Next club purchase...

Our club currently flies a 172R and 172SP as trainers and a Diamond DA40 as
our 3rd plane. We've put tons of students thru our 172s and are finally
getting some good usage on our Diamond. We've started "long distance"
planning on our next planes. We'd like to get a good low wing trainer like
an Archer and we'd like to get a high performance plane to get complex
ratings. For the complex plane, we're thinking we like something that can
do 150kts or better that we can do a nice panel upgrade in - say a G540
stack and some other upgrades but still something that the insurance
wouldn't kill us... As we're near the mountains, turbo would be nice but
would incur some other problems with training, etc. That said, we were
leaning towards a Turbo Arrow III... Any suggestions?

Robert Barker wrote:
That said, we were
leaning towards a Turbo Arrow III... Any suggestions?


Without knowing your club members and their proclivities, I would impose
some fairly significant checkout requirements on the turbo plane, say 10
hrs in type or turbocharged complex planes, or a significant total time
amount (either/or or both) in order to keep the archer from being used
as a primary trainer or being inadvertently abused by those fresh out of
primary training.

For a N/A arrow, my club required 10 in type or 25 multi plus a 2 hr
checkout (could be inclusive of the type or multi hours), plus 100 TT.
As a 44 hr private pilot, I had a little ways to go before I could take
the plane..

The 10 hrs in type can be multipurpose, say, training towards commercial
or instrument. While you dont have to do instrument training in a
complex, I found that the Arrow was an excellent platform for doing just
such a thing..

When trimmed for 90 kts inbound on the ILS, when you intercepted the
Glideslope, dropping the gear tended to put you right on the correct
approach descent profile, with minimal trimming or fiddling with power.

Dave

In a previous article, Dave S said:
For a N/A arrow, my club required 10 in type or 25 multi plus a 2 hr
checkout (could be inclusive of the type or multi hours), plus 100 TT.
As a 44 hr private pilot, I had a little ways to go before I could take
the plane..

Our club had a normally asparated Lance. We required 200 hours TT and 10
hours in type, or 2 hours if you had more than 25 complex already.

At one point the insurance company was talking about requiring an
instrument rating. But we got rid of the plane before that happened - the
engine was run out, and only a couple of us were flying it.

--
Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/
Remember, "close" counts in horse-shoes, hand-grenades and nuclear warfare;
but in spamming, it's considered unnecessary precision.
-- Alun Jones

In article ,
"Robert Barker" wrote:

Our club currently flies a 172R and 172SP as trainers and a Diamond DA40 as
our 3rd plane. We've put tons of students thru our 172s and are finally
getting some good usage on our Diamond. We've started "long distance"
planning on our next planes. We'd like to get a good low wing trainer like
an Archer and we'd like to get a high performance plane to get complex
ratings. For the complex plane, we're thinking we like something that can
do 150kts or better that we can do a nice panel upgrade in - say a G540
stack and some other upgrades but still something that the insurance
wouldn't kill us... As we're near the mountains, turbo would be nice but
would incur some other problems with training, etc. That said, we were
leaning towards a Turbo Arrow III... Any suggestions?

Cessna 182.
Not 150 kts, but fast enough.
The ability to haul a load is more important than speed.
Four full adults plus luggage.
I don't worry about the ability to fly long distances in a single leg, I
have reached the age where my bladder controls how long/far I fly.

You cannot get the Complex Endorsement required of the Commercial PTS in the
C-182, unless you find a C-182 RG. Then you can have Complex and High
Performance (HP not required for Commercial PTS)
BT

"John Smith" wrote in message news:jsmith-

Cessna 182.
Not 150 kts, but fast enough.
The ability to haul a load is more important than speed.
Four full adults plus luggage.
I don't worry about the ability to fly long distances in a single leg, I
have reached the age where my bladder controls how long/far I fly.

John Smith wrote:
In article ,
"Robert Barker" wrote:

Our club currently flies a 172R and 172SP as trainers and a Diamond DA40 as
our 3rd plane. We've put tons of students thru our 172s and are finally
getting some good usage on our Diamond. We've started "long distance"
planning on our next planes. We'd like to get a good low wing trainer like
an Archer and we'd like to get a high performance plane to get complex
ratings. For the complex plane, we're thinking we like something that can
do 150kts or better that we can do a nice panel upgrade in - say a G540
stack and some other upgrades but still something that the insurance
wouldn't kill us... As we're near the mountains, turbo would be nice but
would incur some other problems with training, etc. That said, we were
leaning towards a Turbo Arrow III... Any suggestions?

Cessna 182.
Not 150 kts, but fast enough.
The ability to haul a load is more important than speed.
Four full adults plus luggage.
I don't worry about the ability to fly long distances in a single leg, I
have reached the age where my bladder controls how long/far I fly.

What part of "complex" didn't you understand?

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 07:53:07 -0400, Matt Whiting wrote:

What part of "complex" didn't you understand?

The part where you think it describes your brain.
--
http://tinyurl.com/38zr4j

In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:

John Smith wrote:
In article ,
"Robert Barker" wrote:

Our club currently flies a 172R and 172SP as trainers and a Diamond DA40
as
our 3rd plane. We've put tons of students thru our 172s and are finally
getting some good usage on our Diamond. We've started "long distance"
planning on our next planes. We'd like to get a good low wing trainer
like
an Archer and we'd like to get a high performance plane to get complex
ratings. For the complex plane, we're thinking we like something that can
do 150kts or better that we can do a nice panel upgrade in - say a G540
stack and some other upgrades but still something that the insurance
wouldn't kill us... As we're near the mountains, turbo would be nice but
would incur some other problems with training, etc. That said, we were
leaning towards a Turbo Arrow III... Any suggestions?

Cessna 182.
Not 150 kts, but fast enough.
The ability to haul a load is more important than speed.
Four full adults plus luggage.
I don't worry about the ability to fly long distances in a single leg, I
have reached the age where my bladder controls how long/far I fly.

What part of "complex" didn't you understand?

The part where I missed it.
Go for an Arrow II or a C172RG "Cutlass".

John Smith wrote:
In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:

John Smith wrote:
In article ,
"Robert Barker" wrote:

Our club currently flies a 172R and 172SP as trainers and a Diamond DA40
as
our 3rd plane. We've put tons of students thru our 172s and are finally
getting some good usage on our Diamond. We've started "long distance"
planning on our next planes. We'd like to get a good low wing trainer
like
an Archer and we'd like to get a high performance plane to get complex
ratings. For the complex plane, we're thinking we like something that can
do 150kts or better that we can do a nice panel upgrade in - say a G540
stack and some other upgrades but still something that the insurance
wouldn't kill us... As we're near the mountains, turbo would be nice but
would incur some other problems with training, etc. That said, we were
leaning towards a Turbo Arrow III... Any suggestions?
Cessna 182.
Not 150 kts, but fast enough.
The ability to haul a load is more important than speed.
Four full adults plus luggage.
I don't worry about the ability to fly long distances in a single leg, I
have reached the age where my bladder controls how long/far I fly.
What part of "complex" didn't you understand?

The part where I missed it.
Go for an Arrow II or a C172RG "Cutlass".

Now you're talking!

Matt

On Aug 22, 8:55*pm, John Smith wrote:

Cessna 182.
Not 150 kts, but fast enough.
The ability to haul a load is more important than speed.
Four full adults plus luggage.

I do a lot of instruction in the C-182 but I cant say I'm a big fan of
the airplane. Cessna was just lazy and bolted a high performance
engine on their training plane. Its dog slow, sucks gas like no
tomorrow and flys like a box. I think the 172 is a fine airplane but
they really needed to go back to the drawing board when it was time
for the 182. Its a bit like putting a high performane engine in a Yugo
and calling that your high performance offering.

-Robert