I'm with Gump's......ya want STOL? Go sling wing.

MTV

Yes, but buy both a fixed wing for greater distances, and a chopper (they ARE loads of fun) for the shorter distances.

I'm gonna break with the crowd here and at least suggest that buying a "starter" plane might be useful to build more TW time and get to be a better pilot. In addition if you happen to bend it a bit, (if it was me) it would be better to bend a cheaper ride. Just something to consider.

Greg

Zzz wrote:Perhaps, but the build and finish quality of the CC aircraft is incredible, and for some people only a Cub will do.

Money, initial and ongoing, no object? I'd go CC also. The first one I saw, in a hangar in Winifred MT., I was prepared to be unimpressed, but like Zane said, the fit and finish was so good I wanted one NOW, it was flat pretty! I still haven't see one fly (I think) but can guesstimate that. And again, if the money was no object, I wouldn't have to worry about scratching it I guess, just hire someone to buff it out.

Your buddies that are telling you to start small might be thinking of the experience you will get learning in a low HP plane?

Terry wrote:Your buddies that are telling you to start small might be thinking of the experience you will get learning in a low HP plane?

That is a good point. While the greatest value is definitely something with good power loading, there are invaluable airmanship and decision making skills that only those who've had the pleasure of flying a scary gutless wonder possess.

But you can learn those in a rental >:)

What about joining a gliding club and buy the plane you want, great understanding of flight learned in a glider and nothing like a bit of monetary pressure to keep ya plane straight and in one piece.

As much as I'd like to spend your money as well as everyone else is doing here, I'd really have to go against the grain.
It is my opinion that there is no end to the bad habits, and lack of 'learning', that go hand in hand with fundamental skill building in an over powered, over winged, creature like a CC.

Don't get me wrong, it's not that the CC will be a challenge to fly, on the contrary, it will be cake to fly... right up until you hit the moment where all the wing and power aren't going to fix a poor habit.

Recently I've been playing around some in a little 65 hp. Tcart. It has a Heath tailwheel on it, and the amount of 'good habits' this little girl requires out of someone, compared to say our big engined/big wheeled Supercub, is amazing. That's not to suggest that she's squirelly, or anything, quite the opposite actually. Just that you can't just point it at the ground and plop like you can a Giant wheeled cub. Same goes with the Take off, climbing over the local mountains, and so on.... Just gotta put more thought and attention into everything you do with her. Thought and attention..... good flying stuff.

The Tcart cost me a drop in the bucket compared to what one groundloop in a new CC will cost you. I 'bought it right' both dollar wise, as well as TBO wise, so several hundred hours in it will be essentially free... Do some research into how many CC's are sold to newer T/W guys going out to play in the sticks. Then look at the number of those that turn to 'instant bush pilots'... just add water, right?.... lastly look at the rate of wrecks in that group The trend is already there.... Doo you really want to be in that crowd....

Take care, Rob

X 2...


...Well put Rob!

The CC is a good plane and as has been said its really easy to fly.

someone mentioned the king Khatami... that's not even a close comparison, I've flown in both back to back on the same field.

someone else mentioned the super STOL by Just Aircraft..... now that's a real contender

The super STOL lands shorter and with the bigger engine they are talking about putting on it will beat a CC in everything but looks.

But since u have to build it yourself the quality may or may not be there

I know this is a three year old thread, but the question of which starter plane is always a current topic.

Possibilities to consider for a relatively low time pilot, Used, All Metal, & Affordable (under 30 - 35K...) ... ???

Cessna 172 Trike
Cessna 170/A/B Tail
Cessna 150 Trike
Piper Warrior II Low Wing Trike
Zenith 701 or 750 Trike
Murphy Rebel Tail

Any thoughts?
Seems a straight tail 56-59 172 Cont. O-300, or a 1973-76 172M Lyco O-320 with the leading edge cuff make decent affordable "starter" choices. And easy to sell later.
http://www.172guide.com/models.htm
Cessna 172M

Simply buy what you can afford and fly safely with your current level of piloting experience.

What is the mission?????? A 1,000 hr pilot should not need a starter plane. Buy the plane for the mission.
DENNY

DENNY wrote:What is the mission?????? A 1,000 hr pilot should not need a starter plane. Buy the plane for the mission.
DENNY

Agreed!.
Big difference between a 1000 hour pilot and a student or newly minted private pilot.

(However I have seen 1000 hour pilots that couldn't fly a helium balloon!)

Perhaps they lied on their times???

Someone here on BCP once said...

.
It's not what you fly, but that you fly.

I have always loved that quotation.

Let's see...Piper Tomahawk, or a Twotter...which is best?

There's a pretty simple matrix for airplanes, or cars, or houses...

Buy what will accomplishes your primary need(s), limited by what you have/want to spend. THAT is your ultimate airplane, regardless of what model it is.

For a newly minted pilot, that's an airplane they can afford to fly as often as possible and which will actually let them learn something about the medium their traveling in...load hauling, airspeed, and HP are irrelevant in comparison, and frankly counter productive to anyone who wants to fly the backcountry. To use an analogy, if you want to make someone a skilled rifle hunter, you start them off with a .22 single shot, not a AR-10...regardless of the budget.

For a more seasoned pilot, turning gas into noise is a lot less satisfying than some other things you can do in an airplane, so the priorities change.

My 140 was a "ultimate" starter plane...flew it several hours a week, and repeated crossings of the Sierra's, the Mojave, and the Great Basin in that little airplane taught me things about air currents, route planning, fuel planning, and load considerations that I simply wouldn't have had to learn in a larger aircraft. If I could go back in time and transform that 140 into a 180, I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't have learned nearly as much, or had as much fun.

Now my "ultimate" airplane is a big engine 170 (because I already own it), though anyone looking at where, how and why I fly would immediately say I need a 180/185. And from a flight mission point of view that's correct. But I'm fantastically uninterested in spending more money on aviation than I already am, so by definition those airplanes are poor choices...less "ultimate" than what I have now.

I have friends with Carbon Cubs, and new Husky's, and even a Kodiak in the works...super, super expensive play toys. I think it's great that they have them, but they are not airplanes that I would want. The money to have those things didn't fall in their laps, and I've just never been interested in spending that much of my life chasing nickels, or spending the nickels I do have in that way.

I was recently faced with this dilemma.

I'm a few hours short of my PPL. The license, and owning a plane have been dreams since my early 20s and I just turned 51. I live in south coastal British Columbia and the nearby territory for flying is incredible.

I opted for the ultimate route. In my case, I bought a '63 182 w/ Sportsman STOL and Wing-x on amphib floats. Since then I have been busy throwing money at a Pponk, MT, big wheels for wheel season, and a modest but modern panel. I got a good deal on the plane but after spending so much on upgrades I've probably crossed the line where I won't get money back out of it if I decide to sell it.

Numerous smart people suggested I buy a starter plane. I didn't for several reasons:
1. I loathe buying big ticket items but I REALLY loathe selling them. This plane might not be the perfect plane for me for the next 20 years but I've given it every chance. If I win the lotto I will sell it and buy a Beaver on floats, a Carbon Cub for STOL, and a King Air for getting A to B.
2. While I appreciate that many people learn things out of necessity when flying an underpowered plane, I don't believe that the same things can't be learned in a modestly powered plane, with the added benefit of having power on tap if life depends on it. I am a keen student and don't plan to ignore finesse and knowledge in favour of having a big engine. I see the ultimate plane as a license and a vehicle in which to keep learning, not to compensate for not learning. I know for the first few years I'll be 'that guy' that got his license and bought a plane with capabilities beyond his skill, but that won't last forever and, even in the beginning, a 182 with a STOL wing is a pretty benign platform for learning.
3. Related to point #2, as a new pilot I want the power to compensate for a potential miscalculation. Never in my life of cars, trucks, motorcycles, ATVs, boats, chainsaws, weed-eaters and lawn mowers have I ever wished I had LESS power at any given moment. Much better to have it and not need it than vice versa.
4. I have the money, liquid, right now. I know myself well enough to know that if I don't make the commitment and write the checks now I may very well spend or invest it elsewhere. As George Best once said: "Half my fortune I spend on booze, birds, and fast cars. The other half I squandered.".

Truth is, this choice is very personal. Those were the reasons that led me to my choice.

Lots of good points here. One thing in the original post reall struck me, however: The OP said he was currently flying a 182, but he's thinking of buying a much smaller plane for future.

I wonder if he's truly explored the serious limitations, both in weight and in bulk that those smaller planes offer. The Carbon Cub in particular has a VERY limited useful load, unless you fly an EX version and set the GW at 1865.

MTV

I totally agree with Rob because I have always believed best training is good for all, rich or poor. Albravo, however, makes a good point by bringing in a variable I hadn't considered : age. Older gentlemen with funds should get the aircraft they want. Even I don't try to takeoff or land tailwheel airplanes anymore.

Hammer wrote:... taught me things about air currents, route planning, fuel planning, and load considerations that I simply wouldn't have had to learn in a larger aircraft. ....

These may be the key words.
Why learn all about how to fly an under-powered airplane if you're not gonna fly one?
Isn't it a better idea to spend your time learning how to fly the dream plane?

I think initial training in a C150/152 or 172 is a good idea--
I got my ticket in a rented C150, then owned a C150, C170, and C150/150TD.
For financial reasons, it took me 19 years to work my way up to a 180.
But if someone can afford to leapfrog right up to their "dream plane",
whether it's a 180, a Maule, or whatever, more power to them.