Worst to Fly

[RyanShort1]

These are just the first five that come to mind!

He doesn't like any of the low wing trainers w/ the Hershey bar wing ie, Cherokee 140's, Muskeeteer, and Tomohawk. Doesn't like planes that are underpowered; 150s, 172, Tri-pacers etc.

Ok, now you've got me a bit bothered. The Tomahawk is a great little airplane and the guys I've known like myself who trained on them like them quite a bit! In fact I personally prefer it over the Cessna equivalent...
I'm finally starting to appreciate the C-172, but still love the Tomahawks better view. My instructor said that he thought that the pilots he'd seen trained on the Tommys were better for the amount of time they'd spent in them than if they'd been in C-150s.

Ryan

[hairy]

I too prefer the Traumahawk over the 152, being a fat bugger I really appreciate the extra room. By the way have you ever looked back and watched the tail during a stall.

[RyanShort1]

As a matter of fact, NO. I know some folks who were involved in the making of it and they beefed it up to the point where it was structurally sound... Sure it may flex, etc, but so long as it works, and there are Tommys out there with MANY MANY stalls behind them, I really am not worried about it. Besides, if I was worried about it I'm more worried about watching my airspeed and recovering quickly than looking back at the tail! You gotta understand that I saw a fatal 172 stall/spin accident in 2003 and am thus more concerned about getting out of a stall quickly and accurately.

Ryan

[HarvardIV]

Ok, now you've got me a bit bothered. The Tomahawk is a great little airplane and the guys I've known like myself who trained on them like them quite a bit! In fact I personally prefer it over the Cessna equivalent...

Hi Ryan:

I was speaking for my dad, and the Tomohawk is good for it's mission. However, it's still a slow trainer aircraft.

As far as seeing a stall/spin C-172 accident, was it a base to final overly steep/skid bank; resulting in a stall/spin?

Chris

[RyanShort1]

Nope, it was a takeoff accident, though my personal opinion is that it was a completely avoidable thing... They skimmed the ground and then pulled up at something between a 60-70 degree climb before stalling once, then twice, and if my memory isn't faulty, the third "mush" was when the left wing dropped and they did a half-turn of a spin into the ground... Was the 3rd person on the scene and believe me, wrecks aren't pretty.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20030911X01518&key=1


Ryan

[HarvardIV]

It sounds like they took off in ground effect or during a density altitude condition. They must've been students, because a power on stall, as you know, can be recovered from quickly w/ min. altritude loss. I remember doing a lot of power on stalls and recovering with no altitude loss.

Chris