How common are aircraft partnerships compared to outright ownerships?

Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

"xyzzy" wrote in message
...
Newps wrote:

Besides currency, there's initial checkout. I.e, the need for several
dozen members who are current and checked out in Warriors, to have to do a
one-time club checkout in the 172 (most likely a written quiz and 3-5
hours of dual) in order to get back the availability they had when it was
an all-Warrior fleet. You may think it's trivial to transition from one
to the other, and I would agree, but for insurance purposes the club may
need to require more.



If you are current in a Warrior and anybody REQUIRES 3-5 hours checkout in a
Skyhawk they are just making money off you.

I think the pertinent question is what model 172 requires this 3-5 hour
checkout?

A fuel injected 172 does not require priming on a normal day. Ever sit and
watch unfamiliar pilots try to start a 172SP? Prime, grind, grind, grind,
grind pause grind, grind, grind, grind pause grind, grind, grind.

How many seconds should a 172's starter be engaged before a cool-down time
is needed? How many minutes should one wait to attempt a restart?
Mixture lever in or out when attempting to start?

The flight school where I trained actually had a CFII (not from that
school) recently get "stuck" at a nearby airport because he could not start
a 2003 C172SP equipped with a new battery, new starter, and full fuel. He
killed the battery trying to start it! Upon speaking to the flight school
manager, he claimed that the aircraft and maintenance were to fault, not
him. The flight school sent maintenance and a CFII to the airport to
recharge the battery and rescue this person (who, somehow convinced the
school he didn't need a complete checkout). The aircraft fired right up.

What about the new 172s equipped with Garmin G1000 flight displays that are
beginning to appear at US flight schools? You will need probably a
minimum of 10 hours of check-out time to fly one of those.

I have about 450 hours in a C172SP and I would probably need a couple of
hours of instruction/flying just to become familiar with carb heat usage if
I hypothetically needed to rent an older C172 model.

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

"xyzzy" wrote in message
...
Newps wrote:

Besides currency, there's initial checkout. I.e, the need for several
dozen members who are current and checked out in Warriors, to have to do
a
one-time club checkout in the 172 (most likely a written quiz and 3-5
hours of dual) in order to get back the availability they had when it
was
an all-Warrior fleet. You may think it's trivial to transition from one
to the other, and I would agree, but for insurance purposes the club may
need to require more.



If you are current in a Warrior and anybody REQUIRES 3-5 hours checkout
in a
Skyhawk they are just making money off you.

I think the pertinent question is what model 172 requires this 3-5 hour
checkout?

A fuel injected 172 does not require priming on a normal day. Ever sit
and
watch unfamiliar pilots try to start a 172SP? Prime, grind, grind,
grind,
grind pause grind, grind, grind, grind pause grind, grind, grind.

How many seconds should a 172's starter be engaged before a cool-down time
is needed? How many minutes should one wait to attempt a restart?
Mixture lever in or out when attempting to start?

The flight school where I trained actually had a CFII (not from that
school) recently get "stuck" at a nearby airport because he could not
start
a 2003 C172SP equipped with a new battery, new starter, and full fuel. He
killed the battery trying to start it! Upon speaking to the flight
school
manager, he claimed that the aircraft and maintenance were to fault, not
him. The flight school sent maintenance and a CFII to the airport to
recharge the battery and rescue this person (who, somehow convinced the
school he didn't need a complete checkout). The aircraft fired right up.

What about the new 172s equipped with Garmin G1000 flight displays that
are
beginning to appear at US flight schools? You will need probably a
minimum of 10 hours of check-out time to fly one of those.

I have about 450 hours in a C172SP and I would probably need a couple of
hours of instruction/flying just to become familiar with carb heat usage
if
I hypothetically needed to rent an older C172 model.



Since the OP did say they were buying older model 172's the G1000 is a none
issue as far as this thread is concerned. Both of the other items your
mentioned could easily be covered in a pilot orientation meeting followed a
1 hour MAX check ride. In that case if the check pilot saw that the checkee
had a problem it would be easy have them not sign off and give the further
instruction as needed.

And Peter if it would really take you a couple of hours of flight time to
figure out how to use the carb heat I have to ask... How long did it take
you to solo?

Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

Since the OP did say they were buying older model 172's the G1000 is a none
issue as far as this thread is concerned.

OK, I got a bit carried away there.

Both of the other items your
mentioned could easily be covered in a pilot orientation meeting followed a
1 hour MAX check ride.

Are you are saying that a pilot orientation meeting and 1 hour MAX is all
that is needed to transition from a Warrier most likely equipped with basic
avionics and no AP to a fuel injected C172SP equipped with an autopilot and
IFR GPS? I totally disagree.

However, if you remind me of your flight instruction qualifications and how
many students you have successfully transitioned from a Warrier to a C172SP
within this one hour familiarity flight, then I will concede since my
opinion is only based on my familiarity with this model Skyhawk.

And Peter if it would really take you a couple of hours of flight time to
figure out how to use the carb heat I have to ask... How long did it take
you to solo?

LOL! What's in your pants is bigger than mine? Is there some correlation
between number of hours to solo and the aptitude, skills, and proficiency
of a pilot post-solo?

My point was that given my unfamiliarity with something that has caused a
lot of pilots grief (based on the high number of suspected carb ice
incidents and accidents in the NTSB reports), I certainly recognize my
limitations and would want to be sure I completely understood the usage of
carb heat before launching on an X/C flight in IMC with my family.

But, to answer your question, it took 16 hours for me to solo.

--
Peter























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Peter R. wrote:

But, to answer your question, it took 16 hours for me to solo.

In a?

Darrel Toepfer wrote:

But, to answer your question, it took 16 hours for me to solo.

In a?

A 2001 C172SP.

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

Since the OP did say they were buying older model 172's the G1000 is a
none
issue as far as this thread is concerned.

OK, I got a bit carried away there.

Both of the other items your
mentioned could easily be covered in a pilot orientation meeting followed
a
1 hour MAX check ride.

Are you are saying that a pilot orientation meeting and 1 hour MAX is all
that is needed to transition from a Warrier most likely equipped with
basic
avionics and no AP to a fuel injected C172SP equipped with an autopilot
and
IFR GPS? I totally disagree.

Nobody but you mentioned 172SPs. The OP certainly didn't and again I wans't
talking about SPs



And Peter if it would really take you a couple of hours of flight time to
figure out how to use the carb heat I have to ask... How long did it take
you to solo?

LOL! What's in your pants is bigger than mine? Is there some
correlation
between number of hours to solo and the aptitude, skills, and proficiency
of a pilot post-solo?

My point was that given my unfamiliarity with something that has caused a
lot of pilots grief (based on the high number of suspected carb ice
incidents and accidents in the NTSB reports), I certainly recognize my
limitations and would want to be sure I completely understood the usage of
carb heat before launching on an X/C flight in IMC with my family.

But, to answer your question, it took 16 hours for me to solo.


I'd be willing to bet that a significant percentage of the accidents caused
by carb ice were with pilots who trained and flew aircraft with carb heat.

Peter I really don't think it would take you one our of training to figure
out carb heat. Actually I don't think it would take you ANY flight time to
figure out. Actual flying time is really a terrible place to learn things
like that. On the ground you can learn when carb icing is an issue and then
you have to remember when you are in a plane that has a carburetor that it
is an issue. No number of hours IN an airplane with an instructor is going
to help with that.

And for the record the transition time for me from 172 to Archer was 10
minutes on the ground playing with the radios and a 10 minute hop from one
air port to another.

Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

Nobody but you mentioned 172SPs. The OP certainly didn't

Don't get hung up on my mention of the SP model. The OP mentioned "newer
(but not brand new)" C172s. Thus, I assumed post-1998 models, which are
all fuel injected and most contain more advanced avionics than a typical,
older Warrior.

In order to accurately reflect my experience, I used SP since that was what
it was, but I certainly could have included the R model in my assumption
about how long a checkout would take when going from a Warrier to either of
these models.

and again I wans't talking about SPs

You weren't? Then why didn't you say so when you first stated, "If you are
current in a Warrior and anybody REQUIRES 3-5 hours checkout in a
Skyhawk they are just making money off you." Instead, you made a blanket
statement that seems to imply all 172 models.

Given the "newer (but not brand new)" quote from the original post, you
were no more at liberty (and therefore no more right or wrong) to assume a
pre-1998 model than I was to assume a post-1998 model.

--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

Nobody but you mentioned 172SPs. The OP certainly didn't

Don't get hung up on my mention of the SP model. The OP mentioned "newer
(but not brand new)" C172s. Thus, I assumed post-1998 models, which are
all fuel injected and most contain more advanced avionics than a typical,
older Warrior.

In order to accurately reflect my experience, I used SP since that was
what
it was, but I certainly could have included the R model in my assumption
about how long a checkout would take when going from a Warrier to either
of
these models.

and again I wans't talking about SPs

You weren't? Then why didn't you say so when you first stated, "If you
are
current in a Warrior and anybody REQUIRES 3-5 hours checkout in a
Skyhawk they are just making money off you." Instead, you made a
blanket
statement that seems to imply all 172 models.

Given the "newer (but not brand new)" quote from the original post, you
were no more at liberty (and therefore no more right or wrong) to assume a
pre-1998 model than I was to assume a post-1998 model.



Well Peter the OP did mention that they were switching to Cessna because the
vintage aircraft they were looking for was during the Piper bankruptcy isn't
that pre-1996?

You'll have to forgive me. When I think Skyhawk I think Fixed Gear,
Non-constant speed prop, carbureted engine. I think you really know what I
meant and are just being argumentative.

Gig 601XL Builder wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote:

You'll have to forgive me. When I think Skyhawk I think Fixed Gear,
Non-constant speed prop, carbureted engine.

Fair enough. With that clarification, I agree with you that three-to-
five hours does seem excessive for a Warrior pilot, if indeed the features
you listed are the features of the C172 to which the pilot is
transitioning.

However, I honestly didn't know if your initial statement included the
newer model 172s, which have enough differences (IMO) to warrant a longer
checkout. Therefore I sought further clarification. FWIW, when I think
Skyhawk, I think of the abilities and features of the newer models.
Therein is the nature of our disagreement.

I think you really know what I meant and are just being argumentative.

Eh? I disagreed with your comment about the three hour checkout and
provided the reasons for my disagreement. You now dismiss all of this as
argumentative and hide behind the excuse that I knew what you meant all
along, as if I am some type of mind reader? That's just silly.

If you look again at my first post in this thread, it only asked what model
to which you were referring. You are welcome to quote the words from my
post that you interpreted as argumentative.

Need I remind you that in your follow-up, it was you who lobbed a personal
barb by questioning how many hours it took me to solo, as if you expected
this to demonstrate some level of incompetence.


--
Peter
























----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

However, if you remind me of your flight instruction qualifications and how
many students you have successfully transitioned from a Warrier to a C172SP

I've successfully transitioned students into aircraft ranging from
gliders and old-fashioned ragwings to complex singles like the Mooney
and Bonanza, and even the odd twin. From where I'm sitting, he's right
and you're wrong. An hour is plenty of time to deal with issues like
fuel injection vs carb heat. It's nowhere near enough to get full
utility from a glass panel, but it's more than enough time to get the
same utility a pilot would get from a conventional panel. Someone who
is current and proficient in a Warrior should not need more than an
hour max to transition into a Skyhawk regardless of engine and
avionics.

Also, I think it's ridiculous to require recency of experience in make
and model - recency of experience makes sense for a class of airplane,
and a Warrior and Skyhawk are the same class.

Michael