Grumman AA5A & Others - Any Advice
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: N/W London
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Grumman AA5A & Others - Any Advice
Guys,
Myself and a couple of fellow glider pilots are new NPPL SSEA holders and are considering a suitable 'first' aircraft to either buy and syndicate or buy into.
We are all reasonably experienced glider pilots and instructors (I have circa 900hrs) but only a handful with a fan on the front. Ideally we want something relatively cheap to buy into and operate and thus far we've thought about a Grumman AA5, a Robin DR200 / DR400 / Jodel and a Europa.
Any sagely advice please - we've learnt on PA28s and C152's but I dont really like the single door arrangement on the former and the later is cosy as two of us are circa 95Kg each :-)
Cheers,
FA
Myself and a couple of fellow glider pilots are new NPPL SSEA holders and are considering a suitable 'first' aircraft to either buy and syndicate or buy into.
We are all reasonably experienced glider pilots and instructors (I have circa 900hrs) but only a handful with a fan on the front. Ideally we want something relatively cheap to buy into and operate and thus far we've thought about a Grumman AA5, a Robin DR200 / DR400 / Jodel and a Europa.
Any sagely advice please - we've learnt on PA28s and C152's but I dont really like the single door arrangement on the former and the later is cosy as two of us are circa 95Kg each :-)
Cheers,
FA
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: E.Wash State
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have about 150 hours on the Grumman Cheetah AA5A, admittedly some years ago, in a 10-person joint ownership club.
A fun aircraft to fly. Roomy cabin, and you can open the canopy in flight.
Power and rate of climb, however, is not its strong point.
We found maintenance quite reasonable. Easy access to most stuff, including the alternator which went t**s-up on me during a night BFR. That was fun.
Ours got pretty rough treatment from a couple of our Neanderthal members, but it was a sturdy little beast. Not a lot of them around any more, but it was a nice design.
A fun aircraft to fly. Roomy cabin, and you can open the canopy in flight.
Power and rate of climb, however, is not its strong point.
We found maintenance quite reasonable. Easy access to most stuff, including the alternator which went t**s-up on me during a night BFR. That was fun.
Ours got pretty rough treatment from a couple of our Neanderthal members, but it was a sturdy little beast. Not a lot of them around any more, but it was a nice design.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: LKBU
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Grummans are definitely very nice aircraft. One year ago, Genghis the Engineer, who himself owns a share in an AA5A and will hopefully add some useful bits to this topic, too, helped me buy an AA5B. Today, I flew it back from an annual. Over one year of ownership, the Tiger behaved very well, never let me down, forgave some stupid things on my part, and taught me not to repeat them.
AA5A is not very powerful, but its MTOW of 999 kg will save you landing fees at many airfields; AA5B is over a tonne, but it's considerably faster than C152/C172/PA28 - essentially, it's a budget tourer with a very good price/performance ratio.
AA5s have an excellent lookout from the cockpit. Another nice feature is the folding back seats - you get a cargo compartment with a flat floor almost 6 feet long, which is very convenient for bicycles and may in a pinch serve as a place to sleep.
AA5A is not very powerful, but its MTOW of 999 kg will save you landing fees at many airfields; AA5B is over a tonne, but it's considerably faster than C152/C172/PA28 - essentially, it's a budget tourer with a very good price/performance ratio.
AA5s have an excellent lookout from the cockpit. Another nice feature is the folding back seats - you get a cargo compartment with a flat floor almost 6 feet long, which is very convenient for bicycles and may in a pinch serve as a place to sleep.
Moderator
The Grumman AA5 is delightful to fly, and performs well for its size and fuel consumption. Beware though that it's bonded (=glued together) construction, and honeycomb panels can make some repairs rather expensive, and specialty work. The Cessna and Piper just require riveting, which any shop can do.
This might be reflected in the cost to insure, as insurers know that repairs are more difficult to get done, and can be more costly. Replacement parts are also much more rare. It would be wise to research what you would do if a wing were dented etc. It would be a shame to be grounded for a long time awaiting special expensive parts. I did have some email exchange with a member of a very active club member in Australia, who seemed to specialize in AA5's. It might be worth hunting down, I no longer have the email address.
Bear in mind that the good cruise speed (with the fixed pitch prop) can come at the expense of short field performance, and best angle type climb performance. Consider where you would like to fly it, and carrying how much....
This might be reflected in the cost to insure, as insurers know that repairs are more difficult to get done, and can be more costly. Replacement parts are also much more rare. It would be wise to research what you would do if a wing were dented etc. It would be a shame to be grounded for a long time awaiting special expensive parts. I did have some email exchange with a member of a very active club member in Australia, who seemed to specialize in AA5's. It might be worth hunting down, I no longer have the email address.
Bear in mind that the good cruise speed (with the fixed pitch prop) can come at the expense of short field performance, and best angle type climb performance. Consider where you would like to fly it, and carrying how much....
I own a Grumman AA1B and have flown and instructed in the AA5 series. I think they are very under rated aircraft with great visibility, delightfully light controls and they are significantly faster then the equivalent Piper or Cessna. They are not great short field aircraft but do OK if the weight is kept down. The choice of Cheetah or Tiger will be driven by how big a load you want to carry. IMO the sweet spot is a Cheetah with the 160 hp engine mod and the optional 50 US gallon long range tanks.
Thanks for the kind words Ultranomad, and yes, I like my (share of an) AA5a.
The Cheetah took, ooh, about an hour and a half for this particular pilot to become a thorough convert. Not only much cheaper to buy, the handling I regard as much more "sorted" than the common Piper and Cessna breeds that at the time I had far more hours on.
Performance is similar to the larger PA28-161 Warrior II that's very well known, but compared to that the control forces are much lower without ever getting dangerously so, the view is excellent [I'm a 5ft 6" shortarse but can see over the nose very easily], I very much like the slide-back canopy (although I seldom if ever bother opening it in flight), and the instrument fit is always excellent - although I've yet to fly one with a consistently serviceable autopilot. The ground steering is unusual but excellent - with a castoring nosewheel and differential braking you need to learn a slightly different way of steering on the ground, but it'll turn on a sixpence on the ground.
I use mine mostly for long trips solo or 2-up around the UK, which it does very well. It's good in IMC, but the cockpit lighting is marginal for night. On the other hand, as NPPL(SSEA) holders, you won't care about either of those things.
Performance wise, reckon on solo or 2-up about 5-6 hours endurance at ~105kn (no reserves on that), 3-up, around 2-3 hours. The 4th seat is where you put your jacket and flight bag! It's quite happy operating at any altitude up to 10,000ft (and probably higher, I've not tried); personally I'd say that I want 600m of runway for most purposes, and I'd suggest 800m for the first few tens of hours of any new pilot.
If you want an instructor to help with converting the syndicate onto type, shout - I enjoy teaching on type and am based in Bucks and Beds. As Ultranomad said, it's very forgiving.
At 998kg MTOW it saves a lot on insurance and landing fees: annual fixed costs will vary depending upon how/where you keep it, but we run ours at £90/hr all-in, which includes building up some engine fund. Fuel consumption is a little higher than I personally think it should be: plan on 30 litres/hr however and you'll be about right.
I don't know the other types you mention particularly well. The Europa is an LAA aeroplane so day/VFR restricted; it's glider technology in many ways, particularly with the big central monowheel. It should be very familiar territory for a glider pilot and reasonably inexpensive to run. For your group I'd look hard at it. The purchase price is likely to be a bit higher than the AA5a but the running costs much lower with no CofA fees, and Rotax engine fuel burn around 20 litres/hr. The LAA coaching scheme will get you all bedded into the aeroplane well and you all want to be LAA members as a matter of principle. You can't easily bring non-PPL(SEP)/NPPL(SSEA) holders into the group on a Europa because of the legal instructing restrictions, but existing licence holders should be no problem to convert.
The Robins are spoken well of, but I just don't know them well enough to offer a meaningful opinion, so I won't. But, in your position I'd certainly be trying to learn about them.
G
The Cheetah took, ooh, about an hour and a half for this particular pilot to become a thorough convert. Not only much cheaper to buy, the handling I regard as much more "sorted" than the common Piper and Cessna breeds that at the time I had far more hours on.
Performance is similar to the larger PA28-161 Warrior II that's very well known, but compared to that the control forces are much lower without ever getting dangerously so, the view is excellent [I'm a 5ft 6" shortarse but can see over the nose very easily], I very much like the slide-back canopy (although I seldom if ever bother opening it in flight), and the instrument fit is always excellent - although I've yet to fly one with a consistently serviceable autopilot. The ground steering is unusual but excellent - with a castoring nosewheel and differential braking you need to learn a slightly different way of steering on the ground, but it'll turn on a sixpence on the ground.
I use mine mostly for long trips solo or 2-up around the UK, which it does very well. It's good in IMC, but the cockpit lighting is marginal for night. On the other hand, as NPPL(SSEA) holders, you won't care about either of those things.
Performance wise, reckon on solo or 2-up about 5-6 hours endurance at ~105kn (no reserves on that), 3-up, around 2-3 hours. The 4th seat is where you put your jacket and flight bag! It's quite happy operating at any altitude up to 10,000ft (and probably higher, I've not tried); personally I'd say that I want 600m of runway for most purposes, and I'd suggest 800m for the first few tens of hours of any new pilot.
If you want an instructor to help with converting the syndicate onto type, shout - I enjoy teaching on type and am based in Bucks and Beds. As Ultranomad said, it's very forgiving.
At 998kg MTOW it saves a lot on insurance and landing fees: annual fixed costs will vary depending upon how/where you keep it, but we run ours at £90/hr all-in, which includes building up some engine fund. Fuel consumption is a little higher than I personally think it should be: plan on 30 litres/hr however and you'll be about right.
I don't know the other types you mention particularly well. The Europa is an LAA aeroplane so day/VFR restricted; it's glider technology in many ways, particularly with the big central monowheel. It should be very familiar territory for a glider pilot and reasonably inexpensive to run. For your group I'd look hard at it. The purchase price is likely to be a bit higher than the AA5a but the running costs much lower with no CofA fees, and Rotax engine fuel burn around 20 litres/hr. The LAA coaching scheme will get you all bedded into the aeroplane well and you all want to be LAA members as a matter of principle. You can't easily bring non-PPL(SEP)/NPPL(SSEA) holders into the group on a Europa because of the legal instructing restrictions, but existing licence holders should be no problem to convert.
The Robins are spoken well of, but I just don't know them well enough to offer a meaningful opinion, so I won't. But, in your position I'd certainly be trying to learn about them.
G
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to fly G DINA about 20 years ago and had the great pleasure of seeing her sitting on the Grass at Shobdon a few weeks back.
It was like stepping back in time seeing the old girl after such an absence.
Compared to the usual Spam cams the Tiger has character. When you consider you get fixed gear fixed prop running costs and 128 kt cruise that is pretty good.
Handing is good and the views out excellent.
I too never bothered opening the canopy in flight but used to pull it open on hot summer days on the ground.
With the Canopy open getting in and out is a doddle as you step down into it.
The aircraft went back into production so there should be a few newer varieties kicking around.
Very under rated aircraft which knocks the spots of the usual boring PA28s
As for the bonding issues claimed there are many old aircraft still hacking around so it cannot have been that much of an issue.
Pace
It was like stepping back in time seeing the old girl after such an absence.
Compared to the usual Spam cams the Tiger has character. When you consider you get fixed gear fixed prop running costs and 128 kt cruise that is pretty good.
Handing is good and the views out excellent.
I too never bothered opening the canopy in flight but used to pull it open on hot summer days on the ground.
With the Canopy open getting in and out is a doddle as you step down into it.
The aircraft went back into production so there should be a few newer varieties kicking around.
Very under rated aircraft which knocks the spots of the usual boring PA28s
As for the bonding issues claimed there are many old aircraft still hacking around so it cannot have been that much of an issue.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 12th Sep 2012 at 09:23.
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Milton Keynes & Lausanne !
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I bought into the same share as G some months ago and the Cheetah is a pleasure to fly. 
Good visibility and I find a lot lot quieter than 152/172's at cruise.
Never tried flying with top open but its nice to open it while taxiing on the ground.
I will share the same comment as G that the 4th seat is best kept empty.
4 up and for a low hours PPL it took some getting used to.. a bit unnerving climbing on the stall warner ...
Step in canopy real nice , took my 70+ year old mother for a flight recently and she found it really easy to get in/out.
Scott
Good visibility and I find a lot lot quieter than 152/172's at cruise.
Never tried flying with top open but its nice to open it while taxiing on the ground.
I will share the same comment as G that the 4th seat is best kept empty.
4 up and for a low hours PPL it took some getting used to.. a bit unnerving climbing on the stall warner ...
Step in canopy real nice , took my 70+ year old mother for a flight recently and she found it really easy to get in/out.
Scott
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Midlands
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'As for the bonding issues claimed there are many old aircraft still hacking around so it cannot have been that much of an issue.'
I can confirm that it is a major issue on any Grumman produced between early 1974 and middle of 1977 when a purple glue was used to replace a vanilla coloured glue.(They went back after '77 to the vanilla glue)
'Purple Passion' as it was commonly known can cause you to have some very (and I mean very)expensive problems with wing and fuel tank debonding.
Personally I would avoid any Grumman built in the 'purple glue' years. A good inspection of an aircraft will tell you which glue has beeen used.
The vanilla glued aircraft have virtually no debonding issues.
I can confirm that it is a major issue on any Grumman produced between early 1974 and middle of 1977 when a purple glue was used to replace a vanilla coloured glue.(They went back after '77 to the vanilla glue)
'Purple Passion' as it was commonly known can cause you to have some very (and I mean very)expensive problems with wing and fuel tank debonding.
Personally I would avoid any Grumman built in the 'purple glue' years. A good inspection of an aircraft will tell you which glue has beeen used.
The vanilla glued aircraft have virtually no debonding issues.
Ours is post 77, which is probably why the debonding hadn't been on my particular radar.
A few trip round times in the Cheetah to give you something to think on:-
Cranfield-Wickenby-Cranfield: 2:30
Cranfield-Prestwick-Cranfield: 6:00
Cranfield-Dundee-Cranfield: 6:35
Cranfield-Exeter-Cranfield: 3:05
Cranfield-Prestwick-Dundee-Cranfield: 8:25
Cranfield-Liverpool-Cranfield: 2:50
Cranfield-Rufforth-Cranfield: 2:40
No prizes for guessing our home airfield! But, it shows what she's capable of very easily. All the times are out of my logbook, so include the taxi time.
G
A few trip round times in the Cheetah to give you something to think on:-
Cranfield-Wickenby-Cranfield: 2:30
Cranfield-Prestwick-Cranfield: 6:00
Cranfield-Dundee-Cranfield: 6:35
Cranfield-Exeter-Cranfield: 3:05
Cranfield-Prestwick-Dundee-Cranfield: 8:25
Cranfield-Liverpool-Cranfield: 2:50
Cranfield-Rufforth-Cranfield: 2:40
No prizes for guessing our home airfield! But, it shows what she's capable of very easily. All the times are out of my logbook, so include the taxi time.
G
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I know any of those machines would make great first aircraft.
Suggest you go sit and fly in them if you can before making a final decision. The grummans for some reason are quite cheap relatively speaking but I hear many good things about flying them. They are also fairly common which means getting maintenance support should not be too tough.
Also once you've decided where to keep your machine, why not check what kind of aircraft the local maintenance facility have experience in? You may find that none of them know much about wood and fabric - hence a Jodel or a Robin might not be such a good idea. Don't set your mind on something too soon before flying. I have only really flown one Jodel and it was very nice to fly.
Europas are lovely, tend to be well equipped and very economical especially using mogas
. I'd go for the tri gear version in a syndicate, it makes it simpler although the classic is also really nice . Advice I've taken is avoid the subaru engined ones with the fancy clutch mechanism on the propeller .
Suggest you go sit and fly in them if you can before making a final decision. The grummans for some reason are quite cheap relatively speaking but I hear many good things about flying them. They are also fairly common which means getting maintenance support should not be too tough.
Also once you've decided where to keep your machine, why not check what kind of aircraft the local maintenance facility have experience in? You may find that none of them know much about wood and fabric - hence a Jodel or a Robin might not be such a good idea. Don't set your mind on something too soon before flying. I have only really flown one Jodel and it was very nice to fly.
Europas are lovely, tend to be well equipped and very economical especially using mogas
. I'd go for the tri gear version in a syndicate, it makes it simpler although the classic is also really nice . Advice I've taken is avoid the subaru engined ones with the fancy clutch mechanism on the propeller .
The late and not-overly lamented Cabair used to have a fleet of Grummans which is why there are quite a few around, which went into the private market when they replaced their fleet around a decade ago. It's probably also why most of the UK AA5s are very well equipped.
A typical fit is 2xalt, 2xVOR, ILS, ADF, DME, 2xradio, and a useless single axis autopilot.
Some very good advice there from Dan, although if the syndicate are all high hour glider pilots, the bit about a trigear Europa is probably less important.
G
A typical fit is 2xalt, 2xVOR, ILS, ADF, DME, 2xradio, and a useless single axis autopilot.
Some very good advice there from Dan, although if the syndicate are all high hour glider pilots, the bit about a trigear Europa is probably less important.
G
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Europas are lovely, tend to be well equipped and very economical especially using mogas . I'd go for the tri gear version in a syndicate, it makes it simpler although the classic is also really nice . Advice I've taken is avoid the subaru engined ones with the fancy clutch mechanism on the propeller
The Grumman can be flown in IMC! So the Europa will be limiting although a nice aircraft.
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 12th Sep 2012 at 11:08.
But if all of the syndicate are NPPL holders - as said by the OP, they can't legally fly it night or IMC.
Permits and the NPPL are quite literally made for each other.
To use the capabilities of a CofA aeroplane fully you also need a more expensive licence.
The impressive kit on that Europa is probably all uncertified, but it does give an effective "get out of gaol card" on occasion, as well as easing everyday cross-country flying.
G
Permits and the NPPL are quite literally made for each other.
To use the capabilities of a CofA aeroplane fully you also need a more expensive licence.
The impressive kit on that Europa is probably all uncertified, but it does give an effective "get out of gaol card" on occasion, as well as easing everyday cross-country flying.
G
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: just to the left of the filing cabinet
Posts: 255
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilot did a Buyers Guide for the AA5 in the June 2009 edition, concentrating mainly on the Cheetah; you can probably get a re-print from them to get a bit more detail.
The main things to bear in mind seem to be the bonding issues previously mentioned, checking the nose leg and firewall for landing abuse and the main spar which is lifed at 12,500hrs. Not a big problem, but taxiing with a castoring nosewheel and differential braking takes a bit of getting used to after steerable nosewheel aircraft and needs to be borne in mind with crosswinds. The sliding canopy is my favourite bit; you don't get fried on the ground in the summer, it offers good visibility and easy access.
The main things to bear in mind seem to be the bonding issues previously mentioned, checking the nose leg and firewall for landing abuse and the main spar which is lifed at 12,500hrs. Not a big problem, but taxiing with a castoring nosewheel and differential braking takes a bit of getting used to after steerable nosewheel aircraft and needs to be borne in mind with crosswinds. The sliding canopy is my favourite bit; you don't get fried on the ground in the summer, it offers good visibility and easy access.
Moderator
My reference to the bonding issues was partly an awareness point, as other posters have also mentioned. However, in addition, even a bonded aircraft which is in good condition may need to be repaired one day. The AA1 and AA5 designs were born of Jim Bede amateur build designs, which were intended to be quick and simple to build and maintain. That simplicity can turn itself back around decades later into costly complexity, if the maintenance facility is not set up for that kind of work. Simply satisfy yourself that were the aircraft to be damaged, getting it fixed is easily accomplished - denting a leading edge is easy, replacing several whole wing panels can be more that expected in cost, time, and parts.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: purley
Age: 69
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to fly an AA5A G-BFIJ, 160hp and long range tanks, which was very comfortable for long 4 hour flights. Very good performance at 2400rpm/115kts. Very good visability and a really clear panel. I was told by a maintenance organisation at Biggin that in fact they are very cheap to maintain. I like the way the cowlings open and the slide back canopy that is safe and great for taxying in hot weather. I think the AA5B with the 180hp is slightly better at load and speed, but does used more fuel. If you are looking for a LAA type, but only two seats then you cannot beat the simplicity of the RV6/7 or the 4/8 if you want tandem seating. All of them will cruise at 130 - 150kts.