Switching Trainers,172 to Warrior,PIREPS?

[jesse]

I do wonder about X-wind landings...I keep thinking of a unusual situation in which rudder is deflected one way and then down comes the nose wheel and a subsequent veer or ground loop. What happens here?

It's a non-issue.

 

[AdamZ]

I'd be more concerned with finding yourself an instructor you can work with then what the airplane is. That is what is holding you back. Who cares what the airplane is.

Personally I'd rather be flying a 172P. Or any model 172 for that matter. But it's not going to really make a difference in your training. As an instructor low wing pipers can be a little annoying because it's hard to teach someone good rudder control and nearly every piper only pilot I've flown with has no clue what rudder is as a result.

I agree 100% with the first comment but personally I''d rather be flying a Cherokee, I found the 172 to be a bit mushier but the 172 is still an awesome plane and what you prefer to fly is just that a preference and nothing else.

I also finally have the CFI that I have always dreamed of. He's practical, has salty humor, and he has vast experience. He has 2000hrs in Cessna's so he knows that side as well. He also tows for a glider club that I affiliate with. He quickly adapted to my learning style and even called to see if I wanted to fly earlier than planned in order to avoid high winds and heavy chop. Never had a CFI ask me that even when they were open and at the airport.

Stalls were surprisingly a non-event and akin to a 172.

As Jesse said this is the most important part, you seem to have finally found a CFI that fits!

 

[Sac Arrow]

I have a lot of time in various Cherokees, ranging from PA 140's to PA 28R 201T's. Personally, I like flying Cherokees better than I like flying Cessnas, and Cessnas, especially 172's, are about as simple as they get.

I like low wings. You do lose the gravity fuel system and have to deal with an electric pump, but, big deal. My Turbo Arrow did not require normal use of the auxiliary electric pump. I suppose the mechanical pump could fail but jeez, it's at least as reliable if not more reliable than the engine itself.

172's float. Warriors float less. Arrows sink, especially older Hershey Bar winged Arrows. That is both a detriment and an asset. I have to use a fairly wide pattern to land a 172 without going high. In a Cherokee of any type, I can fly a fairly close pattern and it wouldn't make a lot of difference whether my engine was working or not, I'd still stick the landing. Hell, my Arrow decent profiles resemble helicopter approaches.

I say just get proficient in one, get your ticket, then start training in others. That's what it's all about.

 

[poadeleted20]

172's float. Warriors float less. Arrows sink, especially older Hershey Bar winged Arrows.

My experience is that they all float about the same if you bring them in at the same multiple of Vs0. Bring the 172 in at the Cessna-recommended speed of about 1.4-1.5 Vs0, and they will float more than the Pipers, since Piper's recommended speeds are closer to the FAA-recommended 1.3 Vs0. Bring them all in at 1.3 Vs0 (corrected for actual landing weight) and full flaps, and float is about the same.

 

[bigblockz8]

My swap also has another couple of reasons. The Warrior is a new plane (for me) and I'll be at a new airport thats 2x as big with all types of traffic. On takeoff we got to swerve around ducks crossing the runway. At my old base that would be an immediate abort (15kts from Vx with the duck popping up) for that one duck that ran out. The tires would be bald or the takeoff would have been a 5ft high stall,or with a calm CFI (such as the one that calmly avoided the ducks), simply would have been free lunch processed by an expensive "knife." (Note: the duck,as was the centerline, was within reaching distance on my side. I was sure that the wing would hit it's head,it didn't.)

It's like a fresh start for me. No pressure to slam it down because I only have a good 800ft to put it down on. If I float here now I have 3000ft+ to safely land or go around. I'll have to practice on a 40ftx2X00 runway someday though but, for basic landings I think 75ftx4201 is the way to go. The airplane is similar enough that I have basically transitioned (minus landings) but still gives the feeling of a new aircraft and a new lease on my training.

I see the reasons why it's a trainer. I also see why the PA-28 family has 101 variants that all look the same to me

 

[Sac Arrow]

My experience is that they all float about the same if you bring them in at the same multiple of Vs0. Bring the 172 in at the Cessna-recommended speed of about 1.4-1.5 Vs0, and they will float more than the Pipers, since Piper's recommended speeds are closer to the FAA-recommended 1.3 Vs0. Bring them all in at 1.3 Vs0 (corrected for actual landing weight) and full flaps, and float is about the same.

I agree with you - but the Hershey bar style wings seem to have a greater tolerance for speed variation if your approach speed is slightly too fast. That was my point. Not that it's an excuse to be sloppy with your airspeed of course.

 

[dmccormack]

Lots of good feedback here and my only little add is this:

• It's better to learn by rote procedure early on when the brain is overloaded and "understanding" can't catch up with "performing."
• It's best to have rote procedures drilled for when the feces hits the ventilator.
• All learners should expand beyond the rote once fundamentals are mastered and understand the how, when, and why.

This is axiomatic as it applies to sports, flying, fly fishing, soldiering, armor operations, canoeing, motorcycles, horse riding, barn cleaning....