If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Hehe... Well, hadda find out..hate surprises... I just looked at my post, I sure don't qualify for the spelling T-shirt tho... Gawd I hate laptop keyblards. err...keyboards.... Dave +On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 08:43:53 -0800, Jack Allison wrote: I think you qualify for the "slip with flaps" T-shirt Dave. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
I did my training in high wings, and then purchased a low wing after training. Though I could go back to a high wing if I had to, I wouldn't want to. My reasons are as follows: You don't have to get a ladder to put gas in the tank. You don't loose sight of the airport during turns in the pattern. Much less susceptable to crosswind effects. It is much harder for the crosswind to get under the wing, and flip it over, with the wing nearer to the ground. I need much less crosswind correction in the low wing than in the high wing aircraft I trained in. (This will, however, vary with the exact aircraft under comparison.) Not as susceptable to launching itself into the air during flare if the landing is a bit hot. (Though this will also vary somewhat with the aircraft under comparison.) More stable during taxi operations on windy days. Better forward visibility in flight and during flare. (This will, also, vary with the models under comparison.) Easier to de-ice/de-frost the wings. Easier to wash the aircraft. Though the low wing took some getting used to, I don't believe I'd want to go back without some great finincial incentive. (As in, I probably wouldn't turn down a free 182 in excellent condition.) Paul |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Paul Missman wrote:
I did my training in high wings, and then purchased a low wing after training. Though I could go back to a high wing if I had to, I wouldn't want to. My reasons are as follows: You don't have to get a ladder to put gas in the tank. You don't loose sight of the airport during turns in the pattern. Much less susceptable to crosswind effects. It is much harder for the crosswind to get under the wing, and flip it over, with the wing nearer to the ground. I need much less crosswind correction in the low wing than in the high wing aircraft I trained in. (This will, however, vary with the exact aircraft under comparison.) How so? The amount of crosswind correction needed depends only the the cross wind component and the groundspeed of the airplane, not where the wing is located. Matt |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Paul Missman wrote: You don't have to get a ladder to put gas in the tank. I can wear good pants to check my fuel. You don't loose sight of the airport during turns in the pattern. I don't "loose" sight of the airport either. Much less susceptable to crosswind effects. It is much harder for the crosswind to get under the wing, and flip it over, with the wing nearer to the ground. I need much less crosswind correction in the low wing than in the high wing aircraft I trained in. (This will, however, vary with the exact aircraft under comparison.) Nonsense. Two aircraft with about the same cross sectional area will drift the same amount in the same wind. Not as susceptable to launching itself into the air during flare if the landing is a bit hot. (Though this will also vary somewhat with the aircraft under comparison.) Pilot error. Better forward visibility in flight and during flare. (This will, also, vary with the models under comparison.) During the flare? A blanket assumption? Nonsense again. Easier to wash the aircraft. Not easier, I don't have to crouch down. I have one of them car washing wands with a brush on the end that dispenses soap when I want it too. Though the low wing took some getting used to, I don't believe I'd want to go back without some great finincial incentive. (As in, I probably wouldn't turn down a free 182 in excellent condition.) I wouldn't want a Cherokee 235 for off road ops either. To each his own. |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
"Paul Missman" wrote in message ... I did my training in high wings, and then purchased a low wing after training. Though I could go back to a high wing if I had to, I wouldn't want to. My reasons are as follows: You don't have to get a ladder to put gas in the tank. Many high wings have steps to get to the tanks. The fuel on my high wing is gravity feed. No fuel pumps to fail. You don't loose sight of the airport during turns in the pattern. But you do lose sight of anyone else that might be on final. I know where the airport is. Much less susceptable to crosswind effects. It is much harder for the crosswind to get under the wing, and flip it over, with the wing nearer to the ground. I need much less crosswind correction in the low wing than in the high wing aircraft I trained in. (This will, however, vary with the exact aircraft under comparison.) Simply not true. Low wings have more dihedral which could make them more suspectable. Not as susceptable to launching itself into the air during flare if the landing is a bit hot. (Though this will also vary somewhat with the aircraft under comparison.) Huh? More stable during taxi operations on windy days. Huh? Better forward visibility in flight and during flare. (This will, also, vary with the models under comparison.) Don't believe so. Wing location has nothing to do with forward visibility. Easier to de-ice/de-frost the wings. That's what hangars are made for. Easier to wash the aircraft. Tell me how easy it is to wash the bottom of the wing or how easy it is to sump the tanks.. Or for that matter getting into the plane when it is raining. Though the low wing took some getting used to, I don't believe I'd want to go back without some great finincial incentive. (As in, I probably wouldn't turn down a free 182 in excellent condition.) Paul |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Not all high wings cause you to lose sight of the airport on final. My
citabria has fantastic visibility. I haven't flown one but I understand the cardinal has excellent visibility because the wing is further compared to a 172 or 182. I really don't have a preference. Both have their good points. Dave 68 7ECA Paul Missman wrote: I did my training in high wings, and then purchased a low wing after training. Though I could go back to a high wing if I had to, I wouldn't want to. My reasons are as follows: You don't have to get a ladder to put gas in the tank. You don't loose sight of the airport during turns in the pattern. Much less susceptable to crosswind effects. It is much harder for the crosswind to get under the wing, and flip it over, with the wing nearer to the ground. I need much less crosswind correction in the low wing than in the high wing aircraft I trained in. (This will, however, vary with the exact aircraft under comparison.) Not as susceptable to launching itself into the air during flare if the landing is a bit hot. (Though this will also vary somewhat with the aircraft under comparison.) More stable during taxi operations on windy days. Better forward visibility in flight and during flare. (This will, also, vary with the models under comparison.) Easier to de-ice/de-frost the wings. Easier to wash the aircraft. Though the low wing took some getting used to, I don't believe I'd want to go back without some great finincial incentive. (As in, I probably wouldn't turn down a free 182 in excellent condition.) Paul |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 22 Jan 2005 20:42:11 GMT, Dave Stadt wrote:
But you do lose sight of anyone else that might be on final. I know where the airport is. Dave, How do you lose someone on final due to a low wing configuration? I fly a Sundowner and have never lost someone on final. I would think it would be more possible to lose someone on final if you were in a high wing, since the wing would POTENTIALLY block your view on your turn from base to final. Allen |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Paul Missman wrote:
I did my training in high wings, and then purchased a low wing after training. Though I could go back to a high wing if I had to, I wouldn't want to. My reasons are as follows: You don't have to get a ladder to put gas in the tank. Well, most high-wings I fly do not require a ladder, but I agree low wings are better for this; i.e. putting gas in AND verifying the gas level. You don't loose sight of the airport during turns in the pattern. I fully agree AND you can see during turns to avoid mid-airs. Much less susceptable to crosswind effects. It is much harder for the crosswind to get under the wing, and flip it over, with the wing nearer to the ground. Why does the ground change anything? Also, low wings generally have more dihedral which would make low wings more susceptable. Not as susceptable to launching itself into the air during flare if the landing is a bit hot. (Though this will also vary somewhat with the aircraft under comparison.) What does the high-wing/low-wing have anything to do with this? More stable during taxi operations on windy days. If this was really a deciding factor, I would seriously start being more critical of my go/no-go decisions. Better forward visibility in flight and during flare. (This will, also, vary with the models under comparison.) What does the high-wing/low-wing have anything to do with this? Hilton |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
This thread sounds remarkably similar to discussions I had about
motorcycles. Sportbikes vs cruisers, Harleys Vs. Imports. Funny thing was, after riding for 20 years, off and on at times, I would occasionally get the bug a by an old bike for $1200. whatever was available, I bought it just because I had to ride. You know what I realized? They are ALL good. heck I 've even bought a scooter. It's just plain fun wrapped up in a different package. That's the way it is when you _have to_ ride. When I finally get my private license I don't think I would ever want to get wrapped up in what is best. I'd be looking forward to what is next. I will say this though, I am training in a high wing, but I expect a low wing in my future, perhaps a Tiger. I can't wait for the transition. -- Dave A Aging Student Pilot "Jack Allison" wrote in message ... I find myself in the position of having just under 200 hours in Cessna 172s/152s (99% C-172 time), approximately 9 hours in an Archer, and in the process of making an offer on an Arrow. So, I'm well on my way from being a high wing to low wing convert. I'm wondering how many other folks out there did their primary training with the wing on the top then switched to flying (or even better, buying) one with the wing on the bottom...or even the other way around? Any issues, likes/dislikes about the transition? It's funny because I started out researching Cardinals (still like them, have yet to fly one but really want to some day). Two weeks ago, things shifted gears with a different partner on a possible Cherokee. Then, a week ago, this same partner has a friend who found a really nice '67 Arrow that the three of us are going to make an offer on. Adding it all up, four potential partnership prospects and four aircraft prospects (first potential partner bought himself a C-172 XP and offered me 1/2...I declined based on a questionable engine). The Arrow deal isn't done yet but it's interesting to see how things have twisted and turned a bit in the last few months. One thing is for sure, I've definitely hooked up with a couple of partners that I'm very comfortable with. That in and of itself has been worth it. Should the Arrow deal fall apart, plan-B just might be a two way deal on a Cherokee. -- Jack Allison PP-ASEL, IA Student, Student Arrow Buyer "When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return" - Leonardo Da Vinci (Remove the obvious from address to reply via e-mail) |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Hilton wrote:
Paul Missman wrote: I did my training in high wings, and then purchased a low wing after training. Though I could go back to a high wing if I had to, I wouldn't want to. My reasons are as follows: You don't have to get a ladder to put gas in the tank. Well, most high-wings I fly do not require a ladder, but I agree low wings are better for this; i.e. putting gas in AND verifying the gas level. You don't loose sight of the airport during turns in the pattern. I fully agree AND you can see during turns to avoid mid-airs. People keep saying this like it's a plus for low-wings. It's not. At the time you guys are complainining that the high-wing blocks your view of the runway (which isn't moving), you SHOULD be looking out the other side to make sure you're not turning into the path of an oncoming airplane -- execpt in a low-wing, that's the view that's blocked. I hate turning base to final in the Warrior, knowing I can't see if a plane is coming down final. yes I was watching final while in the base leg, but I would like to still keep an eye on it while turning because sometimes you don't see other traffic until you've been looking for a while |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
High wing vs low wing | temp | Owning | 11 | June 10th 04 02:36 AM |
High Wing or Low Wing | Bob Babcock | Home Built | 17 | January 23rd 04 01:34 AM |
End of High wing low wing search for me | dan | Home Built | 7 | January 11th 04 10:57 AM |
Canard planes swept wing outer VG's? | Paul Lee | Home Built | 8 | January 4th 04 08:10 PM |
Props and Wing Warping... was soaring vs. flaping | Wright1902Glider | Home Built | 0 | September 29th 03 03:40 PM |