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

G.R. Patterson III wrote:


Jay Honeck wrote:

But in the end the real "deal killer" for a high-wing aircraft was when she
laughed out loud while flying the pattern. She just couldn't believe that
people flew a plane where the runway environment was invisible while turning
base-to-final.


That's probably also related to her height. I don't lose sight of the runway
turning base to final in a 182. I *do* have to lean forward, though.

Yes, same here, but I'm 6' tall with relatively short legs so I could
see over even the 182's glare shield fairly well and leaning forward I
could get ahead of the wing root fairly easily. No doubt that a
low-wing gives you a better view of the runway environment than a
high-wing, but I never found it a problem. As long as you start your
turn to final at the right point, it isn't hard to roll out on the
extended centerline. Usually you can see the runway once your heading
is within 30 degrees or so and that is usually plenty of time to adjust
the rate of turn to accomodate wind drift or an early or late turn.


Matt

The runway disappears, but that has never bothered me as it always
reappears right where it was originally. When the runway disappears is
a good time to look the other direction for the King Air zipping toward
the same piece of asphalt.

---------------------
She just couldn't believe that
people flew a plane where the runway environment was invisible while
turning
base-to-final.

--------------------

I can see where short people have a forward visibility problem,
although cranking the seat up helps some. For us tall people, the
headroom is great. I can barely sit in a Commanchee with headsets on,
and the Cherokee was pretty limited too.

The 182 does handle like a truck, but that's kind-of-nice sometimes,
too.

The differences are all secondary, though.

bk wrote:

The runway disappears, but that has never bothered me as it always
reappears right where it was originally. When the runway disappears is
a good time to look the other direction for the King Air zipping toward
the same piece of asphalt.

---------------------
She just couldn't believe that
people flew a plane where the runway environment was invisible while
turning
base-to-final.

--------------------

I can see where short people have a forward visibility problem,
although cranking the seat up helps some. For us tall people, the
headroom is great. I can barely sit in a Commanchee with headsets on,
and the Cherokee was pretty limited too.

The 182 does handle like a truck, but that's kind-of-nice sometimes,
too.

I hear that a lot, but I find the 67 Arrow I fly now to be just as
trucky as the 182. It is a little lighter in pitch, but the rudders are
stiffer. Roll is comparable.

I also prefer the vernier controls to the quadrant controls in the Piper.


Matt

Jay...

I love flying our 172...(love flying anything)

But I am with Mary on the invisible turn to final!

One gets used to it.. but I much prefer the low wing
aircraft..

Dave


On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 15:20:49 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

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.

I've flown "uppers and lowers", and find that both have weaknesses and
strengths. In the end, I like to fly both types.

What I found interesting, though, was watching Mary test-fly Cessna 182s
back in 2002 when we were looking to sell our Warrior. She had maybe 200
hours total time at that point, but no high-wing time at all, so she was a
valid test subject on this matter.

She was impressed with the interior room of the Skylane, but, being just 5
feet tall, she found the Cessna to be too "tall" for her comfort (I.E.: the
seating and panel position restricted her forward visibility too much, even
with a pillow) -- and she absolutely despised the 182's truck-like handling
characteristics.

But in the end the real "deal killer" for a high-wing aircraft was when she
laughed out loud while flying the pattern. She just couldn't believe that
people flew a plane where the runway environment was invisible while turning
base-to-final.

On 2005-01-19, Jay Honeck wrote:

But in the end the real "deal killer" for a high-wing aircraft was when she
laughed out loud while flying the pattern. She just couldn't believe that
people flew a plane where the runway environment was invisible while turning
base-to-final.

I learned to fly in C-172s and bought a Comanche. I laughed outloud the
first time I made a 30 degree banked turn and I could see everything!

--
Ben Jackson

http://www.ben.com/

TRIM!!!
TRIM!!!
TRIM!!!
The 182 (and other such aircraft) are flown with trim controls.
Set the proper trim prior to taking the runway, add power and with a
gentle tug, the airplane flys off the runway.
Adjust the elevator trim for climb airspeed and the rudder trim to
center the ball.
Level off for cruise, readjust the pitch and yaw trims after setting power.
To descend, reduce power (or set down trim if you can stay out of the
yellow arc with power) and readjust rudder trim.
What are you doing that requires large control inputs?

Jay Honeck wrote:
She was impressed with the interior room of the Skylane, but, being just 5
feet tall, she found the Cessna to be too "tall" for her comfort (I.E.: the
seating and panel position restricted her forward visibility too much, even
with a pillow) -- and she absolutely despised the 182's truck-like handling
characteristics.

In rec.aviation.owning jsmith wrote:
: To descend, reduce power (or set down trim if you can stay out of the
: yellow arc with power) and readjust rudder trim.

Why would you want to stay out of the yellow arc if the air is smooth?
The yellow arc is my target in the descent!
--
Aaron C.

TRIM!!!
TRIM!!!
TRIM!!!
The 182 (and other such aircraft) are flown with trim controls.

I know. But Mary didn't.

Our Pathfinder (essentially a Piper Skylane, with the wing on the right
side) is not quite so trim-dependent, but proper trim sure makes everything
easier.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

One of the nice things about the Diamond Eclipse I rent is that
although it's a low wing it has great visibility. The wings are far
enough back of the cockpit that you get excellent upward visibility and
usable downward visibility as well. The picture is different from the
172 I learned on though, the forward window goes down lower. It makes
a great sightseeing airplane!

-Malcolm Teas

wrote in message
ups.com...

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).

I concur with those sentiments entirely.

I soloed in a 172, finished PVT and IFR training in a 182, bought a 210,
then moved to a Baron (did ME training in a Seneca), then a Bonanza. The
transition involved minimal time and "effort". That's because the
differences are minimal: an airplane is an airplane, especially when they
are of the same general class.