Complex singles
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Rugby
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Complex singles
Hi
For those on here that do fly complex singles or have done, when did you move on to them relative to earning your PPL ie: learned on one, straight after PPL, after getting an IMC or IR, a couple of hundred hours in etc and why ?
I'm assuming for the purpose of this discussion that this means wobbly prop, retractable undercarriage, a bit heavier and a bit quicker than a 172 or warrior and instrumentation for IFR.
Thanks
BB
For those on here that do fly complex singles or have done, when did you move on to them relative to earning your PPL ie: learned on one, straight after PPL, after getting an IMC or IR, a couple of hundred hours in etc and why ?
I'm assuming for the purpose of this discussion that this means wobbly prop, retractable undercarriage, a bit heavier and a bit quicker than a 172 or warrior and instrumentation for IFR.
Thanks
BB
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 2,547
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moved onto a TB9 which unusually for TB9's had a constant speed prop, straight after PPL.
Move on to the Arrow II (CSP, Retractable) after about 80 hours total. (PPL completed just under 50, so 30-35 post PPL.)
Why? Convenience really. The TB9 belonged to the school that I trained with, and was generally reserved for PPL's rather than training, so have much better availability.
When that school got taken over, things went downhill quickly, so I changed clubs. The new one had only two aircraft, one of which was the Arrow, so it made sense to get checked out on both.
dp
Move on to the Arrow II (CSP, Retractable) after about 80 hours total. (PPL completed just under 50, so 30-35 post PPL.)
Why? Convenience really. The TB9 belonged to the school that I trained with, and was generally reserved for PPL's rather than training, so have much better availability.
When that school got taken over, things went downhill quickly, so I changed clubs. The new one had only two aircraft, one of which was the Arrow, so it made sense to get checked out on both.
dp
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did the PPL in Tomahawks, C150s C152s then rented PA28s, and with 50hrs post-PPL got a TB20. Never looked back, the transition was easy.
There is nothing complex about retractable gear and a CS prop. One rarely touches those controls anyway.
There is nothing complex about retractable gear and a CS prop. One rarely touches those controls anyway.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Age: 52
Posts: 585
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes - what IO540 said.
I originally learned to fly in a Cessna 172. I had a go in a Katana DA20 shortly after getting my PPL (C/S prop) and at about 200 hours did my MEP in a Twin Comanche - which obviously has rectractable gear.
Didn't actually get round to flying a retractable single until I went for a CPL.
Neither 'complexity' is expecially difficult to grasp although if you forget to put the wheels down it'll get expensive
I originally learned to fly in a Cessna 172. I had a go in a Katana DA20 shortly after getting my PPL (C/S prop) and at about 200 hours did my MEP in a Twin Comanche - which obviously has rectractable gear.
Didn't actually get round to flying a retractable single until I went for a CPL.
Neither 'complexity' is expecially difficult to grasp although if you forget to put the wheels down it'll get expensive
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When describing light airplanes that have constant speed props and or retractable gear as " complex " it is nothing more than someone trying to make it look like something it is not......
Fly Conventional Gear
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Winchester
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've always thought the notion of 'complex singles' is a bit misleading. Yes they are more complicated but really a CSP and retractable gear doesn't really constitute a major increase in complexity.
I had a lesson in the Arrow during my PPL (because the school had run out of standard PA28s) and since then I've flown the C185C amphib as well and a few other types with CSPs. There is nothing difficult about them and in fact the Arrow could quite easily be used for PPL training.
I had a lesson in the Arrow during my PPL (because the school had run out of standard PA28s) and since then I've flown the C185C amphib as well and a few other types with CSPs. There is nothing difficult about them and in fact the Arrow could quite easily be used for PPL training.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I went to the USA and did a few hours in a PA28R-200 and some ground school.
For that, the Feds gave me both 'complex' and 'high performance' endorsements - your views on that would be gratefully received.
****************************************
****************************************
You have been hoodwinked by the bureaucracy because it is disingenuous to try and pretend that a PA28R-200 is anywhere near complex or high performance.
Using that mindset what would a Lear Jet be?
For that, the Feds gave me both 'complex' and 'high performance' endorsements - your views on that would be gratefully received.
****************************************
****************************************
You have been hoodwinked by the bureaucracy because it is disingenuous to try and pretend that a PA28R-200 is anywhere near complex or high performance.
Using that mindset what would a Lear Jet be?
Guest
Posts: n/a
You have been hoodwinked by the bureaucracy because it is disingenuous to try and pretend that a PA28R-200 is anywhere near complex or high performance.
My thoughts entirely, but I did learn that the difference between aviation oxygen and medical oxygen was that the former cannot contain moisture.
A Learjet is definitely not a complex single (not unless one goes bang!)
My thoughts entirely, but I did learn that the difference between aviation oxygen and medical oxygen was that the former cannot contain moisture.
A Learjet is definitely not a complex single (not unless one goes bang!)
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Age: 52
Posts: 585
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I might be wrong here (and I've not got my FAR / AIM to hand), but I thought that you needed to fly an aircraft with MORE than 200hp to get an FAA high performance endorsement?
Formerly HWD
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Indochina
Age: 56
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You have been hoodwinked by the bureaucracy because it is disingenuous to try and pretend that a PA28R-200 is anywhere near complex or high performance.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By describing what is in reality basic machines as somehow " complex " it serves several purposes...it gives bureaucrats something to do in their cubicles that sounds real professional. ( to them )
It also gives flying schools another way to make money...gone are the days when you could just take a check out from someone who was proficient on the airplane...
.....now we have a sort of Voo Doo Black Magic Doctor mentality whereby we must go to the Dr. who will get the chicken entrails, bones and ashes and using his/her magic stick poke through the ashes and find the magic answers.
Ahhhh how I miss the days when life was so much less " Complex"
It also gives flying schools another way to make money...gone are the days when you could just take a check out from someone who was proficient on the airplane...
.....now we have a sort of Voo Doo Black Magic Doctor mentality whereby we must go to the Dr. who will get the chicken entrails, bones and ashes and using his/her magic stick poke through the ashes and find the magic answers.
Ahhhh how I miss the days when life was so much less " Complex"
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know what guys? Sometimes Pprune p
es me off. Here's someone who asks a question and some here have to sound off about how irrelevant this is. Well, Chuck, what hyper-complex all-singing, all-dancing spaceship do you fly then? 
We could argue about what constitutes a 'complex' or a 'high-performance' airplane until Chuck Yeager descends from the clouds. These definitions, like all in aviation, have been introduced by someone in an office - live with it. And answer the OP's question, which I do here: immediately after my PPL for 'complex' (C172RG), a couple of years later for 'high performance', i.e. C182, etc.
PS: btw 99% of N-reg PA28R-200's are NOT good enough for the high-performance sign-off as they are rated at 199BHP. Must be some insurance thing. The FARs stipulate more than 200 for that....
es me off. Here's someone who asks a question and some here have to sound off about how irrelevant this is. Well, Chuck, what hyper-complex all-singing, all-dancing spaceship do you fly then? We could argue about what constitutes a 'complex' or a 'high-performance' airplane until Chuck Yeager descends from the clouds. These definitions, like all in aviation, have been introduced by someone in an office - live with it. And answer the OP's question, which I do here: immediately after my PPL for 'complex' (C172RG), a couple of years later for 'high performance', i.e. C182, etc.
PS: btw 99% of N-reg PA28R-200's are NOT good enough for the high-performance sign-off as they are rated at 199BHP. Must be some insurance thing. The FARs stipulate more than 200 for that....
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well 172 driver I guess we all get pissed off at different things and what pisses me off is the dumbing down of aviation by those who have to make the relatively simple into complex.
Now that I have explained my position what does the type of airplanes I fly have to do with this?
If going from one basic simple single engine airplane to one with a couple of extra knobs, levers or switches is difficult for you that is not my fault.
But I will try and answer your question.
---------------------------------------------------------
You asked:::
Well, Chuck, what hyper-complex all-singing, all-dancing spaceship do you fly then?
--------------------------------------------------------
I don't fly spaceships...but I do fly aircraft that might meet the description of being more " Complex " than a basic single engine airplane such as being discussed here.
So where would you like me to start?
Helicopters or airplanes?
Piston engine, turbo prop or jet?
Land or Sea?
Now that I have explained my position what does the type of airplanes I fly have to do with this?
If going from one basic simple single engine airplane to one with a couple of extra knobs, levers or switches is difficult for you that is not my fault.
But I will try and answer your question.
---------------------------------------------------------
You asked:::
Well, Chuck, what hyper-complex all-singing, all-dancing spaceship do you fly then?
--------------------------------------------------------
I don't fly spaceships...but I do fly aircraft that might meet the description of being more " Complex " than a basic single engine airplane such as being discussed here.
So where would you like me to start?
Helicopters or airplanes?
Piston engine, turbo prop or jet?
Land or Sea?
Last edited by Chuck Ellsworth; 4th Dec 2007 at 00:16.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Rugby
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Easy folks
The reason for the post is that I am coming toward the end of my PPL training and starting to look at buying a first aeroplane. It looks like I might have to go it alone as I want it for business travel and will want it when I want it.
So I'm looking at a market where the "complex" singles arent a great deal more expensive than the basic models. Part of me says I dont really need all that stuff and it just adds to the running costs. Another part says well why not.
Not necessarily running before I can walk, just looking ahead a bit.
Thanks for the answers to date, very informative. Especially the view that a CS prop and retractable undercarriage do not make anything a lot more complex.
BB
The reason for the post is that I am coming toward the end of my PPL training and starting to look at buying a first aeroplane. It looks like I might have to go it alone as I want it for business travel and will want it when I want it.
So I'm looking at a market where the "complex" singles arent a great deal more expensive than the basic models. Part of me says I dont really need all that stuff and it just adds to the running costs. Another part says well why not.
Not necessarily running before I can walk, just looking ahead a bit.
Thanks for the answers to date, very informative. Especially the view that a CS prop and retractable undercarriage do not make anything a lot more complex.
BB
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Vancouver Island
Posts: 2,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the answers to date, very informative. Especially the view that a CS prop and retractable undercarriage do not make anything a lot more complex.
B.B. the addition of a CS prop and retractible gear will of course add to the purchase cost and maintenance cost to some degree, but the increased performance is a reward well worth having.
The difficulty of flying the thing is a non issue, its just another type check out and it is not difficult nor complex.
Where you must take care when flying is using common sense and knowing what not to do.
It is known as airmanship which trumps all other considerations.
B.B. the addition of a CS prop and retractible gear will of course add to the purchase cost and maintenance cost to some degree, but the increased performance is a reward well worth having.
The difficulty of flying the thing is a non issue, its just another type check out and it is not difficult nor complex.
Where you must take care when flying is using common sense and knowing what not to do.
It is known as airmanship which trumps all other considerations.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Midlands
Posts: 2,359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The added “complexity” will not cause you much of a problem unless you forget the gear, but do not expect to get much of an increase in performance by going for a “low end” retractable. I have some time in a PA28R, and a Robin DR400 180 with fixed pitch and fixed gear will leave it behind and carry more weight. It was also an excellent instrument platform and cost much less to maintain than my friends Arrow did over the same period.
Rod1
Rod1
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've heard much the same thing. Below approximately 200 knots cruising speed, the added weight, complexity, maintenance and insurance issues etc. of disappearing dunlops is not worth it, compared to well-streamlined fixed gear. That's the reason that for instance the Cirrus has fixed instead of retractable gear. (Plus, in the Cirrus the fixed gear is an integral part of the BRS system, to cushion the landing.)
As for VP or CS, always a good idea. Even better if you combine it with FADEC like on the Diamond or Liberty. Although FADEC does mean a greater dependence on the electric system. (Discussion already underway in another thread.)
As for VP or CS, always a good idea. Even better if you combine it with FADEC like on the Diamond or Liberty. Although FADEC does mean a greater dependence on the electric system. (Discussion already underway in another thread.)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B.B. the addition of a CS prop and retractible gear will of course add to the purchase cost and maintenance cost to some degree, but the increased performance is a reward well worth having.
The difficulty of flying the thing is a non issue, its just another type check out and it is not difficult nor complex.
Where you must take care when flying is using common sense and knowing what not to do.
The difficulty of flying the thing is a non issue, its just another type check out and it is not difficult nor complex.
Where you must take care when flying is using common sense and knowing what not to do.
I'll second most of what has been said here, there is, however one issue with fixed gear vs retractable. At least AFAIK, there is no SEP with fixed gear certified for flight into know icing conditions (FIKI). Now, doing that is probably not a great idea in a SEP anyway, but if you want an airplane for business travel, this might be a consideration.
I always describe our Arrow to prospective students as being complex for training reasons, not for performance reasons. Don't expect blistering performance, but you can do a CPL in it.
