Club Styles

[GeeWhizz]

Not sure this deserves a thread to itself but....

I enjoy flying with a different instructor now and again, each with his/her own different experiences to share. Something new may crop up, or an adjustment/improvement to my current technique is revised. However reading many posts here it seems clear that not only do instructors differ in their techniques, but different types of club teach the PPL syllabus in very different ways.

For example there are posts that suggest big FTOs teach us to fly small aeroplanes as if they were airliners applying a commercial slant to everything; RAF clubs teach to fly them like fast jets with oval circuits and a PFL 'pattern'; and smaller schools teach a more recreational style of flying.

Obvious as it seems, these are innate to the school of thought, and most can probably be expected: FTOs perhaps focus on passenger comfort and fuel economy (procedures and cost?), RAF clubs on pilot comfort and concise circuitry (flying suit and ovals?), and recreational flying being focussed on simple fun and adventure. There no 'right' or 'wrong' here nor is this to instigate class wars!

But it came to me that all of these clubs essentially teach toward the same thing (PPL skills test is a defined standard after all), and their students once qualified may progress up the pilotage ladder or even enjoy a PPL forever.

My curiosity is whether these club styles have a significant impact on our effectiveness as private pilots, or even as future professional pilots? If changing clubs does it matter which style we use? I like to think I have a flying style of my own, do you? Do you know what you do differently from others?

I think this is interesting, any thoughts?

[Genghis the Engineer]

But it came to me that all of these clubs essentially teach toward the same thing (PPL skills test is a defined standard after all)

In the very short time I've been an instructor, I've already learned to know who the examiner will be, and find out (ideally from them directly) what they consider to define that pass standard. They vary significantly.

Most clubs have an examiner in-house, or a couple of nearby examiners they usually use. So, in many ways, I find that clubs are teaching to the known foibles of the examiner.

Frankly, this is little different at CPL either. At-least where I did mine, there was a great deal of "habit spotting" because they knew who the examiners were, what their favourite routes were and how they tend to construct a skills test.

Not healthy, to be frank, but it's what happens.

G

[RTN11]

Agreeing with the above - you know you're going to get one of possibly 3 examiners, so you teach to their standards, then brief the student beforehand on anything specific you know they will look for.

I moved from teaching at a club to an FTO. At the club we were left to do what we wanted - to a degree - which was great. We all taught to the same standard, but often taught different methods to achieve the same goal. Now at a larger FTO everything has to be standardised, and I'm in trouble if I teach the wrong method (E.g point and power rather than attitude for speed and power for glide on approach).

I've also met instructors and examiners who see anything other than their method as completely wrong. Often the hot topics are use of carb heat, cct size and shape, approach method, and getting back on track on navigation.

The standards document is there, so all exams should be to the same standard, it's just different examiners will pick up on very small things.

There is a big difference because the student (or customer) is usually very different. An aspirational 18 year old hoping to go commercial should be taught differently than a 40 something who is likely to buy his own tail dragger as soon as he's got his licence. Their flying after the licence will be very different.

[blagger]

Most PPL schools in the UK have no idea of standardisation, FTOs should be standardising their instructors and SOPs etc.. though.

When RFs have to move to ATOs under EASA there will have to be a lot more work by PPL schools to standardise lesson content, documentation, checklists, SOPs and so on.

[GeeWhizz]

All interesting responses above. But Big G, RTN11, blagger, do you have any idiosyncrasies in flying or things that you'd call your flying style?

Edit: for example on local trips I'm a little bull in a big china shop: if it can be done at max rate, max rate it is! (although the aeroplane always remains within its limits). On A to B routes it's more fluency and comfort during departure and arrival I.e a quicker speed in the climb rather than at Vx (lesser ROC), then a straight-in/down wind/x wind as opposed to overhead joins etc)

[thing]

I learned at a military airfield (although I'm a civvy) and found it very useful flying from a fully controlled and busy with big jets airfield. I'm more bothered about flying into a small GA airfield with the sometimes less than great circuit discipline than I would be flying into somewhere like Stanstead.

My instructors were all ex CFS instructors, now involved in various civilian flying jobs from airline pilot to warbird pilot, I obviously haven't anything to compare them to but I guess that I had top class instruction, they managed to get me through in the minimum hours without me feeling in the slightest rushed or under pressure. They also have a wealth of flying experience of all types and can pass on those little tips that are so important.

So I had quite a disciplined ride through the PPL, this has most definitely wormed it's way into my flying style. I always try to fly accurately and it's a matter of personal pride to stick within 50 ft of cruising level (I've flown with guys who wander up and down by 2-300 ft and think nothing of it) and within a couple of degrees of chosen heading.

I guess it doesn't make any difference at all if you don't do any of the above as long as you're safe and get to your destination in a more or less straight line, it's just the way I was taught I suppose.

[Grob Queen]

RAF clubs teach to fly them like fast jets with oval circuits and a PFL 'pattern';


Like Thing, I too am a civvy learning at a busy RAF airfield with fast jets, medium twins and fellow Grobs - even the BBMF pop over occasionally (although I haven't yet flown in teh circuit with them). To be honest, I wouldn't have it any other way.

Our QFIs are all either vastly experienced RAF Pilots or civvy pilots who have spent their entire career teaching RAF student pilots. Our RT has to be crisp and our oval circuits tight, we mostly fly in gro-bags and boots for practicality and comfort. PFL circuit patterns, Emergency Breaks, MRTs. Although i am being taught Nav using a Plog, I know that when I have my licence i'll scribble all over the chart military style - it makes so much more sense! I am also taught to fly accurately to within 50ft of my desired altitude and accurately on my heading. All the club paperwork is tip top and all flying orders have to be read...

My first air experience flight was at Coningsby in a Chippy, so I started this disciplined way and love it; and daresay when I get the freedom of my PPL will continue to fly as disciplined as I have been taught. I have now flown with four instructors, three are serving officers and my main QFI a civilian instructor who has instructed RAF students all his career. They all have their different teaching styles nad yes, they pick up different things. Our CFI is a CFS examiner, the club is small, everyone is relaxed, has fun and looks out for each other. Personally I would hate going to a large, more commercial and maybe less personal FTO. But I guess it comes down to what we are used to, and that there is no right or wrong.

Although I have nothing to compare it with and am not even in possession of that coveted licence (yet) I am sure that with military instructors i'm getting a first class training which will ultimately impact on my future abilities as a pilot

(light the blue touch paper, retire immediately and wait for the flak...:uhoh:.....)

[blagger]

GeeWhizz

The main things I teach but have had conflict with other instructors about are:

SCA for VFR nav off track corrections

Specific checks for each aircraft not generic BUMFFPICHH stuff in aircraft with fixed u/c

Point and power for approach control

Fly the POH approach speeds not made up urban myth rubbish, same goes for flap settings, leaning and other handling issues

Although as an examiner if the candidate safely demonstrates the aim/requirement of the test item, then we have to be open minded and flexible about the method.

[GeeWhizz]

There's no flak coming from my direction! Curiosity killed the cat and all that I suppose.

I know the Lincolnshire triangle rather well as it goes, and as a result have flown with both military and civilian instructors. I was simply musing over the differences in flying style that the different types of club instil, and what your own flying style is. You can have a flying style as a student too you know, please share :)

[thing]

Ah I forgot the other advantage of flying from a mil base, PAR and ILS on tap and free. I took up one of the talkdown guys the other day and flew a real IMC PAR to minimums which he found most illuminating.

[Grob Queen]

Sorry Geewhizz, its only that I have had flak from other ppruners when I mentioned oval circuits and my love of the military way of flying!

My style, mmmm I tend to do what my instructor tells me! But seriously, I do now automatically get in close to the runway when I fly a circuit (which I believe is a military trait). I will be learning the technical PFL "circuit" pattern. Oh yes, I know another different thing I do, I am learning "Initials" as a way of joining the cct rather than always joining in the overhead. I use military acronyms like POB, pax, some times use "Land" rather than "Full stop" when making a full landing. We have to do right hand ccts when using runway 19 to avoid the gliders on Northern. I know I do tend to grip the stick too firmly - in fact my first instructor (and a good friend of mine) when flying the Chippy said that I ahd an "Iron Grip" on teh stick and that I needed to relax more! Now, it depends on whether I am doing something i am comfortable with or not..for instance, now when I taxi I can chat away to my instructor about non-aviation stuff just as I would if driving...

...and always carry my ID card around my neck when flying. We have to wear them all teh time at Cranwell, but also, I make sure I ahev it on me when flying, after I flew to Benson on the BBMF Dakota and on landing realised my ID was at Cgy! :uhoh:

Am I correct in thinking FTOs and civvy clubs do not teach the Emergency Break or MRTs?

[thing]

I think they all come under the general heading of steep turns.

[GeeWhizz]

OK first of all there's nowt wrong with learning the military way. I prefer the 'initial' join, and firmly believe that it should be taught everywhere (although an overhead join is similar, just at a higher alt and descending deadside), and its possibly safer. Now I'll wait for the incoming....!

I dont know about FTOs, but civvy clubs do teach 'steep turns', bearing in mind a C150/152 wont get much more than 60 deg AoB whilst level. C172/PA28 can easily make 60 deg level turn, any further and it's comparable to the 150s. With a controlled semi spiral dive it's possible to hit the 90 deg mark in both, ane a brave man might try. G115s can do it and do it reasonably well; I've seen the operational chaps do their stuff very well indeed.

Not sure what you mean by an 'emergency break'? An unanticipated steep turn to avoid traffic would be taken from the steep turn lesson.

[Grob Queen]

I've thought of another two possible differences. My flying training "Bible" is the Tutor training manual rather than Jeremy Pratt or Peter Thom - in fact my instructor positively discourages me to use the Flying Training Jeremy Pratt book! The other is any "Ground School" and pre flight briefing is very informal and free on the goodwill of the instructor, as our instructors all have day jobs.

It would make sense that MRTs and Emergency Breaks come under the steep turn sessions. I have indeed banked a 115 to 60 deg and continue to practice steep turns, still have trouble getting the attitude and back pressure).

"Emergency break" is yes, an unanticipated steep turn to avoid an aircraft on a collision course, flown with rather less accuracy than a textbook steep turn, its more roll, power, pull and get out of the way....and great fun!!! ;)

Oh, and by the way, this thread is fun - so much so that its taken up the evening which I was indeed going to study PFLs and steep turns!!! :ok:

[thing]

Odd that, I haven't a clue what an initial join is. Don't teach them here, possibly because this airfield isn't a training one and all of our instructors are civs. (now)

[GeeWhizz]

"Emergency break" is yes, an unanticipated steep turn to avoid an aircraft on a collision course, flown with rather less accuracy than a textbook steep turn, its more roll, power, pull and get out of the way....and great fun!!!

More jealousy that you're doing it in a Grob, than our Cessna spammies! :E

Odd that, I haven't a clue what an initial join is. Don't teach them here, possibly because this airfield isn't a training one and all of our instructors are civs. (now)

An initial join is flown through the 'Initial point (IP)' which is generally 3-4nm out 1nm deadside (ish). You fly thorough the IP at circuit height (Typhoon does it at 800' climbing to 1000' on the break) and it becomes a deadside join. The RT is a little different in that you call 'Initial' at the IP and get information from ATC on where all circuit traffic is in the order that you'll meet it, in order for you to plan how to fit in (more relevant in a faster aeroplane). I'm sure Waddington must have an IP...?

Edit:

Oh, and by the way, this thread is fun - so much so that its taken up the evening which I was indeed going to study PFLs and steep turns!!!

I'd still like to hear of others' flying styles though ;)

[Grob Queen]

Tutor training manual, Initials:

"The standard join allows joining traffic to fit into the pattern from a standard position known as the initial point. The IP is situated 2 miles back from the runway just on the deadside of the runway extended centre line. From teh IP, aircraft fly into the cct on the dead side at the intended cct height along a track parallel to the landing runway. Teh aircraft should be far enough on teh deadside to allow the occupants to see the whole of the cct area, including the runway"

So I agree, Initials are safer than an overhead join! Thats another thing, cct height is 800ft rather than the civvy 1000ft.

[GeeWhizz]

So I agree, Initials are safer than an overhead join!! :ooh:

Sweeping statement!!!!

That's probably a Tutor training manual for Cranwell too, as the IP changes from station to station with regard to the aircraft type ;)

They are safer if the aircraft joining is quick and the pilot is on top of her game. An Initial join is very quick in itself. For the slower aircraft and (I'm going say it without offence I hope) older pilot, an overhead join in easier and allows more time to spot other circuit users.

Horses for courses?

Thats another thing, cct height is 800ft rather than the civvy 1000ft.

Sadly again, this is another airfield specific anomaly. Both civil and military airfield use 800, 1000, and even 1500' ccts. :)

[thing]

Nope, as far as I'm aware Waddo doesn't have an IP. We only have big beasties here, their version of a run and break is to join extended centerline about 5 light years out and then spend 4 days on a straight in approach.

Usually while I'm waiting at the hold...:ugh:

Also our deadside is always to the north, so not quite sure how having an IP would work there.

[Grob Queen]

True, but doesn't an Initial join also allow the pilot to see all of the cct? Haven't really flown overhead joins; more straight in or Initials.

lMore jealousy that you're doing it in a Grob, than our Cessna spammies!

If you think doing it in a Grobs good, you ought to try steep turns in our Firefly..truly BRILLIANT!;) I wouldn't want to fly high wing aircraft now. Give me a low wing any day.


I'd still like to hear of others' flying styles though

Me too, i'm intrigued!

[AfricanEagle]

My instructor was an ex WWII Siai Marchetti 79 bomber pilot.

No theory, no standardisation, just pratical inputs on how to fly an aeroplane and good sense on how to arrive and conform to different traffic patterns.

In one word "airmanship".

Big airports with liners, local airfields with club aircraft, grass strips with microlights, as a Pilot you use the proper approach depending on aircraft and place of arrival.

[thing]

An overhead join is supposed to fulfil the same thing, you get a good look at the airfield, signals square and cct traffic. Mind you, if you're approaching somewhere with four runways and they call something like 'Join overhead 2,000ft runway xx right hand' it can take me more than a few seconds to figure out how I'm going to execute it properly.

If I get clearance at ours I nearly always do a base leg join, it just saves time.

[JOE-FBS]

I am privileged as a civilian to fly with a Royal Air Force flying club and don't want the image given by the OP to go unchallenged. I learnt to fly at and have been a member of a RAF club for the last four years and recognise none of what the OP said about RAF flying clubs. Our instructors teach, as far as I can tell, a standard JAR PPL syllabus. The space cadet gliding school with whom (amongst others) we share the airfield is all flying suits and oval circuits but not us. What I do gain from flying with a RAF club is a sense of discipline, safety and comradeship. We wash and fuel our aeroplanes together; keep the facilities in good order together; and every spring get together to give them deep cleans. The flying order book is strict and safe but not unduly restrictive. We have a social gatherings and monthly aviation themed talks.

A big thing I have noticed at my club is the quality of instruction whether from the very experienced or the very young (we have instructors of all ages), it has always been very good. Every time I see a thread here or in the other place about poor training practices whether for PPL or IMC, I notice that I have never seen any of the poor practices described (some of which I have seen at other clubs where I have rented) at my club.

[GeeWhizz]

Also our deadside is always to the north, so not quite sure how having an IP would work there.

Ask one of your instructors to do one with you. Fly a deadside join, be at cct ht at about 3nm out and call 'G-XX Initial' (ATC will know what you're on about), see what ATC say. Abeam the upwind thld break left (around the bomb dump IIRC) onto downwind. Simples!

I wouldn't want to fly high wing aircraft now.

I'm the opposite. Flown Chippies, Bulldogs, PA28s, little Cessnas, and aeros in a ASK21 once... I like them all. I feel that I 'know' what the high wings are doing without thinking about it, and so enjoy them very much.

Big airports with liners, local airfields with club aircraft, grass strips with microlights, as a Pilot you use the proper approach depending on aircraft and place of arrival.

Absolutely! Although I'm not familiar with the Marchetti?

[thing]

I wondered for a second then Joe if you were at my place but when you mentioned washing the aircraft I thought 'Nah'...:}

[GeeWhizz]

JOE-FBS I must apologise if an 'image' was conveyed. It really wasn't supposed to elicit such reaction. I thought it'd be interesting to learn of the way individual clubs impact flying styles.

[Grob Queen]

I am privileged as a civilian to fly with a Royal Air Force flying club and don't want the image given by the OP to go unchallenged.

Hopefully we have not given a poor image of our clubs. Of course we are taught the correct PPL syllabus! Just with military procedures which are pertinent to our airfields.

we share the airfield is all flying suits and oval circuits but not us.

What, pray is wrong with flying suits...eminently sensible, I wear mine not only for comfort and practicality but for safety as well as nomex is fire retardent.

What I do gain from flying with a RAF club is a sense of discipline, safety and comradeship. We wash and fuel our aeroplanes together; keep the facilities in good order together; and every spring get together to give them deep cleans. The flying order book is strict and safe but not unduly restrictive.

Totally agree, that is absolutely in our ethos as well!!

[JOE-FBS]

Nothing wrong with a flying suit, I'm only jealous!

and of course nothing wrong with space cadets either. Thirty years ago I was one. In fact it was in an ATC Kirby Cadet III that I made my first ever solo flight in any form of aircraft (Scampton, April 1982, two minutes!).

[JOE-FBS]

Grob Queen,

If you want to seek opinions on student topics without being abused then the Flyer student forum is a good place to go. There are some people on Prune who give sound advice but there are a lot more who are abusive and / or talk nonsense.

[GeeWhizz]

Hey guys, lets not enter into yet another slagging off of our counterparts be they studes or old-timers :=

The military style of flying is but one of many, to return to my original curiosity perhaps you'd share any of your flying-isms too? Maybe pitching such questions at the extremes (student and liner-old-timer) was incorrect. I'd like to hear from PPLs with a few hours under their belt that have developed a flying style, as well as the student and instructor cadres. Again there are no right or wrong answers to this one. :ugh:

[M-ONGO]

It's annoying for an instructor though GeeWhizz, such as myself. Some of the questions posted on here really make me wonder what some schools/clubs are churning out... No 'slagging off match' or offence intended.

[GeeWhizz]

Understandable MONGO.

But how do you compare the professional civilian flight school to the RF flight school/local club? Are they as I alluded to further back that FTOs are more focussed on procedures and fuel economy?

[M-ONGO]

GeeWizz

What makes you think an FTO is more into procedures or fuel saving than an RF? That's not the case. Just because one may be an RF does not mean it can't churn out excellent quality pilots, and vice versa. Standardisation WITHIN schools is the key element though, for the students sake. As long as we're all teaching 'on the same page' so to speak.

It's reading stories such as taking off with full flap (outside AFM limits) and the like that show poor understanding of aircraft limitations and basic aerodynamics though. I blame the instructors, regardless of hours or years in the job. They are the ones passing on these bad (potentially life threatening) habits.

[GeeWhizz]

What makes you think an FTO is more into procedures or fuel saving than an RF? That's not the case. Just because one may be an RF does not mean it can't churn out excellent quality pilots, and vice versa.

Hmmmm....

Ok. To me it's logical for commercial ops to be as economic as possible(?). Hence my question on its impact on the way we fly. Who am I to question the quality of the pilot at the end!? Nobody. No loaded questions, just a simple interest :)

It's reading stories such as taking off with full flap (outside AFM limits) and the like that show poor understanding of aircraft limitations and basic aerodynamics though. I blame the instructors, regardless of hours or years in the job. They are the ones passing on these bad (potentially life threatening) habits.

I take these things with a pinch of salt really. There has to be some kind of misunderstanding between instructor and student. Surely no instructor would teach such tosh? And yes, PPRuNe-rs will come along with some kind of odd reason/example of when this could be practiced. IMO I'll fly as I've been taught in accordance with the POH (although with my own twang or accent), and if things like this sound plausible I'd discuss it with someone that I trust before considering flying it. Sometimes what is written on these threads can be read differently to what was meant, maybe that's what happened in this case? That said there are some that are inexcusable.

Cheers :)

[Grob Queen]

Mongo (and others),

Of course I trust my instructor! I jsut thought the PFL question may be an interesting one for everyone. Obviously it gives the wrong impression (again:rolleyes:) Obviously I don't take this as gospel, jsut interested in what other pilots of all types think!

I may ask, if i and others like me are going to get slagged off for questions asked, what is the point of PPrune? Genghis may be able to answer that one!!

Well, honestly, i'm not going to bother again.

[Piper.Classique]

Ahh the joys of Ppruning......S'okay, Grob Queen, I thought you got an interesting thread going there. No need to go home in a huff just yet.
Seriously though, I think we all do develop our own style, though it will often change from aircraft to aircraft. I don't fly my supercub and the club DR400 the same way, at all. Oh, and the cub will take off very nicely with full flap :). Also my style is different at my home base, which is a flying club airfield, no atc, mix of microlights, gliders, light a/c to the way I will approach a flight to a major airport with a different mix of traffic, approach, tower, gnd etc. The main thing here is to remember
A) Flying is supposed to be fun. Sure, take safety seriously, but if as a private pilot you don't enjoy your flying then why are you doing it?
B) Your instructor is probably reading your posts and by now has worked out who you are :E

[M-ONGO]

Grob - don't take any offense please. Also, nobody is 'slagging you off'.

Piper Classique - the Grob 115 is not certified for full flap takeoffs, that's the point. You as an instructor wouldnt advocate ignoring the POH now would you?

Flying is meant to be fun AND safe.

[Piper.Classique]

M-ONGO, I was talking about the cub when referring to full flap take-offs. No, I don't advocate ignoring the POH. Yes, flying is meant to be safe. Now, can we all start taking ourselves a little less seriously? Pretty please with choccy buttons on.....:ok:

[GeeWhizz]

To make this a little more constructive, are there any SOPs that do recommend full flap take offs?

PC as your Cub can do it nicely, are there any conditions that dictate when this technique can/should be used? Are there clubs that teach this normally within prescribed conditions?

I have to add that I've not come across it yet. But interestingly, a go around from a short field approach implies adding full power with full flap set. OK so the aircraft is already airborne with an ample trim setting, and unnecessary flap can be retracted at a suitable height/ROC. I would suggest a full flap take off would be hard work with the trim set to the take off position (POH/checklist compliant?).

Just another thought or two :)

[M-ONGO]

GeeWizz

PC as your Cub can do it nicely, are there any conditions that dictate when this technique can/should be used? Are there clubs that teach this normally within prescribed conditions?

It's all aircraft specific. Some types it's approved, others not (as the G115's case) you certainly wouldn't want to try it in a C150 with 40* Flaps!

[GeeWhizz]

Thanks MONGO, learning point for us inexperienced mortal bottom feeders: some aircraft are approved full flap TO.

you certainly wouldn't want to try it in a C150 with 40* Flaps!

Ha ha, can only agree! Also took a 172 up the other day when it was rather windy. With 10* of flap she got off the ground after 50ft! The guy in the RHS said simply 'jeeze...', it was amusing to say the least :D

This was obviously followed by the weather-dictated-mandatory attempt to 'hover' the aeroplane!

[M-ONGO]

[quote] This was obviously followed by the weather-dictated-mandatory attempt to 'hover' the aeroplane [quote]

That's where you need PC's super cub! More like a helicopter on a blowy day. :)

[Piper.Classique]

OK, a super cub is rather an unusual aircraft in some ways. In a full power climb with full flap selected you can hold the stick on the back stop at max gross and the aircraft whilst well on the back of the drag curve will continue to climb, albeit less well than at a sensible speed. Of course, an engine failure while doing this means some hasty readjustment of the attitude is needed:D Also, it isn't best for engine cooling.

Best angle of climb speed gives a seven degree climb out path. Most aircraft the difference between best angle and best rate is so tiny the flight manual doesn't tell you what the climb path is.

Full flap take-off is standard for short field take-off. For really short, this is what you do:

Starting with flaps UP
Power against brakes. As the tailwheel starts to lift, release the brakes, allow the aircraft to start rolling tail up, then pull smartly back on the stick, at the same time pulling full flap (60 degrees) with the left hand. Put left hand back on the throttle. Once off the ground accelerate to a sensible climbing speed. Retract the flaps if you like. You don't really need this for normal operations, as the take-off roll is so short anyway, but it's good for airshows and the like.

This is not in the flight manual, at least not in the one I have got, but as the official flight manual as approved by the CAA bears no relation to the aircraft in any other way (wrong prop, wrong engine, wrong weight) I am not too worried about this :}

I don't teach this to students, this is my aircraft and I don't use it for training. I don't know any clubs using a supercub for abinitio training. (The J3 is a very different bird).

Full flap go arounds require a substantial push against the pitch up when power is added. Either get winding on the trim handle ((26 turns fully nose up to fully nose down) The go-around case will need twenty turns or thereabouts) or retract the flaps to first stage smartish if you don't want to wear out your right arm in compression.

Ok, I will now await incoming. Please remember I am not telling you to do this, it is aircraft specific and I have been flying and tugging with this cub since 1988. I do the maintenance including the last refabric, so I know it pretty well. It is on a normal C of A on annex II, with engineering organisation sign-off for the inspections other than the 50 hours.

This aeroplane is nearly 60 years old. Certification standards and flight manuals have changed over the years, and if it was built today it would probably struggle to meet them. However, a lot of cubs have survived so I expect Piper got it right. I certainly don't propose to buy anything else. In fact, I was asked the other day what I would buy if money was no object, and I didn't really have to think about the answer. If you want to know, I would keep the cub but spend some money on hire fees for exotic types, and expand my horizons with a twin rating and IR. As the money isn't there, I intend to continue touring with the cub, especially since the shiny new transponder should make that a lot easier.

I say again: Flying should be fun
If it isn't why are we paying to do it?:cool:

[M-ONGO]

I don't teach this to students, this is my aircraft and I don't use it for training. I don't know any clubs using a supercub for abinitio training. (The J3 is a very different bird).

West London Aero Club do at White Waltham Airfield. G-WLAC.

[Piper.Classique]

West London Aero Club do at White Waltham Airfield. G-WLACAh, White Waltham. Nostalgia time! I did my groundschool there for CPL. Good instructors, too. Just out of interest, and don't please send me to Lasors, how do they get on with that on annexe II? And how do they manage with the bits and pieces that the instructor can't reach? (Flap lever, mag switches, fuel tap and prolly the trim wheel) In my case with my short legs I can only just get the rudder pedals from the back seat, too.

[M-ONGO]

And how do they manage with the bits and pieces that the instructor can't reach?

Yell! Im not sure how annexe II affects them on the supercub. Who did you're ground school? Brian St.Clair?

[Piper.Classique]

Brian St.Clair doesn't ring any bells. This was way way back in 1989 or 1990. The syllabus still had Loran, and GPS was science fiction. About the time we bought the cub, which wasn't even considered vintage then , just old and cheap. One of the best purchases my then future husband and I made. :)