Nicolaki From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4153 times:
I am almost done with my PPL (flight test next week) and I thought about getting checked-out in a 4-seater aircraft after. My school presently have 1 Piper Warrior and 2 Cessna 172 (used to be 3 until 2 weeks ago when one hit powerlines during an approach). I know of the differences between high-wings and low-wings but I would like to know what you think of both planes. I have never flew low-wings in my life, I did all my training in the C152, so maybe the Warrior would be a good new experience.
Jetguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 1, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4095 times:
I've instructed in both and they're both good aircraft. There will those who will have strong opinion one way or another, but I would recommend that you checkout in the Cherokee and fly it for a while then when you get the urge checkout in the 172. I have no real reason to make this particular recommendation other than you've already flown a Cessna so why not try something different for a while? They are both straight forward and very simple. Either way, checkouts shouldn't be time consuming affairs - spend a bit of time studying the POH and an hour of so getting the feel of the airplane out in the practice area and a few touch & goes and that should about do it. Becareful about how you load the airplane - they are not "true" 4-seaters. You can not fill all the seat and fill the fuel tanks. Also, becareful with the climb performance - density altitude considerations really come into play with these airplanes. Once you get your PPL, make your flying time count. Now's the time to develop and reenforce good flying habits - don't get sloppy holding atitudes and headings. Fly precisely. Don't forget that once you get your license you can share the rental costs with you passengers so get some friends together and go get some of those $50 hamburgers.
Nicolaki From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4073 times:
Thanks for your recomendations Jetguy. I was guessing thta those aircraft could not fit 4 persons on board plus top tanks, but do you have an idea about which one has the greater payload? At my school the check out times are 2 hours for a 172 and 5 hours for the Warrior and they both run at 99$ hourly. I might go with your advice for the Warrior, just to try something different.
Jetguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4057 times:
Although, I'm not positive, I'd bet you lunch that there isn't 100 pounds difference in their respective payloads. There never is with directly competitive aircraft. As far as checkout times go I bet that the 5 hour minimum is an insurance restriction and has nothing to do with how long it will take you to become proficient in the airplane. The two hour figure for the 172 is also an insurance-driven number that reflects how similiar the 150/152 and 172 are. Don't get hung up on slight differences in speeds or payloads. Even a 20 knot difference is seldom significant except on relatively long legs which the average pilot will seldom fly anyway. Besides, what you're looking for at this point in your career is total time so in some ways slower is better. Have you checked out the various ways to lower your "cost per hour"? I'd look into local flying clubs. Who knows, there may be several in your area. A flying club is basically a group of people that go in together and purchase an airplane and divide the fixed costs of ownership among the group. It's a great way to save some money while you're time-building.
Western727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 643 posts, RR: 4 Reply 5, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 4019 times:
I'd say it depends. Is there a "new" 172? I had the opportunity to do my BFR in a C-172S - 180 HP, and it was by far the best airplane I'd flown (thus testifying of the limits of my flight experience). Second to that would probably be a Piper Archer (also 180 HP - another great airplane that I have time in). If you could, I'd check out in either of those before I checked out in a Warrior.
Having a lot of time in a 172, and also some time in the Warrior: If you are limited to only those two airplanes,(A warrior or an old 172), I'd just get checked out in the one that was in the best shape. For example, I checked out in both a Warrior and a 172 after my certification. The Warrior was in a lot better shape because it hadn't had nearly as many hours put on the airframe. And some 172s have been "tweaked" by the zillions of touch and go's and student landings - not handling well at all.
They are both good airplanes. Something you may want to consider: How are scheduling demands for the two different types? I don't like having to shoe-horn myself into the schedule all the time.
RAAFController From Australia, joined May 2001, 125 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 4011 times:
Being at roughly the same stage as you (PPL) andbeing endorsed on both the Warrior and the 172, I'd tend to agree with the other posts that there is really nothing in it. I'd go with the 172 but only for the simple reason that there are 2 of them you said, so you will have more of a chance of hiring one when YOU want to. Also if you take friends for joyrides, the high wing will give them better views (small i know, but its worth considering). Also, if you ever go and practice stalls and things the 172 will give you a bigger wing drop, which will keep you on the ball more, and its a bit more fun.
They are all small things, but since there is so little in it, its worth considering.
Western727 From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 643 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3965 times:
I think I'd like to revise my comment, and this may be shocking considering my predominantly Cessan upbrining. If I were trying to decide whether to purchase a New 172, or an Old Archer, I'd pick up the Archer.
As I mentioned before, the new C-172 was great, but the feel was still decidedly "Cessna."
So basically, I'm coming out in favor of low wings. Therefore, I'd go with the Warrior. C-172s are great airplanes, and they have a niche that they fill well. But I think that I prefer the low wing feel, especially in landing and taxiing. Cessna 172s are really quite difficult airplanes to land (even the new ones). And I think that the Warrior/Archer make somewhat better Instrument training platforms.
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 20 Reply 13, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3951 times:
Start with common aircraft. You'll need to rent an aircraft until you buy your own, so you'd better be checked out on types that are commonly available as rentals.
From what I see here on the light aircraft ramps, rentals are mainly 172s and a few 182s.
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29509 posts, RR: 59 Reply 14, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 3952 times:
I have flown only a couple of marks of the PA-28 series and never had a problem with any of them. You would never think of a low wing as a good brush airplane but the low wing does seem to help get out of soft areas.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.