low wing vs. high wing

[cforst513]

is there an advantage in learning how to fly in low-wing aircraft vs. high-wing (or vice versa)? maybe tomahawks and archers vs. 152's and 172's. what do you guys prefer, or what did you learn on?

 

[VNugget]

I learned in cessnas... at one point I scored a free hour in an arrow, and now i'm a little... bi-curious... if you will.

 

[rumpletumbler]

Low wing will handle a good bit more crosswind than high.

 

[Lead Sled]

is there an advantage in learning how to fly in low-wing aircraft vs. high-wing (or vice versa)? maybe tomahawks and archers vs. 152's and 172's. what do you guys prefer, or what did you learn on?

It doesn’t really make any difference at all. There are those who will say that “high-wing” trainers such as the Cessna 152 or 172 are easier to fly and are more stable. Others will say that the “low-wing” aircraft such as the Pipers are better. The truth is that either type is just fine. Each type has its particular “pros” and “cons”. There might be some argument for using a high-wing trainer if someday you dream of owning a Cessna 210 or a low-wing trainer if someday you plan on buying a Bonanza or other high performance low-wing aircraft. However, when all is said and done it doesn’t really matter. You can safely base your decision on what “strikes your fancy” and where you can make the best deal. What does matter is who your CFI is. Take some time and find a good one.

'Sled

 

[rumpletumbler]

Unless you are tiny then I'd stay away from a 152. I feel like I'm flying an ultralight when I'm in one and they are so small its uncomfortable. I'm flying the Alarus now and even though its a 2 seater its 6.5 inches wider than a 172 in the seating area so its more comfortable. Much more roomy than even the 172 much less the 152.

 

[Doug]

Hey, I fly a 152

And yes it is small and cramped. Thing is the 152 is $70 and hour, but everything else like the 172 and the Piper Warrior are ~$100 and up. I just don't know that it's worth the money.

Thing is I guess I don't mind small and cramped, I love small cars too, and would never be able to drive a large car. To each his own.

Other thing is, the school has 3 152's, but only 1 warrior, and a couple 172's but some are IFR and even more expensive, etc.

Once I get my ticket, I will certainly learn to fly the warrior, and the 172...but right now, I just can't see burning the money in those planes when the 152 will teach me the same thing...and I would imagine it would make me better at dealing with x-wind landings than a 172 would

In fact you guys will all think I am insane, but I am leaning toward purchasing a 152 to build time when I get my ticket. I personally have no problems with the 152, and don't plan to ever really do any long distance travels, I got into flying for something to do on a nice day...I like to see the world from above.

 

[rumpletumbler]

We rent the Alarus for $78 an hour. I'll bet it is far better equipped and much newer than your 152 as well.

http://www.newplane.com/amd_files/Alarus-2005-13Ss.jpg

 

[Vector4fun]

It's easier to put gas in a low wing than a high wing. That's about the biggest difference. Beavers are an exception....

 

[noslonlo]

I think Doug has the right idea. Unless you're really a big person, fly a 150 or 152. The savings can really add up.

Also, if someone has trained in a smaller airplane with less power, I notice that their takeoffs are smoother. They smoothly set a pitch attitude and let the airplane fly itself off the runway. You can't jerk a 152 off the runway like you can a 172 or warrior.

This is just my personal observation and I'm not trying to say that 152 pilots are better than others. Sorry to get off the subject of low wing vs. high wing.

 

[Frmr Avro Drvr]

We rent the Alarus for $78 an hour. I'll bet it is far better equipped and much newer than your 152 as well.

http://www.newplane.com/amd_files/Alarus-2005-13Ss.jpg

Just be careful when you step on the step to get on the wing or the tail will be sitting on the ground. Also be careful not to stick your hand through the skin.

It flew all right but seemed cheaply made. That was in 2000. I don't know if they are any better now.