Flying an unfamiliar aircraft type

What do you think?

  • You're an idiot for even considering flying it without someone with experience when available

    Votes: 12 22.2%

  • People do this all the time; do the homework and go fly

    Votes: 42 77.8%
  • Total voters
    54
  • Poll closed .
mscard88 said:
I highly doubt that.
Click to expand...
If by take off and land, he means lift the plane off the ground, and then put it back on the ground again, then yes, most people could do that. I think "most" people could figure out a way to get it off the ground - thanks to gravity, getting it back down is going to happen in some form, regardless of the skill of the pilot.

If he means, take off, fly around and land with no damage to the plane. I doubt that also.
 
If I had to bet one way or another, I'd bet that less than half of random non-pilots could figure out how to steer the plane to the runway without damaging the plane - or something else along the way.
 
Salty said:
If I had to bet one way or another, I'd bet that less than half of random non-pilots could figure out how to steer the plane to the runway without damaging the plane - or something else along the way.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Not familiar with how to steer on the ground they'd be in the weeds.
 
Salty said:
If he means, take off, fly around and land with no damage to the plane. I doubt that also.
Click to expand...

And yet somehow people manage to do it all the time. If you listen to the Internet, we should all be utilizing one of the 10 ways that pilots crash airplanes and we should have all died by now.

It's an airplane. If you know the basics of flying one and spend time with a POH, there is no reason you cannot complete a flight of a similar but new type without a CFI to take the blame for the first 5 hours. Yes, time in type is one of the major risk factors identified by the FAA. But that risk persists in significant form out beyond 100 hours, so all you're talking about is the amount of risk.

172 to PA-28-140? Not a real concern. Do some reading, do some research.
 
bflynn said:
And yet somehow people manage to do it all the time. If you listen to the Internet, we should all be utilizing one of the 10 ways that pilots crash airplanes and we should have all died by now.

It's an airplane. If you know the basics of flying one and spend time with a POH, there is no reason you cannot complete a flight of a similar but new type without a CFI to take the blame for the first 5 hours. Yes, time in type is one of the major risk factors identified by the FAA. But that risk persists in significant form out beyond 100 hours, so all you're talking about is the amount of risk.

172 to PA-28-140? Not a real concern. Do some reading, do some research.
Click to expand...
agree
 
I find the whole attitude displayed in this thread kind of interesting.
You mostly have two groups with a very minor third group; those who scoff at that thought any simple Piper could bite a pilot on the a** who has never flown one before. This group mostly listens to the echo chamber and proudly boasts how many times they have already completed such a feat.
The second group which is mostly implied by saying "others" apparently are super scared of anything that flies and needs to ensure pilots have their hands held during the first X hours on a new plane.
The last group, if you can get someone to show you, do it. It likely will reduce risk.

As usual, reality is likely somewhere between the first two extremes. The CAR/FAR standards for certified aircraft in many ways were designed to make it easier to for pilots to switch planes by creating a common standard to which pilots train. So in theory, a reasonably proficient could switch between any two planes in the same category and be able to "safely" fly them.

The reality is there is not a perfect match between such aircraft. And if there was, flying would be boring.

As a result of the regulations; can you hop into almost any certified plane, and fly away safely? Very likely.

From a pragmatic perspective, if you can learn from the experience of others, on the specific way the plane feels, you will likely decrease the odds you crash the plane, and you often will be better able to use the plane to the edge of its performance envelop. For example, if you always fly a Cessna high wing, and then take a Mooney and go around the pattern. The feeling in the flare is not similar, and if you attempt to land a Mooney with the high angle flare of a Cessna you likely will porpoise and wreck the gear. When in slow flight, the Piper Arrow has a very different feel than the Cirrus or the Mooney; you guess wrong about the signals the plane is giving you and you can stall the plane, even potentially spin it. Not something to find out in the traffic pattern..

Tim
 
That would be a different category not type.
 
A Mooney flies like an Arrow
Fruit flies like a Bonanza

skier said:
I knew that would ruffle a few feathers, but in my experience it's more similar than not:

A Bonanza flies a lot like a Mooney.
A Mooney flies a lot like an Arrow
An Arrow flies a lot like a Cherokee
A Cherokee flies a lot like a 172
A 172 flies a lot like a 152, 182, 206

So I'd argue that yes since a
152 flies like a 172
then a 152 flies a lot like a Cherokee
then a 152 flies a lot like an Arrow
then a 152 flies a lot like a Mooney.
then a 152 flies a lot like a Bonanza.

Just remember to check your gear.
Click to expand...
 
Monkey-Pilot.jpg


Flies well... needs more work on the radios...
 
So long as the radio works, it'll fly, right? :D

Ever hear those guys with inflatable mics though?
 
SkyHog said:
Pilots have this weird knack for trying to make flying this special skill that only certain people can do, and make it seem to difficult to do.

But it’s not. Any moron can fly a plane. I’d wager that most people could take off and land a Cessna with 0 Total hours solo if they had to.

Remember how much time was spent on primary training covering such advanced topics as “to roll the plane to the left, move the yoke to the left” and so on. Yeah, that’s what I’m talking about.
Click to expand...

You are suffering from selection bias. It's natural and easy for you, thus it must be the same for everybody. This is not the case. There's an 80% dropout rate (according to AOPA) during Private Pilot training. There's a reason for that, and also a reason some students are ready for their checkride at 40 hours while others take 100 hours or more.
 
I was introduced to Mooney’s less than 24 hours before my commercial checkride. Couple hours flying it the day before and reviewing the owners manual while drinking a few beers the night before yielded a passed checkride.
It’s just another airplane. Know the speeds and fly them
 
dmspilot said:
You are suffering from selection bias. It's natural and easy for you, thus it must be the same for everybody. This is not the case. There's an 80% dropout rate (according to AOPA) during Private Pilot training. There's a reason for that, and also a reason some students are ready for their checkride at 40 hours while others take 100 hours or more.
Click to expand...
I have a theory. People stop because aviation is expensive. People take 100 hours because the requirements to get a PPL are dumb. I’ve said before - takeoff, land, navigate, and recover from common mistakes. That’s all a PPL needs to know. Everything else is “mastery” AKA commercial certificate territory.

Steep turns, s turns, turns around a point, gone
Stalls, stall recovery, Accidental IMC recovery, spin recovery, all in.

Could turn the PPl into an30 hour endeavor.
 
dmspilot said:
You are suffering from selection bias. It's natural and easy for you, thus it must be the same for everybody. This is not the case. There's an 80% dropout rate (according to AOPA) during Private Pilot training. There's a reason for that, and also a reason some students are ready for their checkride at 40 hours while others take 100 hours or more.
Click to expand...
I'll bet 80% is due to finances vs lack of ability.
 
paflyer said:
I'll bet 80% is due to finances vs lack of ability.
Click to expand...

Those things aren't mutually exclusive and a person can use a lack of one to rationalize a lack of the other. Rich people can afford to do things they're bad at ad nauseum until they're not as bad at them.
 
Last edited:
Passion is what makes pilots, not money. Some get hooked, some don't. Passion isn't defined by economics. Ownership? That's a different story.
 
dmspilot said:
Those things aren't mutually exclusive and a person can use a lack of one to rationalize a lack of the other. Rich people can afford to do things they're bad at ad nauseum until they're not as bad at them.
Click to expand...
Correct but there are also plenty of lousy instructors and crooked/incompetent flight schools.
 
For the record I still haven’t decided. If it turns out to be convenient I will at least take a quick flight with an instructor. I’m still undecided if I will seek someone out if it doesn’t fall in place naturally.
 
Last edited:
Salty said:
For the record I still haven’t decided, but if it turns out to be convenient I will at least take a quick flight with the instructor. I’m still undecided if I will seek someone out if it doesn’t fall in place naturally.
Click to expand...

Going from your first post, I don't think you'd have a problem at all jumping into a 140 without being checked out. Be a good idea to read thru the POH though for speeds, limitations, emergency checklist, stuff like that though. Nothing wrong going up with someone who is familiar with the plane, or a CFI either.
 
mscard88 said:
Going from your first post, I don't think you'd have a problem at all jumping into a 140 without being checked out. Be a good idea to read thru the POH though for speeds, limitations, emergency checklist, stuff like that though. Nothing wrong going up with someone who is familiar with the plane, or a CFI either.
Click to expand...
I’ve already done that and will review it again before the flight. I honestly don’t think it’s a big deal at all. I try to go into every flight with an attitude that I don’t know it all, so this won’t be any different really.
 
Salty said:
For the record I still haven’t decided. If it turns out to be convenient I will at least take a quick flight with an instructor. I’m still undecided if I will seek someone out if it doesn’t fall in place naturally.
Click to expand...
If it helps, when I bought my 140, I had about 350 hours, 0 in PA28s, and I "jumped right in" and flew it home. I did have time in c150/152s, c172s, Rutan experimental, and slow tailwheels...I'd put the PA28 as one of the easiest of the bunch.
 
I had zero time in the Fairchild when the seller rode around the patch and did three to a full stop, then loaded it up and headed for home.
 
tawood said:
If it helps, when I bought my 140, I had about 350 hours, 0 in PA28s, and I "jumped right in" and flew it home. I did have time in c150/152s, c172s, Rutan experimental, and slow tailwheels...I'd put the PA28 as one of the easiest of the bunch.
Click to expand...

+1. A Cherokee 140 is one of the most docile airplanes ever built. The OP should be fine, especially coming out of a Mooney. If you only had 172 time before jumping in the Cherokee, you'd want to be aware that when you get slow in a Cherokee it comes down faster than a 172, but if you'd studied the POH and read some reviews, you'd be fine.

I went the other way. All my time had been in Pipers and Grummans, my father bought a 172 and sent me out to pick it up. I got a POH and studied it, got aboard the human mailing tube to get from ATL to OKC, the seller picked me up at OKC and flew us to SNL while giving me a rundown on the airplane. We gassed it up in SNL and I set off for a one stopper to GVL. No worries, mate.
 
SkyHog said:
I have a theory. People stop because aviation is expensive. People take 100 hours because the requirements to get a PPL are dumb. I’ve said before - takeoff, land, navigate, and recover from common mistakes. That’s all a PPL needs to know. Everything else is “mastery” AKA commercial certificate territory.

Steep turns, s turns, turns around a point, gone
Stalls, stall recovery, Accidental IMC recovery, spin recovery, all in.

Could turn the PPl into an30 hour endeavor.
Click to expand...
Looking back at my CFI days I’m remembering several competent PP’s.... but VERY FEW true “masters”.
Give your average PP a 15kt 90° crosswind. They will get the airplane on the ground, but very few have truly mastered the crosswind landing. In theory, yes. But not in application.
I know I didn’t until I became a CFI.
 
Kritchlow said:
I think those two tie together....
The more ability, the less the cost thus more apt to continue.
Click to expand...
You can have a lot of ability but if $ only allow sporadic training or long gaps, it's going to take longer.
 
The Cherokee 140 is an extremely difficult plane to master, requiring the utmost caliber of pilot and concentration skills rivaling that of a brain surgeon's.

Any of you buttheads screw that up for my wife and friends...I'll cut ya deep.
 
Kritchlow said:
Looking back at my CFI days I’m remembering several competent PP’s.... but VERY FEW true “masters”.
Give your average PP a 15kt 90° crosswind. They will get the airplane on the ground, but very few have truly mastered the crosswind landing. In theory, yes. But not in application.
I know I didn’t until I became a CFI.
Click to expand...

Same here..!!
 
If someone is handy, take them around the pattern. If not, you'll probably be just fine. One thing I will mention: if it has a metal handle on the fuel selector, be advised that there are no positive stops, can't count the number of times a student has hit mute on the engine when trying to switch tanks. It's quite entertaining. Many have been fitted with the late model selector which has a big plastic handle and does have positive stops.
 
dmspilot said:
You are suffering from selection bias. It's natural and easy for you, thus it must be the same for everybody. This is not the case. There's an 80% dropout rate (according to AOPA) during Private Pilot training. There's a reason for that, and also a reason some students are ready for their checkride at 40 hours while others take 100 hours or more.
Click to expand...

The more I live, the more I realize how important natural aptitude is. It still takes focused practice to acquire a skill, but if you're aptitude level is low, you'll struggle and may never get where you want to be, where someone with a high aptitude level picks up that skill rapidly and progresses to a level that people with lesser aptitude can never reach.
 
SkyHog said:
I have a theory. People stop because aviation is expensive. People take 100 hours because the requirements to get a PPL are dumb. I’ve said before - takeoff, land, navigate, and recover from common mistakes. That’s all a PPL needs to know. Everything else is “mastery” AKA commercial certificate territory.

Steep turns, s turns, turns around a point, gone
Stalls, stall recovery, Accidental IMC recovery, spin recovery, all in.

Could turn the PPl into an30 hour endeavor.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with being smart or dumb. I write software for a living. I can find you many people with 120+ IQs in demanding jobs that can't write software at all. They just don't have the aptitude.

Aviating is more of a visual and motor skill thing than a test of intelligence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top