Training aircraft

Well if you want a really nice aeroplane to fly try the Gulfstream American Cheetah or more powerful Tiger. Very docile and forgiving aeroplane. Sliding canopy fighter style. Very gentle sink rate.

I landed one once with a 45 knot crosswind and the little plane took great care of me, I don't think you could perform the same landing in a Cessna. I have seen many Cessnas flipped on the ground by strong winds where I live.

I have no experience of Piper aircraft except the Tommahawk which is twitchy and is hard to flare properly without risking a tailstrike. I had an experience with a Tommahawk in moderate turbulence once with my hand on the throttle. Hit a pocket and it slammed my hand down, closing the throttle. Much prefer a push pull toggle type throttle.

 

An Arrow is a complex retractable gear plane. While you can learn in one, its adds to the cost and things to know and do working on your private. I think a fixed gear plane might be better - look at an Archer or Warrior if you like Pipers.

I will also second the comment about the Grummans (aka Gulfstream American) being terrific, certainly the Cheetahs and Tigers. They are not as docile in my experience as a Cessna or Piper (especially Grumman 2 seaters). That said, they really are wonderfully responsive, are very fast for their hp, and are more a pilots airplane.

Best I can tell, a Tommahawk is nothing like other Pipers, flying poorly in comparison to the PA-28 family. If you like that T-tail look, try a Beechcraft Skipper.

Of course, if you really want to learn to FLY..... there's nothing like the Champ and its bretheren.
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Each airplane has its advantages and disadvantages, in terms of technical advantages, however, there are some performance benefits for a high wing configuration.

High wing airplanes almost always have a higher crosswind landing capability since you can carry more roll angle (as you correct for the crosswind by holding one wing down) into the landing. A low wing airplane would be dragging a wing tip where the high wing airplane wouldn't. They also can have larger and more effective flaps (and Cessnas use fowler flaps that add more wing area and thus can have lower stall speed), where a low wing airplane would be dragging its flaps on the ground if they were as big as those of a Cessna. Since the flaps are higher off of the ground, they are less likely to get damaged by rocks and stuff thrown up by the prop (on takeoffs where you are using one notch of flaps). Since the wing is higher up, it doesn't float or get into ground effect as much on landing, which means you can get more weight on wheels sooner and onto the brakes earlier. The larger flaps and higher flap angles provide more drag on final approach, so you can get over an obstacle and onto the runway in a shorter distance again, providing a shorter landing distance over the proverbial 50 ft obstacle. The larger flaps and higher flap angles provide higher decent rates, so when ATC hangs you up and you need to expedite your decent, you can throw out the flaps and put the nose down and get down in a hurry. You have to experience a dive bomber approach in a 182 to appreciate how steep you can come down at maximum flap extension speed with full flaps. With these reasons it's easy to see why high wing airplanes are clearly the airplane of choice for bush flying. High wing airplanes are more pleasant to load when it is raining since you can park the car under the wing and not get drenched loading the airplane. If the airplane is on the ground it is easier to blow over a high wing airplane if it isn't tied down.

Low wing airplanes have a carry thru structure of the wing spar going thru the cabin under the seats and are structurally easier to make work without struts and they look sexier. On takeoff they get off the ground easier since the wing is lower and in ground effect. Depending on the design, there can be lower drag for a low wing configuration, but there are a lot of variables so each design has to be considered on its own. Low wing airplanes have better visibility in turns, and you don't have to crane forward to look around the wing in the pattern.

So it depends on what type of performance you feel is more important. If you want lower landing speeds and shorter landing distances then high wing airplanes have a distinct advantage.

If you have a tall landing gear setup as a result of having a big engine and prop, (like on a PC12) then there are less technical reasons for mounting the wing up high.

As far as learning, as noted above, the Arrow is a complex airplane with retractable gear and a constant speed prop, which is more to try to learn and for that reason I'd recommend the Skyhawk.

 

In my Old opinion, you are at the stage of learning to fly NOT to learn the complexities of retracting landing gear and everything that goes with it while you are learning the basics of flight. Do the flight training first in a simple trainer like the Aeronca Champ or in the best, the Piper Cub. These airplanes will force you to learn good flying and MAKE you fly right. My son , who has flown everything you can think of and has almost 10,000 hours flies a Cub and still says that," This little airplane makes you coordinate and use the controls like they are supposed to be used. It keeps me sharp." A Champ will do the same. I feel that you should learn in an airplane that will teach you in all three axis first so that you can develop good flying skills early on and then go on to the fancy stuff.
Switches

 

A lot of great information has been laid out here.
I am currently training students in both of the aircraft you have mentioned. Like many other have said the arrow is a "complex" aircraft and can be a little daunting for a newbie who has trouble leveling off much less adjusting the prop speed and making sure the gear is down etc etc. If you want to fly an Arrow more power to you but I just don't see it as beneficial until you have simply flying the plane down first. The other big thing is that if your skyhawk uses a G1000 or similar glass cockpit again that can be a daunting challenge for someone just starting out. AOPA flight training mag did a survey in their feb 2009 issue that states "glass-panel training aircraft are a detriment to flight training" it goes on to explain that the students were more concerned with how to use the cool display than how to fly the plane. Also another thing to think about is that on a stage check your stage pilot can ask you about anything in the plane, why make it harder on yourself by having to know how glass works too, you have enough to worry about already. Now with that said I personally love glass cockpit and think it has its place i just don't think its place is initial training. Every plane has its weaknesses and strengths it just becomes a matter of finding what you want out of it. If I had to pick a plane to start out in it would be a piper warrior with good old steam gauges and maybe a GPS thats it. O and as for the comment about low wings not being able to handle as much of a crosswind, I wanna see what winds you fly in! It takes nearly a 30 degree bank before your wingtip will hit the ground at the same time as the wheels (dont forget about the dihedral) I have put an arrow down in a 37 knot direct crosswind with out a problem. Those pulling for the tail wheel aircraft I just dont see it as a good starter plane as the landings can be trickier and can get out of hand much faster with a tail wheel.

The biggest thing though is enjoy your training and stay safe because remember every takeoff is optional every landing is mandatory.

 

"Tailwheel airplanes are trickier to land and get out of control...." That is the crux of the statement to start in a taildragger. You start out with good training in how to fly the airplane in ALL THREE AXIES and learn to control it on the ground like you are supposed to. You'll get your " tailwheel endorsement" right off the bat.

 

I'm not an instructor yet, but I have to say from my own experience that I agree. A lot modern trainers are so stable that I think much is lost in terms of actually feeling and learning to properly interpret the forces of flight. That IS a good thing for getting your feet wet and building confidence, but it just seems incomplete to me. I got my private after spending time in 172s and a Symphony 160, then moved on to a Citabria for aerobatics and tailwheel. After a few lessons in the Citabria, proper use of the rudders became WAY more apparent -- I feel like I knew very little about real aircraft control before. Only bad thing is that I have to remember not to use as much rudder when I get back in the other planes! Anyway, on one hand, it was good to start in a more docile, stable airplane because I developed confidence, but on the other hand, I wish I had started in the Citabria because a lot of lessons would have made much more immediate sense.

 

I have owned 5 aircraft and flew for 21 years including light IFR. Sadly I do not fly anymore because of age and health. I sold my last plane 9 years ago.

The plane you want to learn on is the Cessna. It has a clean stall both departure stall and normal stall. it eaches you how to get out of it and they do spin so you need to practice rudder control. The pipers are wonderful aircraft but the stall is just bobbing. We call it porpoiseing.

The jim Bede aircraft like the yankee and tiger are great planes but go not train in them. The Yankee was sold as a trainer. It stalls and spins quickly. it killed alot of people.

Cessnas are safe, almost never come apart and most flight instructors know them.

When I had my A36 bonanza the local FBO flight instructor wanted me to do a departure stall. Mine was a 28 volt plane but did not have the stall strips they added later. The Bonanza was as part of the biannual. The Bonanza society told pilots to never do a departure stall in onanza. They stall and go into a flat spin and it is almost imposible to get out of. This guy had 8000 hrs just in A36's and he shared the stall than flat spin that almost killed him. It was chilling story

Of course this could all have changed with time.During the 21 years I flew I had 6 friends die in plane crashes.

Great hobby but it deserves respect.

good luck and enjoy!

Lee

 

Your experience sits with mine. The tiger as I remember does 140 knots with 180 and a fixed pitch prop. A great feel. The T tail arrows did not give rudder untill a higher speed. It took some time to get used to it. I flew a skipper but do not remember much about it. There was a plane with retracts it started with a M, musketer I think. All I remeber was it was slow for the hp.

I love xhamps and J-3's. They are a hoot to fly. I can still remember flying out of the Princeton airport and as landing we would yell out the window, as a joke " downwind runway XX"

Lee