The title of this article may well confuse astute observers, as the photographs of our test aircraft look remarkably similar to a Piper Seneca.
| But don't worry: we have not used the wrong photographs. What you are looking at is an aircraft which is, in essence, a mixture of a Seneca II and III. |
 |
But it isn't built by Piper.
Rather it's the product of the Polish firm PZL.
Taking western design technology and transplanting it to a country with a technically capable but much cheaper workforce, and then producing what should be the same product at a lower cost is nothing new. It has been tried in a number of fields over the years - most prominently in the manufacture of motor cars - so why not aircraft?
PZL is a conglomerate of companies whose history spans 50 years. That history is steeped in aircraft production, much of it Soviet in origin, and covering everything from Mig fighters through the cavernous AN-2 to sub-assemblies for the large Ilyushin IL-86 and IL-96 Airbuses.
With the collapse of communism the traditional Soviet bloc market has virtually vanished and the company are now seeking to penetrate western markets. The Mewa (the word means 'Seagull') has been around for a number of years. It all started when Piper signed an agreement with PZL in 1977 to manufacture and sell PA-34s in Poland. These early aircraft were originally based on the mark II Seneca but fitted with Polish Franklin engines.
Upping the engines
In 1981 Piper gave the Seneca another revamp and it became the III series. It must have been obvious that for a Polish-produced Seneca to have a chance of selling in western markets it was going to have to employ credible and known western technology for its engines.
So PZL, having modernised the basic Seneca II (although they retained the older fashioned spilt windscreen) adopted some of the Seneca III features, mixed in a few modifications for their own use in Poland and spawned the current Mewa M20. Consequently the company are now actively back in the western market and have recently appointed a Europe-wide agent, Hans Christian Hummelbrunner of Germany.
To date, PZL have built and sold approximately 78 Mewas in Poland, South America, Asia and, more recently, two have gone into the German market - one to a training school and the other to a charter organisation. So just how successful has the transfer technology been?
Seneca the Elder
The first thing that any dedicated Seneca follower will notice is that the design is definitely that of the older Seneca II and III series. There are no fancy aerodynamic engine air inlets, three blade props or single piece windscreens.
Our test example has full German type approval (it's registered D-GELB), and was just six months old with under 100 hours total time. The all-alloy construction is corrosion proofed and has fairly zany paint scheme, which was applied in Poland.
Unfortunately the standard of painting is not really up to western standards, something that I have noted on a number of aircraft which have come from the PZL factory, including the Rallye-like Koliber and others.
Hummelbrunner's intention to take delivery of aircraft green in future and have them sprayed for the British market. This should improve the finish and bring it up to an acceptable western standard.
Apart from that the only obvious differences compared to a normal Piper-built Seneca are a slightly beefed up undercarriage to cope with unpaved operations - particularly relevant in Poland, apparently - and a very poorly finished plastic moulded tailcone.
The two large slab-like wings with considerable built-in dihedral house a total of 484 litres of fuel. The all-moving stabilator tailplane has a large anti-servo trim tab. Both wing leading edges as well as the stabilator and fin leading edges are fitted with pneumatic de-ice boots which, coupled with electrically de-iced props and a hotplate windscreen, all of which provides for known ice certification, although I was surprised to see that there were no boots on the smaller inner wing areas.
The turbocharged Continentals - revealed!
|
The two turbocharged Continental TSIO-360KB 220hp engines drive constant speed two blade propellers and are counter rotating (so there is no critical engine if one fails). |
Pilot and co-pilot access is over the right wing root
through one large door. To the rear there is a larger door with a further hinged section
which provides access to the rear seating or baggage area; there is also a supplementary
baggage locker in the nose section. The company are offering the Mewa in five basic
versions: the passenger/air taxi version with forward facing fixed seats; service/light
cargo transport - two seats and an open baggage compartment providing 4 cubic metres (140
cubic feet); club/executive with conventional pilots' seats and four club-type seats to
the rear, facing inwards to an executive table; ambulance version with pilot, stretcher
space and room for two medical attendants; and finally reconnaissance/patrol, configured
to an operator's requirements for maritime and border patrol with mountings for external
radio, radar, infa-red, UV, searchlight and so on. What the company are really saying is
that if you have a mission in mind, talk to them and they will try and tailor the aircraft
on a bespoke basis within the type certification.
Our test example was fitted with leather seats in club configuration, which are functional if not luxurious. Unfortunately some of the trim and the curtains did not really hit the spot either in quality or colour co-ordination and, as might be expected when using design technology over 20 years old, the ergonomic general layout looked dated compared to the revamped Seneca IVs and now Vs from the Piper stable.
|
Up front the flight engine instrumentation and panel switches are all of western origin, as is the very comprehensively fitted avionics stack with autopilot and even Bendix colour radar.
|
The instrumentation is western,
with plenty of room for an IFR fit.
|
Getting moving
The pilot seating position feels somewhat low, but that's normal in a Seneca, the high instrument panel tending to limit visibility. The twin Continentals started easily but during taxying the Polish-made disc brakes did tend to squeal.
Being mindful of the 40 inch manifold boost limit - there is no automatic wastegate, just two amber warning lights which illuminate on overboost - we were airborne to very short order, raising the nose at 70 knots, lifting off at 80, accelerating to 89 knots blue line speed (best single engine rate of climb) then, with no runway left to land on in case of an engine failure, raising the undercarriage before accelerating above the gear retraction speed of 107 knots.
Blue line climb speed resulted in a very high nose attitude, but a more conventional cruise climb (100 knots with 35 inches manifold pressure and 2,500rpm) produced in our very lightly loaded state a very acceptable 1,500 feet per minute rate of climb. With 110 knots and an even lower nose attitude we were still climbing at nearly 1,000 feet per minute.
Stopping the climb at 5,000 we levelled out, bringing the power back to 65%, 33 inches manifold and 2,400rpm: at this point we were burning approximately 80 litres (21 US gallons) of fuel per hour and producing 140 knots true airspeed. Increasing the manifold pressure to 75% nudged the speed up by approximately 8-10 knots. Of course, with the turbocharged engines and a service ceiling of 25,000 feet - assuming that you're carrying supplementary oxygen equipment - then the true airspeed could be expected to hit the quoted figure of 174 knots; however under normal circumstances the aeroplane is really a 145-155 knot platform.
Stability is good in all axes, making the aeroplane a good IFR platform; the roll rate is fairly slow but adequate. During asymmetric work (simulating a single engine failure) rudder pressures are quite high but easily trimmed out. Engine out performance, particularly at max all up weight, is marginal. Assuming that the aircraft is cleaned up and the dead engine's propeller feathered properly, 220 feet of climb per minute is about as much as you can expect.
The VMC (minimum control speed with one engine inoperative) is notionally the same as the stall, making it fairly difficult to experience one without the other. As stalling the aircraft under normal circumstances is not easy in the first place it should make the aircraft fairly safe in the event of an engine failure... From level flight and slowly bringing the power back it requires a mighty haul on the long travel column - bringing it right back to its stop - before the aircraft stalls. The stall is preceded by an aural warning and buffet, and the aircraft mushes down with no marked break at 62 knots clean.
The sink rate is fairly high - over 1,000 feet per minute - and recovery from a fully developed stall requires 350 to 400 feet. Lowering flap reduces the stall speed and leads to a slightly more marked break and nose drop but in all cases the symptoms are unmistakable.
The 220hp Continentals are as bulletproof as turbocharged engines come. They are well capable of exceeding their 2,000 hour TBO with moderate care. I know from personal experience - I have instructed on Seneca us for more hours than I care to remember.
Back to the start
Returning to the circuit, the speed has to be reduced to below 109 knots before deploying flap or undercarriage. The recommended circuit speed is 100 knots so the best procedure seems to be to lower the undercarriage to introduce some drag and then bring in the first stage of flap downwind. The second stage is lowered when turning onto base leg with the speed bleeding back to 85 knots, then full flap (40 degrees) on finals. The threshold speed is 70 knots and a positive hold off is needed to ensure that the main wheels make first contact. The crosswind limit is some 17 knots, not that high compared to many contemporary aircraft but something most Seneca operators learn to live with.
The mongrel Seneca?
So what can I say? The Mewa is what you might call a 'mongrel' Seneca. It looks like a Seneca, handles like a Seneca: in fact, it is basically a Seneca by another name. The question is: is it good enough to compete with Piper at their own game on what is, after all, also their own playing field?
|
The first Mewas came onto the market when Piper were going through the same black period as the rest of the aviation industry. At that time there really were no other new twin engine aircraft available.
|
The Mewa's slab-like wings and all moving
stabilator are inherited from the Seneca
|
It didn't sell well then, except in Poland, which perhaps could have been expected bearing in mind the market conditions. But will it sell now?
On the face of it, depending on options selected, there is a $200,000 difference in price between the Mewa and the new Seneca V. The Mewa is a capable solid aircraft which would provide training organisations with an aircraft at some 20% to 30% less than the New Piper equivalent, so there may be a market for organisations which want new aircraft built to a specification.
A few private owners might be tempted to buy a new aircraft in preference to a second hand example, but with second hand Seneca IIs and IIIs available for half the price of a new Mewa it is not going to be a easy market to penetrate.
The company also has to do something about improving the paint finish and overall standard of trim in order to compete. Therein lies the problem: simply, you get what you pay for. The Mewa is a solid old design, built by a good and reliable workforce used to producing kit for the military or to a communist standard where the customer was definitely not king.
To compete in the western market the German distributor is going to have to bring the aircraft specification up to the western standard. Coupling this with the requirement to buy in western engines and instrumentation, which leaves only the airframe components being manufactured in Poland, the price differential between the genuine article built by Piper and the Polish equivalent is going to get smaller.
Ok, I admit that it was perhaps a little uncharitable to describe the Mewa as a 'mongrel', a bit of this and a bit of that. With deeper acquaintance I can assure you that, in this context, mongrel should not be interpreted as 'old dog'. Sometimes mongrels inherit many of the better traits of their parents and in most respects the Mewa has achieved this despite the restrictions of its older design.
Basically there is nothing wrong with the aircraft other than minor cosmetics. With a choice of colour schemes, interiors and the availability of almost made to measure configuration, together with a real effort on the marketing side to present a more modern western image, the company deserves some success. Alas, I fear it will be elusive as at present I think the price differential between the new Piper product, the Mewa and second hand examples of the newer Senecas will mean limited marketing opportunities.
PZL M20 MEWA
| Dimensions |
|
| Wing Span |
11.86m |
| Length |
8.72m |
| Height |
3.02m |
|
|
| Weight and Loadings |
|
| Empty Weight |
1,320kg |
| Useful Load (standard) |
750kg |
| Payload (standard) |
490kg |
|
|
| Performance |
|
| Maximum Speed |
194kt/223mph |
Cruising Speed
- at 45% power @ 24,800ft |
168kt/193mph |
Stalling Speed
- flaps retracted
- landing flap |
67kt/77mph
60kt/69mph |
| Rate of Climb (near ground) |
1,500fpm |
Range (45 min. reserve; 45% power)
- standard tanks (352l)
- optional tanks (465l) |
670nm/770sm
990nm/1,140sm |
| Service Ceiling |
25,000ft |
Price
Base price as delivered in UK, including registration and delivery charges, $296,350.
Aircraft as tested including cold weather start kit, full de-ice, DME, dual NAV coms, inter-radio compass, 2 x transponder, autopilot CAFC 150, HSI, additional fuel system $400,000.
Contact
H C Hummelbrunner
Altklosterbergstrasse 31
D-21614 Buxtehude
tel (0049) 04161-713631
fax (0049) 04161-713633
This article was originally published in the October 1997 issue of FLYER.
