What aircraft to train in?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Burton on Trent
Age: 35
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What aircraft to train in?
Hi folks.
This might be a silly question but here goes.
I'm going to be booking some lessons soon but I'm a little confused as to what's best to train in.
The choice will probably be between a Cessna 152 or an Archer PA28.
So my question really is what are the pro's and con's of the two for purposes of learning and also with there be any restrictions imposed if I learn one or the other.
Cheers for your help here.
This might be a silly question but here goes.
I'm going to be booking some lessons soon but I'm a little confused as to what's best to train in.
The choice will probably be between a Cessna 152 or an Archer PA28.
So my question really is what are the pro's and con's of the two for purposes of learning and also with there be any restrictions imposed if I learn one or the other.
Cheers for your help here.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seconded.
Once you have your licence you will have an SEP single engine rating added to it. They are both valid types on the rating, so you would only have to under-go differences training.
Flying (and cost) wise you be better on the 152. The Archer is a souped up warrior, of course the salient difference being low wing when compared with the 152 (obvious really!!) The Archer may be a bit faster and more powerful, but in the SEP world its really rather insignificant. The Cessna is a great training aircraft and very forgiving. I guess the only pro for the Archer is it may require a bit more power and speed management so you'll be ahead of the game quicker if you ever want to trade up to a complex type like a PA28-200 Arrow.
Start on the 152. Work up to the other stuff at a later date when your wallet allows
Once you have your licence you will have an SEP single engine rating added to it. They are both valid types on the rating, so you would only have to under-go differences training.
Flying (and cost) wise you be better on the 152. The Archer is a souped up warrior, of course the salient difference being low wing when compared with the 152 (obvious really!!) The Archer may be a bit faster and more powerful, but in the SEP world its really rather insignificant. The Cessna is a great training aircraft and very forgiving. I guess the only pro for the Archer is it may require a bit more power and speed management so you'll be ahead of the game quicker if you ever want to trade up to a complex type like a PA28-200 Arrow.
Start on the 152. Work up to the other stuff at a later date when your wallet allows
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't say it would do that but it will do.
The C150/C152 don't really have any vices but against an archer its a waste of money doing it in a 4 seater.
Now if you had said PA38 v C152 you should have choosen the PA38
The C150/C152 don't really have any vices but against an archer its a waste of money doing it in a 4 seater.
Now if you had said PA38 v C152 you should have choosen the PA38
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C152 is usually cheaper and is a superb trainer. It has good handling and for navigation it's a little easier because your downwards visibility is not impeded by the wings as in the PA28. Refuelling requires a bit of climbing, so it's not as easy as a PA28.
PA28 is usually a bit more expensive, but if you're on the larger side there's a bit more room in a PA28. There's only one door and that's on the instructor's side so there's a bit of clambering to get in and out. The view up and out is a bit better than in the case of the C152.
I personally prefer the C152A, because a) it's cheaper and b) you can do a loop, roll and spinning in it.
PA28 is usually a bit more expensive, but if you're on the larger side there's a bit more room in a PA28. There's only one door and that's on the instructor's side so there's a bit of clambering to get in and out. The view up and out is a bit better than in the case of the C152.
I personally prefer the C152A, because a) it's cheaper and b) you can do a loop, roll and spinning in it.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Vienna
Age: 50
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you can do a loop, roll and spinning in it
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: EU
Posts: 628
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And if you try it in a normal C152 and not the Aerobat version, you might not only see some oil but some solid and possibly vital parts leaving the airplane.
Given neither the PPL nor CPL syllabus contain any manoeuvre even faintly aerobatic, the tenuous aerobatic capability of the C152 is rather irrelevant.
For somebody first learning to fly then, which is an expensive occupation, by any standard, the first and most important consideration is price. The C152 will always be cheaper than the PA28, so that ticks that box.
Is the C152 any good as a training aeroplane? Yes, it is absolutely superb, well laid out, easy to fly, but requiring and teaching good habits and practices.
Is there anything wrong with the C152?
- Well to an experienced pilot, it's very boring. That does not apply to anybody new, or frankly anybody with under 300 hours, so who cares. [The Ford Escort is a very boring car as well, but excellent to learn to drive in.]
- It's a bit cramped - but unless you have a rugby players shoulders, or are well over 6ft, or are seriously overweight, it should be fine. There's an easy way to find out - go for a half hour trial flight in one.
So, given a choice of the two, I'd pick the C152 for initial flying courses, for most people.
As others have said, there's a healthy debate between the C152 and PA38, if the latter is available (plenty of threads on that, and no need to start a new one). You'll find as many people on either side of the argument. Ultimately, both are damned good training aeroplanes, but if only one is available - take that one!
G
For somebody first learning to fly then, which is an expensive occupation, by any standard, the first and most important consideration is price. The C152 will always be cheaper than the PA28, so that ticks that box.
Is the C152 any good as a training aeroplane? Yes, it is absolutely superb, well laid out, easy to fly, but requiring and teaching good habits and practices.
Is there anything wrong with the C152?
- Well to an experienced pilot, it's very boring. That does not apply to anybody new, or frankly anybody with under 300 hours, so who cares. [The Ford Escort is a very boring car as well, but excellent to learn to drive in.]
- It's a bit cramped - but unless you have a rugby players shoulders, or are well over 6ft, or are seriously overweight, it should be fine. There's an easy way to find out - go for a half hour trial flight in one.
So, given a choice of the two, I'd pick the C152 for initial flying courses, for most people.
As others have said, there's a healthy debate between the C152 and PA38, if the latter is available (plenty of threads on that, and no need to start a new one). You'll find as many people on either side of the argument. Ultimately, both are damned good training aeroplanes, but if only one is available - take that one!
G
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I elected to do full spinning in my initial training, for a number of reasons. I know I'm not the only one to incorporate some aerobatic training as a means of using up some of the PPL hours requirements. If you can convince an Aerobat to do passable aeros, it makes anything else seem simples. The lean towards aeros in my ATC Air Experience flights probably had something to do with that.
But it's horses for courses; it was one of the factors that influenced my decision, which is why I mentioned it. There are as many people who are straight and level all the way, as there are people with an irrational desire to put the green bit on top and the blue bit underneath.
I think the OP has his answer anyway: good luck with your school visits and enjoy your flying, whichever way up you go!
But it's horses for courses; it was one of the factors that influenced my decision, which is why I mentioned it. There are as many people who are straight and level all the way, as there are people with an irrational desire to put the green bit on top and the blue bit underneath.
I think the OP has his answer anyway: good luck with your school visits and enjoy your flying, whichever way up you go!
I agree that there is mileage in seeing spinning during the PPL course, but that realistically can be done in another type, it doesn't need to be done in the main training type.
I'm teaching a chap for NPPL at the moment, and we're doing the main course in an AA5, but will be demonstrating the spin in a single sortie in the C150 (which will double as a useful but non-syllabus lesson in how to get to know a different type).
G
I'm teaching a chap for NPPL at the moment, and we're doing the main course in an AA5, but will be demonstrating the spin in a single sortie in the C150 (which will double as a useful but non-syllabus lesson in how to get to know a different type).
G
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA28 is a better aircraft in all but one way - the Cessna is a better training aircraft.
A PA28 will flatter your flying, it is a very easy aircraft to fly, and especially to land. The Cessna 152, on the other hand has the best combination for training. It is easy to fly safely, but difficult to fly well.
Your instructor will more easily see if your technique is not good landing the Cessna, but (assuming you don't land on the nose wheel, which will wreck any aircraft) it will shrug off the thump of arrival, protected by that lovely sprung gear. I also know three people to have put them down in fields and walked away unharmed, and two of the aircraft also suffered no further damage.
I am 6'2", by the way, and learnt and taught in 152s and 150s. My first instructor was over 6' as well.
A PA28 will flatter your flying, it is a very easy aircraft to fly, and especially to land. The Cessna 152, on the other hand has the best combination for training. It is easy to fly safely, but difficult to fly well.
Your instructor will more easily see if your technique is not good landing the Cessna, but (assuming you don't land on the nose wheel, which will wreck any aircraft) it will shrug off the thump of arrival, protected by that lovely sprung gear. I also know three people to have put them down in fields and walked away unharmed, and two of the aircraft also suffered no further damage.
I am 6'2", by the way, and learnt and taught in 152s and 150s. My first instructor was over 6' as well.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: miles away
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not too far into the PPL myself, about 12 hours now, all on a 172. Local school in Ireland offers only the 172.
Is there any benefit to be had in training in a 172 over a 152?
On the other hand, have been living in Nairobi and could train for less money in a 152. Nairobi is at 5000 ft+ elevation, which affects performance of course, plus the need to convert to a JAA PPL back in Europe. Which is why I reckon I'll just do it in Ireland.
Thoughts?
Is there any benefit to be had in training in a 172 over a 152?
On the other hand, have been living in Nairobi and could train for less money in a 152. Nairobi is at 5000 ft+ elevation, which affects performance of course, plus the need to convert to a JAA PPL back in Europe. Which is why I reckon I'll just do it in Ireland.
Thoughts?
On the other hand, have been living in Nairobi and could train for less money in a 152. Nairobi is at 5000 ft+ elevation, which affects performance of course, plus the need to convert to a JAA PPL back in Europe. Which is why I reckon I'll just do it in Ireland.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
To start a CPL you need an ICAO PPL, for which the Kenyan PPL should do fine.
a C152 from 5000ft+ density altitude will be a bit sporting, but equally if the locals are doing it safely, then they're doing it safely.
Frankly if you're there, and it's affordable, I'd do your PPL in Nairobi on the C152. ICAO --> JAR conversions are fairly straightforward if you move permanently back to Ireland, or if you come back to do your CPL then the Kenyan PPL should be fine to start from.
G
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK
Age: 44
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just out of interest, has anyone got any experience of a Robin DR400/120? What are they like to train in? I am considering a school close to me and they use this along with a Cessna F172N Skyhawk II (more expensive) for training in PPL.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: miles away
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi GtE,
Thanks for that, well appreciated. The one thing stopping me doing the PPL here in Nairobi to be honest is that most of the training is done down on the Masai Mara, which in itself is brilliant, but in terms of learning to fly in controlled airspace, not so helpful. Likely at this point I'll finish the PPL at home in Ireland on the 172, which will be a bit dearer, but the standard of instruction is very good and one learns proper RT procedures, as well as having to develop the situational awareness needed around a busy airport, holding patterns, etc.
As my job is contract-based in Nairobi, the option to hour build on the 152 when I come back is there, once I revalidate the Irish PPL. I have it in my head that a solid foundation to this business is important, and I think bringing that back here to NBO should help.
Of course the other thing is that I have heard it said that the KCAA is notoriously inefficient in issuing licenses once you've done all the hours and exams - even getting a student permit took three months. We shall see.
By the way, not so much interested in passenger as in cargo (if and when I get to end of this) as the metal is more interesting. Not being choosy either, but in your experience do cargo companies take low hour pilots? Different thread probably so bear with me...
Cheers,
SB
Thanks for that, well appreciated. The one thing stopping me doing the PPL here in Nairobi to be honest is that most of the training is done down on the Masai Mara, which in itself is brilliant, but in terms of learning to fly in controlled airspace, not so helpful. Likely at this point I'll finish the PPL at home in Ireland on the 172, which will be a bit dearer, but the standard of instruction is very good and one learns proper RT procedures, as well as having to develop the situational awareness needed around a busy airport, holding patterns, etc.
As my job is contract-based in Nairobi, the option to hour build on the 152 when I come back is there, once I revalidate the Irish PPL. I have it in my head that a solid foundation to this business is important, and I think bringing that back here to NBO should help.
Of course the other thing is that I have heard it said that the KCAA is notoriously inefficient in issuing licenses once you've done all the hours and exams - even getting a student permit took three months. We shall see.
By the way, not so much interested in passenger as in cargo (if and when I get to end of this) as the metal is more interesting. Not being choosy either, but in your experience do cargo companies take low hour pilots? Different thread probably so bear with me...
Cheers,
SB