Any Aussie have a thought on this?

Typerated,

Had I flown the Winjeel as my basic trainer, I'm sure I would have failed the basic flying course! Instead I squeezed through 1 FTS on the CT4, and enjoyed the Winjeel later on as a Forward Air Controller.

Lovely handling characteristics, really nice. Strong as a horse. Just that tailwheel was a bitch (sometimes).

The Prentice was as strong as a horse and after the Tiger Moth a first class basic trainer

The BT is one of the easiest airplanes I have ever flown. It’s utterly predictable, and telegraphs its intentions easily. It is dramatically easier to fly than a T-6/SNJ. I’m not sure that’s a good thing though, because a lot of the stuff you get away with in a BT would kill you in a T-6, Mustang or even a T-28.

Trained on the 28 and thought it a pussy cat, a Chippy with a bit more power, though any aircraft can bite and kill if you try hard enough.

The Winjeel in post #81 is a lot like the piston Provost, but with a 450-hp radial under the bonnet. As has been said before, an easy aircraft to fly, but took a lot of effort to fly well. I never had any problems with the tailwheel, and a solo at 18 years old and 11.5 hrs shows that it was dead easy to fly, and I can state with no chance of contradiction that I did NOT fly it well.

I had heard the RAAF thought it too stable and wanted it redesigned - ended up being shorter to solve this

The only change to the Winjeel that I'm aware of is moving the fin/rudder forward on the fuselage as the prototype was almost impossible to get into a spin.

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....cb4fc232a9.jpg
https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....6455b9491a.jpg


A piston Provost I saw at a airshow in about 1957 at RAAF Mallala which was designed by Polish engineer Henry Millicer when working for Percival, he emigrated to Oz and designed the locally produced Victa, which in CT4 form became a RAAF trainer. Any idea why the Provost was in Oz, supporting RAF test work perhaps?


https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....630596fad8.jpg

Thanks - that what it was!

Interesting undercarriage on the Percival, wheels inboard of the struts like it was going to be retractable?

It would have groundlooped even faster if they had been on the outside.

The Marchetti was a great trainer for the Irish Air Corps for years. It was tricky to get the landing right at flare height and a lot of people were cut pre solo, after that you had a reasonable expectation of getting through the course .

From the Airco DH.6 to the Hawk, each trainer was chosen to prepare the next generation of fighter pilots for the aircraft they will eventually fly. Any pilot will tell you, more frequently with advancing age, that their trainer was the most difficult to fly, and that modern pilots don't realise how easy they have it. I remember my first Sqn QFI telling me that I would never become a proper Tornado pilot because I didn't fly the Hunter, and that the Hawk was too easy.

What matters above all else is the quality of the instructor.

Agree with you there, having the right tools at hand is a big help.

One maybe the best and most knowledgeable person around. If they are unable to impart that knowledge in a simple manner the student can absorb, they shouldn't be instructing of course. A decent instructors course would weed it out. .As we all know, there is a great deal of psychology involved when instructing, to help attain the results required The same applies to Captaincy and CRM. IMHO.