|
I chose the 172 because I wanted a plane that would climb with "authority" with me and the instructor in it. Full tanks + us is still well under gross. A 152 would have been a bit over. I"m sure I'll try something smaller later. I have a fetish for small vehicles.
|
| # ? Apr 13, 2012 14:08 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 03:04 |
|
|
Dalrain posted:Is anyone else going to Funday Sunday at Moraine in Ohio May 6th? Our chapter is going to try to fly-out, and I'd be happy to meet-n-green a goon if it works out. I fly out of this airport, but I am still a student. I will try to show up for the Fly-in. Moraine is a cool airport.
|
| # ? Apr 13, 2012 14:54 |
|
|
There's nothing wrong with being a student, especially when all the action is coming to you! On a side note, I don't recommend doing any training flights that day. I will be in 7576W if the weather works out.
|
| # ? Apr 13, 2012 16:19 |
|
|
helno posted:I prefer flying the 150/152. Never got why people like the 172 (other than the extra 2 seats). Other then all the performance increases you get for about 2-3 gallons an hour difference in burn, you'll like it instantly when your next student is a 350 pound sweaty neck beard. That is of course if you don't like snuggling up to sweaty neck beards but if that's your thing 152 ahoy. Seriously a toy though? A Seminole grosses what another 1500 pounds more the a 172. I could understand that sentiment if you just got out of you 747, but a Seminole?
|
| # ? Apr 13, 2012 19:55 |
|
|
Dalrain posted:There's nothing wrong with being a student, especially when all the action is coming to you! On a side note, I don't recommend doing any training flights that day. I will be in 7576W if the weather works out. This sounds fun, I should be in town that weekend. As for training flights, I am currently out of money so that wont be a problem. (35 hours)
|
| # ? Apr 13, 2012 23:18 |
|
|
Ferris Bueller posted:Other then all the performance increases you get for about 2-3 gallons an hour difference in burn, you'll like it instantly when your next student is a 350 pound sweaty neck beard. That is of course if you don't like snuggling up to sweaty neck beards but if that's your thing 152 ahoy. It's not that much, granted, but it makes a very noticeable difference. The 172 feels like a little sailplane where you are just negotiating where you want to go when it's windy. "Go left.. oh we're going right oh okay... how about left now.. ahh sweet, thanks bro". Especially in hot AZ heat too, you feel every tiny little bump. The seminole is like "I am doing what I want, gently caress you", and feels a lot more stable and solid. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rgzAnrI6Bw Awesome video. The Slaughter fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2012 around 02:12 |
| # ? Apr 14, 2012 22:46 |
|
|
The Slaughter posted:It's not that much, granted, but it makes a very noticeable difference. The 172 feels like a little sailplane where you are just negotiating where you want to go when it's windy. "Go left.. oh we're going right oh okay... how about left now.. ahh sweet, thanks bro". Especially in hot AZ heat too, you feel every tiny little bump. The seminole is like "I am doing what I want, gently caress you", and feels a lot more stable and solid. I'm willing to bet you're like most of the students I had when they made the transition back from flying the Seminole back to doing the Comm add on or CFI with me. They forgot to use the rudders and in my experience the Cessna singles seem to use "more rudder" to make a turn effective, and since they just got done flying the Seminole they forgot that technique. So I guess I'm telling you, with all due respect, no it's not a huge difference, it feels different because its a different airplane. You just learn to make the plane you're flying do what you want when you want it to happen, and different types of planes take different types of techniques to make it happen. You are after all in control of the airplane, and if you feel if you are negotiating with it I might suggest you rethink that attitude, and if you are flying it were full deflection of the controls makes what you want it to do impossible then you certainly should not have been flying. I will say in an instrument approach configuration the Seneca's I used to fly were bar none the most stable platform I've flown during an approach, but when it's bumpy, they all bump along, when it's turbulent they all get thrown around. EDIT: Sorry to get all preachy, just a pet peeve of mine when words like toy, and negotiate get thrown around it shows respect has been lost for the aircraft. When respect has been lost bad things happen, and I know folks no longer with us because of that. It's great you're advancing your career but just remember the adage " A Cub can fly just high enough, and just fast enough to kill you." Ferris Bueller fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2012 around 12:15 |
| # ? Apr 15, 2012 11:34 |
|
|
Wow. Please all pilots refrain from making generalizations about how bad 172s are (they're awful) on a forum thread dedicated towards students and Professionals alike. What slaughter is saying, is that the 172 is light enough to get thrown around in the wind, while the seminole is not as prone to being a victim in the air. I am just really shocked that your first response about how airplanes fly differently is pilot error. Do you work for the FAA?
|
| # ? Apr 15, 2012 15:31 |
|
|
If you want to make a left turn and the plane goes right, that's pilot error.
|
| # ? Apr 15, 2012 15:34 |
|
|
Ferris Bueller posted:Other then all the performance increases The rental 172 that is available at my local airport is really clapped out the 150 gets used less and is better shape. We just about had to keep the 172 redlined to keep up with a Stinson 108 last year. I'll post some pictures in a while but I went to the museum of flight simulation in Eindhoven this morning. http://www.vluchtsimulatie.nl/ These guys started otu as a bunch of hobbyists but turned into a museum and flight school. They recently got an A310 that they are getting ready to go. I flew a very messy ILS approach in one of the simulators. (I am a very rusty VFR only pilot so flying a twin for my first IFR approch was a bit tough) helno fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2012 around 17:31 |
| # ? Apr 15, 2012 17:25 |
|
|
Last time I flew a 172 I found the controls a little heavier than the 152, but didn't think it was bad, I did my IMC in a warrior but that was purely down to the 172 having a few nav aids U/S in it. Saying that after flying tailwheel most of time I now find tricycles less enjoyable.
|
| # ? Apr 15, 2012 18:02 |
|
|
Captain Apollo posted:I am just really shocked that your first response about how airplanes fly differently is pilot error. Do you work for the FAA? DNova posted:If you want to make a left turn and the plane goes right, that's pilot error. No, I just don't like excuses like that. So yeah what DNova said. EDIT: Not really important my status with the FAA, but I don't have a badge that says inspector. Ferris Bueller fucked around with this message at Apr 15, 2012 around 19:55 |
| # ? Apr 15, 2012 19:51 |
|
|
DNova posted:If you want to make a left turn and the plane goes right, that's pilot error. poo poo, you just departed flight.
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2012 02:39 |
|
|
I was just reading my newly purchased "Say again, please" and noticed in the Class E section that talking to Center auto-clears you through class D. (In that Center has to do the talking with them for you.) Does anyone know how this works for class C? Will they just switch me to approach when appropriate? I'm specifically looking at my Funday Sunday flight and realizing it's going to be a little interesting when I get near I73 (Moraine). It looks like I might have to transit Springfield if the ceilings are low-ish, and I'll definitely skirt Dayton. It would be totally sweet to just have flight following and radio-walk through the area automagically. EDIT: My navigation equipment consists of two VORs, the airplane I rent doesn't even have a usable GPS. Hence my greatly increased comfort with the idea of handoffs happening without me knowing exactly where I am with relation to those pretty magenta circles... Dalrain fucked around with this message at Apr 16, 2012 around 18:03 |
| # ? Apr 16, 2012 17:44 |
|
|
Dalrain posted:I was just reading my newly purchased "Say again, please" and noticed in the Class E section that talking to Center auto-clears you through class D. (In that Center has to do the talking with them for you.) Get a 3G iPad with Foreflight to work around your GPS lack.  I'd expect them to switch you to approach when appropriate, or drop you and give you approach's frequency to contact to re-request flight following/clearance through airspace.
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2012 18:47 |
|
|
Or keep the wifi only ipad (or iphone here) and get the $99 Dual GPS that is absolutely incredible! Connects over bluetooth and has great battery life. (rechargeable lithium, not double a or w/e) Fits in the palm of your hand. http://www.sportys.com/PilotShop/product/16597 edit: this is better than the bad elf, where something is physically sticking out of your ipad. At least to me....... You can literally throw the dual GPS anyywhere in the plane (windows help though)
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2012 18:51 |
|
|
Captain Apollo posted:Or keep the wifi only ipad (or iphone here) and get the $99 Dual GPS that is absolutely incredible! Clearly the right answer is $700 more with the Stratus and get subscription-free weather & TFRs (and GPS). http://www.sportys.com/PilotShop/product/17165
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2012 18:58 |
|
|
I really do love gadgets as much as the next guy, but I'll be honest: even the iPad is going to be more than I can afford in the short term. As long as Center will pass me off when appropriate, I think things will work out alright. Alternatively: Perhaps an Android 4.x tablet would be a nice way to go, using Avilution's map app. http://www.avilution.com/ No ADS-B weather option for that yet, but hopefully that'll be forthcoming. I contacted the dev to see if he's working on support for any of the existing devices.
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2012 19:26 |
|
|
With flight following, you are not expected to coordinate your own transition through a C or D surface area. If going through a Bravo, just make sure you hear the magic words first.
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2012 20:58 |
|
|
fordan posted:...or drop you and give you approach's frequency to contact to re-request flight following/clearance through airspace. That should never happen. Much easier for them to point you out to the other facility than go through the whole spiel of having you recite your flight info again.
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2012 21:16 |
|
|
two_beer_bishes posted:That should never happen. Much easier for them to point you out to the other facility than go through the whole spiel of having you recite your flight info again. I hear it all the time, at least for flight following without transiting a Bravo or Charlie. But that might be the fact I fly in an area with 2 busy Bravos (Philly & New York), a Charlie (Atlantic City) and an Air Force RAPCON. Hell, I almost never talk to center; it's approach controller to approach controller. Getting dropped happens a lot less if one of the controllers is nice enough to actually start a strip with the flight info, but I don't see that an awful lot, at least on relatively short hops.
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2012 21:31 |
|
|
Your flight plan should automatically transfer to the next facility/controller. If the auto handoff fails the controller will have to make a call and pass the FP info to the next controller, which is mandatory for IFR, optional for VFR. Unless they are down the shitter, they will make the call. If you get a squawk code, there's a strip for you. If you are worried about busting class B you can ask the controller for clearance through the airspace or a (suggested) heading to avoid it. I don't know about tracons but centers have no depictions of airspace classes on their scopes.
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2012 22:56 |
|
|
kmcormick9 posted:If you get a squawk code, there's a strip for you. That's not always true if the TRACON puts them on a local VFR code. I think these guys are getting typed in locally, without a NAS code or corresponding flight strip, so they wouldn't hand off to an adjacent sector. If they're taking that shortcut because they're too busy to type in a full NAS entry, then I guess they probably won't bother doing a manual hand off, preferring to just drop them at the boundary. That said, I've never been terminated at the boundary of approach airspace when requesting flight following through to my destination. Maybe it's a regional thing. Make sure, as pilots, that you're setting the expectation on your call up that you want flight following to your destination airport, along with your cruising altitude.
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2012 23:03 |
|
|
True, you can just request a code to get them radar identified, but it's only 1 more step to put in a destination and type
|
| # ? Apr 16, 2012 23:15 |
|
|
kmcormick9 posted:True, you can just request a code to get them radar identified, but it's only 1 more step to put in a destination and type With the work loads that most center guys have, especially the low guys have that's one step too many I'm afraid. They really do try to coordinate with the next person they're trying to hand you off with, but sometimes if they don't answer the phone or they themselves are too busy you get dropped. That unfortunately is part of a VFR cross country.
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 00:47 |
|
|
Ferris Bueller posted:With the work loads that most center guys have, especially the low guys have that's one step too many I'm afraid. They really do try to coordinate with the next person they're trying to hand you off with, but sometimes if they don't answer the phone or they themselves are too busy you get dropped. That unfortunately is part of a VFR cross country. Now center>approach manual handoff is a different beast and is entirely up to approach's workload. kmcormick9 fucked around with this message at Apr 17, 2012 around 01:12 |
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 01:00 |
|
|
i'm sorry if i offended anybody with my disrespect for the 172. I still feel that it is a terrible little airplane, although I'm getting... somewhat... more comfortable in it with more time. But having flown enough other planes now, I still rate the 172 a 3.5/10, primarily for poor landing characteristics like a ridiculous amount of float even while carrying minimal airspeed into the roundout/flare, stupidly nose high attitude necessary for landing, poor control feel, and trim wheel in a stupid place. Particular gripes of the old 172 I'm flying would be that has MPH on the outside and knots on the inside of the airspeed indicator, which is very difficult to see from the right seat, and that it lacks a heading bug. The intercom makes you sound like you are underwater. It also features an entirely unpredictable and mostly quiet stall warning horn - probably needs a new reed, not sure. In fairness, it probably isn't so bad, but I've spent 14 hours in it airborne, in just a few days with it being 105F inside that little fucker and after 4 hours in the plane my brain is just mush and I hate everybody and everything. My instructor is the world's biggest dick as well and we are not compatible at all. So I would temper my comments with a big dose of, "yeah, he's really frustrated right now." In summary, 3.5/10. CFI SE/Comm SE checkride moved back to thursday.
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 01:02 |
|
|
I thought centers had magical keyboards that made automation function at the click of a button. Everytime I see "IF" ("Interface Failure," means the simple Point-And-Click handoff function is NOT going to work due to automation/routing problems) flash on my scope I think "Man, I wish I had one of those center keyboards." The Ferret King fucked around with this message at Apr 17, 2012 around 01:09 |
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 01:05 |
|
|
There's the RF key you can try if the handoff fails on the first try. It works about 40% of the time with IFR fps. Don't know about vfrs but I've only ever tried a few times and it didn't work on any of them. "man I wish I could use 3 miles"
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 01:11 |
|
|
The Ferret King posted:That's not always true if the TRACON puts them on a local VFR code. I think these guys are getting typed in locally, without a NAS code or corresponding flight strip, so they wouldn't hand off to an adjacent sector. Thinking this is probably the case, and that it's regional as you say. I usually know when a strip is being done as I'll get asked about the actual flight path intended and the squawk is in a different range. And again, at least here in the northeast, I am almost always talking to approaches and not centers. A flight I did last year from southern NJ to Rochester, NY I went McGuire Approach->Philly Approach->Allentown Approach->Wilkes Barre Approach->Binghamton Approach->Elmira Approach->Rochester Approach, and I didn't have someone ask about my flight plan and give me a "permanent" squawk until either Wilkes Barre or Binghamton. On the way back Rochester set up a strip and I kept the squawk the entire way. Pity there isn't a way to file a VFR flight plan that actually pops up in the ATC system (rather than FSS for search & rescue).
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 01:31 |
|
|
kmcormick9 posted:It's actually the opposite. The high guys are the busy ones and the low guys are probably working more VFR than IFR on a nice day. It sounds exactly the opposite from where I sit so bravo to the high guys in that moment of time. I hear that a bunch "appch. says they're too busy," in places like RDU, IND and other REALLY busy class C airports. I chuckle a bit and my heart goes out to the guy or gal who is obviously on their first cross country and they're like "oh poo poo, now what." I remember those days. The Slaughter posted:i'm sorry if i offended anybody with my disrespect for the 172. I still feel that it is a terrible little airplane, although I'm getting... somewhat... more comfortable in it with more time. But having flown enough other planes now, I still rate the 172 a 3.5/10, primarily for poor landing characteristics like a ridiculous amount of float even while carrying minimal airspeed into the roundout/flare, stupidly nose high attitude necessary for landing, poor control feel, and trim wheel in a stupid place. . This gets into a Ford/Chevy=Piper/Cessna type argument, but it will really boils down to technique* in each type of aircraft in the end as to how to make them do what you want. Both make quality planes. As you get more time in the plane you'll find there are several ways to skin the cat as to not feeling that nose high during landing amongst other things. Sorry the instructor is not working out though. Sucks when someone isn't where they feel they should be in their career and takes it out on you(this was the primary cause for dickism where I taught.) *Unless you are freakishly tall(I'm 6 foot, and this is how I always sat in them) crank the seat all the way up and all the way forward and you'll have a much better view over the 172's nose and it helps alleviate that tipping backwards feeling on landing. I used to fix peoples landing problems so if you get stuck PM me and I'll see if I can help.
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 01:33 |
|
|
kmcormick9 posted:It's actually the opposite. The high guys are the busy ones and the low guys are probably working more VFR than IFR on a nice day. A busy low is an approach. The lows on the west end of ZKC can be pretty busy with a poo poo ton of VFR pop-ups and all the little airports in the middle of nowhere, but yeah, I'm pretty sure our highs are quite a bit busier. Only a couple more weeks till I'm trying to put real planes together instead of ones in the dysim! I guess I can take comfort in the fact that I'll probably never see the traffic levels we're seeing in the lab?
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 02:25 |
|
|
Ferris Bueller posted:It sounds exactly the opposite from where I sit so bravo to the high guys in that moment of time. Yeah, I always sit seat full forward/seat back full forward in the 172, the right seat doesn't seem to go up or down at least in this old 172L, so i can barely loving reach the brakes, and barely see over the nose. That said, my landings aren't bad in it, I'll be surprised if I bust my checkride on the landings. I think the examiners understand you don't have much right seat 172 time and they're not all going to be greasers - as long as you make a reasonably stable approach and the landings are safe and longitudinally aligned with the runway (and if not go around). Well, not that there's really any excuse for landing flat, but the 172 does require a shitload more concentration than the Seminole or the Warrior to land. Re; instructor... I think he needs 50 more hours to get to 1500 for his ATP, and once he does, he's out of there. He just doesn't give a poo poo, in my opinion. And personality wise, we just clash. I end up arguing with him instead of flying the drat plane. I've never had an instructor so mismatched personality wise, and I've had a lot of different instructors. We aren't a good fit. Thankfully, I have 4 more hours left and a checkride, and then I'm done forever if I pass (at least til I get to the ATP) so I won't have to listen to his poo poo anymore soon.
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 03:22 |
|
|
Sometimes reading this and other aviation threads I'm grateful that the C172 I fly has a G1000 and leather interior  ...so I never bitch about aircraft that are hard to fly but complain loudly about how landings are the plane's fault and not mine 
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 04:06 |
|
|
The Slaughter posted:i'm sorry if i offended anybody with my disrespect for the 172. I still feel that it is a terrible little airplane, although I'm getting... somewhat... more comfortable in it with more time. But having flown enough other planes now, I still rate the 172 a 3.5/10, primarily for poor landing characteristics like a ridiculous amount of float even while carrying minimal airspeed into the roundout/flare, stupidly nose high attitude necessary for landing, poor control feel, and trim wheel in a stupid place. I've got probably 800 hours in various 172 iterations (ranging from a 1968 to a 2010 model) as well as quite a bit of dual given in Piper products, so I figured I'd throw my 2 cents in. The landing issues you're running into are actually pretty common with a lot of light piston singles (it's mostly down to a much lower wing loading than you're used to), and they'll go away with a bit of practice. While the 172 does float a bit more than something like a Cherokee, that can be countered pretty easily by either shifting the aiming point slightly further back or by using a slightly slower approach speed, since Cessna tended to publish approach speeds only for the max takeoff weight on older 172's. If you're having trouble seeing over the nose (a lot of older 172's lack height-adjustment on the right seat, so it's a common problem for shorter instructors), see if you can find some kind of cushion to sit on, since being able to easily see over the cowling will make the pitch attitude on landing a lot more managable. The control feel is probably an issue with that particular airplane being either misrigged or having worn control cables and pulleys. One of the 172's I fly has a noticeable amount of free play in the yoke before it actually moves the control surfaces (it was damaged in an accident years ago, which is likely to blame), but every other 172 I've ever flown can be easily put through most maneuvers with only a little pressure from one hand on the yoke.
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 09:07 |
|
|
Butt Reactor posted:Sometimes reading this and other aviation threads I'm grateful that the C172 I fly has a G1000 and leather interior Same  Makes it easier to deal with when there's lots of buttons to distract you.Would agree with the statements above though, definitely the 172 (and 182 for that matter) needs some effort in managing the flare to prevent crappy landings - slightly lower airspeed, and really focusing the eyes on the end of the runway throughout the flare, compared to the Warrior where you can just sorta tug back on the stick a little and still get a decent landing out of it.
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 10:05 |
|
|
So I'm talking to the Avilution dev and he's just starting to look at ADS-B in devices. I can't think of any reason one of these is better than another other than Stratus having ForeFlight behind them on the iPad side and therefore potentially some longevity as a company. The problem is that they're apparently exclusive to ForeFlight, though I can't tell if that's a legal agreement or just what they developed for so far. Also, thanks to everyone who responded to my en route question. For the coming trip, I'll probably just call up center and get flight following down to Moraine. It'll definitely help my workload a lot to just worry about flying the plane.
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 12:07 |
|
|
Dalrain posted:So I'm talking to the Avilution dev and he's just starting to look at ADS-B in devices. I can't think of any reason one of these is better than another other than Stratus having ForeFlight behind them on the iPad side and therefore potentially some longevity as a company. The problem is that they're apparently exclusive to ForeFlight, though I can't tell if that's a legal agreement or just what they developed for so far. From what I remember from chatting with the Stratus folks at Sun 'n Fun, the Stratus is exclusive to Foreflight for a set duration, I want to say a year.
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 13:27 |
|
|
Thanks, fordan. I sent that info along with my email. Also, saw this today: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012...E83F10120120416 My favorite part: The airliner dropped about 400 feet before the captain pulled back on the control column. Fourteen passengers and two crew were hurt, and seven needed hospital treatment. None were wearing seat belts, even though the seat-belt sign was on.
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 16:24 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 03:04 |
|
|
Dalrain posted:Thanks, fordan. I sent that info along with my email. Unfortunate that this happened since we augment this flight Westbound only when Eastbound is when you feel the worst. It is fairly hard to discern the altitude of oncoming aircraft at night, especially when just recently awoken. Swiss cheese model in effect once again.
|
| # ? Apr 17, 2012 19:25 |
|
