Cessna 172 and PA-28-140 - over the dash visibility on the ground

[yevesto23]

Cessna 172 Skyhawk (1970s model) - 4 seats
PA-28-140 Cherokee (1970s model) - 4 seats

For those of you at around 5' 10" and have flown both of the above models, without raising the seat, when on the ground, which aircraft provided you with more forward visibility over the dashboard?

Asking the question another way (opposite), without raising the seat or using a cushion, which of the above aircraft did you have to lift your behind off the seat a little and/or raise and tilt your head upward to see more forward visibility over the dashboard whilst on the ground?

 

[SixPapaCharlie]

I've flown a lot of both models and I've always felt that pipers have really terrible forward visibility. But that's completely outweighed by their swagger so I have way less time in Cessnas

 

[EdFred]

Cessna 172 Skyhawk (1970s model) - 4 seats
PA-28-140 Cherokee (1970s model) - 4 seats

For those of you at around 5' 10" and have flown both of the above models, without raising the seat, when on the ground, which aircraft provided you with more forward visibility over the dashboard?

Asking the question another way (opposite), without raising the seat or using a cushion, which of the above aircraft did you have to lift your behind off the seat a little and/or raise and tilt your head upward to see more forward visibility over the dashboard whilst on the ground?

Well, was the seat already raised when one sat in it? Because then that person wouldn't have raised the seat. It would have already been done.

 

[SebIp]

Some pa28, like our 1969 180, have seats that can’t be adjusted up/down.

That said doesn’t seem to make that much difference to me at 5’ 6” between the 172 and our pa28. I actually had a harder time finding a comfortable sitting position in the 172.

Not sure what you need to see over the front that much while on the ground.

Btw that swagger out of a piper, that’s from the discomfort of getting out of a single door clown car enthusiast plane. And the swagger from the 172 pilot from banging their shins on the main gear.

 

[BMan]

...Btw that swagger out of a piper, that’s from the discomfort of getting out of a single door clown car enthusiast plane. And the swagger from the 172 pilot from banging their shins on the main gear.

I would say it's more like 172 stagger from main gear shin banging. Been there.

 

[morleyz]

I did my PPL in a 172 and bought a PA-28. At 5'8", I don't have a problem with forward visibility on the ground or while flying straight and level. I use(d) a cushion in both because I couldn't see over the nose when flaring without one (and didn't have fancy adjustable seats). They seem pretty similar to me.

 

[bluesideup]

Hi yevesto.

without raising the seat,

This would imply that both models are at the lowest position.
In that case you will likely Need a external cushion / pillow, maybe 2, one for the back also.
A Note of caution, when you use something like this make sure you belts a well secured, if not it can become a problem during landing and or turbulence if you position changes unexpectedly.
A second Note, do not take off, or fly, unless you are in a proper position, in trainers like the 172 you should see at least a portion of the top of cowl, and the wing tips and be sure you can use full travel of the rudder pedals. There are good reasons for what I described and I will not go into details here, but your CFI will be able to tell you why, if you need more details.

 

[Brad W]

I don't have all that much time in Pipers and no fresh experience to draw on
Most of my logged time post PPL was in 172's with the highest fraction in the 172N model.
I'm about 1/2 inch shy of 5-10, and as I recall my seat position was seat cranked full up, and 1 stop back from full forward. No added cushion

 

[AV8R_87]

The nitrogen pressure in the nose strut will have the greatest impact on forward visibility for both.
A lot of them out there are over-serviced and keep their noses high.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I have a few hundred hours in so many ages and variations of both airframes with different types of seats in conditions from brand new to dearly departed, and I can't say I have seen a net difference on the ground.

May I ask the reason for the question?

 

[Clip4]

What is a dashboard in an airplane?

 

[frfly172]

Never noticed a difference ,in the Cessna I use a cushion because of the seat bar on the butt.

 

[dmspilot]

The later versions of both models had taller instrument panels which reduced visibility. This started with the 172 "N" models (and possibly later "M" models as well, I'm not sure). Not sure any Cherokee 140s had the taller panel, but Warrior II, Archer II, etc. did.

 

[psahakia]

been training in pa-28-161 and at 5'10' have no issues seeing out. i dont think the seats move up or down. on one of the trainers im too high above the dg so its hard to see the top of it so i just reference the opposite end and do the math.

 

[Racerx]

My 5'1" sister has not complained about these issues in my 60's pa28 180, and my seats aren't vertically adjustable.

Line the hinge of the butterfly cowl with centerline.

I think the Cherokee c model has that weird bump in the panel... Dammit, this is when @Pilawt would chime in

 

[mandm]

Cessna is like a minivan and Piper is like a sports car with the seat all the way down.

 

[RussR]

Why would you want to know the visibility WITHOUT the seat adjusted? That's a basic cockpit setup task, adjusting the seat, that you should do every time you get in the airplane. The view with the seat in the all-the-way down position is irrelevant.

 

[Crashnburn]

The later versions of both models had taller instrument panels which reduced visibility. This started with the 172 "N" models (and possibly later "M" models as well, I'm not sure). Not sure any Cherokee 140s had the taller panel, but Warrior II, Archer II, etc. did.

I flew 172 Q's, M's, and N's at Aerodynamic Aviation. They each had about the same height IP. I flew an N at Vector Air, and the IP was noticeably higher. Next flight, I need to adjust the seat higher than bottomed out. (Sorry about that).

 

[chemgeek]

I would say that the over-nose visibility in a 172N and a Cherokee 140 are both so-so but in different ways, but largely irrelevant for taxiing, flying, or landing. I'm a bit spoiled by the visibility in Grummans. I'm 5'11"-6'0". My wife preferred to use a cushion when flying a C172, but doesn't need it in a Grumman. I didn't find that the visibility in a C172 (various models) or a PA-28-140/160/180 was a significant issue.

 

[Tantalum]

I'm an even 6, so not tall, not short, but I have always found C172 panels to be daunting in size.. the Pipers are more "flat" .. but someone both have generally similar forward view.

Forward visibility is not great in either. The Duchess, Aztec, any Cirri, all have better forward visibility.

As posted above, the big difference seems on Pipers is how the struts are serviced. Low mains and a pumped up nose will give it a ridiculous low rider look.

Side rant - I hate the much adored 'ROZEN SUN VISOR!!' .. a big piece of plastic that I spend most of my time trying to move out of the way and keep banging my headset on. I've tried using it to block the sun but it just tints in brown. Total crap. I slide the plastic out of these things when flying so I can actually see. If it's sunny, I have a pair of sunglasses I can wear.

 

[Salty]

Being able to see the runway out the front windshield is an unnecessary luxury.

Us height challenged folk have just learned to cope.

 

[yevesto23]

I have a few hundred hours in so many ages and variations of both airframes with different types of seats in conditions from brand new to dearly departed, and I can't say I have seen a net difference on the ground.

May I ask the reason for the question?

Thank you all for your replies. @midlifeflyer - I am just curious especially as the Piper has low mains and a bit taller nose gear.

 

[Huckster79]

Either is dandy- they sit on their nose…

 

[midlifeflyer]

Being able to see the runway out the front windshield is an unnecessary luxury.

Us height challenged folk have just learned to cope.

Jason Miller ("The Finer Points") talks about using "The Lindbergh Reference" for landing. And for many maneuvers. Works quite well.

 

[Albany Tom]

You can't see the runway in front of you at all in one of these Pipers when all 3 wheels are on the ground. But it's not a big deal, you just make S turns. Also not an issue for takeoff and landing.