ing
retractable geared airplane in the world.
After a time instructor pilots expressed a desire to be
23
TAPE 26
able to lock the gear in the "up" position for the practice
of slow flight and stalls. Also, after a pilot who.
apparently did not know enough about the system to hold the
override lever up and keep the gear retracted during a climb
at high altitude, crashed at the 9,000' elevation at the
north rim of the Granll Canyon, the NTSB (Nationa 1
Transportation Safety Doard) demanded that Piper supply a
means of locking the override lever in the "up" position.
This was accomplished, as I remember it, within a year or two
after I retired in 1969.
I should have mentioned before this occurred that
insurance companies had allol'led a reduced premium for
retractable geared airplanes fitted with ~he automatic back
up system. All in all, the system has worked well over a
period of many years. I know of only three cases in which
gear-up landings were made, although I am not sure that I
have all of the information. In one case, the pilot having
forgotten to lol.,rer the gear, landed (It a high airspeed well
in excess of 105 mph and the gear naturally did not come dol'ln
automatically. In the other two cases, the pilots had left
the override lever in the locked "up" condition and the
airplanes acted like ordinary retractable gear airplanes.
The best measure of the success of the system is that it is
still in use on the Arrows and in addition, has been
24
TAPE 26
incorporated in a retractable geared model of the Cherokee 6
of higher horsepower and performance. This model will be
discussed later.
I should have mentioned previously that the original
Cherokee Arrow, the PA-2S R-180, was approved in June 1967
and production started at that time. In addition, a 200 hp
version was approved and production started in January 1969.
H'The production of most of the Cherokee PA-28 series has
continued for the 14 years since I retired in September 1969,
mostly with minor improvements as time \-rent on. The length
of the fuselage has been increased by 5", \vhich gives more
leg room for the rear passengers.
During my last year at Piper we did some preliminary
investigation to\vard improving the climb by increasing the
span and \vithout requiring a strengthening, at least a
substantial strengthening, of the inner portion of the wing.
This could be done by tapering the outer half of the wing,
the portion beyond the flaps, so that the tip cord was ~
.smaller than the root cord, and the load at the tip would be
r e d u c e d • T h i s c h a n g e ''a s f i n a 11 y m a d e t o t h e 1 5 0 h p m o d e 1 i n
1973 and it was designated the PA-28-151. The span was
increased to about 35' and the plane had better climb and
flatter glide characteristics. The change was well received
25
TAPE 26
and by 1978, all of the Cherokee models still in production
were fitted with the tapered outer wing panels. These
included the PA-28-161, 181, R-201 and 235. Now in 1983 most
of them are still in production, but have been given names
such as Warrior, Archer and Arrow.
I should have said back a bit when speaking of the
ArrQw, that after it had. been in production a few months and
the automatic landing gear back-up system had been well
received, the sales department thought that the company
should have a patent on it, if possible. Up to that time
Piper had no patents whatsoever. It happened that I had
anticipated this possibility and had prepared a description
and mailed it to myself and then filed it away unopened so I
that the orioinnl date could be verified as stamped on the
sealed envelope. A year or more later I ran across the
letter unopened in my files and, in my usual absent-minded
manner did not recognize it, and opened it, breaking the seal
and spoiling the record. Fortunately this did not matter,
however, because in the patent office search, no significant
p r i or a r t ba ~ was f o u n d an d a v e r y g o o d p a t en t w a s
obtained in my name and assigned to Piper (#3511455 and dated
Hay 12, 19 7 0) •
I have just gone dol-ln to the Piper plant in Vero Beach
26
TAPE 26
and obtained the latest informatin on the PA-28 models that
are still in production. The smallest one now is the PA-28-.
161 called the Warrior II. The suggested list price for this
model is just under $40,000 in 1983, as compared with just
under $10,000 when it first came out in 1961. The model has
been spruced up a bit, but most of this difference represents
inflation. When the new model is fitted with the usual
amount of instrumentation and new e 1 cc tronic gear, it se 11 s
for any\·rhere bet\veen ~50,000 and $70,000. Under these
conditions, the production rate has dwindled to a small
proportion of its former value. The 180 hp model, the PA-28-
181, is now called the Archer II. It makes a very
satisfactory airplane and one that Dorothy and I have taken
three trips with this last summer.
The 235 hp model, the PA-28-236, is now called the
Dakota and the retractable Arrow, the PA-28 -R-201, is now
called the Turbo-Arrow IV.~~~
End of Side 2
END OF TAPE 26
27