First plane

-----Original Message-----
From: Tim ]
Posted At: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 8:36 AM
Posted To: rec.aviation.owning
Conversation: First plane
Subject: First plane

....

I call BS on that. I bought a grumman cheetah while learning to fly.
It was a great learning experience. Where do you get the data for
"most
cannot handle the added distraction?"


I would not recommend that a student of mine be trying to learn to fly
our trainers while at the same time looking for a different aircraft of
their own. First, they should be concentrating on the make and model
they will be flying for their tests. They should know the systems cold
and become intimately familiar with that aircraft. Then by the time they
get their license (usually only a couple of months) they understand what
they should expect to learn as they move to other makes or models.
Trying to do that all at once leaves gaps. I sure wouldn't want a
student to be learning in a PA-28 or a C-152 and be looking at or trying
to buy a Grumman. I've taught in all of them and they are different
birds. Let's learn one thing at a time, and learn it very well.

....

The only way to get that experience and knowledge is to go through the
process of looking and buying. Renting for years does not make anyone
more qualified to purchase an airplane compared to a newbie looking to
buy.


I disagree again; renting can expose a pilot to various makes and models
if he or she is willing to be a little adventurous. I'm really glad that
I had a chance to rent a Cardinal-RG before I put a lot of effort or
expense into researching them for purchase. I'm also happy that I had
the chance to fly a 172RG into Gunnison IFR before I started lusting
after them. Renting is a great way to discover which make or model you
absolutely do not want.

The only disadvantage to renting is that you get to fly lots of models
you will never own and that is disappointing.

BTW, I didn't think much of the Grumman line back when we were flying
the AA1As and AA5s, but over the years I've come to believe a Cheetah or
Tiger might just be the solution to my needs now.

Jim Carter wrote:


I call BS on that. I bought a grumman cheetah while learning to fly.
It was a great learning experience. Where do you get the data for

"most

cannot handle the added distraction?"

I would not recommend that a student of mine be trying to learn to fly
our trainers while at the same time looking for a different aircraft of
their own. First, they should be concentrating on the make and model
they will be flying for their tests. They should know the systems cold
and become intimately familiar with that aircraft. Then by the time they
get their license (usually only a couple of months) they understand what
they should expect to learn as they move to other makes or models.
Trying to do that all at once leaves gaps. I sure wouldn't want a
student to be learning in a PA-28 or a C-152 and be looking at or trying
to buy a Grumman. I've taught in all of them and they are different
birds. Let's learn one thing at a time, and learn it very well.


90 HP to 180 HP single engine fixed gear planes are all about the same.
I am not sure why this is a problem. (excepting tail draggers) It is
pretty simple - teach the speed to fly at the different phases of flight
and all is straightforward. Teaching a specific aircraft is problematic.

Again, what is it about your experience with students that leads you to
believe they cannot handle "the distraction" of owning an airplane?

snip

Apparently your position is that if one can handle the workload than all
should. I and others have suggested that most (not all) students would
be better served if they concentrated on the particular topic at hand,
which is learning to fly.

I stand by that position. Learning to fly is a complex and very
expensive endeavor. In the interest of both the learning curve and the
pocket book, students would be well served to focus on the learning
rather than the buying.

Besides, if the student is still learning to fly, how in the world does
he or she have the experience to know which make or model is right for
him or her? Sure they can post "what do I buy" questions on newsgroups,
but that too adds to the distraction of learning.

It is too bad that neither of us can substantiate our position with
data. It would be interesting to see the numbers on student pilots that
buy before getting licensed and how long they are happy with their
decision versus pilots that have rented for a while before they buy and
their happiness duration.

I also take issue with your position that 90 to 180 HP fixed gear
aircraft are all about the same. There is a tremendous difference in the
handling of a Cessna 177, an American Yankee AA1A, a Piper Cherokee 140,
and a Beech Skipper. Flaps on the Yankee were ornaments and the
non-steerable nosegear was a challenge for most at first. The elevator
ran out of effectiveness on the C177 before the slotted elevator came
along. The Cherokee was interesting in July and August in Texas and
Oklahoma and came down pretty fast until that low wing hit ground
effect.

The point is that each aircraft model has its own peculiarities as well
as systems and speeds. Learning one set before taking the PP check ride
is usually enough for most students with limited time and money.


-----Original Message-----
From: Tim ]
Posted At: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 5:51 PM
Posted To: rec.aviation.owning
Conversation: First plane
Subject: First plane

Jim Carter wrote:


I call BS on that. I bought a grumman cheetah while learning to
fly.
It was a great learning experience. Where do you get the data for

"most

cannot handle the added distraction?"

I would not recommend that a student of mine be trying to learn to
fly
our trainers while at the same time looking for a different aircraft
of
their own. First, they should be concentrating on the make and model
they will be flying for their tests. They should know the systems
cold
and become intimately familiar with that aircraft. Then by the time
they
get their license (usually only a couple of months) they understand
what
they should expect to learn as they move to other makes or models.
Trying to do that all at once leaves gaps. I sure wouldn't want a
student to be learning in a PA-28 or a C-152 and be looking at or
trying
to buy a Grumman. I've taught in all of them and they are different
birds. Let's learn one thing at a time, and learn it very well.


90 HP to 180 HP single engine fixed gear planes are all about the
same.
I am not sure why this is a problem. (excepting tail draggers) It
is
pretty simple - teach the speed to fly at the different phases of
flight
and all is straightforward. Teaching a specific aircraft is
problematic.

Again, what is it about your experience with students that leads you
to
believe they cannot handle "the distraction" of owning an airplane?

snip

Jim Carter wrote:
opinions snipped

I also take issue with your position that 90 to 180 HP fixed gear
aircraft are all about the same. There is a tremendous difference in the
handling of a Cessna 177, an American Yankee AA1A, a Piper Cherokee 140,
and a Beech Skipper. Flaps on the Yankee were ornaments and the
non-steerable nosegear was a challenge for most at first. The elevator
ran out of effectiveness on the C177 before the slotted elevator came
along. The Cherokee was interesting in July and August in Texas and
Oklahoma and came down pretty fast until that low wing hit ground
effect.


Flaps on the yankee are not ornaments. They may not be lift devices,
but they sure as heck are glide path/speed affecting. The differences
you cite are all minor - if the instructor teaches how to fly any person
who is supposed to be able to master flying should be able to handle
different planes.

I heard the same garbage from supposed experts when i was learning to
fly - they said I should not do glider lessons and power plane lessons
at the same time. That is horse****. It was all great experience and
each contributed to the other.

The point is that each aircraft model has its own peculiarities as well
as systems and speeds. Learning one set before taking the PP check ride
is usually enough for most students with limited time and money.


So you advocate memorizing everything rather than using checklists?

Tim,
Why do you insist on arguing absolutes when everyone else is
discussing generalities? No one here other than you is taking the
position that our opinions apply to everyone. Everyone here other than
you has suggested that for most of the students we've experienced,
focusing on the task at hand is a good idea. You on the other hand want
to argue that because ignoring that advice worked for you then everyone
should ignore it.

There are exceptions to every rule, apparently you are the
exception. That doesn't make you wrong or anyone else wrong. It just
makes you different than everyone else, and isn't that a good thing?

As a general rule that applies to most all students except you,
it is not a good idea to get distracted with other unnecessary tasks
while learning a complex new task. Several instructors and respected
contributors on this forum have agreed with this recommendation. Can you
cite personal experience with a wide variety of students that refutes
this advice and can you justify the position that what works for you
must work for everyone?

Again, regarding your comment about checklists, you have taken
the position that a pilot either has to memorize everything or use
checklists. Isn't any complex task a combination of both? It is a well
recognized fact that memorization improves the chances of proper
reactions. It is also well recognized that checklists improve safety.
Those two actions are not mutually exclusive.

It has been many years since I taught in the AA-1 Yankee so I
may have been mistaken about the flaps being ornaments. In any event I
got out my old Owner's Manual for the bird and researched the
information on flaps. Turns out I wasn't wrong after all. Page 5-6,
Figure 12 shows there is a 2 MPH difference in stall speed in level
flight and a 3 MPH difference in stall speed in a 60 degree bank. These
flaps are very small on this aircraft, produce minimal lift, and produce
almost negligible drag. Also on the same page the short field landing
speed is listed as 72 MPH flaps down and on page 3-5 under Normal
Approach and Landing the recommended speed is 75 MPH with flaps as
desired. This is from the 1973 manual by the way.

Again, it is my opinion that flaps on the Yankee were ornamental
to a certain extent. They did however prove useful in teaching students
procedures and systems. We have no argument about pilots being able to
master different planes, just the timing of those events.


-----Original Message-----
From: Tim ]
Posted At: Thursday, January 25, 2007 9:48 AM
Posted To: rec.aviation.owning
Conversation: First plane
Subject: First plane

Jim Carter wrote:
opinions snipped

I also take issue with your position that 90 to 180 HP fixed gear
aircraft are all about the same. There is a tremendous difference in
the
handling of a Cessna 177, an American Yankee AA1A, a Piper Cherokee
140,
and a Beech Skipper. Flaps on the Yankee were ornaments and the
non-steerable nosegear was a challenge for most at first. The
elevator
ran out of effectiveness on the C177 before the slotted elevator
came
along. The Cherokee was interesting in July and August in Texas and
Oklahoma and came down pretty fast until that low wing hit ground
effect.


Flaps on the yankee are not ornaments. They may not be lift devices,
but they sure as heck are glide path/speed affecting. The differences
you cite are all minor - if the instructor teaches how to fly any
person
who is supposed to be able to master flying should be able to handle
different planes.

I heard the same garbage from supposed experts when i was learning to
fly - they said I should not do glider lessons and power plane lessons
at the same time. That is horse****. It was all great experience and
each contributed to the other.

The point is that each aircraft model has its own peculiarities as
well
as systems and speeds. Learning one set before taking the PP check
ride
is usually enough for most students with limited time and money.


So you advocate memorizing everything rather than using checklists?

I will bow out of the conversation. I figured since I actually had
first-hand experience with what the OP was asking that my comments would
be relevant. I know of no owner who bought while or prior to being a
student who has commented on it being a negative. (and I am familiar
with a dozen or so people)

Perhaps we are a different lot. I just can't agree with the advice
given here.

regards,
tim

Jim Carter wrote:
Tim,
Why do you insist on arguing absolutes when everyone else is
discussing generalities? No one here other than you is taking the
position that our opinions apply to everyone. Everyone here other than
you has suggested that for most of the students we've experienced,
focusing on the task at hand is a good idea. You on the other hand want
to argue that because ignoring that advice worked for you then everyone
should ignore it.

There are exceptions to every rule, apparently you are the
exception. That doesn't make you wrong or anyone else wrong. It just
makes you different than everyone else, and isn't that a good thing?

As a general rule that applies to most all students except you,
it is not a good idea to get distracted with other unnecessary tasks
while learning a complex new task. Several instructors and respected
contributors on this forum have agreed with this recommendation. Can you
cite personal experience with a wide variety of students that refutes
this advice and can you justify the position that what works for you
must work for everyone?

Again, regarding your comment about checklists, you have taken
the position that a pilot either has to memorize everything or use
checklists. Isn't any complex task a combination of both? It is a well
recognized fact that memorization improves the chances of proper
reactions. It is also well recognized that checklists improve safety.
Those two actions are not mutually exclusive.

It has been many years since I taught in the AA-1 Yankee so I
may have been mistaken about the flaps being ornaments. In any event I
got out my old Owner's Manual for the bird and researched the
information on flaps. Turns out I wasn't wrong after all. Page 5-6,
Figure 12 shows there is a 2 MPH difference in stall speed in level
flight and a 3 MPH difference in stall speed in a 60 degree bank. These
flaps are very small on this aircraft, produce minimal lift, and produce
almost negligible drag. Also on the same page the short field landing
speed is listed as 72 MPH flaps down and on page 3-5 under Normal
Approach and Landing the recommended speed is 75 MPH with flaps as
desired. This is from the 1973 manual by the way.

Again, it is my opinion that flaps on the Yankee were ornamental
to a certain extent. They did however prove useful in teaching students
procedures and systems. We have no argument about pilots being able to
master different planes, just the timing of those events.



-----Original Message-----
From: Tim ]
Posted At: Thursday, January 25, 2007 9:48 AM
Posted To: rec.aviation.owning
Conversation: First plane
Subject: First plane

Jim Carter wrote:
opinions snipped

I also take issue with your position that 90 to 180 HP fixed gear
aircraft are all about the same. There is a tremendous difference in

the

handling of a Cessna 177, an American Yankee AA1A, a Piper Cherokee

140,

and a Beech Skipper. Flaps on the Yankee were ornaments and the
non-steerable nosegear was a challenge for most at first. The

elevator

ran out of effectiveness on the C177 before the slotted elevator

came

along. The Cherokee was interesting in July and August in Texas and
Oklahoma and came down pretty fast until that low wing hit ground
effect.


Flaps on the yankee are not ornaments. They may not be lift devices,
but they sure as heck are glide path/speed affecting. The differences
you cite are all minor - if the instructor teaches how to fly any

person

who is supposed to be able to master flying should be able to handle
different planes.

I heard the same garbage from supposed experts when i was learning to
fly - they said I should not do glider lessons and power plane lessons
at the same time. That is horse****. It was all great experience and
each contributed to the other.


The point is that each aircraft model has its own peculiarities as

well

as systems and speeds. Learning one set before taking the PP check

ride

is usually enough for most students with limited time and money.


So you advocate memorizing everything rather than using checklists?

Tim wrote
... I know of no owner who bought while or prior to being a student who
has commented on it being a negative.

Tim, add me to the list of positives. I bought my Cessna 182Q when I was a
student and found it worked out very well.

Jon

I suppose I'm reviving a dead string on an active thread, but I think
most here would agree that "payload" refers to the weight available for
passengers and baggage with full fuel. "Useful load" is, as you
describe, "the total weight of fuel, passengers, and freight." The
only difference being that "useful load" only includes usable fuel,
because unusable fuel is included in the empty weight.


Chad Speer
PP-ASEL, IA
ATCS, Kansas City ARTCC



On Dec 19 2006, 8:11 am, Dave Butler wrote:
*****
"Payload" is usually used to mean the total weight of fuel, passengers,
and freight, so that you can adjust the amount of fuel carried to fit
the mission. Payload is a better measure of an aircraft's capability
than "payload with full fuel".

/pedantry off

DB
*****

Chad Speer wrote:
I suppose I'm reviving a dead string on an active thread, but I think
most here would agree that "payload" refers to the weight available for
passengers and baggage with full fuel. "Useful load" is, as you
describe, "the total weight of fuel, passengers, and freight." The
only difference being that "useful load" only includes usable fuel,
because unusable fuel is included in the empty weight.

I'd argue though, that "payload" refers to the weight of passengers and
baggage period. I've removed the word "available" and the reference to
fuel. Nevertheless your criticism of what I wrote previously is valid.
Thanks.

coming into the discussion rather late, but let me add a few data points.
As Tim and Mike and others discuss, there are advantages to renting
various aircraft before buying. On the other hand, far too many schools
have just one model aircraft, so the student must either go to another
school or wait until passing checkride to rent something else.

While a student, I had the opportunity to fly C152, C172 and Cherokees
(both 160 & 180 hp). Perhaps it's a gender thing, or just issues with
aging, but I really never enjoyed the Cessna. Let us NOT get into the
high-wing/low-wing argument (again) but for me, the advantage of not
having to climb on the roof to check fuel and being able to see the
airport when turning in the pattern were critical.

As for dealing with both learning and owning, I really don't see much
conflict. I solo'd in the C172, did the XCs in the C172 but bought the
cherokee before the checkride -- and took the checkride in it. In
all fairness, I had been looking for an aircraft for about a year
(when you're working full-time, traveling extensively and dealing with
2 major family emergencies, flying gets in the way sometimes).
I was not happy with the rental aircraft. Why? Because far too many
people treat rental aircraft the same way people treat rent cars.

Is owning practical for everyone? No, not really. We've had the discussions
here repeatedly as to the pros & cons. But I don't believe the
argument "too much to learn and own at the same time" is valid. As
a student I was dealing with 4 unknowns:

my schedule
instructor's schedule
aircraft schedule
weather

Owning an aircraft means item 3 is no longer an issue (unless it's down
for annual or repairs). And out here in the west, if the weather is
questionable, it doesn't matter who owns the aircraft, the beginning
student is probably not going to be flying.

Owning an aircraft meant I learned more about the systems of the
aircraft and much better than if I was renting and only needed to know
enough to pass the exams.

Is it expensive? Sure. On the other hand, have you seen the price tag
for a day lift ticket out in the Rockies these days? There's a reason
so many people buy the early season pass specials -- and the ski areas
are beginning to regret it, too. $82 at Vail per day. Yet the early
season pass is under $400. Ski 5 days and you're now skiing for
free. I gave up skiing when I started flying lessons. I can only have
one exhorbitant hobby. Besides, the traffic from Denver to Vail (or
Copper or A-Basin or Keystone or Mary Jane) has become impossible
and far too aggravating. From my front door, I can get to 12K faster
in the cherokee than I can on my skis. (2 hours door to ski lift at
Copper assuming traffic moves at a reasonable rate, 1 hour door to
12K in the cherokee and traffic isn't an issue).

The one strong suggestion to the OP is to NOT rush into a purchase.
There will always be another aircraft that suits your needs.