High or low wing?

G.R. Patterson III wrote:

The wing spars have to pass through the fuselage. With a low-wing, that means a hump
in the floor. With a high-wing, that means a lwo ceiling at that point. Planes that
carry cargo would rather have a flat floor to ease loading. People, on the other
hand, will step over a hump in the floor and bang their heads on a drop in the
ceiling.

The spar is typically below the floor -- I don't have a hump on the floor of
my Cherokee, and I don't remember ever seeing one in an airliner. The cargo
handlers will might to worry about it in the airliner, of course.

Dunno about "cold weather" planes, but the high-altitude aircraft which come to my
mind are mid-wing aircraft; the U-2 and SR-71.

If a high-altitude plane is designed for ground surveillance, high wing
makes sense. "Cold weather" planes may refer to bush planes, which are also
high wing for obvious reasons.


All the best,


David

David Megginson wrote:

The spar is typically below the floor -- I don't have a hump on the floor of
my Cherokee, and I don't remember ever seeing one in an airliner.

I've seen them on some of the twins used for shuttles.

George Patterson
If you don't tell lies, you never have to remember what you said.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


David Megginson wrote:

The spar is typically below the floor -- I don't have a hump on the
floor of
my Cherokee, and I don't remember ever seeing one in an airliner.

I've seen them on some of the twins used for shuttles.

In Brooklands Museum where I work part time as a volunteer,
we have a cartoon in the Viscount from a bygone era where it
shows the best place for men to sit was where the air hostess
with her knee length skirt had to step up over the spar box,
showing the tops of her stockings...

Paul

In article ers.com,
David Megginson wrote:

The spar is typically below the floor -- I don't have a hump on the floor
of
my Cherokee,

What is that thing under the rear seat in my 140?

and I don't remember ever seeing one in an airliner. The
cargo
handlers will might to worry about it in the airliner, of course.

airliners have fuselages high enough that the passengers can be
above the spar.

--
Bob Noel

As one poster already said, there are advantages and disadvantages to
each (macho/religious leanings aside). I prefer high wing (qualified)
for a few reasons. I like two doors for egress if I need to get out of
the plane in a hurry. (Not a problem in a Beech, Grumman or a
Traumahawk, but an issue in a Piper or Mooney). High wing planes tend
to be a bit easier to get in and out of. Checking the fuel level is not
a problem for me (6'3"), but a "vertically challenged" neighbor can't
see the fuel level in a 172 without a step ladder. (He flies a Piper.)
High wings help when the snow banks start to grow.

I like the visibility down, but, as others have stated, the wing
generally blocks the view of the airport in a turn in the pattern
(except in a 177, so I've read) but does allow a view of any traffic
that may be entering the pattern (helped me avoid a mid-air once when
someone in the pattern decided to do a 360 on base).

(As an interesting aside, I read recently that passengers that have
little or no experience flying in small planes generally prefer low
wings because they get the feeling that they are being held up by the
wings and not suspended in the air under them.)

I also like the fact that, at least in the 172, there is generally no
need to switch tanks (there is a "Both" setting) and the fact that the
fuel system is gravity fed (no need to worry about the fuel pumps).

I think that you will find that each of the models have their good and
bad points, and that there are a number of makes to choose from for a
particular mission.



C. Paul Williams, MD wrote:
Hi, I'm new to this group and new to piloting, just having passed my
private pilot FAA written and about halfway through flight school.
I'm training in a Cessna 172SP and have a question for the experienced
pilots out there. Do you prefer flying a high wing or low wing
aircraft and why?...I apologize if this is a redundant question on the
newsgroup.
Thanks. CPW


--
Remove "2PLANES" to reply.

I also like the fact that, at least in the 172, there is generally no
need to switch tanks (there is a "Both" setting)


But when your'e out of gas, you're out of gas.

JOse

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

Teacherjh wrote:

But when your'e out of gas, you're out of gas.

But when the fuel pump breaks, my engine keeps running.

George Patterson
If you don't tell lies, you never have to remember what you said.

G.R. Patterson III wrote:

But when the fuel pump breaks, my engine keeps running.

Low-wing planes normally have an electric fuel pump to back up the pump
attached to the engine's accessory drive. Still, in this case, gravity is a
simpler and more elegant solution than an extra gadget.


All the best,


David

In article , Dan Truesdell
wrote:

High wing planes tend
to be a bit easier to get in and out of.

My initial training was in 172's. Probably 75 hours of
my first 100 were in 172's. But I find it easier to get
in and out of a cherokee than the 172 (I've owned a cherokee
since 1994).

--
Bob Noel

Wow! Thanks a lot guys, your responses really clear things up...
I get the feeling this has been discussed/debated/dueled over before.
I'll have to fly each when I've got the certificate...but have decided
already to stay away from the true high performance/complex aircraft
until I've got a few hundred hours under my belt.
As to the "doctor killer"...I think that applies more to the
egotistical specialties like surgery, and I'm just a poor country
radiologist.
Thanks again. CPW