Piper Tomahawk or Cessna 172SP for GFPT Completion?

[ckaine]

Hi All,

I am getting back in to completing my licence after a few years of 'very limited' time in the air (less than 2 hours a year in total).

I have around 45 hours with approx 4 solo in mostly Jabirus, I only have a couple of hours in GA aircraft at this stage. As I am now looking at completing my PPl/CPL I have decided to go down the GA path. I also don't think it will be much more expensive than going with the RAA option first as I already have the required number hours, just have to get up to speed and cover off a couple of things.

I have the choice of a Piper Tomahawk at around $220 and hour dual or a Cessna 172SP for $290 an hour dual. I am not sure which option to go with. Obviously, the Tommy is cheaper, however I am not sure whether this will end up being the case overall. I'm thinking that the Cessna will be able to do a couple more circuits in an hour as well?

Seeing as though getting my GFPT is just a matter of getting fully back up to speed and getting a couple more hours solo time I am wondering which aircraft I'd be best to go with.

I'm guessing that the Tommy won't be overly suitable for doing my NAV's in either?

I would really appreciate any advice you might have for me.

Cheers,
Chris.

[Seabreeze]

Suggest you use the C172 if you can afford the extra $$$.

It is faster so that it is less wind-affected doing cross country flights.
It is heavier so less affected by turbulence.
From memory it will perform better at higher altitudes giving you flexibility for cross country flights.
It has 4 seats so you get experience in an aeroplane that can carry passengers, giving you confidence to take pax once qualified.

good luck! Seabreeze

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Same old debate....
The Tommy's better for learning how to recover stalls properly:E,
High wing pilots will find the transition to low wing aircraft easier when it comes to landing.

[GoodbyeGA]

Go with the 172SP, that way you get the G1000 Avionics Suite - you feel like real airline pilot.

[ckaine]

Ha, very true (not that I have any interest in being an airline pilot).
It's also the year before they introduced G1000 so it's got the traditional gauges which is more appealing to me anyway.

[PA39]

Doesn't really matter mate.....depends on the $$$

[Tinstaafl]

Go with the cheapest. The money you save can be used for more flying later.

[sixtiesrelic]

If you're going to be a commercial pilot, check out all the charter operators.
You wont find too many Pipers in the bottom of the fleet and that's where you're goung to start.
Cessna is the way to go.
Yeah I know... Pipers are nice, BUT operators go for Cessnas and you'll have to pay when you're broke to get some hours to become Cessnafied, because the operators'll want you to have enough hours on 'em to be comfortable.
Seen it often.

[Tinstaafl]

He's going for his GFPT. Aircraft type experience while training for a CPL for a possible career down the track isn't particularly relevant at this stage. Go for the cheaper aircraft while you can.

If anything a decent instructor is more important.

[solowflyer]

The cheapest machine you can find is the best, at the end of the day bum in the seat is all that counts. Who cares if it is slower or does not have digital this and LCD that. Worry about faster and more complicated systems later in your training and save the coin for more flying.:ok: Don't let flying schools pull the wool over your eys and NEVER pay in advance.

[eocvictim]

For the GFPT its simple really. Cheapest you can get.

You need a little compromise on the PPL but $290 is a bit rich. There is no reason to be spending more than $240/hr for a warrior and they're more than adequate for nav ex. CPL, well I'm not touching that; I have my preference but each to their own and what ever you can get your hands on really.

At the end of the day the only people I've seen struggle with different single engine pistons at CPL level were pretty hopeless anyway. Personally I put that down to poor instruction rather than a lack of ability.

[mcgrath50]

How hard is the transition from Piper to Cessna? I have done the other way and it wasn't that big of a deal, I certainly would pay $70/hour less and make the transition if I could.

[Old Akro]

I'd do a shandy of both. I think flying multiple types helps your experience.

[The Bunglerat]

Traumahawk?!? Ughhhh... :yuk: :yuk: :yuk:

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

There is no reason to be spending more than $240/hr for a warrior

Yes there is.

You won't find a school that will hire one out with an instructor for that rate.:}

PS Not one that you'd probably want to be more than 3' off the ground in anyway.:}

PSS Which is about how far you are off the ground when it's not moving.:}:}:rolleyes:

[eocvictim]

There are good warriors for hire at $205/hr. I still use them to take family on Jollies. They're not as fancy as some but they get the job done and I certainly dont see an rational reason for using anything else.

[Tee Emm]

They're not as fancy as some

Meaning they are just a little bit airworthy?:ok:

[eocvictim]

That or everyone else is getting ripped off by polished turds. When I was training I wanted to pay for a plane not its paint job.

[Lodown]

Doing a 2 hour nav, you'll never get lost in a Tomahawk. After an hour, you can still see your departure point. In terms of number of circuits, I don't think there's much of an issue. You'll get close to the same number in either a/c. If you have an instructor/operator who considers your pocketbook and not just his/her own, then that would be the way I'd go.

[Nose wheel first]

Go for the Tommie and save some bucks.... you'll need them later on.

I did my entire PPL (except for a couple of flights in a 152) in a PA38, navs and all..... was a great little plane to fly. I transitioned to the 172 before I started my CPL.

As previously mentioned, a good instructor will make more difference to you now than the aircraft you fly.

Take the Tommie now and the 172 later.

[KING PIN]

I would have to agree with Nose Wheel First. I am presently doing my training in a Tomahawk. and I will be transferring to a 172 when i start my CPL.

[Lodown]

Hey 60's relic...

Yeah I know... Pipers are nice,...

Maybe in the turboprop range....but Tomahawks....really?????

[Super Ord]

I've instructed in both, just stick to the knitting, as an ab inito trainer, the tomahawk is by far surperior to the 172. Save some dollars on your training, and then spend it closer to your cpl by doing some advance training in a 182 or similar.

[baron_beeza]

The Tomahawks weren't about when I did my training.
I have worked on them for many years now and done a few hundred hours flying them.

I cannot think of any aircraft I flew as a trainer that does the job better.

They are a brilliant aircraft and I cannot understand why you are considering the C172.

The savings can go towards another rating later on.....

If you are lucky you may be able to stay away from 'Brand C ' products. Nothing wrong with Warriors and Archers later on.

I am not repeating this from bar talk, but from 30 years as a LAME, ..A Commercial pilot for many years and listening to owners....
There is a reason why some aircraft have to be charged out at a higher rate.

Go for the cheaper rate, and fly the better aircraft. A Win /Win in my books.

Let us know how you get on.

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

There are good warriors for hire at $205/hr.

Considering we are talking about GFPT training, the student will be spending at least four times as much time under instruction as they will solo.

If that's the DUAL hire rate and not just the pvt hire, please feel free to let everyone know where they are.

Nothing personal, but I seriously doubt it is.

PS Love those schools that are charging for the aircraft,
then an instructor (some at a per day rate),
then a fuel surcharge,
then a terminal nav charge,
then landing fees,
and then, and then, and then, and so forth......:rolleyes:

[brad_nz90]

172 defiantly time on a cessna is so valued especially when trying to get that first job compared to a traumahawk

[baron_beeza]

Hmmm, interesting comments.

To me the original question was a no-brainer.
It just goes to show what a diverse community the aviation industry is.

I have only ever heard about 172 time being better as far as the first job goes in recent years. With the arrival of Indian students claiming that they need the Cessna time.
I can only imagine Brad, and perhaps some of the others have been about in recent years only.
In my experience, going back well over 30 years... the Tomahawk was designed as an easy to maintain, operate and fly, training aircraft. A role it excelled at in all aspects.

The C172 in comparison is a Landrover type aircraft, a good utility machine that can perform any number of roles and tasks. To me it is debatable how they perform in some of them.
I have many hours in both types.. and would fly either at any time. Undoubtedly the Tomahawk is far cheaper to operate. I spend hours maintaining both types, - there is no comparison....... the Piper is a dream to work on.

We are talking training and training aircraft, to me that leaves just the one contender.
The original post mentions nothing about getting a flying job, he just wants to get current... go on and get a PPL and then perhaps a CPL.

It will be interesting to see which type he decides upon.

[RadioSaigon]

To me the original question was a no-brainer...

Concur. In my training pretty much flew Traumahawks all the way to PPL, then went out and flew every damn thing I was allowed to until I got to the 'business end' of the CPL training -when I went back and flew Traumahawks again.

They certainly make your money go that much further, and they are designed and built for that very (training) purpose. Mugs call suggesting otherwise IMO.

[c100driver]

172 defiantly time on a cessna is so valued especially when trying to get that first job compared to a traumahawk

Valued by who? Sound like a line from a flying school to me!

The PA38 is a good little trainer. Time on both will produce a better well rounded experienced pilot than just flying one type!

[desert goat]

And if you really do want cessna time in your book for a job, why not save some money now, fly the traumahawk, then later you can put the money you saved into getting your CSU/RG on a 210? Best of both worlds, and despite what some might have you believe, transitioning into a 210 ain't rocket science.

[LeadSled]

Folks,
Strangely enough, in all the years I was GA instructing, I never taught students to fly a C-172 or a PA -XX ( fill in preferred digits) or a Beech whatever, I just taught students to fly aeroplanes.
Tootle pip!!

[Chrisdt]

I just saw a Piper Tomahawk on auction on bidbuyandfly.com that sells for R110 000 or that would be more or less $16 000 US. I saw that some of you have flown a Tomahawk in this Thread. Can anyone tell me more about this kind of piper and if it is a good plane compared to for instance a Cessna 152?

[empacher48]

I did a fair bit of my flying in the PA-18. Still think it is the best Piper ever built too.

These fancy Pipers and Cessnas now with computerised this and electrical that and get you from A to B at the speed of light are getting people further and further away from the enjoyment of flying.

My suggestion is to fly whatever you want to fly because you enjoy flying it!!

[baron_beeza]

Nothing wrong with a good Piper Tomahawk. - Just have a thorough engineers report done to determine the SB status.
The undercarriage is now available in 4 options so you really want to know what you are getting, or seeking. (The 4th option is an illegal blend, of nose gear components)
Basically they come as 5"....., 5" with internal rod stop. The 3rd type is the 6" which should have the rod stop. And option 4 is the one you needn't bother with.
Some have oil coolers, some don't. The engine tends to run far too cool anyway so it is often best to have the engineer address that also.
The O-235L2C runs much better when hot, eliminates much of the leading issue. Leaning is a requirement also if you are the only operator of the machine.

There is a good Yahoo Forum for Tomahawk owners. The guys are very helpful.
23 litres per hour and very quick and easy maintenance should return a really viable hourly rate. Depreciation is not an issue.