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

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.

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

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

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.

"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

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

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

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

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)

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