Chipmunk - Should I?
Joined: Mar 2005
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 6,563
Likes: 953
From: Aus
any reason why not to, anything to be wary of
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
From: Dubai
Somebody once told me that a Jungmann was a better handling aircraft than the Chipmunk. I dispute that.
Loved flying the Chipmunk and seriously considering getting involved in another.
I'm certain SSD will be along in a moment to extol the virtues of the Chippy.
Delightful aircraft if properly maintained. A bitch if it aint.
Loved flying the Chipmunk and seriously considering getting involved in another.
I'm certain SSD will be along in a moment to extol the virtues of the Chippy.
Delightful aircraft if properly maintained. A bitch if it aint.
Joined: Jun 2002
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 7,177
Likes: 297
From: Nanaimo (CAC8)
FA,
Of course you should, but as others have said, look at the maintenance history carefully.
With regard to comparing the Chippie with a Spitfire, I am lucky enough to have flown both
Without doubt, the Chipmunk is much nicer to fly, but the elliptical wing and the 27 litre Merlin of the Spit more than make up for the heavy ailerons and super-sensitive elevators. 
Of course you should, but as others have said, look at the maintenance history carefully.
With regard to comparing the Chippie with a Spitfire, I am lucky enough to have flown both
Without doubt, the Chipmunk is much nicer to fly, but the elliptical wing and the 27 litre Merlin of the Spit more than make up for the heavy ailerons and super-sensitive elevators.
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 2
From: UK
SRD - here I am! When I bought into G-BCSL as a founder member of the Barton Chipmunk Group in 1979 the then CFI (who had formed the group for us new PPLs to have something interesting to fly after the prosaic club C150s) said "it'll spoil you for anything else".
I thought he was exaggerating. He wasn't! It is far and away best handling aeroplane with the most 'character' I have ever flown, and I've flown a few. Had a share in a Yak52 for a few years - knocked the Chippy into a cocked hat for capability. But it just wasn't as much fun.
I haven't flown a Spitfire but I know a few lucky souls who have flown one and the Chippy. Obviously the Spit is in a different world performance wise, but for handling.... at least one prefers the Chippy.
So not only should you; you MUST!
This sums it up for me - me having fun at Kenyon Hall Farm strip in our beloved SL:
I thought he was exaggerating. He wasn't! It is far and away best handling aeroplane with the most 'character' I have ever flown, and I've flown a few. Had a share in a Yak52 for a few years - knocked the Chippy into a cocked hat for capability. But it just wasn't as much fun.
I haven't flown a Spitfire but I know a few lucky souls who have flown one and the Chippy. Obviously the Spit is in a different world performance wise, but for handling.... at least one prefers the Chippy.
So not only should you; you MUST!
This sums it up for me - me having fun at Kenyon Hall Farm strip in our beloved SL:
Moderator
Joined: Jun 1999
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 2,903
Likes: 32
From: MAN. UK.
Having been fortunate enough to have flown the Harvard, Mustang and Spitfire (Back seats on the last two) I can honestly say that my overwhelming respect for the Chipmunk remains intact.
It really does handle like a Spitfire without the power and speed inertia but in all other respects does replicate that feeling of 'wearing the aircraft'.
The handling is superb and I often tell people it's the difference between learning to ride on a school Dobbin and climbing onto your first dressage horse.
Owning one outright or being in a small group will seriously hurt your wallet. You are placed at the top end of GA maintenance bills but if you can join a group that is caring for it's aircraft and sharing the bills then you will never regret your decision to join.
Just watch the crosswinds!
It really does handle like a Spitfire without the power and speed inertia but in all other respects does replicate that feeling of 'wearing the aircraft'.
The handling is superb and I often tell people it's the difference between learning to ride on a school Dobbin and climbing onto your first dressage horse.
Owning one outright or being in a small group will seriously hurt your wallet. You are placed at the top end of GA maintenance bills but if you can join a group that is caring for it's aircraft and sharing the bills then you will never regret your decision to join.
Just watch the crosswinds!
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
From: london
I thought that the maintenance costs had got a lot better since the Chipmunk had gone on to an LAA permit to fly? I understand that a few are still run on a C of A, so that they can be used for training and hire...?
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,146
Likes: 5
From: The Wild West (UK)
Perhaps the comparison is moot, given that the Chipmunk is aerobatic but the Turbulent is not, but it's also a tailwheel/taildragger aircraft with crisp handling often described using superlatives: can anybody comment on how they compare?
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,856
Likes: 75
From: uk
I have never flown a Turbulent but I have flown the Chipmunk and Condor. Personally I prefer the handling of the Condor, especially in roll. More crisp is the right word and, with a four point harness, one does feel part of the aeroplane. However, for pure ethos and aerobatics, the Chipmunk is in a world of its own.
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 584
Likes: 1
From: 1000ft above you, giving you the bird!
As long as you remember the pedals on the floor are actually required at all times that the engine is turning you'll be fine, handbrake whilst taxing in a crosswind can be fun also...and that when you slow roll them do not worry about the canopy sliding back......caveat... try and catch it before it goes past the retainer for 1 up - otherwise its really embarrassing when it goes all the way to the back stop and you are flying Solo......but for giggles you cannot get a better aircraft
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 2
From: UK
I think all civilian Chippies (so these days, that's all of them bar the BBMF) don't have cartridge start. And the ring mod on the pistons largely tames the oil consumption, though you wouldn't think it as you crawl underneath post flight all the way down to the rear of the fuselage wiping the oil off!
That's assuming you aerobat it. But doesn't everyone who is lucky enough to fly one?
That's assuming you aerobat it. But doesn't everyone who is lucky enough to fly one?
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,214
Likes: 0
From: S Warwickshire
I had a share in a chippy and really enjoyed it ( when it was serviceable)...
But then got a Vans RV-4 which may not quite have the aesthetic character, but it was 70mph faster, more than twice the climb rate, used less fuel, had better handling, was easy to maintain at about 10% of the maintenance cost and didn't leave a pool of oil on the hangar floor!
If it's a good one then go for it, you won't regret the experience.
But then got a Vans RV-4 which may not quite have the aesthetic character, but it was 70mph faster, more than twice the climb rate, used less fuel, had better handling, was easy to maintain at about 10% of the maintenance cost and didn't leave a pool of oil on the hangar floor!
If it's a good one then go for it, you won't regret the experience.
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 1
From: In the boot of my car!
Never flown A Chippy but believe some were modified into very sporty machines. Some even with a bubble canopy?
Best handling aircraft I flew was a Sia Marchetti 260 which was a delight to fly but no idea if it has better handling than the Chippy
So what wins the best handling Single Piston ?
Pace
Best handling aircraft I flew was a Sia Marchetti 260 which was a delight to fly but no idea if it has better handling than the Chippy
So what wins the best handling Single Piston ?
Pace
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 3,077
Likes: 1
From: Oop North, UK
But then got a Vans RV-4 which may not quite have the aesthetic character, but it was 70mph faster, more than twice the climb rate, used less fuel, had better handling, was easy to maintain at about 10% of the maintenance cost and didn't leave a pool of oil on the hangar floor!
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,663
Likes: 0
From: Gone
I'll probably get flamed for saying this but IMHO the Chippy and RV are incomparable. The Chippy is iconic and oozing nostalgia whereas the RV breed is Meccano like kit build.
Last edited by Jetblu; 20th April 2016 at 16:50.
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 1
From: In the boot of my car!
Jetblu
I had the delight of flying a friends homebuilt RV6A which he built from plan constructing every piece himself. It took him five years to build and nearly caused a divorce but it was a beautiful aircraft to fly one you almost thought into turns without a conscious movement
Wasn't there a super chippy or something like that?
Pace
I had the delight of flying a friends homebuilt RV6A which he built from plan constructing every piece himself. It took him five years to build and nearly caused a divorce but it was a beautiful aircraft to fly one you almost thought into turns without a conscious movement
Wasn't there a super chippy or something like that?
Pace