PPL TRAINING - WHATS THE KATANA LIKE?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: scotland
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPL TRAINING - WHATS THE KATANA LIKE?
HI
I m looking to do my PPL training this summer and have a choice of two schools.
Can anyone give me their impressions on the Diamond Katana and Cessna 172
for learning to fly on.
I work down the back with the SLF for a UK airline and havent heard anything good about the Katana from our flight deck crew.
thanks
I m looking to do my PPL training this summer and have a choice of two schools.
Can anyone give me their impressions on the Diamond Katana and Cessna 172
for learning to fly on.
I work down the back with the SLF for a UK airline and havent heard anything good about the Katana from our flight deck crew.
thanks
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 2,118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have about 20 or so hours in the Katana from a few years ago. My limited recollections are ...
1. Beautiful handling in the air with outstanding visibility. Delightful aeroplane to fly, lovely and responsive stick and rudder flying with virtually no retrimming necessary on power changes.
2 Horrible handling on the ground with a tendency to set off in any old dirction it fancys after touchdown due to free castoring nosewheel
3 unbelievably unreliable engine
4tendency to porpoise on landing unless speed bang on the numbers
5 Possible to make nice steep approaches with full flap, much a la C150
1. Beautiful handling in the air with outstanding visibility. Delightful aeroplane to fly, lovely and responsive stick and rudder flying with virtually no retrimming necessary on power changes.
2 Horrible handling on the ground with a tendency to set off in any old dirction it fancys after touchdown due to free castoring nosewheel
3 unbelievably unreliable engine
4tendency to porpoise on landing unless speed bang on the numbers
5 Possible to make nice steep approaches with full flap, much a la C150
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The katana is ok for what it is. A plastic pig! Personally I'm not a fan and having done only a limited amount of teaching on them, I'm no expert, but they do seem to suffer from an inordinate amount of maintenance problems.
We use Cessna's for for inital training because they are still pretty much the best thing around for teaching the basic handling skill required. They are starting to get a bit long in the tooth now admittedly, but apart from the Robin 200, I haven't flown anything that matches them (and even then there are things the cessna does better.)
Are you thinking about learning on a 172 or a 152. Unless you're a monster, I would do your training on a smaller machine than a 172, simply on basis of cost.
We use Cessna's for for inital training because they are still pretty much the best thing around for teaching the basic handling skill required. They are starting to get a bit long in the tooth now admittedly, but apart from the Robin 200, I haven't flown anything that matches them (and even then there are things the cessna does better.)
Are you thinking about learning on a 172 or a 152. Unless you're a monster, I would do your training on a smaller machine than a 172, simply on basis of cost.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Here and there
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've done a couple of flights in my club's Katana before I decided upon flying a TB-9 instead. I found pretty much the same as flybymike, however in regards to the unreliable engine mentioned, I take it that he means the Rotax equipped Katana? My clubs one has a Continental I believe, and its ultra reliable. However, I've heard that its only one of 2 Kats in the country that have Continentals so good luck on finding one! 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Oxford
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well 8 out of 10 owners can't be wrong....
Ouuuch.... hat.... door.......
Have flown the Kat a number of times and what a fine little aeroplane it is too. And it has a floppy prop so no need to do differences post PPL if you want to do fly a constant speed Prop. And yes great vis, rather quick and slippery and don't worry about the ground handling keep the weight off the nose wheel and it steers just fine.
Ouuuch.... hat.... door.......
Have flown the Kat a number of times and what a fine little aeroplane it is too. And it has a floppy prop so no need to do differences post PPL if you want to do fly a constant speed Prop. And yes great vis, rather quick and slippery and don't worry about the ground handling keep the weight off the nose wheel and it steers just fine.
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Orlando, Florida
Age: 68
Posts: 2,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Considering the investment costs of a PPL - why not actually go to both clubs and do a 30 minute "aircraft assessment" ride in each type. See which one you prefer and which is most comfortable.
Ensure that you ask them to show you a full weight and balance calculation on each type, too.
As every person is different in size, shape, weight etc. I don't see much value in the opinion of others as to which is the better machine.
A bigger question, for me, would be the the difference in flying club charges, terms and conditions.
Ensure that you ask them to show you a full weight and balance calculation on each type, too.
As every person is different in size, shape, weight etc. I don't see much value in the opinion of others as to which is the better machine.
A bigger question, for me, would be the the difference in flying club charges, terms and conditions.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SCOTLAND
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This one is easy- The Katana is a lovely aircraft to fly, I have about 20 hours on type and is in a seperate league to any Cesna!
Visibility, response, comfort, looks are all far superior to a Cesna. I have never experienced any problems with the castoring nosewheel on touchdown or the porpoising if the speed isn't bang on the numbers either, in fact found it very forgiving.
Visibility, response, comfort, looks are all far superior to a Cesna. I have never experienced any problems with the castoring nosewheel on touchdown or the porpoising if the speed isn't bang on the numbers either, in fact found it very forgiving.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to elaborate on what Keygrip has mentioned. The most important thing a student needs is a comfortable environment to learn in. This is more than just what aircraft type you are in. At the end of the day SEP machines used for training are all basically similar and you won't be a more or less competent pilot if you train on one machine over another.
Price is obviously important, but value for money is more critical. Don't train some where or with someone you don't like just because they are a couple of quid cheaper per hour. In the end, you'll pay more.
A few questions to ask schools:
1) How much experience have their instructors actually got?
2) What has the turnover in instruction staff been in the previous 12 months? (This is sometimes not a fair comparison depending on the airline hiring market.)
3) Do they offer big discount schemes for upfront? If so be wary and NEVER EVER PAY UPFRONT.
4) Chat to the people who may know a bit about the different clubs. For instance, chat to the flight deck crew in your airline and see if they have heard any tales.
5) Don't get taken in by flashy marketing. I have often seen people get "blinded by the lights." There is little margin in training in the UK and very few companies that arrive with big fanfares and big promises actually survive more than a couple of years. Don't let your money go with them.
Finally and most importantly.
6) Use your gut instinct, where do you feel most comfortable? Try different schools (I'm assuming that you are thinking of different schools as well as different a/c.) and which ever you feel the happiest in, go there, that is far more important than which type you are flying.
Be careful however, there really are some awful places that are a complete disgrace to the name of flight training. I'd say more here, but I wouldn't want to get Danny in trouble with the lawyers!
Price is obviously important, but value for money is more critical. Don't train some where or with someone you don't like just because they are a couple of quid cheaper per hour. In the end, you'll pay more.
A few questions to ask schools:
1) How much experience have their instructors actually got?
2) What has the turnover in instruction staff been in the previous 12 months? (This is sometimes not a fair comparison depending on the airline hiring market.)
3) Do they offer big discount schemes for upfront? If so be wary and NEVER EVER PAY UPFRONT.
4) Chat to the people who may know a bit about the different clubs. For instance, chat to the flight deck crew in your airline and see if they have heard any tales.
5) Don't get taken in by flashy marketing. I have often seen people get "blinded by the lights." There is little margin in training in the UK and very few companies that arrive with big fanfares and big promises actually survive more than a couple of years. Don't let your money go with them.
Finally and most importantly.
6) Use your gut instinct, where do you feel most comfortable? Try different schools (I'm assuming that you are thinking of different schools as well as different a/c.) and which ever you feel the happiest in, go there, that is far more important than which type you are flying.
Be careful however, there really are some awful places that are a complete disgrace to the name of flight training. I'd say more here, but I wouldn't want to get Danny in trouble with the lawyers!
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Not around here
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have about 60hrs experience in a Katana and only about 2 in a cesspool
172, so cannot really provide a balanced comparison. However my experience of the Katana has been:-
1) As people have said, the Katana handles very well in the air, great viz, great gliding characteristics for those PFLs.
2) Not very complicated, all the knobs, buttons etc are well placed. The Rotax engined types have a variable pitched prop, but again, I've never found this a problem.
3) No problems handling on the ground, keep the weight of the nose wheel if req'd, but I've never really had any problems.
4) As to reliability, I've only had 1 lesson cancelled due to aeroplane going u/s.
As mentioned above I only have a couple of hrs in the 172, but I was genuinely shocked by it at first after experiencing the modern Katana. The 172 smelt like an old A35 Austin van, the doors pinged like them too when you shut them, the viz was awful.
The school that I learn at runs a 172 and a couple of Katana's for students. Generally, it is cheaper to learn on a Katana and then if you want a 4 seater, then to do the necessary conversion hours.
Overall tho', I'd agree with the comment that it would be worth trying out the different types that are available to you before plumping for which one - ie don't just make your choice on cost alone.
172, so cannot really provide a balanced comparison. However my experience of the Katana has been:-1) As people have said, the Katana handles very well in the air, great viz, great gliding characteristics for those PFLs.
2) Not very complicated, all the knobs, buttons etc are well placed. The Rotax engined types have a variable pitched prop, but again, I've never found this a problem.
3) No problems handling on the ground, keep the weight of the nose wheel if req'd, but I've never really had any problems.
4) As to reliability, I've only had 1 lesson cancelled due to aeroplane going u/s.
As mentioned above I only have a couple of hrs in the 172, but I was genuinely shocked by it at first after experiencing the modern Katana. The 172 smelt like an old A35 Austin van, the doors pinged like them too when you shut them, the viz was awful.
The school that I learn at runs a 172 and a couple of Katana's for students. Generally, it is cheaper to learn on a Katana and then if you want a 4 seater, then to do the necessary conversion hours.
Overall tho', I'd agree with the comment that it would be worth trying out the different types that are available to you before plumping for which one - ie don't just make your choice on cost alone.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have 600 hours or so in the ' Plastic Rat '. It's good points are, the visibility is pretty good from the bubble canopy, and it glides ok.
The bad points are, it is very uncomfortable, the seats are non adjustable, it seems to suffer from an unusually high number of maintanence problems and the electric trim is crap. I didn't realise how bad they were to fly until I got my hands on a PA28 again. If you can find somewhere with a decent PA28 for training, I would definately go for that. I think Leading Edge at Cumbernauld may have one.
The bad points are, it is very uncomfortable, the seats are non adjustable, it seems to suffer from an unusually high number of maintanence problems and the electric trim is crap. I didn't realise how bad they were to fly until I got my hands on a PA28 again. If you can find somewhere with a decent PA28 for training, I would definately go for that. I think Leading Edge at Cumbernauld may have one.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agree with GASH. I did a fair stint in one of the Continental DA20s and despite being a decent trainer it is bloody uncomfortable. Bugger to land flapless at first if you are used to the brick-like 152. You can't beat a warrior or cessna for the ppl, and I thought the Katana was the most difficult to fly consistently accurately when starting out. I'd go for a cessna. All my opinion however, take a quick flight in each and see which you are happiest with.
Anyone else think the Katana looks like a sperm with wings?
Anyone else think the Katana looks like a sperm with wings?
