is true, and I agree that the direct answer to this question, in the context of this discussion is the 172.

However,

My opinion of why they are good trainers, as I also think a Tiger Moth is a good trainer, is that they are not stellar in performance nor handling, but are unusually safe. A good trainer is not the aircraft that can do everything well, that's the good working aircraft. If a pilot can manage an anemic aircraft well, they are well positioned for transition to other types.

For a few pilots I have cross trained, who I know were very experienced on more capable types, an element of my training (which took a lot of time and demonstration) has had to be that this aircraft will not simply out climb something straight ahead, you'd better plan. It will not just haul a load off a short runway, you will have to refer to performance information, and apply a suitable technique.

The foregoing may be small "deltas" for long paved runway operations, but when I have a Cessna 210 pilot whom I'm now training in a 172 on floats, it can be critical. A good training aircraft will not be a ball of highly maneuverable fire in the hands of a new pilot, for the same reason we don't normally train drivers in Ferraris. The trainer must demand good technique, planning and patience.

For the few times I have had to train a pilot in a new type which was a real performer, I have reverted to artificially reducing the capability of the aircraft. When finishing the training of a fellow once in his new (to him) Lake Renegade, I required all takeoffs to be at 60% power maximum. He reflected later that my requiring that of him was the single most formative element of the training, and had been a great benefit over the training of the other instructor who had allowed him to use full power.

There have been times I have said to another pilot "well, that worked, but it should not have". Meaning that the capability of the aircraft had masked their poor technique. A "good trainer" will not mask poor technique with its own performance or handling. But, on the other hand, it will not be so difficult to fly, that it frustrates the student, or is dangerous.

It is for these reasons that one must really understand the intended role of an aircraft before choosing it for the job....

Step Turn - You have made a really good case for learning to fly poorly performing aircraft but I think an even better case for learning to fly with a really well qualified, experienced instructor. But would I be correct in thinking that your pupils would achieve a higher standard if you taught them in a 150 than in 172? And which do you prefer to teach in?

PM

I eagerly agree that an experienced instructor, and adequate time for extensive instruction (= student pays) is the very best tool for good pilot training, and beyond that, the aircraft need be reliable and durable, and less importantly of a particular type. I know of one fellow who went zero to multi day night PPL, only ever flying the Aztec he bought - but, he spent the time, and had a good instructor!

All of the training I do is advanced type conversion training, no ab initio. Therefore, I defer to Instructors in the more established form to select there preferred type. However, I will say that it is not the role of the instructor to select a plane they like to fly, in which to train, it is their job to train well in what they are given to train in, within their skill set.

150 vs 172? Both fine, the 150 trained pilot will catch onto the 172 with more ease than the other way around, but not by much.... Training in a 170B or 180 would be better though!

Best aircraft for a group is a totaly different question, to my mind the best group aircraft would probably be an LAA aircraft as the savings on maintanence will save a load over a CAA type, flew our RV7 Barton - Lille and back this weekend, 2:05 out, 2:15 back, cost was £84 plus fuel (125l), try and achieve that in a Cessna of any type and I will be surprised if you manage it!
For a school the argument is completely different, in the UK performance is not normally a problem from most fields, reliabilty, operating cost and ease of maintenance becomes the major factor which is where the C152 comes in.