Best aircraft to learn in?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 68
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm doing my PPL and I've learned mostly in 172's. I've flown the 28 a few times and it's definitely more sluggish (172 and 28 both 160hp) but also seems less 'twitchy'. Can't say I've noticed a difference in crosswind landings but then I'm no expert. I would imagine the 28 would float a bit more because the wing is closer to the ground, but that's just a guess on my part.
The 28 is definitely easier to fly because it's docile (or rather dociler than a 172........) but then I wouldn't want to fly one out of a smallish grass field. It stops OK though. You have the visibility issue, 172 is poor in a turn but then you can see straight down, 28 has good vis but you see wing when you look down. 172 has two doors, 28 has one etc.
Looking at the figures there's nothing in the glide, my POH says 10 miles from 6,000 ft at 75 kts for both of them. Don't forget they don't run on rails, book figures are by test pilots with new a/c.
I flew the 152 to do my incipient spin part of the syllabus and I must admit it felt like a toy compared to the other two. Nothing wrong with it though, flies perfectly well and if I was flying into/out of a small strip I would take it 'cos it stops on a tanner.
Try them both.
The 28 is definitely easier to fly because it's docile (or rather dociler than a 172........) but then I wouldn't want to fly one out of a smallish grass field. It stops OK though. You have the visibility issue, 172 is poor in a turn but then you can see straight down, 28 has good vis but you see wing when you look down. 172 has two doors, 28 has one etc.
Looking at the figures there's nothing in the glide, my POH says 10 miles from 6,000 ft at 75 kts for both of them. Don't forget they don't run on rails, book figures are by test pilots with new a/c.
I flew the 152 to do my incipient spin part of the syllabus and I must admit it felt like a toy compared to the other two. Nothing wrong with it though, flies perfectly well and if I was flying into/out of a small strip I would take it 'cos it stops on a tanner.
Try them both.
Last edited by thing; 20th Jun 2011 at 20:33.
Moderator
book figures are by test pilots with new a/c
That said, presupposing that the book figures are correct, the type of pilot and age of aircraft are not relevent. Many of the design requirments specify that they "must not require unusual pilot skill attention or strength" - so any pilot should be able to achieve the same result, and a few pilots perhaps do even better...
If the aircraft is "airworthy" (thus eligible for a C of A), it is in a condition which conforms to it's "type design" and therefore will perform as the book says it will.
To return to the original theme, the most gentle, stable trainer might not be the best plane to perfect your flying skills, That's why the Cessna 150 is a better trainer than the 182, or the Tomahawk better than the Lance for training. If an aircradft is too easy to fly, it won't demant that you learn how to fly well.
You'd like to learn to fly well, and have broad skills. Don't look for the easy way to fly, look for the well mentored challenge....
Guest
Posts: n/a
As usual ask a simple question and get complex answers
Ah Pprune dontya jusluvem.
My take on your question is to start small. Which type is down to you and how comfortable you are with the training establishment.
I started on a C150 which now seems like a toy, but then was a challenge.
All the advice above is good; the metal comes second the people you learn from first.
Sir George Cayley
Ah Pprune dontya jusluvem.My take on your question is to start small. Which type is down to you and how comfortable you are with the training establishment.
I started on a C150 which now seems like a toy, but then was a challenge.
All the advice above is good; the metal comes second the people you learn from first.
Sir George Cayley
Okay, well lets put it another way - the cheapest aircraft I can learn in is a C152. I have had a few trial lessons here and there but only in P38s. Club now only has C152s, C172s or PA28s
if you had a choice between high wing or low wing which would you choose (Cessna vs Piper). My understanding is that low wing aircraft don't experience as much crosswind on the ground and glide better. Not saying this is a good or bad thing.
if you had a choice between high wing or low wing which would you choose (Cessna vs Piper). My understanding is that low wing aircraft don't experience as much crosswind on the ground and glide better. Not saying this is a good or bad thing.
My colleague asked for a show of hands (of an audience of about 200 current and retired test pilots), how many had logged one or both of those types for flight training?
About two thirds of the audience put their hands up.
The C152 is a simple, well made, well designed, easy to fly training aeroplane. A very many excellent pilots have trained on it (and, doubtless, some pretty mediocre ones to be fair!).
Absolutely nothing wrong with it - carry on, and enjoy learning to fly on a very effective little training aeroplane.
If you switch to something more complex or glamorous later, that's equally fine - but you are highly unlikely to regret learning on the 152.
G
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: england
Posts: 385
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I completed all of my basic PPL training in a trusty little C150, and flew the aerobat version as well, & renewed last year on the PA28. Out of the two (im my limited experience), the Warrior cruises faster but handles more heavily, the C150 was much more "fun" to fly, and could be spot landed/ short/soft field operated with ease 
I loved the 40° of flap on the 150 as well, the approaches you could make were almost vertical it seemed.
I loved the 40° of flap on the 150 as well, the approaches you could make were almost vertical it seemed.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a shame that wing life issues have effectively stopped anyone investing in the remaining fleet - I expect you'd be lucky these days to find one that looks as good as that 'clapped out old cortina' mentioned earlier.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 68
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Find the best possible school with either Cessna or Piper so that you learn on something "normal" (152/172, 38/28).
The instructor is far more important than the brand of plane
The instructor is far more important than the brand of plane
Join Date: May 2011
Location: York
Age: 37
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You'd like to learn to fly well, and have broad skills. Don't look for the easy way to fly, look for the well mentored challenge....
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Glasgow
Age: 40
Posts: 642
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've had the privilege of starting my training in a bolkow junior and then moved onto a SA bulldog just as I was reaching first solo level in the bolkow (aircraft was becoming permanently unavailable). A couple of weeks ago I did an unexpected set of circuits in a pa28 (I was just there to watch but I'm not going to say no to "would you like a go") and was able to transfer what I'd learnt to fly for some ok (far from perfect) circuits.
Did first solo yesterday in bulldog
I found the bolkow not great ergonomically but great visibility and I learnt to be very careful as it's a fairly fragile aircraft. Also wouldn't be good if you are large as the cockpit is quite cramped! Great fun but nowhere near as much fun as the bulldog which is more complex with its constant speed prop and injection engine but also aerobatic capable...
Compared to both, pa28 felt sluggish, especially in roll,with poorer visibility. I'm told they are pretty much indestructable and I'd like those extra seats in the back...
Did first solo yesterday in bulldog
I found the bolkow not great ergonomically but great visibility and I learnt to be very careful as it's a fairly fragile aircraft. Also wouldn't be good if you are large as the cockpit is quite cramped! Great fun but nowhere near as much fun as the bulldog which is more complex with its constant speed prop and injection engine but also aerobatic capable...
Compared to both, pa28 felt sluggish, especially in roll,with poorer visibility. I'm told they are pretty much indestructable and I'd like those extra seats in the back...
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The trouble with threads like this is that everybody will throw in their favourite plane
Like I said, try to think of why you are learning to fly.
If you want to just tick the "learnt to fly" lifestyle box, as many pilots do, then go for the cheapest option.
If you want to learn to fly to go places, see Europe from the air, etc, then think about what kind of plane you want to fly afterwards, and try to learn in that. Because if you do that, you will come out with a PPL and about 50 hours on the type, and nothing beats time on type for safety and confidence.
The problem with a C150 is that it is a really basic plane, mostly in poor condition these days, and it takes a hardened passenger to want to climb into one. And flying alone is a sure recipe for giving up ASAP... You certainly won't be pulling any birds with a C150
Like I said, try to think of why you are learning to fly.
If you want to just tick the "learnt to fly" lifestyle box, as many pilots do, then go for the cheapest option.
If you want to learn to fly to go places, see Europe from the air, etc, then think about what kind of plane you want to fly afterwards, and try to learn in that. Because if you do that, you will come out with a PPL and about 50 hours on the type, and nothing beats time on type for safety and confidence.
The problem with a C150 is that it is a really basic plane, mostly in poor condition these days, and it takes a hardened passenger to want to climb into one. And flying alone is a sure recipe for giving up ASAP... You certainly won't be pulling any birds with a C150
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you want to learn to fly to go places, see Europe from the air, etc, then think about what kind of plane you want to fly afterwards, and try to learn in that. Because if you do that, you will come out with a PPL and about 50 hours on the type, and nothing beats time on type for safety and confidence.
Not suggesting this as a way forward for the OP - just curious.
