On Monday, April 22, 2013 11:31:11 AM UTC-4, Steve wrote:
On Monday, April 22, 2013 9:05:53 AM UTC-5, Tony wrote:

On Monday, April 22, 2013 9:00:50 AM UTC-5, Papa3 wrote:



On Saturday, April 20, 2013 11:08:55 PM UTC-4, wrote: Add the Cessna AgWagon to the list. It is a Pawnee on steroids and has 300+HP - if you can't get air-born behind it, it wasn't meant to fly! ;-) Actually, at the local FBO which had 2 Pawnees (235s) and one Agwagon (I think one of the early models), the Agwagon was far-and-away the least favorite. It's greatest attribute seemed to be converting fuel to noise swinging the big prop. It also seemed to want to fly faster and climb at a shallower angle than the Pawnees. Plus, it was significantly worse on fuel. As a result, it only flew on a couple of days a year when there was a ton of demand or the Pawnees were inop. And no, it's not relevant to the question about a 1-72 :-)







Yea at least for "slow" gliders the Pawnee is better in my limited experience behind both. At Region 10 in 2011 the Pawnees happily pulled me at 65 mph while it was obvious from my end that the AgWagon was really struggling that slow. The Pawnees got me to altitude faster on less horsepower.



I would also consider an L-19 Birddog. Found at the right price, it's a great tow plane. possible downside is the insurance might be a bit higher based on a higher value, but having the extra seat allows tow check outs etc. Excellent aircraft.

When I first learned to fly Lo, Many years ago the operation had an L-19. Even in a K21 dual from 800ft MSL takeoff the climb rate was at least 800fpm. Later
I moved to a club with Pawnees, where we were lucky to get 600fpm in the K21s.
I asked why we didn't have an L-19, and was told that its narrow gear makes it
trickier to handle on the ground. The first operation had to be very picky
about who would tow as a result.

Matt