ppl pa38 or cessna 152??

[ashdaman]

hello avatiors

im am very soon staring my ppl, i am wanting to know by all you experienced guys which aircraft would be the better:confused:

a cessna 152 or pa38
pro and cons please thanks :ok:

[iwrbf]

Hi,

I'm not the very experienced person you're looking for, but I do remember doing my PPL training in a C152 quite well.

Although being a quite pedantic person, I was more than once quite happy about the C150/C152s benign behaviour, especially in the solo part.

I've never flown the 38, but it has a reputation as a plane with a quite contrary philosophy in terms of training. The C152 will forgive mostly everything you do with it, you'll have a hard time destroying it: Its stall behaviour is boring at best, you'll have to abuse it with more than one "mistake" to let it spin and it will leave the spin with the proven Chuck Yeager method: Get your hands off and wait.

The 38 on the other hand will teach you to fly more precisely and it will provide some training in switching tanks.

Personally, I would go with the 152. I'm a confessing coward, so the more forgiving airplane is always my friend :-)
This does not mean that I think of the 38 as a dangerous airplane, it had some issues at the beginning of its production, but I have read some very good reviews about it in the past, too.

Kind regards,
Peter

PS: I don't want to start a war on low wing vs. high wing - I think it's more a thing about personal preference than a thing decidable by facts.

[Cessna 172S Skyhawk]

Hello fellow soon to start PPL. I am starting on Saturday 5th Feb

I have done a few hours before but starting properly this time. From asking so many other PPL'ers and professional pilots, at the begining, it does not really matter which aircraft you choose, as from what I have read and what I have been told is that you are learning the basics of flight.

As finances is the main concern for most, the advise I was given was to choose whichever is the cheapest aircraft to learn in. So for example, if you had the choice between a C152 (say £150 per hour) and C172 (say £170 per hour)....they are random hourly rates, then choose the C152, as after 10 hours of flight you will have saved the cost of just over an hour of flying time, and you will still have the same basic knowledge, experience as most other aircrafts.

You will probably see that I am Irish, and prices are a bit more expensive over here than the UK, that is why it makes sence to go with a cheaper aircraft (hourly rate that is) in the begining.

You can always change (if your FTO has other aircrafts) during the course of your flight training as remember, the minimum is 25 hours dual time with an instructor, so there is plenty of time to try other aircrafts.

Hope this helps, would be interested to hear back what you think????

[AdamFrisch]

The "Traumahawk" has a bit of a reputation as a not ideal trainer. I haven't flown one myself, so this is all hearsay. But it could with its T-tail sometimes get in to stalls and subsequent spins that were not easy to get out of. The T-tail, in all designs, has a tendency to get blanketed by the main wing in high AOA situations, which can make the elevator less responsive.

The C152 is a workhorse. It's cramped, but it flies really nicely. Light on the controls - just one big pussycat. You can really mishandle it and it will never bite you. Stalls are a non event and you have to induce wing drop on most of them. Visibility in turns is not as good as the Tomahawk, but then you do see the ground. Swings and roundabouts.

Not having flown the Tomahawk it's unfair of me to compare, but I personally think the 152 is a lovely aircraft to fly. You can't go wrong with it.

[A and C]

Both are very good training aircraft, I have instructed on both types with about 700 hours on the C152 and 900 on the PA38.

The first thing I would say is that you can forget all the horror storys about the PA38 that are normaly trauled out on these forums when someone asks about it, all the issues with the fin and stab have been adressed by AD's years back.

Both aircraft will teach you all you need to know at this stage, the only advantage in the teaching department goes to the PA38 in that it spins propperly and won't recover without the propper recovery action, the C152 falls out of the spin if you let go of the controls!

The main advantage the C152 has is that it is a much more "sorted" aircraft from an engineering point of view and due to this and better avalability of parts is more likely to have a better servisibility rate.

The engineering issues are why I decided to buy a fleet of C152's rather than the PA38 that I prefer to fly myself.

[IO540]

Avoid the Tomahawk. It's a piece of crap. Unstable, so you will not want to fly it for any distance when you get your PPL. All of them are ancient (they only made them for about 2 years c. 1980) and for some reason most of them are in a bad condition. They have a crap elevator trim, crap seals around the "hatch" (so they fill up with water during rain) and tend to have leaky filler caps so you get loads of water in the tanks.

The C152 is a lot more flyable, trims well, easy to land, and if you want a budget solution you will be able to do bimbling in it after the PPL.

[Pace]

the only advantage in the teaching department goes to the PA38 in that it spins propperly and won't recover without the propper recovery action, the C152 falls out of the spin if you let go of the controls!

A and C

I thought you didnt do such horrendous things like spinning nowadays?
Isnt everything now recover before it actually happens?

Modern student on first solo comes to a grinding halt halfway down the runway " Sorry sir he says to the instructor I was recovering from an incipient takeoff " :ugh:

Spin the TerrorHawk with headsets on and some good beaty music in the background and you can watch the tail twist in time to the music used to be the case.

Pace

[ashdaman]

well thankyou very much for the replies, it looks like the cesnna is winning hands down
i have heard that the pa38 was more of a handfull than the cessna but thought it would be better experiance overall

[mad_jock]

ashdamn I am a pro PA38 instructor but to be honest it really makes no difference which one of them you choose both fleets these days are all old and tired.

Its all in the person sitting next to you that makes the real difference.

If you have a talent limited gimp of an instructor in either type of plane your not going to have a good time of it.

Personally I would suggest if you have the same instructor for both you have an hour in each and see which you find best for you.

But if the instructor doesn't like PA38's its not worth it. There is nothing worse than an instructor that ****'s themselves at the thought of teaching in them. You will end up doing silly fast speeds down approach just to make the instructor feel safe and the benifits you do get from learning in a PA38 will be lost on you because the instructor won't let you see them.

persoanlly I love instructing in the PA38 and think it produces a better pilot at the end of training but there will be quite a few that will disagree with that.

[BobD]

Ashdaman, I am in the same boat (aeroplane ?) as you. I am off to Florida for my PPL training in just over a month, and I had to decide which type to train on. I chose the PA28, and the main reason is that being a four seater, I hope I can go flying with more than 1 buddy at a time if/when I get my PPL !

Maybe not the most scientific of reasoning, but practical, I hope

[ashdaman]

mad_jock....
a think a agree with you with the pa38, as much as the cessna is forgiving i would rather be more confident in control also i want to be a better pilot when i come out of my ppl even if it take more hours

thanks :ok::ok:

[W2k]

BobD

PA38 and PA28 aren't much alike, though. I did my PPL on PA28s and you would have to look hard to find a more forgiving airplane. Practically lands itself.

[A and C]

My students learn to recover from spins, it's not hard to do.............just misunderstood by a lot of instructors.

[ashdaman]

YouTube - Piper tomahawk spin (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1RZDCMO1gk)
check this out

[mary meagher]

Ashdaman, go for the 152. Don't think that flying a Tomahawk will translate into a Warrior, it won't! The 4 seat Warrior would be a very good choice if you can afford it; it is a stable platform for instrument flying. I rather think that's what they use at Oxford Aviation Academy, or whatever they call the place now, to train airline pilots.....

BUT there are a lot more Cessnas around than Tomahawks. Choose the flying school with the best maintenance. Ask questions. Look for sagging oleos, etc. Usually the bigger the fleet, the better the maintenance. Find an instructor you like, this is vital.

WHATEVER you chose, don't chop and change. Get proficient on a single type, comfortable, do all your basic training on that type, solos, cross country, instrument flying. Then type conversion. Say, taildragger, that's fun. Twin if the wallet can take it.

But of course I prefer flying without an engine. .......!

[Mickey Kaye]

Neither aircraft hold any demons so don't believe any of the hanger gossip.

Personally I feel the PA38 is a better training aircraft but the C152 is a better aircraft. I have about 200 instructing in PA38 and 500 in the C150/2

The PA38 has a bit more shoulder room and needs more finesse to fly accurately. So I would argue it produces a student of a higher caliber. But you won't go wrong with either.

[foxmoth]

I would ask if these are your only choices?
If so, I have instructed on both and has been said by others who have instructed on both, they both have pros and cons, the Cessna is more cramped and has only one fuel selection (apart from OFF), so does not teach fuel management or the habit of turning on/off the fuel pump (again, not fitted being high wing). Pa38 has better vision out of the cockpit, but poor for teaching trimming as it does not have the trim changes due to the T-tail (good when you have learn't but IMHO, bad on a trainer) both have AWFUL control response. both are forgiving and easy to fly (in spite of what some say) - though this is not necessarily a good thing in a trainer (dH82a MUCH better here - forgiving, but hard to fly well, so made good pilots).

If you really want to learn to FLY rather than just drive round the sky, find a school that teaches on the Robin! Even better, Bulldog or Chippie!!

[FlyingStone]

They have a crap elevator trim, crap seals around the "hatch" (so they fill up with water during rain) and tend to have leaky filler caps so you get loads of water in the tanks.

It depends on the specific aircraft, I've never had to drain more than few drops of water from Tomahawk's tanks. As far as elevator trim goes, I agree, it's not perfect - but training aircraft in my opinion shouldn't be: training aircraft should teach student pilot how to fly, not how to make it as simple as possible. One could simply install a two-axis autopilot and do all cross-country flights during PPL with AP engaged - I'm sure you would gain lots of experience this way... I know that real-world flying after PPL is different and you can use GPS as a primary means for navigation and lots of other stuff, but student pilot should how to fly and navigate with and without GPS. Transferring this to elevator trim, one should be able to fly straight and level in any aircraft, despite its elevator trim system isn't the best out there - besides, the trim system in PA38 isn't that horrible, it just requires a bit more frequent retrimming than C172, but that surely doesn't mean that one hand must be on the trim wheel during cruise :cool:

I have to agree with mad_jock, PA38 is a great aircraft that will ease the transition to any other aircraft, since the aircraft doesn't "fly by itself", comparing to for ex. C172. One of its downsides is speed, which reduces the workload of a student on cross-country flights - but truth be told, C152 isn't any better.

Pa38 has better vision out of the cockpit, but poor for teaching trimming as it does not have the trim changes due to the T-tail (good when you have learn't but IMHO, bad on a trainer) both have AWFUL control response.

I always thought the trimming "problem" on Tomahawk is due to being a spring-type in contrast to C172's trim tab system. I am ready to be proven wrong of course :)

[IO540]

Yes, the PA38 has crap trim because it isn't a trim tab. It is a spring pushing against the yoke (in effect). The mechanism is guaranteed to not work properly after a while, whereas a trim tab will always work so long as it is properly lubed because it works aerodynamically.

I've drained about five beakers of water from a PA38, before any avgas started coming out - after a rainy night.

Another gripe I have with the PA38 is that it is a waste of the punter's money because they are paying for flight training in a plane which they are highly unlikely to be flying post-PPL. There are very few of them on the rental scene, and very few people choose to fly them for real even when they can rent one.

The idea of getting a PPL is to learn to fly and fly from A to B (unless you want to do aeros, etc). It is not to throw money at becoming a better pilot in the abstract.

And the hardest thing will be to do map+stopwatch nav in a less than stable plane. Why not just remove the yoke and fly with the trim and the pedals? It is perfectly possible and would make one an even better pilot :)

I've got about 20hrs in a PA38... never again.

[Pace]

Reality is they were so unpopular that flight schools could buy them for next to nothing and work the things.
Cheap purchase high profits.

I had a couple of flights in one and wasnt impressed one bit.

The C150/152 I trained in many moons ago at least are honest aeroplanes in their own right.

I still enjoy flying low and slow in a C150 They are good camera ships and give a good view down. Frankly none of these small trainers will light the fires not even the PA28.

Old look at the Grumman Tiger which has bags of character speed and good handling.

No aircraft are cheap for training so for the money i would expect something a bit more clean and tidy than the terrorhawk which just doesnt do it for me!

Maybe a bit more modern???

Pace

[ashdaman]

after all these replies in which i am very great-full, im again struggling to chose a aircraft
i am going to Liverpool airport on Sunday so i can see what they would recommend and possible try both out...

[Pilot DAR]

A and C "post #5", and Mad Jock "post #9" have provided excellent advice.

Don't select a trainer becasue it has a reputation of being easy to fly, select one which will challenge you a little. In terms of challenging you a little, the Tomahawk is a bit better that the 152. It demands being properly flown, but rewards you well when you do. I flew two different Tomahawks for many hours out of a 1600 foot turf runway, for more than a year. Though it demanded proper technique, it was very rewarding. They are not as good as the highwing aircraft in rough, short runways, or in confined areas (snowbanks).

The 152 is fine, but if you are proficient in a Tomahawk, you will be better prepared to transition to other types more quickly.

If you end up with the 152, and can choose between 152, and 150, take the 150 over the 152. It will do everything the 152 will do, and you'll have better opportunity to practice short/soft field landings with the greater flap extension available.

As said, take instruction in Tomahawk and 152/150, and with the same intructor if you can arrange it.

[A and C]

IO540's comments about the PA38 have some basis in truth but I think that it is likely that he was flying a very badly maintaned example, the fuel filler caps are standard Piper and should take in no more water tha any other Piper filler cap.

The trim is spring bias but had the trim clutch been maintaned?

[Genghis the Engineer]

I've reasonable hours in each, and on net would go for the PA38 to learn in, but there's nothing wrong with either.

Why pick the PA38?

- It's a little harder to fly accurately, so tends to teach better handling habits
- View out is excellent
- It has two fuel tanks so teaches fuel management, whereas the Cessna only has one, so it's just on/off.
- Stalling is whilst safe, less benign than the Cessna - I think that this makes for a more useful learning environment.
- They tend to be a bit less popular in most flying clubs, so the availability should be a bit better.
- A little more shoulder room.
- No pre-flight climbing on ladders to check the fuel.


If in doubt however, toss a coin - learning to fly in either should be a good experience.

G

[Gertrude the Wombat]

- No pre-flight climbing on ladders to check the fuel.
Some Cessnas have a step so the ladder isn't needed.

[foxmoth]

The idea of getting a PPL is to learn to fly and fly from A to B (unless you want to do aeros, etc). It is not to throw money at becoming a better pilot in the abstract.

IMHO that is a very sweeping statement - certainly I wanted to learn to fly because I liked being in the air and the though of flying from A to B has never particularly appealed! In my experience, most people do not really know what they want when they start learning, apart from that they like flying and I have found an aircraft that actually handles nicely encourages more than one that does not and as they progress most DO want to be a better pilot, though often the schools will not have a scheme that shows how to do that - hence the popularity of things like UHs Advanced PPL course. This does not really include those who set out to do it as a carreer, but opportunities there are fading these days.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Some Cessnas have a step so the ladder isn't needed.

If you're as short as me, sadly you still usually need the ladder.

G

[ashdaman]

hi guys

been down to liverpool today had a chat with a few clubs and instructors and have gone with Liverpool flying club,

i have also gone with the PA-38 and done a quick trial lesson in to, thanks for all the advice its been greatly absorbed............
ill keep your posted on my progress

[mad_jock]

Personally I think you have made the right choice with aircraft type. I don't know anything about the school.

Enjoy and let me be the first instructor to tell you to get the sodding exams done!!!!! and have you got a bloody medical yet?

[Pilot DAR]

Have fun Ash.

Your instructor will be demonstrating the sensitiviy in pitch control the Tomahawk has while on the takeoff ground roll, and how it varies with airspeed. Unlike the C 152, the high tail of the Tomahawk has it out of the prop wash, and thus it responds only to airspeed, as opposed to propwash earlier in the takeoff roll. This is perfectly fine (other on really rough ground) as long as you are prepared for it, and don't get a "pilot induced ocsillation" going.

A gentle touch on the controls, and a keen eye for the attitude of the aircraft on the ground at all times, will keep you in good form....

[ashdaman]

thanks guys,
Mad_jock medical is getting booked tomorrow, im excited about the whole concept now

[KeesM]

Quote:
- No pre-flight climbing on ladders to check the fuel.
Some Cessnas have a step so the ladder isn't needed.


Some people are tall enough to check the fuel without a ladder or the step. But they tend to have more bumps on their heads. :ouch: