he preferred training students in the PA-38 because not only is it cheaper to fly from the point of view of the student, he also said it is light and gets thrown around more and therefore requires more from the student pilot resulting in a better pilot after training. The PA-28, being heavier, is more stable so the student doesn't work as much and I assume that means his skills aren't as sharp. Any truth in this?
I follow Piper aircraft on Twitter. A couple of times they've posted "what's your favourite Piper training aircraft" - presumably hoping for a ringing endorsment of the still-in-production PA28.
What they usually get is a string of "The Tomahawk" from random flying instructors from all over the world.
In my opinion a good training aeroplane wants to be...
- Cheap to run, robust and reliable.
- Have no more instruments and controls than are really necessary for the training task.
- Have an excellent view out
- Have handling that makes it difficult to completely f*** things up, but at the same time requires good attention and flying ability to fly well and accurately.
The PA28 and C172, much loved of flying schools tick the first box. The PA38 and C152 come rather closer to ticking the other three as well.
Glass versus dials, as Whopity says, is a bit of a moot point. They both present similar information in a similar layout but glass can arguably present a lot more information and not particularly help a student learning their way into this new and alien environment.
The best training aeroplanes currently in production, for ticking all of the above, are probably microlights like the C42 and EV97 Eurostar. I do agree with Whopity about taildraggers - but there just isn't an in production taildragger that is reasonably affordable as a trainer at the moment.
G