Purdue fleet
- Thread starter Kestrel452
- Start date
Kestrel452
New Member
Why would a college flight program buy planes that take the problem solving, pilotage, and instrument cluster eye scanning skill developing away? College flight program + cirrus trainers = poorly developed and stupid pilots. They had the PERFECT platforms, simple pipers with six packs and no more glass than a single garmin 430.
Someone should tell these kids to get a real degree. Though most of them have no idea at all of the lifestyles pilots live.
EDIT: I just read that the ailerons and rudder are linked in the Cirrus. How the HELL are people going to know how to use rudder pedals if everything is incorporated into a single stick?!?! Crosswind landings are going to be quite a sight by students flying these and especially once they get into a plane that actually has independent controls.
Someone should tell these kids to get a real degree. Though most of them have no idea at all of the lifestyles pilots live.
EDIT: I just read that the ailerons and rudder are linked in the Cirrus. How the HELL are people going to know how to use rudder pedals if everything is incorporated into a single stick?!?! Crosswind landings are going to be quite a sight by students flying these and especially once they get into a plane that actually has independent controls.
Blip16
Well-Known Member
AFAIK the G3's are not any more, at least i thought they changed it
CN94559
New Member
Is it twist handle?
Regardless that was really dumb of Purdue to buy Cirrus as trainers. Hopefully for them their marketing ploy of ohhhhh purty airplane will work. It wont though, at least not for a long term situaiton. They will get initial enrollment, but not a consistant enrollement rate after they realize how awful of a trainer it is.
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
Well, that depends how they're interlinked.
If it's like the old Senecas (55908 at laf av still there?), then that interlink sucks because you actually have to have more control over the aircraft as you fight the bungees.
Now, if it's like an Ercoupe, that's a different story.
And, if they charge "lab fees" for flying of real airplanes beyond the Multi-Engine Curriculum, I waive the BS flag.
Actually, I might shoot of an email soon and see what pops up.
Jason, what do you know? (Sorry, I haven't called, I've been avoiding CVG like the plague. I can't get there and home. LAX and ANC is easier....)
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
I hate that about Seneca's. Makes flying the darn thing harder than it needs to be.
Kestrel452 said:
So speak with your dollars. Good money says that Purdue isn't going to see a drop in enrollment because of the change in fleet. They may even see an increase, due to the shiny new airplanes. You seem to have a vendetta against lots of things. Perhaps its time to step back, and take a chill pill. You can try to give other people advise, but you can't live their lives for them. Lots of schools have made Cirrii work for the training environment (Western Michigan, Delta Connection, CAPT, etc...). It might work, might not.
Blip16
Well-Known Member
it is like you described
Kestrel452
New Member
I have no vendettas. However, I had really hoped to train with Purdue and their a/c decision has killed my desire to go with them.
I am perfectly calm and dont need a "chill pill".
A cirrus WORKS, but it's not by any means the RIGHT aircraft to use as a trainer. Anyone who wants to maximize their job opportunities should get time in a Piper or Cessna with analog systems. Those who want to minimize their job opps should train in glass systems, especially planes like a Cirrus.
A Cirrus flight may or may not work. My primary concern is students buying into more airplane than they need. Who knows...none of us have seen the numbers, perhaps Cirrus gave the school a good cut on price.
You bring up a good point about job prospects training with only a Cirrus fleet. Many FBOs may not like the fact that a student has only flown Cirrus aircraft with glass when they go to instruct in Reagan-era Cessnas.
One of my primary concerns with this fleet deal is the change in turbine aircraft. I'll also have to put up the BS flag if the school makes it mandatory to pay a lab fee to get the Pheonom type. Most of the faculty I've spoken with were against the deal since the Pheonom couldn't cover the requirements of the school and TFO operations would decrease. They feared the aircraft would literally punch holes in the sky with students instead of being utilized for actual travel....I really hope the students don't have to foot the bill for that.
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
When I was there, they mocked another university program for doing as described with C-500 series aircraft....
Kestrel452
New Member
All I can say for sure is this: Purdue will regret their decision if they move ahead with the Cirruses. Have fun buying all new machinery, parts, tools, and equipment! And good luck repairing a composite airframe after a hard landing.
Kestrel452
New Member
Gonzo
Well-Known Member
A lot of planes have the rudder linked to the ailerons in fact the plane I got my PVT in did. FYI: you still have to use the pedals in a crosswind landing in fact I think it made me better on the pedals.
At one time I might have agreed with you. But now I don't think it matters. A plane is a plane.
GUNIT
Well-Known Member
Things will happen too fast. A student pilot (or low time PP or really a pilot at any stage) could easily get disoriented if they get complacent. I worry that the students will depend too much on glass and won't learn to look outside.
Not to mention with 17 cirri all coming in and out at the same time at a non-radar tower it's going to be crazy. The push is going to happen faster and finals will be stretched out longer.
Not to mention with 17 cirri all coming in and out at the same time at a non-radar tower it's going to be crazy. The push is going to happen faster and finals will be stretched out longer.
etflies
Keeping calm, Chiving on.
A plane is a plane to a higher time pilot who has flown several types. To a low time SP/PP or low time/no-time dual given CFI they can be very different. Going from Warriors to Cirrus when the instruction is already lackluster is a bonehead move. I feel bad for the kids who will never fly instruments on steam gauges, I have a feeling they're going to lack basic situational awareness skills.
Here's an idea: order another Piper fleet...use the money saved to pay the CFIs more than minimum wage so they actually care. Make the CFI process competitive so those who make it through actually build legitimate hours and are a quality product.
What's going to happen to the Frascas? Are they going to get more G1000 sims or keep the steam gauges?
What's going to happen to the Frascas? Are they going to get more G1000 sims or keep the steam gauges?
KSCessnaDriver
Well-Known Member
Uhh, you do know that Piper is only offering the PA-28 line with either the Avidyne or the G1000 systems. So, that makes the glass panel point kind of irrelevant. Perhaps a split fleet, like Diamond 20's/40's would have made more sense, but apparently not. Just be happy you didn't end up with Cessna GroundPounders (aka Skycatcher).
Blip16
Well-Known Member
actually Piper quit making the PA-28's earlier this year or late last year
Uhh, haven't looked at the numbers but I was assuming that a Cirrus was more pricey than a warrior. I realized that it was going to be glass no matter what, I was curious if they were going to replace their sims as well.
