A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Owning
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

High wing to low wing converts...or, visa versa?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old January 18th 05, 09:22 PM
Jack Allison
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default High wing to low wing converts...or, visa versa?

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)
Ads
  #2  
Old January 18th 05, 09:47 PM
Jim Burns
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The more hours you fly and the more models of airplanes you fly, the less
you will feel that there is a difference, and therefore, the more you will
enjoy flying the airplane that you are currently in, because that is the
best airplane there is.... the one you are the pilot of! The best
airplane I ever flew was the one that happened to meet my mission as closely
as possible, whether high wing or low wing.
Jim
C150
C152
PA 28-150
PA 28-161
PA 28-201R
PA 28-181
R182
PA-18
C170
PA 23-250


  #3  
Old January 18th 05, 09:48 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Jack Allison wrote:
snip
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?


I trained in 152s, then rented 172s, then owned a 172, then bought a
Cherokee.

Sometimes I wish my wing wouldn't scrap the bushes on a backcountry
strip, but when the wind is howling, I'm thankful for the low CG of
Piper. Those are about the only real issues I've run across.

The rest of the high/low wing nit picking that usually accompanies a
thread like this, is just that. Picking at miniscule differences that
don't make much difference in the real world.

If you're a competent pilot, transition from high to low should take
about 1/2 hr. to get really knowledgable about the fuel system. Beyond
that, you're wasting your time (assuming your swapping between planes
of similar performance).

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

  #4  
Old January 18th 05, 10:47 PM
Paul Anton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The only difference worth noting in my opinion is the view restrictions of
each type.

IE: restricted downward view in the low wing and the opposite in the high
wing.

Cheers:

Paul
NC2273H


  #5  
Old January 18th 05, 10:48 PM
Dudley Henriques
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Hi Jack;
(Bet nobody says hello to you walking up the steps to get on an airliner
do they :-)
With your time, you won't have a bit of trouble either way you go. The
whole thing about high wings and low wings is WAY over done. The
differences can be pointed out and taken care of in a single dual
session, and once learned, simply become part and parcel of any good
pilot's ability to fly a SEL airplane.
As for the "fun aspect" of it between the two choices....I can tell you
that the most fun I've had in flying was flying an airplane where I
couldn't see the wings at ALL!!! :-))
Dudley

"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)



  #6  
Old January 18th 05, 10:59 PM
bk
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I learned in a Cherokee and bought into a 182 partnership. The
transition issues had to do with more complexity, somewhat different
handling, and general low-time lack-of-experience on my part. I don't
think there were any issues related to where the wings are (except
learning to duck when approaching the wings and figuring out just where
to put the stepladder to check the fuel.) I like the 182's ample
headroom, but I prefered the Cherokee's manual flaps (although those
electic flaps on the 182 are mighty effective.) The Cherokee has better
visibility for piloting, but the 182 provides a mesmerizing view of the
ground for passengers (and pilots if not careful). The 182's wing
provides more useful shade than the Cherokee's wing does, but it's
easier to check the gas on the low-wing.

For me, the type of plane was secondary. I bought into the 182 because
I knew people who knew the original owner of the plane, the entire
history of the plane was known since it was new, the other partners are
well known around the airport and have excellent integrity. I didn't do
a pre-buy for I had no fear problems were being covered up or even
not-noticed due to negligence (of course, the unexpected could always
happen) and there have been no surprises.

You don't want the wrong plane for your mission, but I think there are
factors beyond the type of airplane that are important in the purchase
decision.

- Bruce


Jack Allison wrote:
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?


  #7  
Old January 18th 05, 11:36 PM
Bob Gardner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Got all my ratings/certificates through CFII with the wing on top, then went
to work for a Piper school. No problem.

Bob Gardner

"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)



  #8  
Old January 19th 05, 12:07 AM
Matt Whiting
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jack Allison wrote:

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.


I got my private in Cessnas, my instrument in a Cherokee, owned a 182
for 6 years and ~350 hours, and now belong to a club that flies an
Arrow. I like flying and the location of the wing is largely secondary.

Having said that, I do have a preference, and it is for a high wing. It
is probably mostly due to that being how I was introduced to flying,
however, I like being able to straight down when flying, I find high
wing airplanes easy to get into and out of and I live being able to hide
under the wing when it is raining.

However, the important thing is to be flying.


Matt
  #9  
Old January 19th 05, 12:16 AM
A Lieberman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 13:22:40 -0800, Jack Allison wrote:

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?


Hey Jack,

Learned in a 172, and bought a Sundowner.

Differeneces I found....

Sight picture will be different on final. Flaps on my Sundowner pitch the
nose way down. I felt like I was diving toward the runway, when in
reality, it was only the nose pitching down. Cessnas I found when
deploying flaps, nose will pitch up.

Speed control on final (FOR THE SUNDOWNER) is critical. Come in too fast,
you will float further down then your expected touch down due to ground
effect. Also, the Sundowner is nose heavy, and has a bad porpoising habit
if you don't put it on the mains and remain on the ground. Initially,
found the Sundowner hard to land, due to such tight speed control, but now,
I find my landings have much improved with the Sundowner.

Handling enroute, no different between high and low wings whatsoever.

Visibility, for me, sitting sorta behind the wing, no big deal, you still
see the ground easily. Not sure about other low wingers though. Wheels
are under the wings, so if you are used to a tire hanging out from your
left side, that dissapears under the wing on a low winger. Makes it harder
to judge how far from the edge of the taxiway initially. I use a line of
rivets where the tire is under for "guidance". No biggie, but something to
be aware of.

Ease of getting in and out, for low wings and passengers, not so easy
loading if you have only one door. Sundowner has two, so I can assist and
ensure the passenger door is closed.

In the air, absolutely no difference flying. I do like the bigger cabin of
the Sundowner which increases outside visibility.

Fuel management, no "both" option, either right or left tanks only. I
switch every half hour to keep things in balance, and also makes me
"stretch" around to keep things moving physically. Some pilots switch
every tanks every hour, either option comes out the same.

Hope this helps.

Allen
  #10  
Old January 19th 05, 12:55 AM
PaulaJay1
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Jack Allison
writes:

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?


I did my private training in a Piper 140. Then IFR training in a Cessna 172
and then rental in the 172 for about a year before buying my Archer 9 years
ago.

I like the ground vis in the 172 when crusing, the ground vis in the Archer
when turning in the pattern. I found that the wind gusts got under the Cessna
wing a little more than the Piper when landing. I like the ground effect in
the Piper when touching down (some people don't and call it float). The
Archer/Arrow choice has some pros and cons too. A little more performance for
a little more maintenance(or maybe a lot). I like the "welded" wheels and
prop.

I like the 2 doors better but don't think that is a high/low wing question.

Chuck
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:21 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.