What 4 seater? 172SH vs PA28 warrior
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Medway, Kent
Age: 41
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What 4 seater? 172SH vs PA28 warrior
Well, im into the last 10 hours of my PPL, all exams are done and dusted! just a Nav exercise, land away and QXC to go before the skills test!
I know that i should be concentrating on whats in hand before i look toward converting to other aircraft but tbh i intend to get these remaining 10 hours + test done within 1 week, which could be pretty soon.
What i would like to know is, What 4-seater is favoured to actually carry four people? I hear that some 4-seater aircraft can only infact carry three average size adults before being close to mass + balance limits? PA28 Arrow springs to mind? What i would like to do is take my girlfriend and her parents on a trip to Le Touquet in the summer. I have checked the M+B and the 172SH is capable but its only just within the weight limits. I guess i could fly there with enough fuel to get there + reserve and re-fuel once there for the return leg, but just wondering if there is any other aircraft that people prefer, that are more suitable for the job?
Many thanks
Ryan
I know that i should be concentrating on whats in hand before i look toward converting to other aircraft but tbh i intend to get these remaining 10 hours + test done within 1 week, which could be pretty soon.
What i would like to know is, What 4-seater is favoured to actually carry four people? I hear that some 4-seater aircraft can only infact carry three average size adults before being close to mass + balance limits? PA28 Arrow springs to mind? What i would like to do is take my girlfriend and her parents on a trip to Le Touquet in the summer. I have checked the M+B and the 172SH is capable but its only just within the weight limits. I guess i could fly there with enough fuel to get there + reserve and re-fuel once there for the return leg, but just wondering if there is any other aircraft that people prefer, that are more suitable for the job?
Many thanks
Ryan
What is a 172SH? I'm guessing you mean Skyhawk. You'll confuse people if you write it like that though, as usually the model number is the letter after "172" - eg a 172N or a 172S.
To actually carry 4 people and gear and fuel, you're looking one level up from the 172/PA28 range; a C182 is a nice choice. I'm don't know much about the Piper range...
To actually carry 4 people and gear and fuel, you're looking one level up from the 172/PA28 range; a C182 is a nice choice. I'm don't know much about the Piper range...
The reality is that most PA-28s and 172s won't carry 4 reasonable sized people and reasonable amount of fuel. There are few in pieces littering the countryside from people who have tried.
Don't be tempted.
The answer to your question is it depends what is available to you via your school or club. If you can find a 200 hp 172 or 182 or Piper Dakota you stand a chance
An Arrow is a complex with retractable gear and so you need differences training and a sign off and nobody is going to let you just hire one with a PPL + 10 hours.
Maybe you should take your GF one week and her parents the next while you are building the hours to get to use a more capable aeroplane.
Don't be tempted.
The answer to your question is it depends what is available to you via your school or club. If you can find a 200 hp 172 or 182 or Piper Dakota you stand a chance
An Arrow is a complex with retractable gear and so you need differences training and a sign off and nobody is going to let you just hire one with a PPL + 10 hours.
Maybe you should take your GF one week and her parents the next while you are building the hours to get to use a more capable aeroplane.
Last edited by Dave Gittins; 19th Mar 2012 at 13:22.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 18nm NE grice 28ft up
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The nearest you will get of the types you mention is the 180hp Cessna 172S or SP. It will carry four 180lb people, no baggage and 2 hours of fuel with 20 min reserve.
The Piper Archer 11 & 111 from memory is similar. I don't think most of the Arrows are any better.
C182 and Dakota have about 200lb more capacity but are semi complex.
D.O.
The Piper Archer 11 & 111 from memory is similar. I don't think most of the Arrows are any better.
C182 and Dakota have about 200lb more capacity but are semi complex.
D.O.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Medway, Kent
Age: 41
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies, i guess i by SH i meant Skyhawk SP, for some reason i thought it was 172SH short for SkyHawk! lol.
Oh well.
Anyways, so how comes so many are against 4-up in a 172 / PA28? surely if they fall within the mass + balance envelope and the take off run is safely with the runway TODA (and obviously within the destination limits) then what is the issue?
I have had a look around my local flying clubs for a 182 but seems no one has one in there fleet! I wanted to take my gf and her parents over for her birthday so doing two separate journeys kinda defeats the object!
Oh well.
Anyways, so how comes so many are against 4-up in a 172 / PA28? surely if they fall within the mass + balance envelope and the take off run is safely with the runway TODA (and obviously within the destination limits) then what is the issue?
I have had a look around my local flying clubs for a 182 but seems no one has one in there fleet! I wanted to take my gf and her parents over for her birthday so doing two separate journeys kinda defeats the object!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 18nm NE grice 28ft up
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PilotPieces explains one of the problems of the average weight of you and your passengers. Don't take their word for it. Weigh them.
The other variable is the difference in individual aircraft performance and payload. Two apparently identical aircraft can differ substantially.
Remember to factor in density altitude.
D.O.
The other variable is the difference in individual aircraft performance and payload. Two apparently identical aircraft can differ substantially.
Remember to factor in density altitude.
D.O.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Slovakia
Age: 59
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C172SP
Weight is technically less important. She climbs and flies slower and accelerates longer if heavy. You can factor this into your calculations.
No technical problem here, rather a legal one. If nothing happens, nobody cares. If you will have a small accident and metal will bent, you will get probably problems with insurance. Not to speak if you will hurt somebody.
Much more important is the balance. You have to keep it well within limits. Fuel consumption will be higher.
The plane feels the same if slightly over gross. The performance numbers are worse however, most important is the ground roll and climb performance. Best glide speeds, approach speeds and the like will be higher.
And do not try any unusual maneuvers, fly very defensively, you are not a test pilot. If you will scare your girl and her parents it will have negative consequences in the relationship! Being you I would want to make some hourbuilding first.
I would rather take the risk of being heavy than marginal with fuel...
I have a C172SP. I take my wife and daughter and her boyfriend for longer trips. I can normally fly four of us and very light luggage with almost full tanks too. It is not legal but technically OK. If I remember correctly I was ca 70 kg over limit at take off.
My remarks are concentrating on technical aspects. Final decision and responsibility is yours you are the PIC. Lives of your passengers will be in your hands.
Miroc
No technical problem here, rather a legal one. If nothing happens, nobody cares. If you will have a small accident and metal will bent, you will get probably problems with insurance. Not to speak if you will hurt somebody.
Much more important is the balance. You have to keep it well within limits. Fuel consumption will be higher.
The plane feels the same if slightly over gross. The performance numbers are worse however, most important is the ground roll and climb performance. Best glide speeds, approach speeds and the like will be higher.
And do not try any unusual maneuvers, fly very defensively, you are not a test pilot. If you will scare your girl and her parents it will have negative consequences in the relationship! Being you I would want to make some hourbuilding first.
I would rather take the risk of being heavy than marginal with fuel...
I have a C172SP. I take my wife and daughter and her boyfriend for longer trips. I can normally fly four of us and very light luggage with almost full tanks too. It is not legal but technically OK. If I remember correctly I was ca 70 kg over limit at take off.
My remarks are concentrating on technical aspects. Final decision and responsibility is yours you are the PIC. Lives of your passengers will be in your hands.
Miroc
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Surrey UK/Quebec CA
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My advice would be to get the weights of your passengers, then fill out the weight and balance calculations for a few aircraft.
Also, I would not listen to miroc. Risking the lives of his wife and daughter because its not legal but "technically" OK. The only thing he said that was useful was that you are not a test pilot. Apparently he is and his family members are test passengers...
pboyall makes a good point too, I would estimate that you have probably about a 20% chance of the day you plan to go actually working out weather wise.
If you want, I will take your girlfriend and you can take her parents. Hopefully that will ease any worries about W&B.
Also, I would not listen to miroc. Risking the lives of his wife and daughter because its not legal but "technically" OK. The only thing he said that was useful was that you are not a test pilot. Apparently he is and his family members are test passengers...
pboyall makes a good point too, I would estimate that you have probably about a 20% chance of the day you plan to go actually working out weather wise.
If you want, I will take your girlfriend and you can take her parents. Hopefully that will ease any worries about W&B.
I'm only a couple of years ahead of you in experience so no sky god but I have managed to fly the 160hp PA28 and various different 172 models. In all cases, it has been either four people, no luggage, 3/4 fuel or only three people.
Runway length is vey important, if you apply the CAA guidance (and the likes of me and you should), the aforesaid 160hp PA28 at MAUW needs on a not very extreme pressure altitude day, 800+m hard or 1100+m grass.
W+B is can kill you and needs careful checking. We normally fly three-up with me in the front and the other two in the back. If we fill the luggage bay, one of them has to sit in front with me.
Finally to support the comments about setting a date, until I got an IMC rating, setting a date for a trip more often than not led to disappointment. Even with the IMCR (not valid in France remember), we don't always get the trip we want. If you want to go on a particular day, plan alternatives in different directions. Cornwall, Wales or Yorkshire could be just as nice.
Runway length is vey important, if you apply the CAA guidance (and the likes of me and you should), the aforesaid 160hp PA28 at MAUW needs on a not very extreme pressure altitude day, 800+m hard or 1100+m grass.
W+B is can kill you and needs careful checking. We normally fly three-up with me in the front and the other two in the back. If we fill the luggage bay, one of them has to sit in front with me.
Finally to support the comments about setting a date, until I got an IMC rating, setting a date for a trip more often than not led to disappointment. Even with the IMCR (not valid in France remember), we don't always get the trip we want. If you want to go on a particular day, plan alternatives in different directions. Cornwall, Wales or Yorkshire could be just as nice.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't
I really hate to pour cold water on the dreams of someone, especially when it comes to aviation, but here I must.
Don't do it. You are already well on your way of lining up the proverbial holes in the cheese that lead to becoming a statistic in the AAIB reports.
Here's why:
1) you are putting yourself under pressure. Setting a date which cannot be moved (birthday in your case) is always a bad idea when flying light a/c, no matter the airplane or your level of experience
2) you are contemplating a flight that - while possibly just about legal - operates right on the edge of the airplane's envelope
3) even if the wx cooperates (a big IF), then crossing the Channel on a hazy summer's day isn't quite the same as flying over the green fields of England. You can be in perfect VFR from a legal POV, but in reality be flying on instruments, as there is no discernible horizon. No big deal in itself, but another hole...
4) you are attempting all of the above with precious little experience
Take your GF flying around locally, same with her parents - separately. Thus you will also see how they react to being in a small a/c - not everyone loves it.
You will eventually fly to Le Touquet and hopefully far beyond. But take a little more time in getting there.
Don't do it. You are already well on your way of lining up the proverbial holes in the cheese that lead to becoming a statistic in the AAIB reports.
Here's why:
1) you are putting yourself under pressure. Setting a date which cannot be moved (birthday in your case) is always a bad idea when flying light a/c, no matter the airplane or your level of experience
2) you are contemplating a flight that - while possibly just about legal - operates right on the edge of the airplane's envelope
3) even if the wx cooperates (a big IF), then crossing the Channel on a hazy summer's day isn't quite the same as flying over the green fields of England. You can be in perfect VFR from a legal POV, but in reality be flying on instruments, as there is no discernible horizon. No big deal in itself, but another hole...
4) you are attempting all of the above with precious little experience
Take your GF flying around locally, same with her parents - separately. Thus you will also see how they react to being in a small a/c - not everyone loves it.
You will eventually fly to Le Touquet and hopefully far beyond. But take a little more time in getting there.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
W&B may well be ok outbound, but return will be difficult - the temptation to overstock on heavy beverages is too great.
Personal experience of this - I went with two work colleagues. We stocked up, my having given an allocation for weight and positioning. The inevitable happened; too much booze. Their solution? Drink the excess... Seemed great until I pointed out they were merely redistributing the excess weight - even after ditching aluminium packaging. It took ten minutes of argument to prove my case to them. Both exceptional computer scientists.
Miroc
I dare you to test this assertion...
Personal experience of this - I went with two work colleagues. We stocked up, my having given an allocation for weight and positioning. The inevitable happened; too much booze. Their solution? Drink the excess... Seemed great until I pointed out they were merely redistributing the excess weight - even after ditching aluminium packaging. It took ten minutes of argument to prove my case to them. Both exceptional computer scientists.
Miroc
It is not legal but technically OK
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Not a million miles from EGTF
Age: 68
Posts: 1,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We normally fly three-up with me in the front and the other two in the back.
I prefer to have one alongside me to help with looking out or helping with chores. If they are in the back, what happens if you are incapacitated?
"Why"
Err, not sure really! I think they see it as more sociable or maybe they just feel the need to clutch each other in terror :-)
As for incapacitation, both my other half and our son (age fourteen) refuse to even consider having a feel of the controls never mind doing the flying companion course (which I would like them both to do).
Err, not sure really! I think they see it as more sociable or maybe they just feel the need to clutch each other in terror :-)
As for incapacitation, both my other half and our son (age fourteen) refuse to even consider having a feel of the controls never mind doing the flying companion course (which I would like them both to do).
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
You are already well on your way of lining up the proverbial holes in the cheese
Miroc
Quote:
It is not legal but technically OK
I dare you to test this assertion...
Quote:
It is not legal but technically OK
I dare you to test this assertion...
(FTAOD: Such musings about past misdeeds are not to be taken as suggestions as to how to behave.)
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Bucks
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To reduce the pressure on the day, give her a voucher and say it can be exchanged when the weather is suitable. It will give her something to look forward to.
I had a close look at the W&B on my flying club Cherokee 180C today in case the entire family come with me on the PPRUNE bash next week. I can take full fuel with two adults and two kids (combined weight 190kg) with about 40kg allowance to spare. So the folklore of 3 adults with full tanks, or four adults + tank to tabs is probably correct.
I would expect the south coast to France and back could be done on tabs with plenty of reserves. But dont forget to pack and allow for the weight of the liferaft and lifejackets.
W
I had a close look at the W&B on my flying club Cherokee 180C today in case the entire family come with me on the PPRUNE bash next week. I can take full fuel with two adults and two kids (combined weight 190kg) with about 40kg allowance to spare. So the folklore of 3 adults with full tanks, or four adults + tank to tabs is probably correct.
I would expect the south coast to France and back could be done on tabs with plenty of reserves. But dont forget to pack and allow for the weight of the liferaft and lifejackets.
W
I used to fly a 160hp 172P regularly which with a full tank of fuel (109kgs) left a useful load on that particular aircraft (the empty weights all vary a bit) of 300 kgs. Half the fuel and it was good for two hours flying with a half hour reserve at 100kts and allowed 350 kgs of pilot, pax and baggage.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
do a shorter trip!
"What i would like to do is take my girlfriend and her parents on a trip to Le Touquet in the summer."
It sounds wonderful, but I must agree with some of the other pessimistic voices here. You shouldn't do a trip like this the first summer after you earn your PPL.
There are SO many things that can go wrong.
1) You'll be flying over the Channel on a hazy summer day. Maybe that will work out, but what if the visibility turns bad? You're not instrument-rated. It's amazing how quickly a VFR summer day can turn into instrument conditions over water. This is NOT good. I had a glimpse of this flying near the shoreline of Lake Michigan, and it was terrifying to think of flying into that.
2) You're planning to fly over the Channel in a single, piston engine airplane. The odds of surviving an engine-out incident over water are grim.
3) If you try to get back at night, your odds of survival plunge even more.
4) Your passengers probably aren't used to the bumpiness and noise of flying in a small plane. They very well may not like it! Putting them in a 172 or Piper Warrior for a long trip could be the end of that romance.
Here's a better idea: this summer take them for a shorter trip to someplace closer in the UK. There will be less time for them to get airsick, no fuel worries, no terrifying loss of visual horizon over the Channel. Just a pleasant, easy jaunt somewhere with a nice lunch and an easy flight back as dessert. If you're set on getting to Le Touquet, buy them all tickets. They'll be grateful, and in the long run so will you.
It sounds wonderful, but I must agree with some of the other pessimistic voices here. You shouldn't do a trip like this the first summer after you earn your PPL.
There are SO many things that can go wrong.
1) You'll be flying over the Channel on a hazy summer day. Maybe that will work out, but what if the visibility turns bad? You're not instrument-rated. It's amazing how quickly a VFR summer day can turn into instrument conditions over water. This is NOT good. I had a glimpse of this flying near the shoreline of Lake Michigan, and it was terrifying to think of flying into that.
2) You're planning to fly over the Channel in a single, piston engine airplane. The odds of surviving an engine-out incident over water are grim.
3) If you try to get back at night, your odds of survival plunge even more.
4) Your passengers probably aren't used to the bumpiness and noise of flying in a small plane. They very well may not like it! Putting them in a 172 or Piper Warrior for a long trip could be the end of that romance.
Here's a better idea: this summer take them for a shorter trip to someplace closer in the UK. There will be less time for them to get airsick, no fuel worries, no terrifying loss of visual horizon over the Channel. Just a pleasant, easy jaunt somewhere with a nice lunch and an easy flight back as dessert. If you're set on getting to Le Touquet, buy them all tickets. They'll be grateful, and in the long run so will you.