What single engine trainer to buy?

SebIp said:
Don’t Grumman have hour limited airframes?
Click to expand...
Everything certified since Part 23 became the rule(s) has a life limit. Grummans, Tomahawks, Cirri, name it, it has a life limit. This began in the early '70's.
 
Ed Haywood said:
Decathlon! Completely unsuitable for the mission, but he'll have fun and can overcharge. I'm told a school in my area gets $400 an hour. :eek:
Click to expand...

I like hearing that number. I am about to get a CAP-10 for unusual attitude/upset/basic aerobatic training.
 
Another independent instructor and I bought a high time 172N in April, 2021 to have a plane at our airport to train in. No flight school at our airport. I am amazed at how good the 172 is as a trainer. Its usage wildly exceeds any expectations we had when we bought the thing. We've had virtually zero problems. It’s flown over 1,000 with us and we just put in an overhauled engine. Engine had 1800 hours on it when we bought it. It’s easily paid for itself including the overhauled engine and other upgrades we’ve put in - 530W and 2 G5s. And I think we’ve got about the cheapest rates in Atlanta area at $135 an hour wet. I’d be hard pressed to consider anything but a 172 were i to do this again.
 
This has been great feedback and good discussion! I appreciate all of the input. Getting to some of the questions, our airport is in MO, field elevation 700’, so high DA is usually not a factor. Wx cooperates the vast majority of days.

My A&P offered up his 150 for sale, so taking a look at that this week. However, the capabilities of the 172 sound favorable as well. Just depends on how much CAPEX my buddy wants to depart with. I appreciate the recommendation of a N or P - exactly the type of information I was seeking. I do see several 172 of that vintage with north of 10,000 hours :eek:
 
It's been a couple decades since I was a student pilot, but my take is that the 172 would be a better choice. The following is my experience (take it for what it's worth)...

The only experience I have with a Cherokee is with an Arrow. And the club sold that several years ago. The 172 has the following advantages (some of which have already been pointed out):

2 doors rather than 1.

More comfortable if the student (or pilot) is tall. I don't know if it was the angle of the pilot's seat to the rudder pedals or what, but 3 hours in the Arrow and it was all I could do to crawl out of that plane. I have not had that problem with a 172. Also, I never flew with anyone I hated enough to put in the back seat of the Arrow. No legroom. None. That 1969 model was a 2 person airplane with plenty of cargo space. I had a back seat passenger 2 times when I was a student (yes, with my CFI in the right front seat once and with the DPE in the right front seat the second, she invited my CFI to ride along on the check ride) and I would not have done that with the Arrow.

Put the fuel selector on Both and forget it. A low wing cannot do that.

I have 4.1 hours in a 150 and have no intention of ever increasing that number. I have long legs and when the seat is all the way back in the 150 I still hit the bottom of the panel with my knees when I go for the brakes. I do not have that problem in the 172 (or the 182). The limitation of maximum gross for a 150 is also a problem. I flew it once with my CFI, we combined a check up and spin training in it. The other two times I flew it were solo.

The bottom line is that I would recommend the 172 as the airplane to consider.
 
Lance F said:
Another independent instructor and I bought a high time 172N in April, 2021 to have a plane at our airport to train in. No flight school at our airport. I am amazed at how good the 172 is as a trainer. Its usage wildly exceeds any expectations we had when we bought the thing. We've had virtually zero problems. It’s flown over 1,000 with us and we just put in an overhauled engine. Engine had 1800 hours on it when we bought it. It’s easily paid for itself including the overhauled engine and other upgrades we’ve put in - 530W and 2 G5s. And I think we’ve got about the cheapest rates in Atlanta area at $135 an hour wet. I’d be hard pressed to consider anything but a 172 were i to do this again.
Click to expand...
how much was the new engine
 
We bought a wrecked 172 for $19,000. Had that engine overhauled so we could do a quick swap (plane was out of service only 3 days) and sold off about everything else. The overhaul was $30,000.
 
SebIp said:
150 or 152 will need either your buddy to be on the light side. Or only take thin young ladies for students.

My CFI is a small guy and he complaint he gets too much time in the 150/152 because other instructors wouldn’t work with many students.
Click to expand...
Could always go with a PA22-108 Colt. 2 seats with a better useful load. Fuel burn averages out to 6gph. Landing gear that is forgiving, no flaps, and a better trainer for rudder use in my opinion. Although its so gentle in stalls students may struggle learning how to recognize them.
 
Last edited:
C172 or PA28. I own a C172 but would lean towards a PA28 for flight training. If you consider other types, make sure to check on insurance to avoid any surprises...
 
kep5niner said:
I’ve got a buddy getting his CFI, that’s looking to buy an airplane to provide instruction, and he’s asking me for input. He’s a fellow Army helicopter driver, and he did have his FW PPL before he went to Army flight school. When it comes to singles, I don’t know what I don’t know. My first inclination is a tried and true 172, even though those prices are seemingly through the roof with all the flight schools lapping them up. But what model? As we know some years are to be avoided, with “gotcha” ADs and such.

Again, I don’t know what I don’t know. Or is a 172 even the way to go? Cherokee 160/180? I started my aviation career in the Army, so I skipped the GA single engine slog (don’t even have a PPL). My only SE time is a little over 50 hours in a Cherokee 180, and that was just to get my CSEL. Been flying my 310 ever since as far as GA is concerned.

He’s chomping at the bit to procure an aircraft and begin instructing. Any input would be appreciated. Thanks fellas.
Click to expand...
Your buddy should join POA and ask for himself.
diamonds are popular around here.

i think it comes down to priorities and goals, then the rest comes easy.
chomping = foolish decisions
 
Why are the Beechcraft trainers never recommended? The Musketeer and Sundowner seem like great training platform, but I have to assume parts are expensive and/or hard to find?
 
Will Kumley said:
Could always go with a PA22-108 Colt. 2 seats with a better useful load. Fuel burn averages out to 6gph. Landing gear that is forgiving, no flaps, and a better trainer for rudder use in my opinion. Although its so gentle in stalls students may struggle learning how to recognize them.
Click to expand...
I’ve owned one. For some reason it’s looks just didn’t do well for attracting students. I could get people to sit in a 172 all day.

They are great little airplanes.
 
RyanShort1 said:
Parts expenses is what I’ve always heard.
Click to expand...

Mostly baloney. The Lycoming engines are pretty standard as is everything else. The only thing that's a bit of a challenge is the rubber donuts in the landing gear; the Textron parts are very expensive, but there's a guy in Africa who will make them as an owner-produced part (you send him a drawing) for about 1/3 the price and that's what most folks use. The Beech Aero Club is a great resource for locating parts and occasionally does a group buy to get a discount.

The planes are quite easy to maintain with no onerous ADs. My model, a B23, has only 4 recurring ADs and they're all pretty simple inspections.

Probably the main reason they're not used by more schools is the possibility of damage from a bad landing. They're not as forgiving on landing as Cherokees and require accurate airspeed control. Flown by the numbers, they land just fine, but if you're outside the numbers they can bite you. You can get into a porpoise if you're too fast and bounce, and if you don't immediately shove in the throttle and go around you may collapse the nose gear on the third bounce.
 
Half Fast said:
Mostly baloney. The Lycoming engines are pretty standard as is everything else. The only thing that's a bit of a challenge is the rubber donuts in the landing gear; the Textron parts are very expensive, but there's a guy in Africa who will make them as an owner-produced part (you send him a drawing) for about 1/3 the price and that's what most folks use. The Beech Aero Club is a great resource for locating parts and occasionally does a group buy to get a discount.

The planes are quite easy to maintain with no onerous ADs. My model, a B23, has only 4 recurring ADs and they're all pretty simple inspections.

Probably the main reason they're not used by more schools is the possibility of damage from a bad landing. They're not as forgiving on landing as Cherokees and require accurate airspeed control. Flown by the numbers, they land just fine, but if you're outside the numbers they can bite you. You can get into a porpoise if you're too fast and bounce, and if you don't immediately shove in the throttle and go around you may collapse the nose gear on the third bounce.
Click to expand...
That's honestly good to know. Must be similar to the whole "Traumahawk" deal.
 
WDD said:
RV 12? - Maybe. You can't use a home built experimental for instruction. Thus, an RV 12 for instruction would have to be an S LSA, not an E LSA.
Click to expand...
You can use an experimental for instruction as long as that experimental isn't provided by the instructor for a fee. But an instructor can't build a business around training in an experimental he provides, as that would be considered "commercial use" of the aircraft. There are some narrow exceptions for specific type transition training under a LODA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WDD
Dana said:
You can use an experimental for instruction as long as that experimental isn't provided by the instructor for a fee. But an instructor can't build a business around training in an experimental he provides, as that would be considered "commercial use" of the aircraft. There are some narrow exceptions for specific type transition training under a LODA.
Click to expand...
Can you log dual?
 
For the RV 12, I believe if it is the factory built or built to the factory specs with no modifications it can be used for training. I know there are several high school aviation built 12's SLSA's being used for instruction. I am not sure of the ownership details if they are registered to the school or an LLC. Here is a list of the training centers for the RV 12. https://www.flyrv12.com/flight-schools/
 
rockwoodrv9a said:
For the RV 12, I believe if it is the factory built or built to the factory specs with no modifications it can be used for training. I know there are several high school aviation built 12's SLSA's being used for instruction. I am not sure of the ownership details if they are registered to the school or an LLC. Here is a list of the training centers for the RV 12. https://www.flyrv12.com/flight-schools/
Click to expand...
Correct. It must be an S LSA and not an E LSA. The S LSA can be rented for flight training. But renting out a plane you own and also providing the pilot services (the instructor) would I believe be a "wet lease", opening up the instructor to also having to be an operator, a flight school. Which means the 100 hour inspections, etc.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top