PDA

View Full Version : Best aircraft to learn in?


newfoundglory
19th Jun 2011, 16:58
Is this a bit like picking a flying school/club, you should try a few before you decide? Any thoughts or points on good aircraft?

Scalper
19th Jun 2011, 17:05
you should try a few before you decide?

don't think that a new student pilot would be able to make such a decision

Jan Olieslagers
19th Jun 2011, 17:21
If indeed you can afford the luxury of choice, rather spend it on selecting a suitable instructor. Hard enough, that, for a newbee. Leave the choice of plane - and many more - to her/him.

Genghis the Engineer
19th Jun 2011, 17:33
I agree with Jan.

Apart from anything, there are very few training aeroplanes that are genuinely not good for learning in - and those which exist, are very rare for obvious reasons - why should the schools buy them?

If you are very tall or short, there are a few you might wish to avoid - but if the instructor is okay, and you can fit in the aeroplane okay, pick whatever's cheapest.

G

PAPI-74
19th Jun 2011, 17:46
C172 SP every day of the week.
Good fuel flow, easy to fly, stable, 180hp injected engine, good vis (for a high wing).

Have a trial flight in a PA28 or 38 too if they are handy. But, as has been said, your instructor and school is the main concern. Look for recommendations as some will be tricky, some will be naff.

PompeyPaul
19th Jun 2011, 21:19
2nd hand space shuttle

IO540
19th Jun 2011, 21:23
Best plane to learn in is the one which you want to be flying afterwards :)

rodan
19th Jun 2011, 21:36
Something that doesn't remind you of a clapped-out Ford Cortina. You may have to do some searching.

newfoundglory
19th Jun 2011, 21:39
Would love to own a nice C180, and would like to learn in a taildragger. But they are expensive to buy, hard to find, and not many schools use them anyway.

Genghis the Engineer
19th Jun 2011, 21:50
Something that doesn't remind you of a clapped-out Ford Cortina. You may have to do some searching.

..... until you find a good microlight school !

G

FirstOfficer
19th Jun 2011, 22:13
Still a PPL student here, but managed to try a few a/c, and out of all of them I prefer the TB10. :E Did 10 hours of PPL training on the TB10 and I only wish I could have carried on with the same type of a/c, unfortunately I moved and none is available for training at my local aerodrome.

Genghis the Engineer
20th Jun 2011, 06:11
You can learn on a permit aeroplane if you sole-own it.

I'd argue learn on microlights if you want to fly microlights, and the NPPL(M) is an inefficient route to SEP/SSEA. However, the minimum hours to convert from NPPL(M) to NPPL(SSEA) is very small so that option is readily and cheaply available for anybody who has significant hours in 3-axis microlights in the UK.

Microlights are absolutely not an efficient route the JAR-PPL(SEP), you get 10% of your P1 hours off, up to 10 hours! Frankly this is daft, since anybody with 100hrs PiC of 3-axis microlights really should not not 35 hours to get a PPL(SEP); you can improve your value for money by getting the night qualification within that 35 hours.


G

CruiseAttitude
20th Jun 2011, 11:57
I learned to fly in a Cessna 152. On one day a C152 was not available, so I had the lesson in a very old 1960's PA28 with a trim handle in the roof, ASI in MPH and of course the handbrake flaps and I really did not like it. I was happy to be back in the 152 on the following lesson, although this was prob. just a case of a student pilot flying something that he was not used to.

All these basic SEP aeroplanes are quite like for like I think, although I've heard the Piper Tomahawk is a good trainer, however a bit like Marmite.

First flight post PPL was my check flight in the Cessna 172S (180hp) which I found to be a natural progression from the C152, my 'differences training' was just over an hour.

I did my IMC rating in a C172P (160hp), it did not really feel that much different to the S model, maybe slightly less right boot requred on climb out, but still a suprisingly capeable a/c (ok you Cirrus and TB20 pilot's are prob. laughing at me for saying that:p).

ADB25
20th Jun 2011, 12:27
I have heard that high wing aircraft tent to be more stable then low wing, so could help you in the early stages of flight training. However saying that I am learning in a Cherokee 140, its been bashed around a bit so is a bit of challenge and has the 'handbrake flaps' and trim in the roof, but other than that im finding it great fun!

Good luck

dublinpilot
20th Jun 2011, 12:43
Best plane to learn in is the one which you want to be flying afterwards

+1 (plus 10 charactars for post to be long enough).

Shortypops
20th Jun 2011, 13:17
Flew a PA28 first 15 hours of PPL (hated it), switched schools and finished up flying Flight Designs (love them). It's a stick control not a yoke, might be weird at first but it feels so much more natural, at least thats my opinion. Flight Design CTSW - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_Design_CT)

Where I'm from its hard to find schools who use these planes. Another downside is the Flight Designs are 2-seaters, so I'm forced to rent C172s when I have more than one friend along for the ride. But I did hear they are coming out with 4-seaters in 2013!!

Genghis the Engineer
20th Jun 2011, 13:45
The Flightdesign CTSW and (slightly older and slower but very similar) CT2K are microlights in the UK, rather than LSA as in the USA (both categories are basically national-only).

There are some excellent schools in the UK training for the NPPL(M) in the CTSW - I've no personal link apart from getting on well with their CFI, but MSA at Damyns Hall is one such, and very well regarded.

G

IanPZ
20th Jun 2011, 19:09
Currently learning, and I was advised as follows:

"Sit in it, make vroom vroom noises, look around, and ask yourself if you think you would be comfortable/happy spending the next 40+ hours being stressed in that plane"

But in all honesty, the advice was sound, and was to imagine whether I wanted to spend a whole load of time in it, and whether I felt relaxed, claustrophobic, safe etc.

Whilst I am sure its true that you can learn in most things, I was told you are more likely to stick through to the end of the training if you like the aircraft you are sitting in, and less likely if you get up on a dreary day and think "I don't want to spend the next hour or two rattling around in that old rustbucket.

That is why I have ended up in microlights. And whilst Ghengis is right that its not an efficient way to get to a full PPL, that didn't matter much for me day 1. If during the process I get a yearning to change, I will, and if not, then not.

(and no, I am not loaded, and therefore free from making those kind of decisions. I just know what gives me a greater chance of sticking with things when it gets stressful).

newfoundglory
20th Jun 2011, 20:08
Okay, well lets put it another way - the cheapest aircraft I can learn in is a C152. I have had a few trial lessons here and there but only in P38s. Club now only has C152s, C172s or PA28s

if you had a choice between high wing or low wing which would you choose (Cessna vs Piper). My understanding is that low wing aircraft don't experience as much crosswind on the ground and glide better. Not saying this is a good or bad thing.

RTN11
20th Jun 2011, 20:17
Tiger Moth, surely

thing
20th Jun 2011, 20:19
I'm doing my PPL and I've learned mostly in 172's. I've flown the 28 a few times and it's definitely more sluggish (172 and 28 both 160hp) but also seems less 'twitchy'. Can't say I've noticed a difference in crosswind landings but then I'm no expert. I would imagine the 28 would float a bit more because the wing is closer to the ground, but that's just a guess on my part.

The 28 is definitely easier to fly because it's docile (or rather dociler than a 172........) but then I wouldn't want to fly one out of a smallish grass field. It stops OK though. You have the visibility issue, 172 is poor in a turn but then you can see straight down, 28 has good vis but you see wing when you look down. 172 has two doors, 28 has one etc.

Looking at the figures there's nothing in the glide, my POH says 10 miles from 6,000 ft at 75 kts for both of them. Don't forget they don't run on rails, book figures are by test pilots with new a/c.

I flew the 152 to do my incipient spin part of the syllabus and I must admit it felt like a toy compared to the other two. Nothing wrong with it though, flies perfectly well and if I was flying into/out of a small strip I would take it 'cos it stops on a tanner.

Try them both.

Pilot DAR
20th Jun 2011, 21:44
book figures are by test pilots with new a/c

Oh, were it to be so! It seems that some of the "older" book figures were determined by very optimistic marketing department pilots. I have found several occasions to prove them wrong. Later manuals are much much better, as the authorities figured out that they must demand it!

That said, presupposing that the book figures are correct, the type of pilot and age of aircraft are not relevent. Many of the design requirments specify that they "must not require unusual pilot skill attention or strength" - so any pilot should be able to achieve the same result, and a few pilots perhaps do even better...

If the aircraft is "airworthy" (thus eligible for a C of A), it is in a condition which conforms to it's "type design" and therefore will perform as the book says it will.

To return to the original theme, the most gentle, stable trainer might not be the best plane to perfect your flying skills, That's why the Cessna 150 is a better trainer than the 182, or the Tomahawk better than the Lance for training. If an aircradft is too easy to fly, it won't demant that you learn how to fly well.

You'd like to learn to fly well, and have broad skills. Don't look for the easy way to fly, look for the well mentored challenge....

Sir George Cayley
20th Jun 2011, 21:55
As usual ask a simple question and get complex answers:) Ah Pprune dontya jusluvem.

My take on your question is to start small. Which type is down to you and how comfortable you are with the training establishment.

I started on a C150 which now seems like a toy, but then was a challenge.

All the advice above is good; the metal comes second the people you learn from first.

Sir George Cayley

Genghis the Engineer
20th Jun 2011, 22:41
Okay, well lets put it another way - the cheapest aircraft I can learn in is a C152. I have had a few trial lessons here and there but only in P38s. Club now only has C152s, C172s or PA28s

if you had a choice between high wing or low wing which would you choose (Cessna vs Piper). My understanding is that low wing aircraft don't experience as much crosswind on the ground and glide better. Not saying this is a good or bad thing.

I gave a presentation at a Test Pilots symposium in San Diego a few years ago, about testing we'd done on the C150 and C152.

My colleague asked for a show of hands (of an audience of about 200 current and retired test pilots), how many had logged one or both of those types for flight training?

About two thirds of the audience put their hands up.


The C152 is a simple, well made, well designed, easy to fly training aeroplane. A very many excellent pilots have trained on it (and, doubtless, some pretty mediocre ones to be fair!).

Absolutely nothing wrong with it - carry on, and enjoy learning to fly on a very effective little training aeroplane.

If you switch to something more complex or glamorous later, that's equally fine - but you are highly unlikely to regret learning on the 152.

G

Kengineer-130
21st Jun 2011, 00:26
I completed all of my basic PPL training in a trusty little C150, and flew the aerobat version as well, & renewed last year on the PA28. Out of the two (im my limited experience), the Warrior cruises faster but handles more heavily, the C150 was much more "fun" to fly, and could be spot landed/ short/soft field operated with ease :ok: I loved the 40° of flap on the 150 as well, the approaches you could make were almost vertical it seemed.

Sillert,V.I.
21st Jun 2011, 06:19
The Cessna versus Piper debate has been ongoing for right around 50 years, and has yet to be resolved. :) I think the Pipers are too easy to fly.

If we're talking PA-28's then I'd agree with you - but IMHO the PA-38 is a very good trainer which ticks all the boxes and is an excellent platform for teaching slow flight, stalling & incipient (& real) spins. But I'm biased since I did most of my PPL & IMCr on the type.

It's a shame that wing life issues have effectively stopped anyone investing in the remaining fleet - I expect you'd be lucky these days to find one that looks as good as that 'clapped out old cortina' mentioned earlier.

vanHorck
21st Jun 2011, 08:56
Find the best possible school with either Cessna or Piper so that you learn on something "normal" (152/172, 38/28).

The instructor is far more important than the brand of plane

ADB25
21st Jun 2011, 12:20
You'd like to learn to fly well, and have broad skills. Don't look for the easy way to fly, look for the well mentored challenge....

Certainly the quote of this thread!:ok:

riverrock83
21st Jun 2011, 15:47
I've had the privilege of starting my training in a bolkow junior and then moved onto a SA bulldog just as I was reaching first solo level in the bolkow (aircraft was becoming permanently unavailable). A couple of weeks ago I did an unexpected set of circuits in a pa28 (I was just there to watch but I'm not going to say no to "would you like a go") and was able to transfer what I'd learnt to fly for some ok (far from perfect) circuits.
Did first solo yesterday in bulldog :)
I found the bolkow not great ergonomically but great visibility and I learnt to be very careful as it's a fairly fragile aircraft. Also wouldn't be good if you are large as the cockpit is quite cramped! Great fun but nowhere near as much fun as the bulldog which is more complex with its constant speed prop and injection engine but also aerobatic capable...
Compared to both, pa28 felt sluggish, especially in roll,with poorer visibility. I'm told they are pretty much indestructable and I'd like those extra seats in the back...

IO540
21st Jun 2011, 16:09
The trouble with threads like this is that everybody will throw in their favourite plane :)

Like I said, try to think of why you are learning to fly.

If you want to just tick the "learnt to fly" lifestyle box, as many pilots do, then go for the cheapest option.

If you want to learn to fly to go places, see Europe from the air, etc, then think about what kind of plane you want to fly afterwards, and try to learn in that. Because if you do that, you will come out with a PPL and about 50 hours on the type, and nothing beats time on type for safety and confidence.

The problem with a C150 is that it is a really basic plane, mostly in poor condition these days, and it takes a hardened passenger to want to climb into one. And flying alone is a sure recipe for giving up ASAP... You certainly won't be pulling any birds with a C150 :)

Sillert,V.I.
21st Jun 2011, 17:16
If you want to learn to fly to go places, see Europe from the air, etc, then think about what kind of plane you want to fly afterwards, and try to learn in that. Because if you do that, you will come out with a PPL and about 50 hours on the type, and nothing beats time on type for safety and confidence.

Following on that line of thought, is there anything to stop you (other than cost!) from doing your entire PPL in something like a PA44/BE76 if that's your ultimate aspiration? If so, what implications would it have for the EFATO/PFL part of the syllabus?

Not suggesting this as a way forward for the OP - just curious.

newfoundglory
21st Jun 2011, 17:45
I'm not suggesting it, but could you in theory do all/part of your PPL in a twin?