Differences learning to fly Piper PA28 / PA38
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: london
Age: 44
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Differences learning to fly Piper PA28 / PA38
Hello all,
I have only ever flown a cessna 152 for a trial flight but have jumped out of a cessna 172 a few times and that is really my only experience in light aircraft.
I was hoping for some insight from some more experienced pilots regarding considerations to take into account when choosing to do PPL on a Piper 2 seater or 4 seater? I am aware that it is slightly more expensive to do it on a pa28 but not prohibitively so, and although it might be nice to take people up occasionally I cannot see this being a regular occurance.
My question really is, I suppose, which is the better experience to learn to fly on / or is it much of a muchness?
many thanks for your time and effort,
B-Man
I have only ever flown a cessna 152 for a trial flight but have jumped out of a cessna 172 a few times and that is really my only experience in light aircraft.
I was hoping for some insight from some more experienced pilots regarding considerations to take into account when choosing to do PPL on a Piper 2 seater or 4 seater? I am aware that it is slightly more expensive to do it on a pa28 but not prohibitively so, and although it might be nice to take people up occasionally I cannot see this being a regular occurance.
My question really is, I suppose, which is the better experience to learn to fly on / or is it much of a muchness?
many thanks for your time and effort,
B-Man
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: .
Age: 36
Posts: 649
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi B-Man,
First off; I'm no experienced pilot (mere student with a paltry 10 hours, learning on Tomahawk). However, here will be the general differences:
As you state, the Tommy will be cheaper to learn on. PA-28 will be a lot more stable; PA-38 twitchier and less stable (not a bad thing when learning).
Don't believe all the bar-room bull**** that is regularly spouted about the Tomahawk; about the trimmer being supposedly "crap" and the "dodgy stall/spin characteristics". Rubbish. It's a fine aeroplane - as is the PA-28.
At the end of the day, it's up to you. What do you feel you would be better off learning in?
Like I say I'll recommend the Tommy because I'm learning on one and it is a nice aeroplane, but don't take my word, it's up to you at the end of the day!
Smithy.
First off; I'm no experienced pilot (mere student with a paltry 10 hours, learning on Tomahawk). However, here will be the general differences:
As you state, the Tommy will be cheaper to learn on. PA-28 will be a lot more stable; PA-38 twitchier and less stable (not a bad thing when learning).
Don't believe all the bar-room bull**** that is regularly spouted about the Tomahawk; about the trimmer being supposedly "crap" and the "dodgy stall/spin characteristics". Rubbish. It's a fine aeroplane - as is the PA-28.
At the end of the day, it's up to you. What do you feel you would be better off learning in?
Like I say I'll recommend the Tommy because I'm learning on one and it is a nice aeroplane, but don't take my word, it's up to you at the end of the day!
Smithy.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: St Albans
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Training
b-man
Suggest you save your pennies and get your wings on the little'un
Then do a checkride in the big'un when you're ready to take more people up with you.
IMHO
Dogfighter.
Suggest you save your pennies and get your wings on the little'un
Then do a checkride in the big'un when you're ready to take more people up with you.
IMHO
Dogfighter.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What DF said, plus the PA38 is the better trainer (stall and spin are more representative of less benign but good-handling types you might meet later if you are lucky but perfectly 'by the book' ),the controls are less stodgy, and it is nicer to fly than the PA28.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: E Anglia
Posts: 1,102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As above: I learnt on a PA38 and luurved it.
Quite prickly stall/spin characteristics and they say that if you can land a Tomahawk, you can land anything. It took me ages to master the landing.......
However, if you and your instructors eat pies, you may have to watch the W & B.............and perhaps choose a PA28.
Whatever you choose enjoy the experience.
Safe flying
Cusco
Quite prickly stall/spin characteristics and they say that if you can land a Tomahawk, you can land anything. It took me ages to master the landing.......
However, if you and your instructors eat pies, you may have to watch the W & B.............and perhaps choose a PA28.
Whatever you choose enjoy the experience.
Safe flying
Cusco
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Newcastle
Age: 42
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew both early on in my training.
I flew the 28 as it was the only aircraft my local school had. When that school went pop I continued my training out of Tees Valley on the 38 until a flying school returned to Newcastle.
Despite what captain smithy says dont be fooled, they do handle very differently especially in the stall/spin (the second time i flew one I nearly stalled her on take off as i just pulled back on the yoke as you do on the 28, which showed my inexperience) I found a much more gentle approach to the controls is needed in the 38.
I did have a trimmer problem once in the 38 when it snapped all the way back and put me in an awkward position on finals, although as we all know with any aircraft things can and do go wrong from time to time.
The dodgy spin characteristics I have been told differ from aircraft to aircraft, one of the instructors at Tees Valley told me he had spun them numerous times in the past with no problems, he then hopped in one he had never spun before and when he did the nose began to pitch up and down by a substantial amount during the spin which was something he had never experienced in 38 before. I think its these differences coupled with a few crashes caused by inexperienced pilots getting caught out in a spin that have given this cracking little aircraft its bad reputation.
Despite this, I absolutley loved flying it, and although I havent flown one for a couple of years now I would jump on the chance to get back in one as its a lovely little aircraft to fly especially if your on a budget.
Steve
I flew the 28 as it was the only aircraft my local school had. When that school went pop I continued my training out of Tees Valley on the 38 until a flying school returned to Newcastle.
Despite what captain smithy says dont be fooled, they do handle very differently especially in the stall/spin (the second time i flew one I nearly stalled her on take off as i just pulled back on the yoke as you do on the 28, which showed my inexperience) I found a much more gentle approach to the controls is needed in the 38.
I did have a trimmer problem once in the 38 when it snapped all the way back and put me in an awkward position on finals, although as we all know with any aircraft things can and do go wrong from time to time.
The dodgy spin characteristics I have been told differ from aircraft to aircraft, one of the instructors at Tees Valley told me he had spun them numerous times in the past with no problems, he then hopped in one he had never spun before and when he did the nose began to pitch up and down by a substantial amount during the spin which was something he had never experienced in 38 before. I think its these differences coupled with a few crashes caused by inexperienced pilots getting caught out in a spin that have given this cracking little aircraft its bad reputation.
Despite this, I absolutley loved flying it, and although I havent flown one for a couple of years now I would jump on the chance to get back in one as its a lovely little aircraft to fly especially if your on a budget.
Steve
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Oop North, UK
Posts: 3,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an instructor who has flown all these aircraft I would make the following observations.
Pa38 - Good for stalling/spinning, good cockpit layout, lousy handling (sensitive in pitch,poor in roll), high tail means there is little trim change with power/flap changes (good on a tourer, not good on a trainer).
- not sure why anyone would think this - very easy aircraft to land and actually one of its good points as it is an easy aircraft to teach people to hold off properly.
Pa28 - Generally OK all round but not actually good in any area apart from being a very easy stable platform.
Out of the two I would probably pick the Pa28 to teach someone on, but add in at Pa38 trip during stalling, as said though the Pa38 will probably be cheaper.
Ideally I would not teach on either but would rather use a Robin (or indeed almost any other trainer apart from a Cessna
)!
Pa38 - Good for stalling/spinning, good cockpit layout, lousy handling (sensitive in pitch,poor in roll), high tail means there is little trim change with power/flap changes (good on a tourer, not good on a trainer).
if you can land a Tomahawk, you can land anything
Pa28 - Generally OK all round but not actually good in any area apart from being a very easy stable platform.
Out of the two I would probably pick the Pa28 to teach someone on, but add in at Pa38 trip during stalling, as said though the Pa38 will probably be cheaper.
Ideally I would not teach on either but would rather use a Robin (or indeed almost any other trainer apart from a Cessna
)!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oxford
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by foxmoth
very easy aircraft to land and actually one of its good points as it is an easy aircraft to teach people to hold off properly.
Tim
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: London, UK
Age: 48
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi b-man, well I have around 60 hours in the PA38 and around 30 in the PA28 and my question to you is this, how tall are you? 
The PA28 was not designed with short people in mind, the brow panel is set very high and sitting on a cushion doesn't always help. I'm 5'7" and it is a real pain in the neck to manoevere on the ground because of the poor visibilty out of the front. Even in flight you might find yourself stretching to see what's going on.
In terms of handling, the PA38 is twitchy and very sensitive to turbulence, I've banged my head on the canopy from being shaken around
Having said that it is a good simple aircraft to learn on and it helps keep the costs down.
Apart from the high coaming on the PA28 it is a better looking aircraft and smoother to fly but more expensive. A good solid cruiser. However the twitchiness of the PA38 can help to train better stick and rudder skills.
Phil
The PA28 was not designed with short people in mind, the brow panel is set very high and sitting on a cushion doesn't always help. I'm 5'7" and it is a real pain in the neck to manoevere on the ground because of the poor visibilty out of the front. Even in flight you might find yourself stretching to see what's going on.In terms of handling, the PA38 is twitchy and very sensitive to turbulence, I've banged my head on the canopy from being shaken around
Having said that it is a good simple aircraft to learn on and it helps keep the costs down.Apart from the high coaming on the PA28 it is a better looking aircraft and smoother to fly but more expensive. A good solid cruiser. However the twitchiness of the PA38 can help to train better stick and rudder skills.
Phil
If you can land a Tomahawk, you can land anything?! Hogwash I say! I found landing a Seminole my toughest flying challenge so far, as it didn't involve flaring and stalling onto the tarmac like every other a/c i've flown so far.
From my limited experience i'd say that the 28 will be more of a pig to flare than the 38. I seem to remember needing to give it a really good haul just to move the controls.
Ginger
From my limited experience i'd say that the 28 will be more of a pig to flare than the 38. I seem to remember needing to give it a really good haul just to move the controls.
Ginger
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'Tis true only a taildragger will DEMAND correct landing technique (with correct use of rudder and a full hold-off unless you're 'wheeling' it on). It will bite if you don't do it right!
A trike will mask sloppy technique (just spend a while watching landings at any GA field - almost all the PA28s and C172s will be 3-pointed on with minimal hold-off).
But - not many instructors can fly-em, and even fewer schools run trainers which have the 3rd wheel at the correct end.
SSD
A trike will mask sloppy technique (just spend a while watching landings at any GA field - almost all the PA28s and C172s will be 3-pointed on with minimal hold-off).
But - not many instructors can fly-em, and even fewer schools run trainers which have the 3rd wheel at the correct end.
SSD
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: He's on the limb to nowhere
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nah, for the sort of stuff we have access to it's got to be a Pitts. Doesn't mean you can land anything of course, but it's a damned sight harder to get it right in a pitts than a tiger moth, and that will propagate to other types.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want "hard to land" then it is the Pitts or the mid wing Extra 300, but that is not what this thread is about.
The PA38 rewards good technique from the tyro and is the best of the American trainners of it,s age but the 13,000 hour spar life has resulted in the high time aircraft becoming very "under loved" by owners who won't spend any more money on an aircraft that is soon to be scrap.
I wanted to run a business with two PA38's but the numbers did not stack up due to the spar life issue an had to settle for two Cessna 152's as it was worth investing in aircraft with no restriction on spar life to get them to a standard that I would be happy to lease out.
The PA38 rewards good technique from the tyro and is the best of the American trainners of it,s age but the 13,000 hour spar life has resulted in the high time aircraft becoming very "under loved" by owners who won't spend any more money on an aircraft that is soon to be scrap.
I wanted to run a business with two PA38's but the numbers did not stack up due to the spar life issue an had to settle for two Cessna 152's as it was worth investing in aircraft with no restriction on spar life to get them to a standard that I would be happy to lease out.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite so. As I said in my first post here, it's a good trainer - certainly the best of the spam cans (a Triumph Spitfire to the PA28's Morris Marina).
Realistically, if a taildragger is not available (and in almost all schools it won't be, and if it is it will be expensive), go for the PA38.
SSD
Realistically, if a taildragger is not available (and in almost all schools it won't be, and if it is it will be expensive), go for the PA38.
SSD
