Piper Tomahawk or Cessna 172SP for GFPT Completion?
I've instructed in both, just stick to the knitting, as an ab inito trainer, the tomahawk is by far surperior to the 172. Save some dollars on your training, and then spend it closer to your cpl by doing some advance training in a 182 or similar.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: ChCh NZ
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Tomahawks weren't about when I did my training.
I have worked on them for many years now and done a few hundred hours flying them.
I cannot think of any aircraft I flew as a trainer that does the job better.
They are a brilliant aircraft and I cannot understand why you are considering the C172.
The savings can go towards another rating later on.....
If you are lucky you may be able to stay away from 'Brand C ' products. Nothing wrong with Warriors and Archers later on.
I am not repeating this from bar talk, but from 30 years as a LAME, ..A Commercial pilot for many years and listening to owners....
There is a reason why some aircraft have to be charged out at a higher rate.
Go for the cheaper rate, and fly the better aircraft. A Win /Win in my books.
Let us know how you get on.
I have worked on them for many years now and done a few hundred hours flying them.
I cannot think of any aircraft I flew as a trainer that does the job better.
They are a brilliant aircraft and I cannot understand why you are considering the C172.
The savings can go towards another rating later on.....
If you are lucky you may be able to stay away from 'Brand C ' products. Nothing wrong with Warriors and Archers later on.
I am not repeating this from bar talk, but from 30 years as a LAME, ..A Commercial pilot for many years and listening to owners....
There is a reason why some aircraft have to be charged out at a higher rate.
Go for the cheaper rate, and fly the better aircraft. A Win /Win in my books.
Let us know how you get on.
There are good warriors for hire at $205/hr.
If that's the DUAL hire rate and not just the pvt hire, please feel free to let everyone know where they are.
Nothing personal, but I seriously doubt it is.
PS Love those schools that are charging for the aircraft,
then an instructor (some at a per day rate),
then a fuel surcharge,
then a terminal nav charge,
then landing fees,
and then, and then, and then, and so forth......
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: ChCh NZ
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, interesting comments.
To me the original question was a no-brainer.
It just goes to show what a diverse community the aviation industry is.
I have only ever heard about 172 time being better as far as the first job goes in recent years. With the arrival of Indian students claiming that they need the Cessna time.
I can only imagine Brad, and perhaps some of the others have been about in recent years only.
In my experience, going back well over 30 years... the Tomahawk was designed as an easy to maintain, operate and fly, training aircraft. A role it excelled at in all aspects.
The C172 in comparison is a Landrover type aircraft, a good utility machine that can perform any number of roles and tasks. To me it is debatable how they perform in some of them.
I have many hours in both types.. and would fly either at any time. Undoubtedly the Tomahawk is far cheaper to operate. I spend hours maintaining both types, - there is no comparison....... the Piper is a dream to work on.
We are talking training and training aircraft, to me that leaves just the one contender.
The original post mentions nothing about getting a flying job, he just wants to get current... go on and get a PPL and then perhaps a CPL.
It will be interesting to see which type he decides upon.
To me the original question was a no-brainer.
It just goes to show what a diverse community the aviation industry is.
I have only ever heard about 172 time being better as far as the first job goes in recent years. With the arrival of Indian students claiming that they need the Cessna time.
I can only imagine Brad, and perhaps some of the others have been about in recent years only.
In my experience, going back well over 30 years... the Tomahawk was designed as an easy to maintain, operate and fly, training aircraft. A role it excelled at in all aspects.
The C172 in comparison is a Landrover type aircraft, a good utility machine that can perform any number of roles and tasks. To me it is debatable how they perform in some of them.
I have many hours in both types.. and would fly either at any time. Undoubtedly the Tomahawk is far cheaper to operate. I spend hours maintaining both types, - there is no comparison....... the Piper is a dream to work on.
We are talking training and training aircraft, to me that leaves just the one contender.
The original post mentions nothing about getting a flying job, he just wants to get current... go on and get a PPL and then perhaps a CPL.
It will be interesting to see which type he decides upon.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: turn L @ Taupo, just past the Niagra Falls...
Posts: 596
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by baron beeza
To me the original question was a no-brainer...
They certainly make your money go that much further, and they are designed and built for that very (training) purpose. Mugs call suggesting otherwise IMO.
172 defiantly time on a cessna is so valued especially when trying to get that first job compared to a traumahawk
The PA38 is a good little trainer. Time on both will produce a better well rounded experienced pilot than just flying one type!
And if you really do want cessna time in your book for a job, why not save some money now, fly the traumahawk, then later you can put the money you saved into getting your CSU/RG on a 210? Best of both worlds, and despite what some might have you believe, transitioning into a 210 ain't rocket science.
Folks,
Strangely enough, in all the years I was GA instructing, I never taught students to fly a C-172 or a PA -XX ( fill in preferred digits) or a Beech whatever, I just taught students to fly aeroplanes.
Tootle pip!!
Strangely enough, in all the years I was GA instructing, I never taught students to fly a C-172 or a PA -XX ( fill in preferred digits) or a Beech whatever, I just taught students to fly aeroplanes.
Tootle pip!!
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: South Africa
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tomahawk
I just saw a Piper Tomahawk on auction on bidbuyandfly.com that sells for R110 000 or that would be more or less $16 000 US. I saw that some of you have flown a Tomahawk in this Thread. Can anyone tell me more about this kind of piper and if it is a good plane compared to for instance a Cessna 152?
I did a fair bit of my flying in the PA-18. Still think it is the best Piper ever built too.
These fancy Pipers and Cessnas now with computerised this and electrical that and get you from A to B at the speed of light are getting people further and further away from the enjoyment of flying.
My suggestion is to fly whatever you want to fly because you enjoy flying it!!
These fancy Pipers and Cessnas now with computerised this and electrical that and get you from A to B at the speed of light are getting people further and further away from the enjoyment of flying.
My suggestion is to fly whatever you want to fly because you enjoy flying it!!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: ChCh NZ
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nothing wrong with a good Piper Tomahawk. - Just have a thorough engineers report done to determine the SB status.
The undercarriage is now available in 4 options so you really want to know what you are getting, or seeking. (The 4th option is an illegal blend, of nose gear components)
Basically they come as 5"....., 5" with internal rod stop. The 3rd type is the 6" which should have the rod stop. And option 4 is the one you needn't bother with.
Some have oil coolers, some don't. The engine tends to run far too cool anyway so it is often best to have the engineer address that also.
The O-235L2C runs much better when hot, eliminates much of the leading issue. Leaning is a requirement also if you are the only operator of the machine.
There is a good Yahoo Forum for Tomahawk owners. The guys are very helpful.
23 litres per hour and very quick and easy maintenance should return a really viable hourly rate. Depreciation is not an issue.
The undercarriage is now available in 4 options so you really want to know what you are getting, or seeking. (The 4th option is an illegal blend, of nose gear components)
Basically they come as 5"....., 5" with internal rod stop. The 3rd type is the 6" which should have the rod stop. And option 4 is the one you needn't bother with.
Some have oil coolers, some don't. The engine tends to run far too cool anyway so it is often best to have the engineer address that also.
The O-235L2C runs much better when hot, eliminates much of the leading issue. Leaning is a requirement also if you are the only operator of the machine.
There is a good Yahoo Forum for Tomahawk owners. The guys are very helpful.
23 litres per hour and very quick and easy maintenance should return a really viable hourly rate. Depreciation is not an issue.
