Aerobatic Instruction, Northamptonshire & Surounding
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
From: Sywell, Northamptonshire
Aerobatic Instruction, Northamptonshire & Surounding
Hi
I am looking around for some dual aerobatic instruction on something cleared for spinning within an hour of Northampton.
Currently my choices seem to be Sibson (c152a at £120 or Pitts at £229) or Cambridge (Extra 200 at £221).
I would rather something 'better' than the 152a, but at a price under £200 rather than the £229 for the Extra 200 at Cambridge!
Any ideas?
Thanks
Kev
I am looking around for some dual aerobatic instruction on something cleared for spinning within an hour of Northampton.
Currently my choices seem to be Sibson (c152a at £120 or Pitts at £229) or Cambridge (Extra 200 at £221).
I would rather something 'better' than the 152a, but at a price under £200 rather than the £229 for the Extra 200 at Cambridge!
Any ideas?
Thanks
Kev
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
From: Norfolk
Sibson
Kev,
Go spin with Charlie at Sibson in the S2A. Do you realise how much more spinning you will acheive in that aircraft than you would for an hour in the Cessna - likewise Camb's Ea200 (but I do not personally know/therefore can't recommend their instructors).
My Pitts-biased opinion.
Do erect/inverted and then cross-overs - in either the Ea200 or the bipe.
HTH
Stik
Go spin with Charlie at Sibson in the S2A. Do you realise how much more spinning you will acheive in that aircraft than you would for an hour in the Cessna - likewise Camb's Ea200 (but I do not personally know/therefore can't recommend their instructors).
My Pitts-biased opinion.
Do erect/inverted and then cross-overs - in either the Ea200 or the bipe.
HTH
Stik
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
From: London
I can vouch for the Cambridge instructors.
I think the only potential issue going forward with there 200 is that the availability can be tough and the currency requirements, which are fully understandable in light of it being a club owned aircraft, are quite tight, meaning if you haven't flown in a couple week you will need to do a circuit check.
If you're just looking for dual training though this won't be an issue.
I think the only potential issue going forward with there 200 is that the availability can be tough and the currency requirements, which are fully understandable in light of it being a club owned aircraft, are quite tight, meaning if you haven't flown in a couple week you will need to do a circuit check.
If you're just looking for dual training though this won't be an issue.
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 832
Likes: 0
From: East Anglia
You can do the same with 30 mins in the Pitts/Extra as you will do in an hour in the C150. The Pitts & Extra rate of climb and ability to do thing without losing height will make them more cost effective.
The front seat in the Pitts doesn't have great visibility, wheras the Extra has much better visibility.
I suggest popping along one day and having an ask to sit in them and make your choice then.
Both Charlie at Sibson and Luke at Cambridge will make sure you get well addicted!!!!
ZA
The front seat in the Pitts doesn't have great visibility, wheras the Extra has much better visibility.
I suggest popping along one day and having an ask to sit in them and make your choice then.
Both Charlie at Sibson and Luke at Cambridge will make sure you get well addicted!!!!
ZA
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
From: Londonish
Don't disagree with anything anyone's said here, but I'd suggest it much depends on what you're looking to get from it:
The 152 is a somewhat limited aerobat, and as has been suggested, the time spent gaining/regaining altitude will eat up some of the cost differential, generally aeros hops will be fairly short, in the order of .6 or so anyway. However, it will spin more like 'regular' aircraft, and is (I'm guessing) more like the aircraft you're used to.
Both the pitts and the 200 will be like nothing normal - it'll take a while to get your head around how responsive they are.
I have flown with Luke in the '200; would second the comment he's a great instructor. Also a lovely aeroplane. In some ways it's like learning on a car with all the driver aids tho, it's a bit german in character - clinically efficient
It is however tremendously capable and will go exactly where you put it. That can be a blessing and a curse!
On the flipside, the pitts isn't impossible - I'm inclined to think they're over-maligned, but it is long on 'character', interesting near the ground, just a bit more mad, and a little more likely to bite. I couldn't comment on the instruction, never been near those you mention.
If you're in for aeros as a long term interest, I'd consider the pitts. It'll take most people longer to get solo in the pitts, but it's good tailwheel time, and there are a lot around - it's probably transferrable if you want to move around. A hireable extra is a bit of an oddity (a lovely one at that).
If you just want a little experience, the 152 might not be a bad idea; also look for a decathlon (great IMHO), or a Robin 2160 - I seem to recall hearing of one up that way a while back - the latter being a nosewheel makes life easier if you've not done the taildragging thing yet.
Lastly, i'd probably stay away from upside down spinning to start with - good thing to know, but quite confronting.
The 152 is a somewhat limited aerobat, and as has been suggested, the time spent gaining/regaining altitude will eat up some of the cost differential, generally aeros hops will be fairly short, in the order of .6 or so anyway. However, it will spin more like 'regular' aircraft, and is (I'm guessing) more like the aircraft you're used to.
Both the pitts and the 200 will be like nothing normal - it'll take a while to get your head around how responsive they are.
I have flown with Luke in the '200; would second the comment he's a great instructor. Also a lovely aeroplane. In some ways it's like learning on a car with all the driver aids tho, it's a bit german in character - clinically efficient
It is however tremendously capable and will go exactly where you put it. That can be a blessing and a curse!On the flipside, the pitts isn't impossible - I'm inclined to think they're over-maligned, but it is long on 'character', interesting near the ground, just a bit more mad, and a little more likely to bite. I couldn't comment on the instruction, never been near those you mention.
If you're in for aeros as a long term interest, I'd consider the pitts. It'll take most people longer to get solo in the pitts, but it's good tailwheel time, and there are a lot around - it's probably transferrable if you want to move around. A hireable extra is a bit of an oddity (a lovely one at that).
If you just want a little experience, the 152 might not be a bad idea; also look for a decathlon (great IMHO), or a Robin 2160 - I seem to recall hearing of one up that way a while back - the latter being a nosewheel makes life easier if you've not done the taildragging thing yet.
Lastly, i'd probably stay away from upside down spinning to start with - good thing to know, but quite confronting.
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 1,274
Likes: 0
From: Glen Prosen, Scotland
As mentioned above, for what you want to do, the relative hourly costs are not that great a comparative tool. While the Cessna may be half the hourly rate of the other two you will spend approximately twice the time climbing to height/regaining height after spinning, or any given figure two-up. Something like a Pitts or Extra is more than worth the higher price and in your situation I wouldn't even bother looking at a Cessna. Also since, as already mentioned, an aerobatic sortie will be more like 40 mins than 1 hour - assuming you don't have to faff around transiting - you won't be spending that much more in real terms.
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
From: Sywell, Northamptonshire
Hi All
Thanks for the feedback, my 'normal' craft is an EV97 Eurostar, low wing, stick between your legs, fairly responsive but non aerobatic aircraft.
I am told there is a 2160 at Wellesbourne Aviation at 140 per hour.
Short term I need to do one more hour of Spin / Spin awareness as part of the NPPL M to NPPL SSEA conversion, but I want to use it actually doing Spins so I can actually recover if I ever find myself in one.
Longer term I would like to do the AOPA aeros course.
I think the decision is between the Extra and the 2160 and is going to come down to can I afford the Extra!
Thanks
Kev
Thanks for the feedback, my 'normal' craft is an EV97 Eurostar, low wing, stick between your legs, fairly responsive but non aerobatic aircraft.
I am told there is a 2160 at Wellesbourne Aviation at 140 per hour.
Short term I need to do one more hour of Spin / Spin awareness as part of the NPPL M to NPPL SSEA conversion, but I want to use it actually doing Spins so I can actually recover if I ever find myself in one.
Longer term I would like to do the AOPA aeros course.
I think the decision is between the Extra and the 2160 and is going to come down to can I afford the Extra!
Thanks
Kev
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
From: London
Hi Kev
All the previous posts have raised some interesting and valid points about the various aerobatic options. Another thing to consider is a longer term view about cost, availability and what YOU want. Let us imagine in the future you want to take your friends, wife, parents for a few aeros they would be more than happy with a couple of loops and rolls. The much maligned cessna aerobat would be perfect for that. Also if you only wanted to do aopa basic manoeuvers it is also perfectly acceptable for that. You should have no problem with currency becauce it is just? a 150. A previous poster claimed that it actually more cost effective to do it in the pitts, well there is another organisation at wellesbourne using a Reims aerobat with parachutes doing the aopa coarse for 880 quid. I know it sounds too cheap but it is there feel free to pm me if you need the details. If you speak to any of the guys that fly it you may be surprised at the positive feedback. There is a lot of choice out there try them all and see which suits.
Regards
deed
All the previous posts have raised some interesting and valid points about the various aerobatic options. Another thing to consider is a longer term view about cost, availability and what YOU want. Let us imagine in the future you want to take your friends, wife, parents for a few aeros they would be more than happy with a couple of loops and rolls. The much maligned cessna aerobat would be perfect for that. Also if you only wanted to do aopa basic manoeuvers it is also perfectly acceptable for that. You should have no problem with currency becauce it is just? a 150. A previous poster claimed that it actually more cost effective to do it in the pitts, well there is another organisation at wellesbourne using a Reims aerobat with parachutes doing the aopa coarse for 880 quid. I know it sounds too cheap but it is there feel free to pm me if you need the details. If you speak to any of the guys that fly it you may be surprised at the positive feedback. There is a lot of choice out there try them all and see which suits.
Regards
deed
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
From: Londonish
Okie, in that case, I'm going to change my tune a little; go fly the R2160. If it was nearer me, I'd fly it too!
Why? It's nosewheel, and not dissimilar to what you're used to. You could probably be checked out on it in a couple of hours, and it's a decent tourer too. It also spins rather well. If you go for any of the tailwheels, it will take a bit of time - tailwheel isn't intrinsically difficult, but neither the extra or the pitts are the easiest tailwheels. It's also side by side, which is nicer for instruction, and more convenient if you want to take pax.
I've also flown the Eurostars (well, the sportstar, but it's the same a/c). R2160 is less sensitive in pitch, and WAY more sensitive in roll, and has a slightly abnormal landing technique in so much as there's not much space under the tail, so you don't perform a full stall landing. It climbs at a decent rate - much more so than the 152, has excellent visibility (eurostar like). At 20 quid an hour more than a 152, and 80 quid an hour less than the extra, I'd have said no-brainer!
Why? It's nosewheel, and not dissimilar to what you're used to. You could probably be checked out on it in a couple of hours, and it's a decent tourer too. It also spins rather well. If you go for any of the tailwheels, it will take a bit of time - tailwheel isn't intrinsically difficult, but neither the extra or the pitts are the easiest tailwheels. It's also side by side, which is nicer for instruction, and more convenient if you want to take pax.
I've also flown the Eurostars (well, the sportstar, but it's the same a/c). R2160 is less sensitive in pitch, and WAY more sensitive in roll, and has a slightly abnormal landing technique in so much as there's not much space under the tail, so you don't perform a full stall landing. It climbs at a decent rate - much more so than the 152, has excellent visibility (eurostar like). At 20 quid an hour more than a 152, and 80 quid an hour less than the extra, I'd have said no-brainer!
A little less conversation,
a little more aviation...
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
From: Bracknell, UK
Without wanting to be offensive, or overtly controversial, I think we need to get this thread back on track, and establish some basic truths.
To wit:
a) Cessna Aerobats are for "special needs" purposes, and nothing more.
b) In aerobatic terms, Robins are for mincers.
The OP should go and fly the Pitts with Charlie.
To wit:
a) Cessna Aerobats are for "special needs" purposes, and nothing more.
b) In aerobatic terms, Robins are for mincers.
The OP should go and fly the Pitts with Charlie.
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
From: Amsterdam
b) In aerobatic terms, Robins are for mincers.
A little less conversation,
a little more aviation...
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 696
Likes: 0
From: Bracknell, UK
b) In aerobatic terms, Robins are either 1) for hard-working potential world champions who simply haven't been able to get into a Pitts yet, even though they know, deep down, that a Pitts is the one true way forward to enlightenment, and, truth be known, should probably get on and do something about it, pronto or 2) mincers.
I think we both know which subsection applies to you. Congratulations on your score at last year's competition - there is always some satisfaction (not to mention a sense of relief) in beating a carbon-wing WundaStunta in something which you know to be, let's face it, a bit of a shed compared to the rest of the competition.
I'd apologise to the the Aerobat driver as well, but I'm assuming he's spent the last 14 hours climbing for height from which to mount an attack in response. I note that not far from Wellesbourne the base of controlled airspace is FL145, so yes, I admit it, you probably can summon up the energy to get round the sequence required of the AOPA course in an Aerobat based there, and probably still not fall foul of Rule 5.
The fact remains that the best price/performance ratio for aerobatic training is an S2A, by a country mile - so if the opportunity is available, then use it.
