Cessna 152 or Piper Pa28 Warrior iii
Moderator
Don't think in terms of "hard". These two types are exactly as hard as one and other to fly, just different in many ways, and happily so! It is a certification requirmeent that an aircraft not require unusual pilot skill, attention or strength to fly safely. Trust in the test pilots who approved each of these designs.
To put my bold statement in context, there are slightly easier aircraft than either of those two types to fly, for example Cessna 172, or 182 (just a tiny bit more stable), and some types which are a little "harder" (= more challenging), for example, most taildraggers, require mor eprecise directional control on the ground. I found the Tiger Moth is fairly challenging under some conditions, and requires more attention than many other types I have flown.
If you are aspiring to learn to fly, don't cheat yourself by seeking the "easiest". Fly what you have available, for compotent instruction. If it takes a little longer to perfect your flying skills, that's okay, you'll be a better pilot for it!
To put my bold statement in context, there are slightly easier aircraft than either of those two types to fly, for example Cessna 172, or 182 (just a tiny bit more stable), and some types which are a little "harder" (= more challenging), for example, most taildraggers, require mor eprecise directional control on the ground. I found the Tiger Moth is fairly challenging under some conditions, and requires more attention than many other types I have flown.
If you are aspiring to learn to fly, don't cheat yourself by seeking the "easiest". Fly what you have available, for compotent instruction. If it takes a little longer to perfect your flying skills, that's okay, you'll be a better pilot for it!
Depends what I want out of it.
For a touring aeroplane, or for a commercial training aeroplane, I'd generally pick the Warrior.
For throwing around a bit, mucking about into small strips, or PPL training, I'd pick the C152.
What do YOU want it for?
G
For a touring aeroplane, or for a commercial training aeroplane, I'd generally pick the Warrior.
For throwing around a bit, mucking about into small strips, or PPL training, I'd pick the C152.
What do YOU want it for?
G
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Canada
Age: 36
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In terms of handling etc, the P28A is "harder" than a C152. But I prefer a P28A over a C152 any day (if we don't look at the price).
Why is it "harder":
- faster
- more ground effect
- less powerfull flaps => correcting a messed up approach is more difficult
- P28A is in general a little more "sluggish" than a C152 (personal opinion, not a fact)
Why is it "harder":
- faster
- more ground effect
- less powerfull flaps => correcting a messed up approach is more difficult
- P28A is in general a little more "sluggish" than a C152 (personal opinion, not a fact)
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have already started my ppl in the pa28 warrior iii, and I throughly enjoy flying the aircraft. I was just curious as my friend learns in a c152 and I wanted to see other peoples views on the aircraft. 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: London
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I was learning to fly I started on the 152 but moved on to the PA28 as I found it a roomier and more comfortable environment to train in (I'm 6'2" with long legs).
I find the PA28 better in turbulence and nicer to fly on cross country flights than the 152. It's also a more stable IFR platform.
I prefer the handling of the PA28. It's also IMHO more forgiving at the stall.
After seeing what a 152 can do in a steep turn at the stall (demo by an instructor) I'll stick to the PA28
I find the PA28 better in turbulence and nicer to fly on cross country flights than the 152. It's also a more stable IFR platform.
I prefer the handling of the PA28. It's also IMHO more forgiving at the stall.
After seeing what a 152 can do in a steep turn at the stall (demo by an instructor) I'll stick to the PA28
Last edited by TrafficPilot; 25th Feb 2011 at 20:44.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's not a matter of harder to fly because both are easy. But having experienced both I'd say that the PA28 is the "least unpleasant." The PA28 is also easier to operate as you have restrictions with payload and fuel. But I think you'll find that virtually any aircraft that you and I get to fly will be pretty easy - if you have been taught properly and don't ask it to do things that it was not designed to do.
PM
PM
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Downwind
Age: 40
Posts: 332
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if you have been taught properly and don't ask it to do things that it was not designed to do.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Why is it "harder":
- faster
- more ground effect
- less powerfull flaps => correcting a messed up approach is more difficult
- P28A is in general a little more "sluggish" than a C152 (personal opinion, not a fact)
- faster
- more ground effect
- less powerfull flaps => correcting a messed up approach is more difficult
- P28A is in general a little more "sluggish" than a C152 (personal opinion, not a fact)
The four bullet points in the quote above do not make an aircraft 'harder' to fly, apart from possibly the last.
- faster, we are talking about an 'over the fence' speed of 63kias at gross, not a hot ship and so long as one has been trained properly and respects the vspeeds, very gentle speed
- more ground effect, sure, but this does not make the aircraft any 'harder' to fly, it is just a characteristic to allow for; the 152 tends to 'pendulum' in strong crosswinds, but that is just another characteristic. Just land the PA28 at the correct speed and you will not float
-less powerful flaps. you should not need to correct a messed up approach with flap, if it is that bad go around and get stabilised next time. If necessary (e.g. engine out), the PA28 will slip very easily and lose height rapidly, but I am mindful of the stress on the vertical stabiliser in normal operations
- more sluggish. Depends on weight and one's technique, I have had 650fpm climb out of a PA28 at max.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would suggest that everyone that is training on either of these should try stalling in a 152 first then move on to the pa28. That way around you will appreciate your training much better ... and have less concerns for the future.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why they have both had the nasty designed out of them.
The C152 mushes and the PA28 does something which isn't really a stall as such because you will never get the AOA across the whole wing past the critcal angle.
Both of them in a training sense will never really teach you what a true stall is.
Both are pretty boring aircraft to be honest designed for the mass market and to mostly stop idiots from killing themselves.
The C152 mushes and the PA28 does something which isn't really a stall as such because you will never get the AOA across the whole wing past the critcal angle.
Both of them in a training sense will never really teach you what a true stall is.
Both are pretty boring aircraft to be honest designed for the mass market and to mostly stop idiots from killing themselves.
Both are pretty boring aircraft to be honest designed for the mass market and to mostly stop idiots from killing themselves.
This is outrageous discrimination against idiots like me!
Why they have both had the nasty designed out of them.
The C152 mushes and the PA28 does something which isn't really a stall as such because you will never get the AOA across the whole wing past the critcal angle.
Both of them in a training sense will never really teach you what a true stall is.
Both are pretty boring aircraft to be honest designed for the mass market and to mostly stop idiots from killing themselves.
The C152 mushes and the PA28 does something which isn't really a stall as such because you will never get the AOA across the whole wing past the critcal angle.
Both of them in a training sense will never really teach you what a true stall is.
Both are pretty boring aircraft to be honest designed for the mass market and to mostly stop idiots from killing themselves.
As a tourer, I really do like the PA28. But, as you say, both are very well designed to be safe and boring.
G
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Must admit I had the 150J in mind rather than the 152 - our club 150J would consistently drop a wing in a stall - not problematic BUT something to be trained to handle and be aware of.
Whereas, I agree, the pa28 just gets flabby and sinks and goes on until you get bored (perhaps a bit of an overstatement).
In our club we found people going from the 28 to the 15O had a bit of an underwear moment the first time they encountered the wing drop.
Whereas, I agree, the pa28 just gets flabby and sinks and goes on until you get bored (perhaps a bit of an overstatement).
In our club we found people going from the 28 to the 15O had a bit of an underwear moment the first time they encountered the wing drop.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep FREDA they do allow clever folk to kill themselves.
C152 in a performance turn on the nibble excessive use of the aerlions will then flip you over the top into a spin mode that the POH method of recovery will not work with.
I think the regualr posters know my views that your intial training should be on something that does what it says in the book. After you have learned to fly properly then go and fly something
PS I do like your
description for when folk transfer to something that does what it says in the book.
C152 in a performance turn on the nibble excessive use of the aerlions will then flip you over the top into a spin mode that the POH method of recovery will not work with.
I think the regualr posters know my views that your intial training should be on something that does what it says in the book. After you have learned to fly properly then go and fly something
very well designed to be safe and boring.
had a bit of an underwear moment
Yep FREDA they do allow clever folk to kill themselves.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Both aircraft fall back into level flight easily at the correct speed settings.
The 152 is a pussy cat and very forgiving. Just lift the wing and have a good look out before going into the turn.
The PA28 is also a pussy cat but you need to obey a few more rules. Always peg the speed correctly for the weight condition and wind condition of the day.
On a hot day 1 up with 75kts over the hedge, they will glide forever. Saw one in the dyke at the end of 09L Nottingham once for this reason. Lower the speed when pulling of the flaps to avoid the nose up pitch. Keep the nose up in the flare to protect the nose wheel and propeller (propeller sits very low to the ground) Pretty well always use 2 stages of flap taking off from grass strips.
The 152 is a pussy cat and very forgiving. Just lift the wing and have a good look out before going into the turn.
The PA28 is also a pussy cat but you need to obey a few more rules. Always peg the speed correctly for the weight condition and wind condition of the day.
On a hot day 1 up with 75kts over the hedge, they will glide forever. Saw one in the dyke at the end of 09L Nottingham once for this reason. Lower the speed when pulling of the flaps to avoid the nose up pitch. Keep the nose up in the flare to protect the nose wheel and propeller (propeller sits very low to the ground) Pretty well always use 2 stages of flap taking off from grass strips.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: My house
Posts: 1,339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have flown both and prefer the PA28 purely for the usage.
More seats, faster, greater lifting capability especially the 181 which only burns a touch more fuel.
Then again the Cessena's are generally better short fielders and out perform the equivalent pipers.
Cheers
More seats, faster, greater lifting capability especially the 181 which only burns a touch more fuel.
Then again the Cessena's are generally better short fielders and out perform the equivalent pipers.
Cheers