Changing from Warrior to 152?

[biz_fish]

I have a choice of starting my training on a Piper Warrior or a Cessna 152. I will be training for PPL only - no ambition to get Commercial.

a) Please vote your preference so I can get a consensus
b) If I train on one of these, how many hours will I need to swapping type later?
c) Would it benefit me training on both perhaps, (or is that a daft idea?:rolleyes:)

thanks

[172driver]

a) don't think it makes much of a difference, it's choice, really. I'd go for the cheaper one, leaves you more cash to enjoy your flying later :)

b) you'll have to get a checkout on any new airplane anyway (otherwise the club/FBO won't let you fly it) and that should be enough. While Cessnas and Pipers are different, they remain in the same class of spamcan....

c) No. Stick with one type and don't needlessly complicate your life. Now go on and learn to fly :ok:

[Flock1]

I did it the other way around. Trained in a C152 then converted to a PA-28. Took 1.6 hours according to my logbook.

Like someone else has stated, go for the cheapest choice. C152 is a nice plane to learn in, and then once you qualify, you'll appreciate the Piper more.

[Paris Dakar]

I suspect a lot people learn on a C150/152 and move up to a PA28/C172 - I did it that way.

Personally, I'd learn on the Cessna and then make a move to the PA28 - I wouldn't mix the two for consistency reasons whilst you are learning.

Between 1 & 2 hours with an Instructor is usually quite sufficient for the conversion.

[the_daddy]

I did about 50 hours in a 152 before heading back to the UK and am now flying a PA-28... I loved the 152 for it's old charm (It was actually 2 years older than I am!) But when I first got into the PA-28 I could feel the difference in quality.

Granted it's a newer plane with 2 extra seats and has a slightly more powerful engine, but everything just seems to be more robust and in a sensible place (To me)... Also you get a proper throttle and not a plunger!

The only thing I would bring over from the 152 to the PA-28 would be the electric flap selector, that's a nice touch compared to the handbrake style one in the 28.

In answer to your question I wouldn't worry too much about your choice of plane as both are similar, however as 172driver and Paris Dakar have said, once you have chosen, stick to it for your entire training to get some consistency in. Convert once you have the skills necessary and I'm sure it will be a fairly smooth transition.

One question though, why on Earth did they only include one door in the PA-28?! I'm sure there's a sensible answer, but I can imagine a few questions coming my way when I finally take up some friends... I'll look it up!

Good luck with the flying!

[foxmoth]

One question though, why on Earth did they only include one door in the PA-28?! I'm sure there's a sensible answer,
It's easier and cheaper to buid it that way!:hmm:

[trafficcontrol]

I'd have to agree, not only on cost terms, but the C152 is more manoverable, if you can fly the 152 on a navigation exercise and you can be accurate you will find a conversion later on in time to a Pa28 much easier, its a much more stable a/c.


Sam

[smarthawke]

biz_fish

Look at it another way - if you train on the PA28 you won't have to convert to another plane to take more people with you.

The 'lightweight' PA28 easily copes with 3 people and those with the higher all up weight (of which BAFC) have 2 can take 4 without too much problem.

Of course then there is the Dakota which gives you a real 4 seater capability plus luggage, hours worth of fuel and a genuine 135 kts cruise - and they have one of those too!

After a few hundred hours in Cessnas and now flying PA28s occasionally (I have a homebuild to fly for fun!) I do feel the Pipers are a more substantial, 'grown up' aeroplane. Sit in a C152 with an instructor and then try the Warrior and feel the extra width for starters!

PM me for some other thoughts if you like.

[speedbird676]

Go with which ever aircraft you feel comfortable in and can afford. I trained in a 152 and had no trouble. When I got my license I got checked out on a PA28 in under 2 hours and loved it, although it was more expensive.

The only real problem I had with a 152 was the lack of power, not so good considering I was flying around during hot and humid summer days... Also the seats are damn uncomfortable (I ended up logging 35+ hours sitting with the cowl plugs as a lumbar support!).

I found I tended to get much smoother landings in the PA28. The low wing makes for much more ground effect and the landing gear is not as rigid as the Cessna. My additional experience probably helped a bit too though.

I never found the lack of electric flaps a problem in the PA28, the feel of pulling up the big lever with one hand and letting the yoke pull forward in the other helped me get a better idea of what the aircraft wanted to naturally do. Personally I think i'd go for the manual lever now given the choice, especially after I experienced a flap servo failure during lessons!

[acuba 290]

I suspect a lot people learn on a C150/152 and move up to a PA28/C172 - I did it that way.

Personally, I'd learn on the Cessna and then make a move to the PA28 - I wouldn't mix the two for consistency reasons whilst you are learning.

Between 1 & 2 hours with an Instructor is usually quite sufficient for the conversion.


done same! Agree 100%. next day after PPL skill test with C-172 (was whole course with 172) i switched to Piper-28 Archer and after 30 min was already familiar with it. but after Cessna , Piper feels like flying Airliner for me, but i'm still happy that my training was with 172;)

[S-Works]

Fly the 152, there is a reason why they have been one of the most enduring trainers of all time. They are easy to fly but hard to master. They give a good view of the ground which when starting out you will find helps with your nav. On a hot day they are a lot cooler as the wing protects you. And above all they are cheap to fly.

I bought one a year after my PPL and just sold it after putting 1200hrs on the clock and enjoyed every minute. It was a teafull parting but at least I swapped it for another Cessna!

As far as "conversion" is concerned to other types if you can fly a Cessna you can fly a warrior. I have never taken more than a couple of circuits to get the feel of another SEP. Read the POH to understand the numbers and of you go, its not rocket science. People who take a couple of hours to go from 1 152 to a warrior or vice versa were probably marginal in the first place or they are being turned over by the school. My Multi Engine was only the required 5hrs!

[EGBKFLYER]

Having gathered the information from this thread (some of which is more useful than others :oh: ), can I suggest that you fly both and see which you like? I wouldn't buy a car I hadn't driven myself and half an hour in each will tell you enough to know which you prefer. There's no 'right' answer and you'll get a PPL either way - just go for what you would like to fly.

Bose-x, I wish I had your confidence.

[bmoorhouse]

People who take a couple of hours to go from 1 152 to a warrior or vice versa were probably marginal in the first place or they are being turned over by the school.
Bit of a sweeping generalisation verging on arrogancy.

1. Some learn quickly and retain well
2. Some learn quickly and retain badly
3. Some learn slowly and retain well
4. Some learn slowly and retain badly

The type 4s tend to drop off training courses as they are getting nowhere, the type 2s end up being a danger to us all - the 1s and 3s end up being competent (and hopefully good) pilots - speed of familiarisation does not imply depth of understanding. One of the best GA pilots I know took just short of 100 hours to get her PPL and one of the worst did it in two weeks in Florida in a total of 50 hours - don't confuse thoroughness with lack of ability.

[FullyFlapped]

Biz_Fish,

How big are you ? I'd try actually sitting in both before you make your mind up !

FF :ok:

[DenhamPPL]

I'm learning on the 152. Currently 27 hours into my PPL course at Denham.

I was originally going to learn on the PA-28 as there was some concern about the leg/knee/headroom for me in the 152 (it's a tightish fit) but those concerns were unfounded and I find it a super little aeroplane to fly.

I have flown 3-4 hours in a PA-28. Yes there's more room and it feels more stable than the 152 (especially on approach) but I like learning in an aeroplane which requires sensitive handling and rewards accurate flying. The 152 is excellent for Nav exercises too and it's also cheaper per hour at my training organisation (The Pilot Centre).

I intend to complete my PPL on the 152 and then convert to the PA-28 also when I want to carry more people around with me.

Hope this helps

Andy

[S-Works]

I am sorry if my comment seemed arrogant but it is a fact. A current SEP pilot should be able to fly any other similar SEP with little effort.

As certified aircraft they all fly inside a similar envelope and a current pilot should not have a problem learning the subtle differences in a very short period of time. I have just this minute come back from being checked out in a PA32.

Checkout was:

Standard landing, short field landing, flapless landing.

Stall, clean, and turning with gear out and final config.

Speeds and power settings were talked through as we went along and were pretty much standard. Gear up back to 25/25 cruise 23/23, lean. I worked out where the fuel pumps, emergency gear release and landing lights etc were and what all the buttons did from being a CURRENT SEP/MEP pilot.

All in all we were brakes to brakes 30 minutes. It really is not rocket science.

[bmoorhouse]

I am sorry if my comment seemed arrogant but it is a fact. A current SEP pilot should be able to fly any other similar SEP with little effort.

Apology accepted. But it is not a fact it is an opinion - as you say "A current SEP pilot should be able to fly any other similar SEP with little effort". Fly - yes, be familiar, comfortable and fully aware may take a little longer and you need those three to be a safe pilot. Even something as simple as "forgetting" that the PA28 does not have toe brakes and the C152 does could easily bite you on the backside when you need to avoid some dweeb who taxies straight across your path.

Difference of opinion but as always mine is right ;)

[S-Works]

Now I see your point, PA28 does have brakes, only the old Cherokee style used the handbrake...... I guess it does take longer for some people, and I always thought I was a retard, now I am juat plain dangerous.....:cool:

[speedbird676]

The 152 has totally unbreakable landing gear so is well recommended for learning! I reckon they make it out of the same stuff they use to make flight recorders!

If you break the gear on a 152 you get to keep the plane!

[EGBKFLYER]

676 - totally unbreakable MAIN gear - I have seen four nose gear failures in my time and there are many more in the accident reports! All PIO on landing...

[Arrestahook]

Bose-x

"A current SEP pilot should be able to fly any other similar SEP with little effort."

Oh, so going from a C152 to say a Tiger Moth or fast VP taildragger wouldn't take you more than just a couple of circuits then? That I would like to see!

[Say again s l o w l y]

I wouldn't classify a C152 or a Mooney as a "similar" SEP type. I don't think Bose is either.

Going from a 150 to a PA28 isn't difficult. It just takes a bit of practice and a good read of the manuals.

I jump between them upto 6 times a day and I've never had any problems.

[GJB]

I would train on the 152 and convert later. It's nice to have experience flying different types.

[speedbird676]

676 - totally unbreakable MAIN gear - I have seen four nose gear failures in my time and there are many more in the accident reports! All PIO on landing...

Quite agree on that! I only have 50 hours logged and have seen one already! Came across it on the first walkarounds I did by myself and felt like a bit of a tit having to ask my instructor if the nose gear strut was supposed to be completely compressed while parked!

[pulse1]

Arrestahook,

How could you possibly consider a C152 to be "similar" to a Tiger Moth? Similar means any aircraft with fixed pitch, tricycle u/c weighing less than 5700kg and with similar glide performance. eg. a DA40 would presumably be different to a C172 if you want to land in short fields (even the DA40 demo pilot had to go around at EGHA a few weeks ago).

[Say again s l o w l y]

Speedbird, a blown seal or nitrogen loss results in the oleo being "flat", when the nose gear collapses, it's the entire strut giving way leading to the nose of the a/c contacting the ground causing the prop to get bashed.

It's usually caused by people approaching at too high a speed and forcing the a/c down onto the nose wheel instead of going around or holding it in the flare. A very common and expensive occurance!

[Arrestahook]

OK my apologies for the oversight of the word "similar" - but I don't believe any conversion can be successfully achieved in a "couple of circuits"!!

[S-Works]

OK my apologies for the oversight of the word "similar" - but I don't believe any conversion can be successfully achieved in a "couple of circuits"!!


Thats 'co you have a vested interest buddy....... :)

As pointed out I was referring to the standard spam cam rides not the exotic hotships oe classics. Of course a moth requires a level of expertise as would something like the Pitts (even Instructors manage to spread the under carriage............ :ok: )

And if you are going to quote me quote the correct text!!!

<I have never taken more than a couple of circuits to get the feel of another SEP>

And none of the checkouts you signed me off on took that long.... ;)

[Bahn-Jeaux]

Late jump in for me here (as usual) but before starting out on my course, I trialled in both the Cessna and the PA28.
The Cessna was the cheaper option @ £95 per hour but the warrior was the more comfortable aircraft for me so even though I am now paying £20 per hour more, I am happy with my decision.

[biz_fish]

The message I keep hearing through this thread is the PA28 is a bit more expensive to hire and run but is overall the more robust, and roomier and altogether nicer to fly.

The low wing also makes spotting other aircraft easier generally.:)

[biz_fish]

What is the comparative running costs of these 2 aircraft?

It sounds like hire costs might be 15% higher for the PA28. Anything else need considering?

What would (say) a 20% share in each a/c cost?

[Human Factor]

"A current SEP pilot should be able to fly any other similar SEP with little effort."

Oh, so going from a C152 to say a Tiger Moth or fast VP taildragger wouldn't take you more than just a couple of circuits then? That I would like to see!

So would I. Except a Tiger Moth or fast VP taildragger isn't similar SEP. From a C152, I would consider the following as similar (not exhaustive):

C172
PA28 (fixed gear, fixed prop)
AA5A
AA5B
TB9/10
Beagle Pup
T-67A

IMHO, none of the above should require more than a couple of hours for an average PPL to assimilate to from a C152. As soon as you bring taildraggers, retractables or wobbly props into the equation, things start to change.;)

[Sky Wave]

My 2p worth

I was trained on PA28 and have c150 hours on them. I recently checked out on a C172 Diesel. I loved the 172, being able to look straight down is great and I also found the 172 really easy to fly, it's so forgiving and doesn't even get nasty in a full stall, it's lovely. As Bose X said, all that was required was a trip out of the zone, stalls, steep turns, PFL and back in for flapless, glide and normal approach. My landings weren't as nice as I would like, but I'm sure that I'll sort them out once I've done a few.

To give you an idea of cost difference, Solent School of flying charge £140 for the C172, £145 for a Cherokee 140 and £150 for a warrior (all exc VAT).
If I could only fly 1 type then it would be the PA28 because of the greater load capacity, but I just love the 7 hours endurance, no carb icing, no mixture and great visibility of the C172 diesel.

SW