From a Warrior to a 172.

[John Baker]

I've only flown Warriors, Archers, and a Dakota (only two times in the Dakota). What is involved , or how different is it learning to take off, fly, and land, a 172. Is it a reasonably quick transition that can be accomplished in a few hours, or does it take some serious getting used to? Any input would be appreciated.

John

 

[bigred177]

Why would you ever want to go to a high wing from the vastly superior low wing?

Easy to switch, just the pitch up with flaps instead.

 

[weilke]

What is involved ,

An hour or two of checkout with the different types of landings and takeoffs.

Learning to sump the thing is about 1/2 of the checkout.

or how different is it learning to take off, fly, and land, a 172.

Not much different.
- A bit easier to bounce a landing as the main landing gear is 'springy'.
- A bit harder to deal with crosswinds on the ground, its sort of a sailboat in that situation.
- Just a different sight picture with more runway moving past in your peripheral vision.

Is it a reasonably quick transition that can be accomplished in a few hours,

Yes.

or does it take some serious getting used to?

No.

 

[write-stuff]

It also depends on your experience level. If you have a 100+ hours in Warriors, the switch to a 172 will be a non-event. Couple of landings and you'll probably be good to go.

 

[Jay Honeck]

I learned to fly in Pipers. Cherokee 140 and 180s. After earning my ticket, it became obvious that a lot of places rented only Cezznas, so I decided to transition to the 172.

I found the Skyhawk to be enjoyable to fly, and almost laughably easy to land, mostly because (for the first time!) I was able to actually SEE where the wheels were! Up till then, all my landings had been "by feel", Piper-style -- but in the 172 I could "feel" AND see. It was great.

The opposite pitching motion with the flaps takes a few minutes to get used to, but in real life you just react -- if it pitches forward, you trim back, and vice versa.

You'll like the electric flaps, at first. They feel so...civilized. After a while, though, you'll start to miss the speed of deployment and positive feel of the ol' "Johnson bar" flaps on the Cherokee.

When the world disappears while turning base-to-final, you won't like it. No one does, but you get used to it.

The Skyhawk and Warrior are both great, easy-to-fly planes. You'll have no trouble in the transition.

 

[Cap'n Jack]

Making a turn, it's a good idea to "lift the wing" that you are turning into before making the turn. This lets you see traffic that might be otherwise obscured by the wing.

 

[ScottM]

They fly very similar to each other. Hardly any real difference at all. You should have no problem.

 

[Jack Spectre]

I just transitioned from Warrior to 172, and in the air it handles about the same. Put a few landings behind you and you'll be set. I had the tendency to flare a bit high the first few times but you get a feel for landings pretty quick.

 

[taters]

Just dont come into fast those things float like a boat.....flaps are over rated on those as well IMO..I usually dont use much.

 

[Ghery]

I learned in a 172. Got my high perf in a 182 and complex in an Arrow (alternating between the two over a period of a couple weeks). If you are used to the Piper being finished flying once the mains are on the ground (in 9 years I have yet to bounce a landing in the Arrow - knock on wood), get over that in the 172. You can and will bounce landings in it. Also, be prepared to keep back pressure on the yoke after landing as the shimmy dampers on the nose gear aren't always working right and reducing weight on the nose will help. Oh, and a 172 glides power out one heck of a lot better than a Hershey bar wing Arrow. A whole lot better.

Have fun, they are both airplanes and will get you away from the ground just fine.

 

[chucky]

I learned in a 172. Got my high perf in a 182 and complex in an Arrow (alternating between the two over a period of a couple weeks). If you are used to the Piper being finished flying once the mains are on the ground (in 9 years I have yet to bounce a landing in the Arrow - knock on wood), get over that in the 172. You can and will bounce landings in it.

Warriors bounce much more easily that Arrows do. I found Arrows a lot easier to land than the Warriors.

 

[poadeleted20]

Warriors bounce much more easily that Arrows do. I found Arrows a lot easier to land than the Warriors.

If you're speaking of Hershey-bar wing Arrows, that might be due to the greater ground effect of the longer, tapered wing of the Warrior, especially if you land the Warrior at the same speed as you did a PA28-150/160. The different wing planform does change things.

 

[chucky]

If you're speaking of Hershey-bar wing Arrows, that might be due to the greater ground effect of the longer, tapered wing of the Warrior, especially if you land the Warrior at the same speed as you did a PA28-150/160. The different wing planform does change things.

I have time in both tapered and hershey-bar Arrows, and I found both of them easier than the Warriors, at least once I got established on speed and glideslope on final. I had attributed it, at least in part, to the added weight in the plane, which is to say those airplanes just felt like they had more inertia.