Single Engine Airplanes that have a lot of room.

FloridaPilot

FloridaPilot

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
2,456
Location
Florida
Display Name
Display name:
FloridaStudentPilot
I was talking with a buddy of mine who is interested in flying but he is a big guy, 6'2 250 LBS. Ex college football player who is not fat but has very wide shoulders. Cessna 172 is too tight for him, he might as well fly with his right arm around the CFI.

Can the folks on here think of an airplane with more width between the left and right seat?


As always thanks for your help.
 
For Cessnas. 177's, 182's(with omnivision) 206's. Commander 112, 114's are wide. Can always go tandem. CubCrafter's Xcub and CarbonCub are all wide-body supercubs, so LOTS of room.
 
Last edited:
Planes with room aren't typically trainers or on a rental line. That would be a problem. To get his training done, he'd probably just have to suck it up.

Afterwards, there are some options. Aside from those mentioned above, Socatas (TB-10/20/200, etc.) are wide. Sundowners are wide. Then there are 6 seaters like the Cherokee Six and it's retractable variants.

For someone that size, a 182 makes a lot of sense. Best bet would be to look for a club that has one that allows primary training in it.
 
One of the biggest reasons I bought my 182 was cabin size and width. Have yet to ever come close to bumping shoulders with anyone.

Those are gonna be the most readily available in rental fleets but gonna be more pricey as a trainer.

MANY 182s sit on the ramps while the 172 are kept busy...if he wants to use it for PPL training there is always the possibility to negotiate a better rate than list price with the FBO.
 
Comanche - but it ain't a trainer. I wear a 46 jacket, and have had a 350+ guy next to me and we didn't bump shoulders at all.
 
A bit of mythology surrounds the 182. The really old ones were just as narrow as a 172, quickly they got wider, but here's the rub, they're only as wide as a pa-28 (42 inches at the shoulders). They have a hell of a lot more headroom and the back seats feel bigger because of the lack of a wing spar, but from a width discussion, they're not that roomy. A comanche is wider (45) and even the little cousin the cardinal is way wider (48 inches). By comparison a PA-32 is 49 inches.
 
If he is looking for a trainer with good width I suggest he look for a Diamond DA-20. Several flight schools have them now if that is the route he is taking.
 
I question some of those numbers or at least where they measure from, because the Cardinal does not seem to be 3 inches wider than the Comanche. Headroom can also be an issue in airplanes that don't have a seat that has a height adjustment.
 
Grum.Man said:
If he is looking for a trainer with good width I suggest he look for a Diamond DA-20. Several flight schools have them now if that is the route he is taking.
Click to expand...
Issue with DA-20's is height. My PPL examiner had to sit with his head severely cocked just to get the canopy closed (6'3") OP is 6'2"... Not gonna work.
 
EdFred said:
I question some of those numbers or at least where they measure from, because the Cardinal does not seem to be 3 inches wider than the Comanche. Headroom can also be an issue in airplanes that don't have a seat that has a height adjustment.
Click to expand...

Can't speak to the Comanche Ed, but the Cardinal is noticeably wider than the 182. And without seats and maybe a 5 gallon bucket or two, you've got all the elbow room you could ever ask for :)

Int15.jpg
 
Oh I know the Cardinal is wider than the 172/182, as I've flown one quite a few times. But it didn't seem 3" roomier than my Comanche is all.
 
I am slightly heavier than that and almost his height. I am wide in the shoulders as well most would say I am just a "big" guy. If I can fly in a 172 he can. Yeah I bump shoulders with a 235 pound instructor but it is doable.
 
Rockwell Commander 112/4, like riding in a Buick.
 
SR20 or SR22. I had a CFI that was around that height and probably weighed at least that much for a SR22 sign-off.
 
Also, the Sierra. How I hate the plane, but it is roomy.
 
Find a nice petite little CFI, fly the Skyhawk and suck it the hell up. This isn't what I'd call a difficult conundrum.
 
wayne said:
SR20 or SR22. I had a CFI that was around that height and probably weighed at least that much for a SR22 sign-off.
Click to expand...

Ditto on the SR20/22. I'm only 6' and around 215 and when I did my discovery flight with a female CFI that barely weight 110 I felt like I was smashing her through the door in a C172.
The SR20 however is more like a mid sized SUV with a center console and there's plenty of room between the two front seats.
 
Remember the mission...PPL flight training.

Unless he is gonna be purchasing a plane right outta the gate, go find out what is available to him locally among the suggestions as rental options post PPL. Availability to the pilot will be a big determining factor.
 
Al it took was one summer flight with my wife in a 172 to convince me to buy a Cardinal. She said rubbing sweaty arms together for a couple of hours was not something she was ever going to do again. Not only do we not touch in the Cardinal but the vent windows mean we don't sweat either.
 
GA-8 Airvan, but it's like wrestling a fat guy to fly, and the has the worst seats in the galaxy.
 
cgrab said:
Al it took was one summer flight with my wife in a 172 to convince me to buy a Cardinal. She said rubbing sweaty arms together for a couple of hours was not something she was ever going to do again. Not only do we not touch in the Cardinal but the vent windows mean we don't sweat either.
Click to expand...





 
MAKG1 said:
Single engine with a lot of room?

PC-12.

You might want to constrain the question a bit more.
Click to expand...

I'd go C208B, got the pilot and co pilot door ;)

To the OP, a wide body 182 would be wider, and there are plenty of them.

If he's interested in tailwheel, even though the planes are smaller, tandem seating can be more comfy compared to a 172.
 
Pilawt said:
Or a PA-32 (also 49 inches)?
Click to expand...

It's not the size that matters, it's how you use it. hah

I haven't sat in a lot of planes so I really don't know the differences, but I bet it has to do with seat configuration almost as much as width. Meaning you could have a lot of width, but two seats close together versus somewhat narrow and a larger gap between seats. Either way, it's probably a matter of just finding whats available and sitting/flying in them until you find something that fits right.
 
Ryanb said:
Maybe the Sierra, but the Musketeer/Sundowner seems almost as tight a 152.
Click to expand...
Before 1970, Musketeer cabin width was 42" -- same as Bonanzas and Barons. In 1970, the fuselage was widened on all BE-19/23/24 models (which would include all Sierras, which came out later), for a 44" cabin width.
 
PA32....Cherokee Six is about as big as they get. It was comfortable for me...:D
 
Pilawt said:
Before 1970, Musketeer cabin width was 42" -- same as Bonanzas and Barons. In 1970, the fuselage was widened on all BE-19/23/24 models (which would include all Sierras, which came out later), for a 44" cabin width.
Click to expand...
I think its just a mental thing for me. The Musketeer always seemed a little on the tight side, even though it isn't.
 
Caravan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top