Your favourite/most suitable training a/c
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,214
Likes: 0
From: S Warwickshire
I'd have a serious look at the new diesel Robin DR400:
Low fuel costs (~£7/hr)
Robust engine, water cooled doesn't mind PFLs circuits etc.
2+2 configuration, so difficult to overload 2-up
Good handling and visibility
Against:
Cost of new plane over £100k
Needs hangarage
Overhaul at 1000hrs (will probably increase)
Not spin approved
If you can get 500hrs a year over 10 years I think the financial bit would be favourable
Low fuel costs (~£7/hr)
Robust engine, water cooled doesn't mind PFLs circuits etc.
2+2 configuration, so difficult to overload 2-up
Good handling and visibility
Against:
Cost of new plane over £100k
Needs hangarage
Overhaul at 1000hrs (will probably increase)
Not spin approved
If you can get 500hrs a year over 10 years I think the financial bit would be favourable
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,214
Likes: 0
From: S Warwickshire
Well, yes, as it happens ....
But mainly the tailwheel variety.
My club has a Robin, but unfortunately its not used for ab-initio. It is however the most popular club aircraft.
I'd personally like to see an updated version of the Chipmunk for PPL training, though early instruction in a tandem cockpit may be more difficult (I've not tried it).
I think the C150s and PA28s out there do quite a good job, and its the cheap secondhand market that keeps a lot of the smaller clubs going.
...Surprised this topic hasn't raised more debate and opinion, maybe its all been said before.
But mainly the tailwheel variety.
My club has a Robin, but unfortunately its not used for ab-initio. It is however the most popular club aircraft.
I'd personally like to see an updated version of the Chipmunk for PPL training, though early instruction in a tandem cockpit may be more difficult (I've not tried it).
I think the C150s and PA28s out there do quite a good job, and its the cheap secondhand market that keeps a lot of the smaller clubs going.
...Surprised this topic hasn't raised more debate and opinion, maybe its all been said before.
Thread Starter
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
From: london
Surprised this topic hasn't raised more debate and opinion, maybe its all been said before.
mark, perhaps not much ego mileage in this one!
everyone seems to like robins.
i flew a dr450 many years ago, whats the difference between this and the 400?
mark, perhaps not much ego mileage in this one!
everyone seems to like robins.
i flew a dr450 many years ago, whats the difference between this and the 400?
Thread Starter
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
From: london
ok i am sort of in agreement but dont forget your starting a flying club so money comes into it unfortunately
minmum maintenace bills
maximum flying time
would these a/c be right
c152s a bit cramped and a bit old but i like them.
what about these new plastic a/c
minmum maintenace bills
maximum flying time
would these a/c be right
c152s a bit cramped and a bit old but i like them.
what about these new plastic a/c
Jet Blast Rat
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
From: Sarfend-on-Sea
Cessna 152s - cheap, easy to fly safely, difficult to fly well, so the perfect trainer. Can spin. Robin HR200/120s - similar operating costs, a dream to fly, just handle like a real aeroplane, stick, good view. Can't spin though.
I like the DR400, but have only flown the Regent which is too expensive.I find it a little heavy on the stick and complicated to operate (who threw the switches at the panel?) and needs 3 hands to taxi well.
I like the DR400, but have only flown the Regent which is too expensive.I find it a little heavy on the stick and complicated to operate (who threw the switches at the panel?) and needs 3 hands to taxi well.
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 889
Likes: 0
From: Australia
"The new plastic aircraft" tend to be quite expensive to buy I think, certainly more so than the 1960's to 1980's airframes that most flying training organisations use. I wonder whether the fibreglass and carbon fibre airframes now being designed, will last as well as aluminium airframes have?
If by plastic aircraft you mean Diamond Katanas, they are pleasant (easy?) to fly, they are spinnable, and they have excellent performance (e.g. climb rate on hot days). Students seem to like them, and they have a good useful load. But they are expensive to repair, and are more prone to tail-strikes on landing than other makes - they do need to be flown, as opposed to stalled, onto the runway.
I liked the Robin 2160 quite a lot, but like all French aircraft anyone over 180 cm in height will be resting against the canopy...
On the plus side one does need to use the footrests to fly accurately, which is good for a basic trainer.
If by plastic aircraft you mean Diamond Katanas, they are pleasant (easy?) to fly, they are spinnable, and they have excellent performance (e.g. climb rate on hot days). Students seem to like them, and they have a good useful load. But they are expensive to repair, and are more prone to tail-strikes on landing than other makes - they do need to be flown, as opposed to stalled, onto the runway.
I liked the Robin 2160 quite a lot, but like all French aircraft anyone over 180 cm in height will be resting against the canopy...
On the plus side one does need to use the footrests to fly accurately, which is good for a basic trainer.
Jet Blast Rat
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 2,081
Likes: 0
From: Sarfend-on-Sea
I'm 186cm and find a Robin200/120 has plenty of space! You're right about the rudder though - interesting when I check out an instructor.
Some colleagues of mine are looking at buying a shared a/c, to use themselves and lease to a club. Originally assuming they would get a PA-28, they realised that for the same money as to buy a basic used Warrior they could put a deposit on a 4-seat Diamond TDi. Assuming about 350 hours per year use (modest for a club aircraft) the fuel savings would pay the finance costs. So I would say a new composite aircraft is possible.
Some colleagues of mine are looking at buying a shared a/c, to use themselves and lease to a club. Originally assuming they would get a PA-28, they realised that for the same money as to buy a basic used Warrior they could put a deposit on a 4-seat Diamond TDi. Assuming about 350 hours per year use (modest for a club aircraft) the fuel savings would pay the finance costs. So I would say a new composite aircraft is possible.
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 10,804
Likes: 1
I have limited knowledge on the finance side of things but have had to deal with the maint in a 3 aircraft school.
C150 under powered and cramped
C152 cramped
C172 Expensive for a ppl but has a bit more room
All the cessnas have good parts availablity and there is good knowledge base of engineers out there who can fix them. Costs are pretty low which is why you see so many of them. Gear is very good at absorbing student landings.
Robins good size and handling spares a bit more expensive. Engineering knowledge base reasonable. FI's need to protectthe geat though
Pipers. Again good engineering base uk wide spares can be had pretty quick.
PA28 roomy but to stable. Low engine sizes are powerfull enough for 2 up no probs Fuel selector in daft place though. Under carrage needs looking after by the FI
PA38. Crap trimmer, very cheap, bad reputation, handels very well, roomy, all the controls the FI can get to without major hassels. Gear is very good.
Katana. Like flying a hairdryer. Good viz, pain in the backside for getting old or less nimble students into. Its plastic so hard to fix if it gets bent. Problems with brakes in the past. Handels ok but has no spirit.
IN all i would go for the PA38 for cost ease of fixing and pax comfort. Has a bit of spirit about it. And can handel 7 hours a day 7 hours a week of teaching circuits with no problems.
MJ
C150 under powered and cramped
C152 cramped
C172 Expensive for a ppl but has a bit more room
All the cessnas have good parts availablity and there is good knowledge base of engineers out there who can fix them. Costs are pretty low which is why you see so many of them. Gear is very good at absorbing student landings.
Robins good size and handling spares a bit more expensive. Engineering knowledge base reasonable. FI's need to protectthe geat though
Pipers. Again good engineering base uk wide spares can be had pretty quick.
PA28 roomy but to stable. Low engine sizes are powerfull enough for 2 up no probs Fuel selector in daft place though. Under carrage needs looking after by the FI
PA38. Crap trimmer, very cheap, bad reputation, handels very well, roomy, all the controls the FI can get to without major hassels. Gear is very good.
Katana. Like flying a hairdryer. Good viz, pain in the backside for getting old or less nimble students into. Its plastic so hard to fix if it gets bent. Problems with brakes in the past. Handels ok but has no spirit.
IN all i would go for the PA38 for cost ease of fixing and pax comfort. Has a bit of spirit about it. And can handel 7 hours a day 7 hours a week of teaching circuits with no problems.
MJ
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 10,804
Likes: 1
Yes there is a mainspar limit.
But if you get one with a reasonable life left in it, it will giveyou years of service. The other thing I forgot to add is that the internal trimmings can get pretty beat up in the PA38. And are very expensive to replace. Its a very basic trainer which does the job it was intended for.
Also as well I prefer the low wing trainers for teaching circuits and it also makes it alot easier refueling and checking the fuel contents on turn around. This really comes into its own when you have pulled the short straw and have 8 hours flying to do that day all 30 min trial flights.
MJ
But if you get one with a reasonable life left in it, it will giveyou years of service. The other thing I forgot to add is that the internal trimmings can get pretty beat up in the PA38. And are very expensive to replace. Its a very basic trainer which does the job it was intended for.
Also as well I prefer the low wing trainers for teaching circuits and it also makes it alot easier refueling and checking the fuel contents on turn around. This really comes into its own when you have pulled the short straw and have 8 hours flying to do that day all 30 min trial flights.
MJ
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 3,077
Likes: 1
From: Oop North, UK
Cessna and Piper
Both to me are designed to drive the People inside with minimum interference from the "Pilot". As for the Pa38, how can a trainer that needs so little trimming be a good trainer.
Robin is nice and a combination of 2 seaters - Aero/Non aero would be good.
Cap10 even better apart from cost.
Both to me are designed to drive the People inside with minimum interference from the "Pilot". As for the Pa38, how can a trainer that needs so little trimming be a good trainer.Robin is nice and a combination of 2 seaters - Aero/Non aero would be good.
Cap10 even better apart from cost.
Joined: Jan 1999
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 899
Likes: 42
From: Slowly decaying (disgracefully)
It's pretty hard to beat the Bulldog or Cap10 for handling, general "niceness" and "pilot appeal". Close behind are: Cub, T67, Pup and Citabria/Decathlon.
C152s may be relatively cheap but they lack the "razzle" I believe is needed for todays market, PA28s are probably better and not much more expensive.
There seem to be 3 groups of people who want to learn to fly: those doing it as a career step, those doing it because they have always wanted to learn and can finally afford it, and those doing it for business. Each group needs something different. Probably the ideal fleet is a mix:
- C152s for the cheap end,
- PA28s for those who want something a little smoother, believe aeroplanes should sit on their wings rather than hang from them (or need more leg/head/shoulder room),
- Arrows and Senecas as natural steps from the PA28s,
- Bulldogs for those that enjoy nice handling,
- Citabrias and Cubs for those who believe aeroplanes should point skyward when on the ground.
... oops. I've accidentally described the fleet where I'm normally based
HFD
C152s may be relatively cheap but they lack the "razzle" I believe is needed for todays market, PA28s are probably better and not much more expensive.
There seem to be 3 groups of people who want to learn to fly: those doing it as a career step, those doing it because they have always wanted to learn and can finally afford it, and those doing it for business. Each group needs something different. Probably the ideal fleet is a mix:
- C152s for the cheap end,
- PA28s for those who want something a little smoother, believe aeroplanes should sit on their wings rather than hang from them (or need more leg/head/shoulder room),
- Arrows and Senecas as natural steps from the PA28s,
- Bulldogs for those that enjoy nice handling,
- Citabrias and Cubs for those who believe aeroplanes should point skyward when on the ground.
... oops. I've accidentally described the fleet where I'm normally based
HFD