Quick advice, PPL costs

sure, if there is not a large price difference and its the steam gages. go for it. Its a fun airplane to fly. I find that starting people in the G1000 results in either being stuck inside the cockpit too much and having a harder time moving to the older steam gages.

A while back I had the chance to fly a Avidyne equipped DA40. That was odd... but the Diamonds are fun.
 
jspeed87 said:
DA20 has conventional instruments no glass. and plus its only 5 bucks more then a old 152. I rather go for the DA20 then get checked out in a 172. I'm not feeling the DA40
Click to expand...

There is a new modification out there that puts the Aspen EFD1000 PFD, replacing some of the steam gauges. Haven't seen one for real, but from the looks of it, its a real nice set up. The way I understand it, is that the Aspen is the only thing that would fit in the panel.

In regards to saving $1000 to fly the 152 over a 172. Go sit in the 152 for 15 minutes on the ground, with the doors closed. See how it feels after that. I wouldn't force myself into the plane, just to save a few bucks. If you aren't comfortable, you probably won't learn as well/as quickly, thus costing more money.
 
What is avgas at right now? If it's coming down, there's no reason to have an old 172 at $135 an hour.
 
I just wanted to add that in 2002, avgas was averaging between $2.20ish and $2.80is a gallon at the pump. This isn't what the FBOs themselves were paying for it, but that's what they were charging. Back then, at my school, a 172P went for $78/hour.

In 2008, avgas prices at the pump exceeded $5.50 a gallon. The G1000 was all the rage and many "raw data" 172's exceeded $100/hour. In 2001, a 172SP was $90/hour at my school. Food for thought. Shop around. Don't pay too much.
 
jspeed87 said:
DA20 has conventional instruments no glass. and plus its only 5 bucks more then a old 152. I rather go for the DA20 then get checked out in a 172. I'm not feeling the DA40
Click to expand...

The DA20 is a slippery bird. It makes it a little harder to master short fields. But it flies way better. You'll get to the practice area much faster in the -20. It will make you much better at enegry management in the long run. I have been in a -20, brought the engine back to idle, and climbed at 1500ft/min in ridge lift. They are much more comfortable as well.
 
Thanks for all the advice! I was checking out a local school (Ohio Valley Flight Service) based in Wheeling, WV and Washington, PA. I think I'll stick with the "everything included" $85/hour for a C150 that I found up in Bradford. That's my summer haunt so I guess I'll just wait for summer to fly again. Washington and Wheeling aren't all the convenient for me anyhow... There's one more place I'm going to look at over in Ohio (Second Wind Aviation); I'm going to have to drive over there because no one ever answers the phone. Anyone know anything about them?
 
wjmiller3 said:
They may be cost effective, but there is NOTHING fun or awesome about a 152. I personally can't stand them. Just my .02 worth.
Click to expand...
To each his own I guess. Yesterday I went up and logged 1.3 in a 150 just for the heck of it. Kind of a waste since I need cross country hours, but I ended up having a lot of fun. It's nice to have something so simple to just go up and put around in every once in a while, do some low-level sightseeing. And I love seeing how short I can get that thing stopped in.:D
 
mshunter said:
The DA20 is a slippery bird. It makes it a little harder to master short fields. But it flies way better. You'll get to the practice area much faster in the -20. It will make you much better at enegry management in the long run. I have been in a -20, brought the engine back to idle, and climbed at 1500ft/min in ridge lift. They are much more comfortable as well.
Click to expand...

Not in Texas in the summer. Not totally convinced of your other comments either...The DA-20 is the easiest plane to land I've flown. It has a huge wing yeah, but that just means a slower approach and shorter landing distance.

I like the cockpit more, but at the end of the day we're really splitting hairs.
 
scramjet said:
I think I'll stick with the "everything included" $85/hour for a C150 that I found up in Bradford. That's my summer haunt so I guess I'll just wait for summer to fly again.
Click to expand...

Sound like a good deal to me. I paid $54 (152 wet) + $24 (instructor) 10 years ago for my PPL.

There are lot's of other great light trainers, I only suggested the 150/152 because: A) there are tons of them. B) they are all cheap. C) They are very safe. D) They are very similar to the 172 that you will probably end up flying.
 
mhcasey said:
Not in Texas in the summer. Not totally convinced of your other comments either...The DA-20 is the easiest plane to land I've flown. It has a huge wing yeah, but that just means a slower approach and shorter landing distance.

I like the cockpit more, but at the end of the day we're really splitting hairs.
Click to expand...

You talking about that little DA-20 that Pilots choice had? I loved that plane...
 
muffinman said:
You talking about that little DA-20 that Pilots choice had? I loved that plane...
Click to expand...

I love flying the DA-20 - I've only got about .8 in it but it was great. However, I can totally see where that bubble canopy becomes a freakin' greenhouse in a Texas summer.

I did all of my PPL training in a 152. I love it. I've moved up to flying 172s lately and I gotta say, even though you get more gas and people and cargo in a 172, the 152 just flies better to me. It's more responsive, you have more rudder authority...it's just overall a more fun airplane to fly for me. YMMV of course...

I'd add that 152s are built like tanks, and will take a severe amount of abuse from ham fisted pilots like me.
 
av8or91 said:
I just rented a G1000 172S for 64 dollars an hour. Thanks UND
Click to expand...

+ tuition?

muffinman said:
You talking about that little DA-20 that Pilots choice had? I loved that plane...
Click to expand...

Indeed I am. I mentioned in another thread that I never trusted it because of an unresolved fuel pump issue. I had a terrible tendency of spilling fuel all over the side of the airplane as well...
 
I've heard bad things about the Rotax powered ones. Dunno if it's just people complaining or not.
 
mhcasey said:
Not in Texas in the summer. Not totally convinced of your other comments either...The DA-20 is the easiest plane to land I've flown. It has a huge wing yeah, but that just means a slower approach and shorter landing distance.

I like the cockpit more, but at the end of the day we're really splitting hairs.
Click to expand...

I never siad it was harder to land, I said it was harder to master short fields. In the 150/152, you can carry power to your spot, chop it and hit your spot. In the -20, you can't. It tends to float more. It is however, eaiser to grease on to the runway, and yes, eaiser to land. But it dosen't have the drag to just chop and drop. As far as being more comfortable, it's much wider, and more roomy. Plus flying with a stick instead of a yoke seems to make a closer connection with the airplane vs. a yoke. One more bennifit is the increase in airspeed that you get. The long x-country no longer takes 2:45. Which leads to more time to learn, rather than just pluging along striaght and level.
 
killbilly said:
the 152 just flies better to me. It's more responsive, you have more rudder authority...it's just overall a more fun airplane to fly for me. YMMV of course...

I'd add that 152s are built like tanks, and will take a severe amount of abuse from ham fisted pilots like me.
Click to expand...

true story
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top