Warrior or 150
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Kent
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I started out on the 152 which I found way too small. With my instructor by my side we could only sit by turning toward each other a bit.. not the most comfortable.
I've done most of my hours on a Warrior which I love but owing to a house move I've switched clubs. The new club has 152's and Diamond Katana's.
Does anyone have experience of the Katana. I know it got some rave reviews a couple of years ago but does anyone here have anything good to say about it?
Nige
I've done most of my hours on a Warrior which I love but owing to a house move I've switched clubs. The new club has 152's and Diamond Katana's.
Does anyone have experience of the Katana. I know it got some rave reviews a couple of years ago but does anyone here have anything good to say about it?
Nige
Hi Genghis
A number of reasons, some trivial, some less trivial but all my own personal experience & opinion.
* High wing gives protection from the sun & rain when getting aboard or waiting for my student to finish a supervised pre-flight. Ditto about how wet the RHS seat gets if it's raining with the door open.
* Better cabin ventilation. Prefer the wing root ventilation outlet on Cessna's. The Warrior just blows up my leg. If it's really hot the windows can be opened. Don't laugh. I used to teach in the N. Territory & it was worth it!
* I found it easier to teach navigation in Cessnas due to the excellent ground visibility. Gives more time/makes it easier to keep a feature in view.
* C150 & C172 can be very docile or can be made to be less docile with some predictability. A warrior is just docile. I think spin training is beneficial. Can't do that with a warrior.
* Doors either side of the cabin. No queing to get in. Both can jump in or out without hampering the other.
* No wing to slip off getting in or out. In spite of the anti-slip coating.
* It's an easy step up from C150/152 ==> C172 ==> C182 ==> C206 or C210 in handling characteristics. From the C206/C210 engine handling is similar for Bonanzas/Barons/C310/C402. Admittedly the PA32-300 type gives equivalent engine handling going into PA23, PA60/AEST, PA31.
There is a downside with C150/152 when it comes to habitual checking & use of fuel pumps. Tank changes too. A C172 has a L-B-R selector so not so much of a problem.
* I think the effect on flight path of flaps is more readily discernable to a brand new student (ie effects of control stage) than the warrior's or PA38's ineffectual things.
* Handling characteristics in C150/152/172 make it more obvious that coordinated rudder input is necessary when using ailerons. I can demonstrate something like adverse yaw in a realistically & easily perceivable way more effectively in the Cessna.
* Can use the lower surface of the wing as a wonderfully visible teaching tool for AoA referencing eg S&L at varying airspeeds, stalls etc
* The reduced vis. in a turn IS a problem although the up side is that it forces a good lookout prior to turning if the instructor is insistant. It also forces the student to look to the Hz instead of the runway to control the turn eg turning onto base.
* Reduced maintenance/unserviceability of main gear. Never had a spring steel leg need a new O-ring or more gas. Obviously this is common to all these types for the nose gear.
* I happen to prefer the trim to be near the throttle. Provides a subtle pressure for the student to use it, particularly when their workload is high-ish.
By way of experience I have a tiny bit over 1000 hrs in C150/152, about 800 in C172 and a bit under 500 each in PA28s & TB10s + various other sundry types.
I'd take a PA28 before a TB10 though. I think they're even worse!
A number of reasons, some trivial, some less trivial but all my own personal experience & opinion.
* High wing gives protection from the sun & rain when getting aboard or waiting for my student to finish a supervised pre-flight. Ditto about how wet the RHS seat gets if it's raining with the door open.
* Better cabin ventilation. Prefer the wing root ventilation outlet on Cessna's. The Warrior just blows up my leg. If it's really hot the windows can be opened. Don't laugh. I used to teach in the N. Territory & it was worth it!
* I found it easier to teach navigation in Cessnas due to the excellent ground visibility. Gives more time/makes it easier to keep a feature in view.
* C150 & C172 can be very docile or can be made to be less docile with some predictability. A warrior is just docile. I think spin training is beneficial. Can't do that with a warrior.
* Doors either side of the cabin. No queing to get in. Both can jump in or out without hampering the other.
* No wing to slip off getting in or out. In spite of the anti-slip coating.
* It's an easy step up from C150/152 ==> C172 ==> C182 ==> C206 or C210 in handling characteristics. From the C206/C210 engine handling is similar for Bonanzas/Barons/C310/C402. Admittedly the PA32-300 type gives equivalent engine handling going into PA23, PA60/AEST, PA31.
There is a downside with C150/152 when it comes to habitual checking & use of fuel pumps. Tank changes too. A C172 has a L-B-R selector so not so much of a problem.
* I think the effect on flight path of flaps is more readily discernable to a brand new student (ie effects of control stage) than the warrior's or PA38's ineffectual things.
* Handling characteristics in C150/152/172 make it more obvious that coordinated rudder input is necessary when using ailerons. I can demonstrate something like adverse yaw in a realistically & easily perceivable way more effectively in the Cessna.
* Can use the lower surface of the wing as a wonderfully visible teaching tool for AoA referencing eg S&L at varying airspeeds, stalls etc
* The reduced vis. in a turn IS a problem although the up side is that it forces a good lookout prior to turning if the instructor is insistant. It also forces the student to look to the Hz instead of the runway to control the turn eg turning onto base.
* Reduced maintenance/unserviceability of main gear. Never had a spring steel leg need a new O-ring or more gas. Obviously this is common to all these types for the nose gear.
* I happen to prefer the trim to be near the throttle. Provides a subtle pressure for the student to use it, particularly when their workload is high-ish.
By way of experience I have a tiny bit over 1000 hrs in C150/152, about 800 in C172 and a bit under 500 each in PA28s & TB10s + various other sundry types.
I'd take a PA28 before a TB10 though. I think they're even worse!
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Living in denial
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You guys are good!
Thanks for all the replies!
My decision?????? I'm still unsure until we get delivery of the Warrior. When we do I'll take it for a couple of lessons to see which I prefer (comparing to the 172). Being 6ft 2, the larger the better, and hoping to go commercial probably swings me towards the Warrior as CFI reckons similarities in design and layout will make easier progression onto twins and complex singles.
Cheers again for opinions and one more question!
If I go with the Warrior do I have to change my user name??????
Answers on a postcard please!
Thanks for all the replies!
My decision?????? I'm still unsure until we get delivery of the Warrior. When we do I'll take it for a couple of lessons to see which I prefer (comparing to the 172). Being 6ft 2, the larger the better, and hoping to go commercial probably swings me towards the Warrior as CFI reckons similarities in design and layout will make easier progression onto twins and complex singles.
Cheers again for opinions and one more question!
If I go with the Warrior do I have to change my user name??????
Answers on a postcard please!
Thanks tinstaafl, a well reasoned argument. I have flown both and prefer the Warrior, but your pro-Cessna arguments make good sense from a QFI viewpoint.
Incidentally, I'm a well-known shorthouse (5'6") and find that when navigating my view over the nose of a Warrior to the next waypoint is much better than in a C152, I've not flown the C172 so can't compare that.
G
Incidentally, I'm a well-known shorthouse (5'6") and find that when navigating my view over the nose of a Warrior to the next waypoint is much better than in a C152, I've not flown the C172 so can't compare that.
G
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: No longer on Pprune
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tinstaafl,
I would add that the Cessna's have better (far better) flaps too. I also prefer the elevator and aelerons as the loads are a lot lighter than the Piper counterparts.
Personaly, I prefer the Warrior, but then I'm into touring, and it's definately a more stable platform, one I would sugest at the earlier stages of training is less desirable. Later on for intrument flying, well I'd leave the Cessna behind.
PS
I would add that the Cessna's have better (far better) flaps too. I also prefer the elevator and aelerons as the loads are a lot lighter than the Piper counterparts.
Personaly, I prefer the Warrior, but then I'm into touring, and it's definately a more stable platform, one I would sugest at the earlier stages of training is less desirable. Later on for intrument flying, well I'd leave the Cessna behind.
PS
Guest
Posts: n/a
Cessna Boy
Do you have the option of changing to another club and finishing your course on a 150?
As a PPL with several hundred hours, I love the later PA28s (especially the -181s and 236s), but they are so easy to fly that you may miss some valuable learning points as a student.
I had a similar dilemma to you, doing my first 15 hours on 150 and then completing the course on a PA28 (old style) due to a change of location.
I loved the PA28 at the time, but with hindsight would have benefitted from more time in the 150.
Good luck, whatever you decide.
Do you have the option of changing to another club and finishing your course on a 150?
As a PPL with several hundred hours, I love the later PA28s (especially the -181s and 236s), but they are so easy to fly that you may miss some valuable learning points as a student.
I had a similar dilemma to you, doing my first 15 hours on 150 and then completing the course on a PA28 (old style) due to a change of location.
I loved the PA28 at the time, but with hindsight would have benefitted from more time in the 150.
Good luck, whatever you decide.
