mrivc211
Well-Known Member
Something I learned a long time ago when I went to NJC. The know it all Monday morning quarterback that takes cheap shots is some rookie hiding behind a computer screen and is scared of his own shadow. Carry on kid
Booked my “first” lesson!
- Thread starter NovemberEcho
- Start date
T/O w/FSII
Well-Known Member
ChasenSFO
hen teaser
Interesting debate on the landings/handling of low wing high wing in the beginning of the thread.
I honestly think landings are far too easy in the low wing planes, especially the Grumman tiger I used to fly often. I think I had 2 or 3 hard landings in 2 years of flying that thing. I actually really enjoy pattern work in the 172, especially in an empty pattern where I can do aggressive short approaches and have to bleed that energy fast. A very smooth landing means everything came together well in a Cessna. In an Arrow, Warrior, and Tiger, it seems to be the norm for both myself and most of my friends I've flown with unless you mess up fairly badly. Which, ironically, is why most of my friends seem to prefer not to fly Cessnas.
But hey, at the end of the day, you're landing at what, 55-65 knots in a 172 and you can preform a go-around in about 2 seconds? So as far as airplanes go, a Cessna isn't remotely hard to land all things considered in aviation. So if the purpose is to be a better pilot, isn't the point to master the more difficult (again, when compared to other GA trainers) aircraft over the one that lands/stall recovers easy (though of course engine out is more difficult in a low wing)? The same logic is why I either practice landings on the shortest local runway(PAO) or the busiest airport that will let me in the pattern(SJC) instead of the non-towered airports with long runways like most of my friends do. We're not talking about landing U2s here, I think pilots should always reasonably challenge themselves in GA planes when they're still earning all their ratings. If you're already flying commercially, then of course I understand just wanting the easier option, navigating with foreflight, ect.
I honestly think landings are far too easy in the low wing planes, especially the Grumman tiger I used to fly often. I think I had 2 or 3 hard landings in 2 years of flying that thing. I actually really enjoy pattern work in the 172, especially in an empty pattern where I can do aggressive short approaches and have to bleed that energy fast. A very smooth landing means everything came together well in a Cessna. In an Arrow, Warrior, and Tiger, it seems to be the norm for both myself and most of my friends I've flown with unless you mess up fairly badly. Which, ironically, is why most of my friends seem to prefer not to fly Cessnas.
But hey, at the end of the day, you're landing at what, 55-65 knots in a 172 and you can preform a go-around in about 2 seconds? So as far as airplanes go, a Cessna isn't remotely hard to land all things considered in aviation. So if the purpose is to be a better pilot, isn't the point to master the more difficult (again, when compared to other GA trainers) aircraft over the one that lands/stall recovers easy (though of course engine out is more difficult in a low wing)? The same logic is why I either practice landings on the shortest local runway(PAO) or the busiest airport that will let me in the pattern(SJC) instead of the non-towered airports with long runways like most of my friends do. We're not talking about landing U2s here, I think pilots should always reasonably challenge themselves in GA planes when they're still earning all their ratings. If you're already flying commercially, then of course I understand just wanting the easier option, navigating with foreflight, ect.
