----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----
At 01:34 PM 2/15/01 -0800, Georgia Trehey wrote: >C'mon guys, there are lots of other planes besides coupes and Cessnas. >Why do you ONLY pick on Cessnas? Big target? You know my feelings about the 172 (only, really, the later ones, after they got electric flaps and got heavy, and especially now that a lot of them have gotten a bit loose). To me, the airplane is to flying as the Chrysler K-car or the Ford Fairmont is to driving. I do happen to enjoy the 150/152, as well as the 177B. But to be fair, I once flew a T-Tail Piper Arrow that I found to be a detestable beast whose aerodynamics had been ruined for marketing purposes. And I did my primary in a Piper Tomahawk, and flew one later on a trip to visit family. There's a bad airplane. Lousy build quality (unbelievably lousy), weird behavior at low airspeeds, and now it turns out that they may be out-and-out dangerous due to having had some wing pieces eliminated AFTER most flight-testing was done. I loved the Warriors and Archers that, along with a couple of Skyhawks, I finished my Private Pilot training in and flew on solo cross-countries. And at the time, I even bore an affection for the Skyhawks which I later grew disdainful of. And to this day, given rehearsal time, and if my life depended on getting it into a sub-1000-foot runway, I'll take a Skyhawk any day. >I can't help but wonder, considering WHO >is sending these messages, if it is intended to keep Spook in fighting >form, on her toes, etc. :-) Once the initial novelty wears off, and especially if you end up in Ercoupes, you're bound to become fussier about the way the planes you fly feel. You'll develop some clear tastes. You can tell mine... ...I like 'em light and quick, with very positive ailerons and rather sensitive pitch as well. Like Ercoupes and Bonanzas. I'm a little guy, and in a plane like a 172 or 182, being up close to the yoke to reach the pedals complicates the problem of getting full back elevator on heavy controls to flare in landing, as my seating position makes for poor leverage. Half the time in rentals, the seat height adjustment, if there is one, isn't quite working right, so that makes it worse. On the 172, there is rarely electric trim on the yoke, so I end up fussing with the trim wheel during the flare. I don't like that. But I have very little choice in the matter unless I want to fly down final trimmed for 10 MPH less than proper approach speed. Most Warriors and Archers I've flown do have trim on the yoke: that's not so bad. In a Skyhawk, on a go-round, I'm really pushing to overcome a lot of nose-up force. Between the flaps and the trim I really have to work to keep that airspeed where it should be and not execute a departure stall. On top of that, in a 172 with electric flaps and no pre-sets (like 1975), I'm trying to push the nose down, work the trim, AND get that awful last 10 degrees of flaps off all with only two hands. What's my point? Well, all that seems 'way too much like work to yours truly. Especially to fly a plane which will barely lift 3 adults in a fairly narrow CG. I understand ponderous controls in a 206 Skywagon. But in a 172? Greg __________________________________________________ To unsubscribe from this list please send mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ____________________________________________________________ T O P I C A -- Learn More. Surf Less. Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Topics You Choose. http://www.topica.com/partner/tag01
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
