PA28 or C172
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Colchester, Essex
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA28 or C172
Hi all,
A real quick one this time. I'm wanting to do my training on one of the club aircraft so I can take more than one passenger. The options are either a Piper PA28 or a Cessna 172. Which would you guys recommend and why?
Many thanks
T
A real quick one this time. I'm wanting to do my training on one of the club aircraft so I can take more than one passenger. The options are either a Piper PA28 or a Cessna 172. Which would you guys recommend and why?
Many thanks
T
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mercedes or BMW? It is all your choice.
I would look for other things, like which engine? If both are 180HP 360s, it does not matter which. If one is 180HP and the other 135HP, guess what ;-). If taking passengers, I prefer high wing for two reasons, looking out is usually nicer and it is easier to enter for elder pax.
But - when I trained, there was a passenger-never-ever-allowed-in-basic-PPL-training regulation. So, you are talking difference training or add-on ratings, I hope?
I would look for other things, like which engine? If both are 180HP 360s, it does not matter which. If one is 180HP and the other 135HP, guess what ;-). If taking passengers, I prefer high wing for two reasons, looking out is usually nicer and it is easier to enter for elder pax.
But - when I trained, there was a passenger-never-ever-allowed-in-basic-PPL-training regulation. So, you are talking difference training or add-on ratings, I hope?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Colchester, Essex
Posts: 347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, should've been specific. Recently received PPL, so looking to do conversion training. I'm drawn more to the Piper because of it's relatively forgiving characteristics, as mentioned. I aim to eventually have both, but one to begin with.
Thank you
Thank you
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, should've been specific. Recently received PPL, so looking to do conversion training.
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: go west
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
which PA28? there's a very massive difference whether it's Cherokee or Arrow .. anyway, go try them both and see what you like. For pax, C172 will probably be better as the pax in rear seat will see more of the scenery. For a PA28, guys at the back are sitting on the wing with a very limited view.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
which PA28? there's a very massive difference whether it's Cherokee or Arrow
I agree that there is a difference (though not "massive") between the T tailed Arrows, and their low tail brothers, but otherwise, a PA-28 is a PA-28 near enough....
Take an hour in both and see which one you like.
My own view is that if you trained on low-wingers you'll go for the PA28 and if you trained on high-wingers you'll go for the 172.
If you haven't yet got your PPL then do most of your training on the cheaper one, and assuming you're a decent student make sure you get 10-15 hours on the other.
If you haven't got your PPL and there's a 152 or Tomahawk to rent, then save your money and train on it. It'll be simple to convert to the four-seaters later.
My own view is that if you trained on low-wingers you'll go for the PA28 and if you trained on high-wingers you'll go for the 172.
If you haven't yet got your PPL then do most of your training on the cheaper one, and assuming you're a decent student make sure you get 10-15 hours on the other.
If you haven't got your PPL and there's a 152 or Tomahawk to rent, then save your money and train on it. It'll be simple to convert to the four-seaters later.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Down at the sharp pointy end, where all the weather is made.
Age: 74
Posts: 1,684
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
But - when I trained, there was a passenger-never-ever-allowed-in-basic-PPL-training regulation
Do please quote chapter and verse, if it IS actually a regulation, not just a rule imposed by the training outfit.
The only restriction I would impose would be during exercises requiring the utility part of the envelope, such as stalling.
TOO
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Suffolk
Age: 70
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The one door on a PA28 rules it out for me on safety grounds. But I prefer a low wing to the high wing Cessna which has two doors. The Tomahawk is cheap and has great visibility but (IMHO) is built down to a cost - and that high elevator (out of prop slipstream) means it's authority on landing is limited so speed control is more critical - and arguably teaches you to be a better pilot.
Last edited by rusty sparrow; 17th Jan 2017 at 19:30. Reason: grammar edit
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: London
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would definitely try both if I were you. Perhaps start with the one that is most familiar. For instance - did you learn on a C152? Give the 172 a go first, see how you like it. Then try the PA28.
I am only saying this because some of the reflexes you have learnt are in slightly different places in the Cessnas than the PA28.
Definitely do both!
I am only saying this because some of the reflexes you have learnt are in slightly different places in the Cessnas than the PA28.
Definitely do both!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having flown both, I find they're not too dissimilar to fly. Personally I prefer the low wing for visibility in turns, but I'm currently flying a high wing type and am very happy.
In your position I'd probably base my decision on what had the best availability and the lowest hourly rate.
In your position I'd probably base my decision on what had the best availability and the lowest hourly rate.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From an aircraft performance point of view you could not slide a cigarette paper between the two aircraft and so the decision comes down to other factors.
I can't see facts backing up Rusty Sparrows opinion about PA28 safety issues but I do agree with his / her opinion about the PA38 being a very good training aircraft.
I can't see facts backing up Rusty Sparrows opinion about PA28 safety issues but I do agree with his / her opinion about the PA38 being a very good training aircraft.
Cessna every time.
Two doors, so you can supervise and assist your passenger(s) entering the aircraft and getting strapped in.
High wing - easier entry, great view for all passengers, no grovelling around on the grass, draining fuel. The only drawback is the need for more vigilance during turns.
It's been a while since I've flown a Piper, but I prefer the landing characteristics of Cessnas. The key, as with any aircraft, is to be on speed and trimmed and hold-off as long as possible, to land on the main wheels.
Two doors, so you can supervise and assist your passenger(s) entering the aircraft and getting strapped in.
High wing - easier entry, great view for all passengers, no grovelling around on the grass, draining fuel. The only drawback is the need for more vigilance during turns.
It's been a while since I've flown a Piper, but I prefer the landing characteristics of Cessnas. The key, as with any aircraft, is to be on speed and trimmed and hold-off as long as possible, to land on the main wheels.
Last edited by India Four Two; 18th Jan 2017 at 16:48. Reason: Speelling
My choice wold be a tapered wing PA28, especially for a touring aircraft, they're quieter and faster than a C 172 with nicer handling. The aileron control in a C172 is ponderous and the high wing provides very poor visibility for seeing other aircraft especially in the circuit.
Also a lot of non pilot passengers like the "security" of having a wing between them and the ground.
PA 28 airframes are generally simpler and cheaper to maintain than a C172.
When you're looking at a PA28 you need to be aware of the different variants. Most of the early PA28's have the shorter fuselage and also a smaller elevator. They are usually much cheaper as the 140's especially are really a 2+2 seater. The later ones have a lot more room for the rear seat passengers. The larger elevator gives better control.
The 161 and 181 series have the tapered wing which doesn't stop flying like the old slab wing. Don't be 5 knots or more too fast over the fence otherwise you'll float for ever.
Also a lot of non pilot passengers like the "security" of having a wing between them and the ground.
PA 28 airframes are generally simpler and cheaper to maintain than a C172.
When you're looking at a PA28 you need to be aware of the different variants. Most of the early PA28's have the shorter fuselage and also a smaller elevator. They are usually much cheaper as the 140's especially are really a 2+2 seater. The later ones have a lot more room for the rear seat passengers. The larger elevator gives better control.
The 161 and 181 series have the tapered wing which doesn't stop flying like the old slab wing. Don't be 5 knots or more too fast over the fence otherwise you'll float for ever.
Last edited by 27/09; 18th Jan 2017 at 08:14.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whaaaaaat???
Do please quote chapter and verse, if it IS actually a regulation, not just a rule imposed by the training outfit.
The only restriction I would impose would be during exercises requiring the utility part of the envelope, such as stalling.
TOO
Do please quote chapter and verse, if it IS actually a regulation, not just a rule imposed by the training outfit.
The only restriction I would impose would be during exercises requiring the utility part of the envelope, such as stalling.
TOO
Carriage of passengers
Subject to the approval of the Head of Training and the privileges of his licence, a person may fly as PIC of a Company aircraft carrying passengers provided that the following conditions are complied with:
(a) He shall not act as pilot-in-command of a aircraft carrying passengers unless within the preceding 90 days he has made 3 circuits, each to include take-offs and landings, as the sole manipulator of the controls in a helicopter of the same type to be flown.
(b) Passengers may not be carried on student solo flights
(c) Passengers may not be carried on dual instructional flights with the following exceptions:
i. Another student on the same course of training may be carried if there is a training benefit to be gained.
ii. CAA inspectors may be carried on any dual instructional flight.
iii. Passengers may be carried on trial lessons provided that they have a clear and direct interest in the flight (e.g. parents, partner, etc.) and no remuneration of any kind is given in respect of their carriage.
I didn't look up the specific Part.ORA paragraphs, but as it seems, yes, you may carry special passengers on dual instruction trial lessons (whatever "trial" means in that context, I suspect i.e. not at airwork sessions, which would make sense?).
Btw, the FAA is easier to fetch:
FAA FAQ - Student Pilot Training and Limits
As a student pilot, can I carry passengers with me before getting my recreational or private pilot’s certificate?
No.
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: go west
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cherokee on the other hand, if it's one of those 140hp early models will struggle to achieve anything more than 90kt, where as some of the turbo charged arrows will do 170 ish.. Now that counts as a massive difference in my book
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that the T tailed Arrows are a bird of a different feather. Otherwise, even the "regular" Arrows and Dakota fly basically the same as a Cherokee 140, just somewhat faster in cruise. Ultimately, you should be flying a 'plane at its proper speeds, the fact that they might be faster does not make the 'plane more difficult or different to fly, (unless you're trying to tuck it into a short runway).
I suppose that "massive" is subjective to the speaker, based upon their personal experience. For me, a "massive difference" is present between flying flying a Cub to an SM 1019, or Aztec to DC-3. But when I think of single engined Cessnas and Pipers I don't perceive massive difference, even C 172 to Caravan, just some additional steps, pounds and knots.
I suppose that "massive" is subjective to the speaker, based upon their personal experience. For me, a "massive difference" is present between flying flying a Cub to an SM 1019, or Aztec to DC-3. But when I think of single engined Cessnas and Pipers I don't perceive massive difference, even C 172 to Caravan, just some additional steps, pounds and knots.
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: go west
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that the T tailed Arrows are a bird of a different feather. Otherwise, even the "regular" Arrows and Dakota fly basically the same as a Cherokee 140, just somewhat faster in cruise. Ultimately, you should be flying a 'plane at its proper speeds, the fact that they might be faster does not make the 'plane more difficult or different to fly, (unless you're trying to tuck it into a short runway).
I suppose that "massive" is subjective to the speaker, based upon their personal experience. For me, a "massive difference" is present between flying flying a Cub to an SM 1019, or Aztec to DC-3. But when I think of single engined Cessnas and Pipers I don't perceive massive difference, even C 172 to Caravan, just some additional steps, pounds and knots.
I suppose that "massive" is subjective to the speaker, based upon their personal experience. For me, a "massive difference" is present between flying flying a Cub to an SM 1019, or Aztec to DC-3. But when I think of single engined Cessnas and Pipers I don't perceive massive difference, even C 172 to Caravan, just some additional steps, pounds and knots.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the OP is a freshly qualified PPL holder
Indeed, this does pose a challenge to the ace test pilots who evaluate these aircraft, as they have to detune their skills to some degree, so as not to accidentally mask a demanding characteristic with their skill, which the new pilot might not have.
Aviation tends to contain elements of pilots telling other pilots how different aircraft are to fly, and a little "enthusiasm" sprinkled into their comments. Many types have been warned to me before I flew them, for the most part, I found a pleasant airplane. The only fire breathers I have found are a few taildraggers, who will let you know if you're not applying rudder adequately!