what is a fun RAA plane to learn in?

[hkaneshiro]

im thinking of getting an RPC after RPL training in a C152. 

 

What is a fun and non docile plane to do the conversion in? 

 

Foxbat? Tecnam? Jabiru? Evektor? Sling? 

 

Im unsure what to do but I want to handle a funky airplane as a student

Edited September 28, 2022 by hkaneshiro

[RFguy]

as a student, you'll be limited to planes that are permitted to do training, usually will be a factory type maintained by an L2 or above.

 

So, you'll get to fly great aircraft, but they'll  not be particularly interesting.

 

Outside of boring Foxbats, Tecnams, Jabirus, Evektors, Slings, there are many more fun and interesting  aircraft to fly. 

 

 

Edited September 28, 2022 by RFguy

[SSCBD]

All are fun in 20 kts of crosswind top of FUN IS same plane as a

taildragger. Enjoy the paperwork. 

Edited September 28, 2022 by SSCBD

[Thruster88]

Wrong side of the country for you but this would tick all the boxes.

 

https://www.wingsoutwest.com/

[RFguy]

The odds are, you'll do a conversion in whatever the school is flying, and they'll be flying something suitable for training.  Pair that with geographical choice and you'll be down to a couple of different planes.

 

What's the reason for doing an RPL in  C152 first ? These days a path that is just as effective and suitable and can be cheaper is a PC-XC and then RPL conversion....

 

If you want fun and you are going down the RPL-PPL road , find a instructor with a grin  with an C150 Aerobat..... 

 

 

[turboplanner]

33 minutes ago, RFguy said:

The odds are, you'll do a conversion in whatever the school is flying, and they'll be flying something suitable for training.  Pair that with geographical choice and you'll be down to a couple of different planes.

 

What's the reason for doing an RPL in  C152 first ? These days a path that is just as effective and suitable and can be cheaper is a PC-XC and then RPL conversion....

 

If you want fun and you are going down the RPL-PPL road , find a instructor with a grin  with an C150 Aerobat..... 

 

 

PC-XC is in THEORY if you assume the same hours.

However RA are still not design-developed to the thousands of hours that the 152 was and the lack of inertia and crosswind and landing in an RA usually balloons the hours compared to a GA 152/172/Cherokee.

You can easily spend 10 - 20 hours just trying to learn how to land the thing, and although I've never counted, I'd say I've seen about 30 GA pilots walk away from RA because they couldn't handle the extra work just flying neatly like they used to.

Often the walking away is because cost in RA hours got too hight, even though the hourly rate was lower.

Over the years we've had these discussions and some of the comments are: "If you can fly a [insert favourite RA difficuult plane] you can fly anything", " it won't do you any harm to epend the time learning how to control it" etc, but they don't come back because they're out of money and will never do that first two hour cross country to the quiet country strip right next to the town.

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Yep, after flying a Jabiru SK for years, I was amazed at how easy a  chipmunk was to land..  inertia and big oleos sure helped.

So, maybe for the first time, I fully agree with turbs.

Maybe years of landing taildragger gliders helped with the transition to the Jabiru. But whatever it was, the Jabiru is not easy to land nicely every time.

[RFguy]

It's the Jabiru wing, it wants to keep flying to the last breath. Most small GA wings I have looked at have fairly high induced drag, so they slow down quick when getting slow. IE "auto land".

Edited September 28, 2022 by RFguy

[MattP]

I found the biggest thing adjusting to ra from ga was the lack of inertia and slower speeds ( flap, final, flare etc).  I wouldn't call it deal breaking just something to get used to.  Oh and the climb rate, that surprised me. The hours set aside to convert were sufficient though.  

 

Then there was getting my head around rotax rpm settings (you want me to cruise at what?) And the shut-down!

[MattP]

I wouldn't rush out to find something "fun" so early on in your training though.  You can have great fun in a 150, 172, tecnam etc. Just by going places, seeing things and enjoying being up there. 

 

Given your investment to date down the rpl path, you might be better off sticking with the 152, doing the various rpl endorsements and spending the time flying what you already can then spending more to do the raa conversion and get much the same.  Obviously this depends on your circumstances but think of things like ease of getting to and from the airport, proximity to you, the availability of ANY aircraft for you to hire and other things that will eat into your ability to just get out and enjoy aviation as a recreational pilot.  

 

Over time you'll figure out if you need or want more seats, to go into cta and get other endorsement features etc. Your rpl gives you these options, but an rpc won't give you all of them.

[skippydiesel]

"FUN" - this will be as different for each pilot as their own personality differs from everyone else.

 

In my view (Australasian Agent) you would be hard pressed to find a more exciting (RAA class) aircraft to fly than the ATEC Faeta - there are now several of these (factory built) aircraft in WA. A fantastic combination of STOL (30 kn stall), high speed cruise to 134 knots, all in a quiet ,finger tip response,  Rotax  powered airframe.

[RossK]

The Fun depends what you're doing.

For example, some recent flights.

Flying to Temora, the take-off and landing are enjoyable, but it's prety much a straight line for 2hrs. But being at Temora after 2.5hrs when it's a 6hr drive, that's enjoyable.

Flying down to Apollo Bay along the coast is fun.

Doing some pre BFR airwork with an Instructor for 1.5hrs, that was fun.

[turboplanner]

2 hours ago, RFguy said:

It's the Jabiru wing, it wants to keep flying to the last breath. Most small GA wings I have looked at have fairly high induced drag, so they slow down quick when getting slow. IE "auto land".

That's not so much the problem; that's predictable, so get your speed right and a good landing happens every time.

It's the low inertia with RA; much more like a leaf blowing around.

[Bruce Tuncks]

Gosh, here am I thinking the 230 is a big and heavy plane...   the sk jabiru  was as heavy as the gliders I used to fly, and the 230 is heaps heavier.

But my flight in a chipmunk sure told me that the dark side has easier landings. And easier flying, with no cht instrument to worry about.

[facthunter]

Just put a lot into flying the plane you have available and KNOW it's and your limits. I don't like aerobating planes that aren't well above 5G  safe. NO RAA planes are certified to spin, That doesn't mean they won't spin. Get your skills refined with unusual attitude recovery in a suitable  plane (and with a suitable instructor) when you have a few hours under your belt. Say 80, Never stop learning. When/IF you think you know it ALL you'll be becoming dangerous...

 Bruce you must be a natural. The Chipmunk was my initial trainer but I never take if for granted. It has controls with good feel but will flick if you push it . Time in a drifter won't be a waste of time and has a great view  but if you want to be a better tailwheel driver get something a bit more challenging. (like a C-180). Nev

[djpacro]

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

... I don't like aerobating planes that aren't well above 5G  safe. NO RAA planes are certified to spin, ... Nev

Hi Nev, is that a new philosophy, as your Citabria was a 5G airplane? And - there are quite a few RAA planes certified for intentional spinning.

[facthunter]

It's always been a figure I keep in the back of my head and I restricted the type of aeros I did in the Citabria appropriately. It had a "G" meter to relate what you feel to reality.. I've pulled about 7  in some planes but I choose my chariot for the course carefully. Nev

[kasper]

1 hour ago, djpacro said:

Hi Nev, is that a new philosophy, as your Citabria was a 5G airplane? And - there are quite a few RAA planes certified for intentional spinning.

There are NO RAAus planes certified to spin.  Full stop no quibble.

 

There ARE airframes that are RAAus registered that IF they were registered in another category or country may be certified to spin but once it has RAAus numbers on the side its definitely NOT certified to spin.

[spenaroo]

go a tail dragger, lots of fun

but it all depends on what you enjoy. personally I only ever do a 1 hour flight every couple of weeks.

so hiring the schools champ, and bashing out some circuits or a flight to check out the coast does me fine.
I like the Tail dragger for the added control inputs during circuits. more difficult means more rewarding. that's my fun

if I was to do navigation etc... then the champ is pretty impractical with the need to be always on top of the control inputs. its not a take your hands off the stick like the Jabiru or Vixen I learnt in.
as well as its slow cruise speeds. (was doing cross winds in marginal weather the other day, and the the schools Harmony's were also out doing the same - was a few comments asking if I was moving or that the reverse beeper was malfunctioning)

Edited September 29, 2022 by spenaroo

[facthunter]

My Citabria was registered VH SAG.  It doesn't seem slow if you are low. It's a good 17 knots faster than a Tiger moth and a high wing tandem has a good view out each side and plenty of elbow room... I've had plenty of going fast and that's boring when you are high up.  You only need that if you are in a hurry,   Nev

[turboplanner]

5 hours ago, facthunter said:

I've pulled about 7  in some planes but I choose my chariot for the course carefully. Nev

So it was YOU who did that in the 727 inbound to Hobart that day!

[APenNameAndThatA]

That’s actually a good question. Probably the aircraft with the best instructor, or the aircraft that will best fit your mission. Time in type is good to build up. 

[spenaroo]

15 hours ago, facthunter said:

My Citabria was registered VH SAG.  It doesn't seem slow if you are low. It's a good 17 knots faster than a Tiger moth and a high wing tandem has a good view out each side and plenty of elbow room... I've had plenty of going fast and that's boring when you are high up.  You only need that if you are in a hurry,   Nev

Yes but legally we have to be above 500ft.....

I mean, Im not sure that I can get away with calling the whole flight a precautionary search

[facthunter]

You are taking a bit of poetic licence, 3 000 ft is low 42 000 is relatively high. Nev

[spenaroo]

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

You are taking a bit of poetic licence, 3 000 ft is low 42 000 is relatively high. Nev

yeah was tongue in cheek,

 

though 3000ft is what I consider mid, 5000ft high. everything I have flown doesn't get much higher then that