Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions
Reload this Page >

Piper Tomahawk or Cessna 172SP for GFPT Completion?

Wikiposts
Search
The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

Piper Tomahawk or Cessna 172SP for GFPT Completion?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 18th Jul 2010, 08:31
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: World
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Piper Tomahawk or Cessna 172SP for GFPT Completion?

Hi All,

I am getting back in to completing my licence after a few years of 'very limited' time in the air (less than 2 hours a year in total).

I have around 45 hours with approx 4 solo in mostly Jabirus, I only have a couple of hours in GA aircraft at this stage. As I am now looking at completing my PPl/CPL I have decided to go down the GA path. I also don't think it will be much more expensive than going with the RAA option first as I already have the required number hours, just have to get up to speed and cover off a couple of things.

I have the choice of a Piper Tomahawk at around $220 and hour dual or a Cessna 172SP for $290 an hour dual. I am not sure which option to go with. Obviously, the Tommy is cheaper, however I am not sure whether this will end up being the case overall. I'm thinking that the Cessna will be able to do a couple more circuits in an hour as well?

Seeing as though getting my GFPT is just a matter of getting fully back up to speed and getting a couple more hours solo time I am wondering which aircraft I'd be best to go with.

I'm guessing that the Tommy won't be overly suitable for doing my NAV's in either?

I would really appreciate any advice you might have for me.

Cheers,
Chris.
ckaine is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2010, 09:06
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Sydney
Posts: 289
Received 13 Likes on 8 Posts
Suggest you use the C172 if you can afford the extra $$$.

It is faster so that it is less wind-affected doing cross country flights.
It is heavier so less affected by turbulence.
From memory it will perform better at higher altitudes giving you flexibility for cross country flights.
It has 4 seats so you get experience in an aeroplane that can carry passengers, giving you confidence to take pax once qualified.

good luck! Seabreeze
Seabreeze is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2010, 09:15
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hollister, Hilo, Pago Pago, Norfolk Is., Brisbane, depending which day of the week it is...
Age: 51
Posts: 1,352
Received 31 Likes on 9 Posts
Same old debate....
The Tommy's better for learning how to recover stalls properly,
High wing pilots will find the transition to low wing aircraft easier when it comes to landing.
MakeItHappenCaptain is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2010, 10:19
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Aus
Age: 16
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Go with the 172SP, that way you get the G1000 Avionics Suite - you feel like real airline pilot.
GoodbyeGA is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2010, 10:37
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: World
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ha, very true (not that I have any interest in being an airline pilot).
It's also the year before they introduced G1000 so it's got the traditional gauges which is more appealing to me anyway.
ckaine is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2010, 10:52
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Queensland
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Doesn't really matter mate.....depends on the $$$
PA39 is offline  
Old 18th Jul 2010, 22:15
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Escapee from Ultima Thule
Posts: 4,273
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Go with the cheapest. The money you save can be used for more flying later.
Tinstaafl is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2010, 00:11
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 374
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If you're going to be a commercial pilot, check out all the charter operators.
You wont find too many Pipers in the bottom of the fleet and that's where you're goung to start.
Cessna is the way to go.
Yeah I know... Pipers are nice, BUT operators go for Cessnas and you'll have to pay when you're broke to get some hours to become Cessnafied, because the operators'll want you to have enough hours on 'em to be comfortable.
Seen it often.
sixtiesrelic is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2010, 01:12
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Escapee from Ultima Thule
Posts: 4,273
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
He's going for his GFPT. Aircraft type experience while training for a CPL for a possible career down the track isn't particularly relevant at this stage. Go for the cheaper aircraft while you can.

If anything a decent instructor is more important.
Tinstaafl is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2010, 03:09
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: cloud9
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The cheapest machine you can find is the best, at the end of the day bum in the seat is all that counts. Who cares if it is slower or does not have digital this and LCD that. Worry about faster and more complicated systems later in your training and save the coin for more flying. Don't let flying schools pull the wool over your eys and NEVER pay in advance.
solowflyer is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2010, 05:17
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
For the GFPT its simple really. Cheapest you can get.

You need a little compromise on the PPL but $290 is a bit rich. There is no reason to be spending more than $240/hr for a warrior and they're more than adequate for nav ex. CPL, well I'm not touching that; I have my preference but each to their own and what ever you can get your hands on really.

At the end of the day the only people I've seen struggle with different single engine pistons at CPL level were pretty hopeless anyway. Personally I put that down to poor instruction rather than a lack of ability.
eocvictim is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2010, 05:27
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 962
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 1 Post
How hard is the transition from Piper to Cessna? I have done the other way and it wasn't that big of a deal, I certainly would pay $70/hour less and make the transition if I could.
mcgrath50 is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2010, 05:27
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,693
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'd do a shandy of both. I think flying multiple types helps your experience.
Old Akro is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2010, 06:10
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wherever the job takes me...
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Traumahawk?!? Ughhhh...
The Bunglerat is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2010, 09:33
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hollister, Hilo, Pago Pago, Norfolk Is., Brisbane, depending which day of the week it is...
Age: 51
Posts: 1,352
Received 31 Likes on 9 Posts
There is no reason to be spending more than $240/hr for a warrior
Yes there is.

You won't find a school that will hire one out with an instructor for that rate.

PS Not one that you'd probably want to be more than 3' off the ground in anyway.

PSS Which is about how far you are off the ground when it's not moving.
MakeItHappenCaptain is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2010, 09:45
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There are good warriors for hire at $205/hr. I still use them to take family on Jollies. They're not as fancy as some but they get the job done and I certainly dont see an rational reason for using anything else.
eocvictim is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2010, 14:43
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
They're not as fancy as some
Meaning they are just a little bit airworthy?
Tee Emm is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2010, 14:59
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That or everyone else is getting ripped off by polished turds. When I was training I wanted to pay for a plane not its paint job.
eocvictim is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2010, 17:24
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Doing a 2 hour nav, you'll never get lost in a Tomahawk. After an hour, you can still see your departure point. In terms of number of circuits, I don't think there's much of an issue. You'll get close to the same number in either a/c. If you have an instructor/operator who considers your pocketbook and not just his/her own, then that would be the way I'd go.

Last edited by Lodown; 19th Jul 2010 at 20:55.
Lodown is offline  
Old 19th Jul 2010, 18:26
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Behind a CB near you
Age: 44
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Go for the Tommie and save some bucks.... you'll need them later on.

I did my entire PPL (except for a couple of flights in a 152) in a PA38, navs and all..... was a great little plane to fly. I transitioned to the 172 before I started my CPL.

As previously mentioned, a good instructor will make more difference to you now than the aircraft you fly.

Take the Tommie now and the 172 later.
Nose wheel first is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.