Scudrunners

For me it was the Fleet Canuck.


How about you guys / Gals/ or whatever gender you self identify as.  ;D

Anything tube and fabric with a tailwheel
but no electrics and no gyros on grass.

Go solo on that, then move to a 172 or PA-28
on pavement for nav, x/c, instrument.  Electrics,
radios and gyros but fixed pitch and fixed gear.

Then onto a 6-cyl single with constant-speed
prop, retractable gear, cowl flaps.  Spend
some time inside a cloud in it.  High wing,
low wing, no matter:  182RG, Bonanza,
Mooney, etc.

Then onto a 4-cyl twin (Comanche, Seminole,
Duchess, Apache, whatever).  A manhole
cover on one engine.

Then onto a 6-cyl twin with turbo-chargers,
de-ice, maybe pressurization.  Tricky to fly
well in all conditions in all places.

Then onto a turbine twin (simple)

Then onto a jet (easy)

But, I am just a moron, so what would I know?

For results in learning to fly, a tail drager is hard to beat.
Every student I introduced via some time in a Pitts or a decathalon all went solo
in the lowest of times and at a very high standard.


People will travel a long way and pay what ever it costs to have
their first lesson like that.


The major problem these days appears to be that of insurance which
virtually prohibits low time pilots which increasingly ends the availability
of performance trail dragers for abinitio training.

[quote]Anything tube and fabric with a tailwheelbut no electrics and no gyros on grass.[/quote]


Iflyforpie should soon be finished with our PA11 homebuilt with two doors and 115 HP.


Then we will offer basic training on grass.


And the airplane will be economical enough to operate we will be able to do it at a reasonable price.

I really like the Cub.. wonderful little plane. Couple of simple instruments and just stick/rudder and visual feedback to go on. Hand start and learning to prime properly .. Keep it simple.


Also a ton of fun on a little grass strip! Sheer joy.

[code][quote author=Chuck Ellsworth link=topic=3774.msg10146#msg10146 date=1469669406]
[quote][font=Verdana][size=2px]Anything tube and fabric with a tailwheel[/size][/font][font=Verdana][/size][size=2px]but no electrics and no gyros on grass.[/size][/font][/quote][font=Verdana][size=2px]


Iflyforpie should soon be finished with our PA11 homebuilt with two doors and 115 HP.


Then we will offer basic training on grass.


And the airplane will be economical enough to operate we will be able to do it at a reasonable price.[/size][/font]
[/quote][/code]

My goodness Cat, preview your posts and take out all that extra code man.

It's not Transport Canada written test difficult.

[code][quote author=Chuck Ellsworth link=topic=3774.msg10146#msg10146 date=1469669406]
[quote]Anything tube and fabric with a tailwheel
but no electrics and no gyros on grass.[/quote]


Iflyforpie should soon be finished with our PA11 homebuilt with two doors and 115 HP.


Then we will offer basic training on grass.


And the airplane will be economical enough to operate we will be able to do it at a reasonable price.
[/quote][/code]



[quote author=Chuck Ellsworth link=topic=3774.msg10146#msg10146 date=1469669406]
[quote]Anything tube and fabric with a tailwheel
but no electrics and no gyros on grass.[/quote]


Iflyforpie should soon be finished with our PA11 homebuilt with two doors and 115 HP.

Then we will offer basic training on grass.


And the airplane will be economical enough to operate we will be able to do it at a reasonable price.
[/quote]

Could there be any better bang for the buck than a 152 with a really good instructor?  The thing must be pretty ubiquitous for a reason.

[quote]a really good instructor[/quote]

The problem is, that they don't exist.  Like
a unicorn, the odds of you finding one are
pretty slim.

I might be a cynic, but I'm pretty sure that
after 25 years of giving flight instruction, I
learned that:

1) when teaching occurs, learning rarely occurs

2) learning happens frequently in the absence
of structured teaching

Really, the job of the instructor is to stop
the student from hurting himself or the airplane
while the student teaches himself to fly.

I taught myself IFR on my own airplane.  Bought
a book, did some flying, and got a local corporate
pilot to sign me off for the flight test.  A hold and
two approaches did not present an insurmountable
intellectual obstacle for a cisco engineer, oddly enough.

I taught myself aerobatics.  Formation.  Formation
aerobatics.  Negative G formation.  Negative G
formation aerobatics.  Low altitude aerobatics,
solo and formation.

Why?  Because there were no competent instructors
for any of the above - at least in Canada.  Maybe
there might be one or two in Russia, I have no idea.

Same thing for type checks.  I can't possibly list all
the types I've checked myself out in, because no one
could give me any dual on them.

How I got my jet type ratings would blow your mind.
I'm pretty sure none of the American pilots that signed
the paperwork understood it.  Again, I'm self-taught
on jets.

Back to your 152.  It's too docile.  It will teach the
student that it's acceptable to land crabbed, and
they will be instructing next year.

Best to do ab initio on an airplane that demands
reasonable aircraft handling.

Learning factor of Primacy.

Just my opinion as a class 1 instructor / class 1
aerobatic instructor (that TC thinks is the anti-Christ)
with over 40 years accident-free flying (unlike TC).

PS  Coming up on six months since TC illegally
seized my phone and laptop. 

Any aircraft that defeats the flat feet syndrome, either that or train everyone in an Ercoupe

I'm with Chuck...Fleet Canuck, strong and reliable and legal basic aerobatics.


Barney