Bingo! Absolutely loved the Debonair. What a gorgeously wonderful aircraft to fly. Controls so harmonised. Don’t think I flew it in a straight line for more than 30 seconds.

The Chippie was the first aerobatic plane I flew (dual and after a long inoculation of PA28s). In my very first hour I was doing barrel rolls, loops and knife-edges, you'd think they had finally cut the string tether off this fly. A very graceful aircraft in all unusual aspects of flight, but I had done my thorough research beforehand by reading a book called Flying Aerobatics by Robert T. Bowring which was also beautifully illustrated by Jim Prendergast.

I was watching an F111 do a slow low level (warm-up) display with the wings fully swept back and was quite surprised how effortlessly nimble it was, seemed to be able to turn on a dime. Any pig drivers out who can confirm this?

Generalising a bit, but the Poms seemed to make sweet handling aircraft, even if their cockpit ergonomics were sometimes messy. Thinking Heron MK 2 with original Gypsy Queens, HS 748 ( though the manual pressurisation was a pain for the FO), Viscounts (if you could stay ahead of the tail ice and didn’t flog it through turbulence) and the delightful BAE 146, the sweetest flying almost bulletproof commercial jet ever built (but not for the technically challenged). Of every type I ever flew, I think the 146 would be the easiest to handle.
Still generalising,Yank ‘airplanes’ seem agricultural. The DC3 was a wondrous thing for its time, but anyone who says those ailerons make for good handling must have only flown some crude Russian biplane before. Metro, an effective, likeable enough dog. MU2 ( yes I know, it’s actually Japanese) slippery little sucker. King Air? Cockpit an ergonomic disaster, pissy little control yoke, handling OK for amateurs, which was its original market. C 441 flew way better than any King Air and you could find stuff where you expected it in the cockpit. B737 - best was the 200, provided it had dash 15 or 17 engines; later versions went downhill after that. But my wooden spoon for handling goes to the Convair 580 as the worst contraption to come out of the USA since the war, with its interconnected control system. What WERE they thinking to fit a Piper Tripacer system into such a beast? Also, with the worst cockpit ever built, the CV580 made the Viscount look positively modern. The Dutch were no slugs with their F27 control harmony, which they really worked on to get just right, though F27 ground handling took practice.
The Brazilians did a great job with the Barbie jet, too. Certainly it had nicer handling than anything I flew that the Yanks had built up until that time, and considering it did not speak English, had good ergos.
Another non-English speaking aeroplane, the ATR 42 was good, 72 not so, which often happens when an original design is stretched to please the bean counters.
At bugsmasher level, Beech straight tail Bonanza sweet, also Baron, then most Cessna 400 series and old Citations if you didn’t mind the fact it wasn’t a ‘real’ jet. All Pipers too bland for me; sent me to sleep with boredom, even as a student. The only Piper that did it for me was the Cub, though those heel operated brakes bothered me any time there was a crosswind.
I did not do enough Chippy time to make meaningful comment, other than that if it looks right, it probably is right.

.

That's cheating

I enjoyed the B200 and the B1900C. The B1900C was lovely stable platform. B727 was a blast, but a bit of a cow to land. Alouette 3 was like strapping a back pack on. You just wore it. The Denel Oryx, once you got used to the size, was an unbelievable machine to fly. It felt like it had no limits. I hated the B58 Baron.

The best 777
The easiest A320
The worst 787
Most fun Zlin 242

MP: Dove but ONLY in air, a real dog on the ground
TP: B200
Jet: Citation C650

C150 Texan - a nice tailwheel twist on a benign aircraft.
Cessna CJ3 - twin jet - lovely handling and characterises - really forgiving and capable.
Gazelle Heli - ticks every box
Robin DR400 - a delight to fly and teach in
Fokker 100 - Great old school flying
Always found the Tiger Moth, Cub and Pitts Special exciting to fly in not the most pleasant ways!

Great aircraft you have mentioned.
Best cockpit ride was in an RAF VC10 - next level aircraft.

My favs, by decade F4D, L-1011, Bae-146, G550. 😉

Best piston single BE36
Best piston twin D55
Best turboprop P180. Was an absolute dream to fly (4500hrs in it)

[QUOTE=happyjack;11119638]Maybe a trifle unfair. A truck certainly and very capable in every other respect.

The best was the Falcon 2000 very closely followed by the Falcon 900.

The most challenging and therefore the most satisfying, the LR35.

Robin
 

Robin aircraft I’ve always found a delight to fly. The 2160 is relatively pathetic at aerobatics but the only aircraft I’ve really felt at one with in the flare.

Part-own a cirrus, great cruiser on autopilot, fairly horrible to hand-fly.

1) l1011/500, 2)md83, 3)b777/300, 4) a340/500

Boeing 727........although no 2 landings were ever the same......

What an interesting tread.
Seem the Chipmunk wins the peoples choice even though it may not have been common in the "first to leave" colony in the British Empire.
As a low time PPL years ago my vote is for the C210.
The term harmonisation wasn't mention until post #27. A mysterious combination of balance, response , authority, feel and ???? I remember on a check flight in a Piper Warrior whinging to the Instructor about the awful squishy controls.
The term also applies to sailing boats. Joshua Slocum the first man to sail solo around the world went days without input. That is in the days before auto-sailors. His must have been a very balanced boat.
I had a couple of minutes on the side stick in the back seat of a Rutan Long-ez. A delight. The aircraft seemed to be an extension of my arm.

Enjoyed the F28-4000, delightfully light ailerons in a Transport Category Aeroplane, next type was the Bae146, totally unimpressed!

I thought pre autopilot you just lashed the helm so it went more or less where you left pointing. That being said pre GPS and satellite communications solo ocean sailing was something for the brave.

As far as aircraft, I liked Piper Warriors, Arrows, Seminole, for their simple flying ability, easy to just jump in and circle the air with not much brain power. Cessna was similar, but apart from the 152 all felt a bit tractorish. Favorite is the Chieftain, just liked its solid feel and stability, I've had some beautiful experiences in the ole PA31 types. I liked flying drifters at an early age, they were fun and free, nothing special performance wise, although you could switch off the engine and soar in updrafts which was like chill surfing in the air. Jabirus just way too tight for me, but would be a nice sporty thing for small humans. I found baron 55s twitchy and awkward, 58s were ok, fast but expensive and nothing real special. Bonanza seemed ok, but Lance or Saratoga was cheaper and flew quite well also. Never liked Cirrus or Tobagos or similar. Put floats on anything, it will handle like a dog, but it was some of the most fun I've had, with a few close calls you don't get in other modes of flying. Least liked airplane, P68s, Partbananas are horrible machines, from getting in and out to just the mush it calls control.

I've flown much bigger than the chieftain, but transport category are nice, but relatively boring.

We need to say what we mean by Good Handling first....
Stability is ‘good handling’ in some applications, but terrible for other needs.

I haven’t flow many types, but of the ones I have:
For being docile to the point where you can fly it with your eyes closed: Cessna Caravan
For being able to get in and out of tight spaces on rough terrain: Twin Otter and Super Cub (depending on how much stuff you want to shift)
For being twitchy as heck: Sukhoi Su-29
For being able to turn a tight radius, kick around trees, and go under power-lines: Air Tractor 502

Yep! they don’t make A to B aeroplanes exiting to fly! The more boring they can make them, the better the design.
For most the most part in aviation, success in aircraft design and operational procedures results in making it as uninteresting as possible for the pilots.

The 111 was a lovely jet to fly, but with the wings fully swept, it really didn’t turn on a dime. Ever. :)

I'm really surprised the Tiger Moth didn't feature more strongly. Its a delight that rewards gopod airmanship. It teaches rudder control. The J3 cub is best for the pure joy of messing around on a nice day. The Single seat Pitts is the only aeroplane that has ever really felt like an extension of my body. Think it and it does it. Wonderfully benign in the air. Fearful on the ground. The Stearman is great. But its like flying an armchair. Smaller and more responsive is better. The aitourer (150 / 160 Hp) is a greatly under-rated aeroplane. Its the most fun to land. Loved the time I've spent in a Maule on floats, but you need to be somewhere like Florida where you can lake hop.

Worst? I find it hard to find any redeeming qualities in the Auster.

I’m surprised to see the 73 getting so much shade. I think the -500 and -700 are great. I much prefer those to the 76. I’m also the only one that feels this way. I second the king air. The -100 especially wirh geared garret power. I also throw some shade at barons and bonanzas. I think they’re overrated.

I suggest you try a Stampe SV-4. I can't compare it to a Tiger, but it is nice to fly.

Beech F33A Bonanza. A Bonzer unit with power and beautifully harmonized controls.

Falcon 200. Dassault make nice handling jets. Not flown a 20 but hear they’re pretty good too.

I would add a vote for the Chipmunk - I've never had the good fortune to fly a Spitfire but if the Chipmunk is the 'poor man's Spitfire' then the Spit must be pretty special. ;) I'd also like to suggest the Slingsby T.67 - lacking in roll rate (and power in some versions) but that is another aeroplane that seems to respond almost telepathically. I would suggest the Extra 300 but unlike the aforementioned two that is significantly more likely to bite if you get something a bit wrong...

Another vote for the DC-3 - there's still nothing to replace it.

By nicest handling I think we mean that the controls give the right response in roll, pitch and yaw for the deflection and stick forces involved, and to do so throughout the speed range, and with little or no friction in the control circuits. I am not a test pilot, but John Farley wrote, "The boffins used to say that a good starting point for harmonisation was aileron forces increasing with IAS, elevator forces with IAS squared and rudder with IAS cubed".

The Chipmunk may have lacked power but the control response was excellent and, despite what some have said, it was still good on instruments. I was lucky enough to get my PPL on a Tiger Moth, followed by about 150 hrs at Hamble on the Chipmunk. And even its spin characteristics were good, provided one stuck with the correct recovery procedure.

There’s a few types missing. Does anyone have an opinion of the Rockwell 114? And in biplanes, what’s the Waco and the Stearman like to fly?

L1011 Tristar best large aircraft I have flown. Great to fly, and typical Lockheed, built like a tank.

Chipmunk is the standout light aircraft for me.

767-300er the best handling followed very closely by the 777.
Then of course the 737-200 (not the 300 400 etc), and the DC10🥰.
i didn’t like to fly the 757,bae146

And another vote for the Chippie.

For the most fun - Extra 230. Fun aeroplane with no vices (that I could ever find)! In the early days, a mishandled spin recovery (forgot to take off the anti-spin rudder - DOH!) simply resulted in a power-off full rudder side slip with no inclination to flick out. I could almost hear her saying "Really? You'll have to work harder than that"!

Best, B727 followed closely by the 767


Worst, MD80, sluggish in roll, way too sensitive in pitch and numerous design deficiencies


Most disappointing, the 757, lots of power and all works well but very sluggish in roll, a nasty dead spot in pitch when lowering the nose after landing that can bite and a terrible ride in turbulence

Commander 114?
IMO: comfortable wide cabin, almost car like and nice trailing link main gear but nothing much to recall about the handling characteristics.
Just another light aircraft

Hadn't realised we were such a subjective bunch. I thought the 757-200 was nicer than the 767-300ER. More trim dependant but such a sweet jet. 76 felt a bit too twitchy in roll and pitch, but I am splitting hairs.

For me: 757,767,787,321,320

At low level, 350-550 KIAS, I agree that it was very good. But in the landing pattern it had some of the worst flying qualities I have ever seen! The C2 Greyhound is the only other one that was as bad in the circuit. Also, the directional ‘notching’ above 550 KIAS and the lack of tailplane power at high Mach number left a lot to be desired. Definitely a ‘curate’s egg’.

American Champion Super Decathlon 8kcab followed by Beech Baron A55. 747/757/767 are wallowing pigs in handling, of course they will climb well though.

Best: 777-200. A delight in any weather. The -300 in turbulence spills too much tea for my liking.
Most fun: Extra 300
Worst: Empty A319 on a windy day. The whole A320 series sucks in handling. The A321 is woefully underpowered and under-winged.

I'd vote for the Dak after the Chippy and I became quite fond of the Trident. Mind you, an hour in a Lightning was a revelation.
I'd sooner auto a Schweizer than an R22!

North American F-100; no thrust, but wonderful handling.