Got to fly a low wing today

Morne

Morne

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
699
Display Name
Display name:
Morne
Took a buddy to pick up his Grumman Cheetah from the avionics shop today. He safety piloted for me while I shot a couple of approaches in my 182. After we got back to the home field he took me up in it and I got my first stick time in a low wing, WOW it is different! Not nearly as quirky as I thought it might be, though. I loved the view of the sky. Also, being able to see the runway while turning base was new. Taxiing was really, really strange in that thing.

I don't think I'm a convert or anything but it was sure fun.

You Grumman pilots have nice rides. I still think my mission calls for the load capacity of my 182 but I'm sure a Tiger would've served me pretty well.
 
I really like the views in a low wing. As you noticed, you can see the runway when turning base. You have to be more careful taxiing since in some low wing planes since the wings are obviously lower, you don't want to hit any of the taxiway lights.
 
LevelWing said:
I really like the views in a low wing.
Click to expand...
The Grumman series, especially. Windows are huge, and the top of the panel is low enough to provide a panoramic view out the front. The first time I flew my Cheetah it felt like sitting at a low desk on a mountaintop.

I enjoy the C-172 I have now, but visibility is not its strong suit. I don't like having to crane my neck up to see out the front, and down to see out the sides. In a newer 182, particularly, the top of the panel is just about the same height as the tops of the side windows.
 
Try sometime to get yourself a ride in an RV for the visibility... the short stubby wings and bubble canopy make the view outside awesome.
 
Never flown a Grumman or a RV but I'd like to someday. The view from my Mooney isn't too bad.
 
The Cheetah was always my favorite of the power planes I've flown. In any of the Grummans you can open the canopy a bit, which is a nice touch on a hot day.
 
The view is definitely different. When I fly in a high wing that has a good view of the ground, I find myself enjoying looking out the window and watching the world go by. But overall, what I love most is looking at the sky, especially at night.
 
Owned both a Traveler and a Tiger in the past - great planes.

Sit in a typical Cessna and move the yoke from stop to stop. Then do the same thing in a Grumman. Remarkable difference which gives the Grummans their sportier feel.

BTW, visibility was one of the major factors that led me to purchase my Sky Arrow, at least for the pilot but not bad for the passenger either:

11450102685_53aae3f82a_z.jpg
 
Wow great view out of your plane!

I'm tall so I end up doing a little of neck craning to see out the side window on the 172. Front view is good, though. My vertically challenged wife really likes the view out the side window in the 172.

I love being able to look at the runway while turning in the pattern in the Cherokee but I don't like the way the wings intefere with viewing the ground while just cruising.

FastEddieB said:
Owned both a Traveler and a Tiger in the past - great planes.

Sit in a typical Cessna and move the yoke from stop to stop. Then do the same thing in a Grumman. Remarkable difference which gives the Grummans their sportier feel.

BTW, visibility was one of the major factors that led me to purchase my Sky Arrow, at least for the pilot but not bad for the passenger either:

11450102685_53aae3f82a_z.jpg
Click to expand...
 
First time I flew a low wing I hated it. Went from a 172 to a cherokee 140.
Felt like it was slipping all over the place. We have the TB9 now which is low wing and it is different to fly (very narrow wing) but I have gotten used to it.

Only thing I prefer about the 172 was shade on sunny days, and I love to take photos when I fly and I struggle to keep the wing out of photos in the low wing.

I end up doing what I call "Sight-seeing slips" to snap a photo which in reality is probably not the smartest thing.

On the other side, I think the TB9 is the most comfortable plane I have flown. It is like a corvette on the inside.

I would like to fly a Grumman some time.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
First time I flew a low wing I hated it. Went from a 172 to a cherokee 140.
Felt like it was slipping all over the place. We have the TB9 now which is low wing and it is different to fly (very narrow wing) but I have gotten used to it.

Only thing I prefer about the 172 was shade on sunny days, and I love to take photos when I fly and I struggle to keep the wing out of photos in the low wing.

I end up doing what I call "Sight-seeing slips" to snap a photo which in reality is probably not the smartest thing.

On the other side, I think the TB9 is the most comfortable plane I have flown. It is like a corvette on the inside.

I would like to fly a Grumman some time.
Click to expand...

Oddly enough I did the same thing but I liked the 140 a whole lot better.
 
noobJohn said:
Wow great view out of your plane!

I'm tall so I end up doing a little of neck craning to see out the side window on the 172. Front view is good, though. My vertically challenged wife really likes the view out the side window in the 172.

I love being able to look at the runway while turning in the pattern in the Cherokee but I don't like the way the wings intefere with viewing the ground while just cruising.
Click to expand...

You need the "infinitely adjustable" seat.

I'm 6'4" all torso and need said seat to be able to see out the side, but with it cranked all the way down the view is great, yet still leaves me high enough to have excellent forward visibility over the panel.
 
I just recently sold my stake in a AA-5. It sure is nice to fly a well equipped Grumman.



6575389d-0432-4023-9788-cfa358d43057_zps5873f9e5.jpg


IMAG0081_zpsaba4df58.jpg
 
Last edited:
Got my ticket in the cherokee140,moved up to the arrow. When I bought my first plane it was a 172. High wing low wing I have no preference ,as long as I'm flying.
 
The worst thing about flying a Breezy (other than the bugs hitting your face and getting stuck in your teeth) is the lack of a nose to gauge your pitch angle with the horizon. The visibility is definitely unparalleled. :yes:

The fellow who built my RV-6 and sold it to me, bought a Breezy as his next plane. His wife flies it more than he does! :D
 
Ted and Tim,

If you get a chance to stop by in NJ (47N) this summer, I would be glad to take you up for a Breezy ride. After the first couple of minutes, you will not want to come down.



Mike in NJ
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
Only thing I prefer about the 172 was shade on sunny days, and I love to take photos when I fly and I struggle to keep the wing out of photos in the low wing.
Click to expand...

I find the struts of a 172 intensely annoying. First of all, they are in the way. In effect you have a high wing and a narrow low "wing" that also gets in the way if you're trying to take pictures. The worst of both worlds. Second of all, it just screams inefficiency and a bad engineering compromise. The strut free cardinals and 210s are a little more acceptable.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
On the other side, I think the TB9 is the most comfortable plane I have flown. It is like a corvette on the inside.

I would like to fly a Grumman some time.
Click to expand...

Flying a TB-10, I agree. Instructor is talking about buying a TB-9 for a second plane, I think the seating is pretty much identical. Looks like the -9 has less stuff on the right hand side dash.
 
I own a low wing Gobosh 700 and love the low wing and the canopy giving a spectacular view of the mountains out here in CO. I think I have about 20 hours total time in high wings and I like them too for what they are but I think I still prefer the low wing for visibility.

Carl
 
The 'best vis' aircraft I've flown was a DA40. You sit on / in front of the leading edge and can still see down to the ground, and the bubble canopy view was just amazing. The worst for me was a newer Arrow III. The windows were small and visibility was terrible.
 
BobThePilot said:
I find the struts of a 172 intensely annoying...The worst of both worlds. Second of all, it just screams inefficiency and a bad engineering compromise...
Click to expand...

Right :rolleyes: and they built so darn many of them too - what morons.
 
Silvaire said:
Right :rolleyes: and they built so darn many of them too - what morons.
Click to expand...

Cessna are clearly not morons (in the business sense when it comes to all those 172 sales they have made over the years). The "morons" (your word) would be those who buy them.

;)

Best wishes for the New Year.
 
BobThePilot said:
Cessna are clearly not morons (in the business sense when it comes to all those 172 sales they have made over the years). The "morons" (your word) would be those who buy them.

;)

Best wishes for the New Year.
Click to expand...

I am a moron...:rofl:

I bought TWO Cessnas...fly a low wing plane now but I still dig both the 172 and 182...they were fantastic airplanes...
 
You can't beat that high wing shade down here in the TX sun!

However, after owning one, it makes all the sense in the world to go experimental.

Never say never. But I'll never buy another certified aircraft unless the FAA get's off their butt and does something.
 
These guys didn't even have seat belts, although Glenn does appear to be wearing some sort of protective vest - maybe to ward off the impact of large bugs? Interesting also to see where Beechcraft stole the idea of the swing over yoke :wink2:

Photo-1-WINGS-OF-GOLD-Glenn-Curtiss-teaches-first-naval-aviator-to-fly1.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top