High Wing or Low Wing

[RJPKRP]

Okay....So I'm thinking I might want to purchase in the next 12-18 months. So I'm beginning my research now, unfortunately there aren't many places to rent a 6-seater. I'm currently a student pilot and will sit for my battery of tests in the next couple of months. Sure I can rent a 72 and a Warrior II or Arrow, but flight characteristics might be a bit different. High Wind/Low Wing, doesn't matter to me since these are kind of the "SUVs of the Sky". So, if anyone has any experience in the following planes or would have any recommendations for a novice pilot....pros/cons....lemme hear it.....



<table border="1"><tbody><tr><td>Cessna 206
</td><td>Piper Cherokee 6/300
</td></tr><tr><td>

</td><td>

</td></tr><tr><td>Seating: 6
Displacement: 520ci
HP: 300
Fuel Capacity: 65 Gallons (84 with LR tanks)
AVG Burn/HR @ 75%: 15.8
Max Cruise: 148 knots
Max useful load: 1750lbs
Service Ceiling: 14,800'</td><td>
Seating: 6
Displacement: 541ci
HP: 300
Fuel Capacity: 84 Gallons
AVG Burn/HR @ 75%: 16
Max Cruise: 146 knots
Max useful load: 1623lbs
Service Ceiling: 16,250'
</td></tr></tbody></table>

 

[docjohn]

I have nothing usefull to add..but I'm so glad you are'nt trying to compare them to the nsx.or corvette or viper:wink:

 

[Vega$ NSX]

Friend of mine who is a amateur pilot said that you can't really go wrong with either, both are good planes. He prefers the Cessna but it's only because he has one already.

 

[nsxtasy]

Since you're a student pilot, I think it's absurd to be considering buying an airplane in the next 12-18 months. Especially a fairly large high-performance plane.

Think of it this way. If someone said, "I'm fifteen years old and I'm learning to drive with a learner's permit. I'm trying to decide whether to buy a Lamborghini or a Ferrari. Which should I get?", what would your answer be? (I HOPE it would be, "learn to drive, and then learn to drive in a high-performance setting, and try driving any of the cars you would consider buying. Build up at least half a dozen years of driving experience before buying any high-performance car".)

It's also very difficult to justify the high fixed costs of owning an airplane, unless you plan on keeping it in the air an average of two or more hours a day. But that's a separate issue.

To answer your specific question, though, I always preferred high-wing planes. Both have issues with obstruction of visibility, that your flight training should teach you how to avoid. But I prefer being able to look down at the ground - not only for the enjoyment of the view of the ground, but also to give you an idea of terrain that you might need to land on, or conditions at a non-controlled field. Also the high-wing planes are cooler on a hot day.

 

[Aero]

Since you're a student pilot, I think it's absurd to be considering buying an airplane in the next 12-18 months. Especially a fairly large high-performance plane.

Think of it this way. If someone said, "I'm fifteen years old and I'm learning to drive with a learner's permit. I'm trying to decide whether to buy a Lamborghini or a Ferrari. Which should I get?", what would your answer be? (I HOPE it would be, "learn to drive, and then learn to drive in a high-performance setting, and try driving any of the cars you would consider buying. Build up at least half a dozen years of driving experience before buying any high-performance car".)

It's also very difficult to justify the high fixed costs of owning an airplane, unless you plan on keeping it in the air an average of two or more hours a day. But that's a separate issue.

To answer your specific question, though, I always preferred high-wing planes. Both have issues with obstruction of visibility, that your flight training should teach you how to avoid. But I prefer being able to look down at the ground - not only for the enjoyment of the view of the ground, but also to give you an idea of terrain that you might need to land on, or conditions at a non-controlled field. Also the high-wing planes are cooler on a hot day.

Agree completely. If you're still a student pilot I wouldn't get anything beyond a C172 or equivalent 'time builder'. I wouldn't even consider a 6 place to own until you're well past your instrument and commercial rating. If you want a 6 place to take people and go places you pretty much have to have your instrument rating. (and for insurance rates as well) By that time you may want something else anyway to own. You'll have to really look at how frequent you fly to see if it actually pays off to own vs rent once you consider insurance/maintenance/annuals etc.

 

[Texas91Brent]

My neighbor is a big shot with the FAA....He has the piper and loves it......

 

[RJPKRP]

Since you're a student pilot, I think it's absurd to be considering buying an airplane in the next 12-18 months. Especially a fairly large high-performance plane.

Think of it this way. If someone said, "I'm fifteen years old and I'm learning to drive with a learner's permit. I'm trying to decide whether to buy a Lamborghini or a Ferrari. Which should I get?", what would your answer be? (I HOPE it would be, "learn to drive, and then learn to drive in a high-performance setting, and try driving any of the cars you would consider buying. Build up at least half a dozen years of driving experience before buying any high-performance car".)

It's also very difficult to justify the high fixed costs of owning an airplane, unless you plan on keeping it in the air an average of two or more hours a day. But that's a separate issue.

To answer your specific question, though, I always preferred high-wing planes. Both have issues with obstruction of visibility, that your flight training should teach you how to avoid. But I prefer being able to look down at the ground - not only for the enjoyment of the view of the ground, but also to give you an idea of terrain that you might need to land on, or conditions at a non-controlled field. Also the high-wing planes are cooler on a hot day.

Agree completely. If you're still a student pilot I wouldn't get anything beyond a C172 or equivalent 'time builder'. I wouldn't even consider a 6 place to own until you're well past your instrument and commercial rating. If you want a 6 place to take people and go places you pretty much have to have your instrument rating. (and for insurance rates as well) By that time you may want something else anyway to own. You'll have to really look at how frequent you fly to see if it actually pays off to own vs rent once you consider insurance/maintenance/annuals etc.

Valid points guys....and I understand your concern. Rest assured I'm not walking into this doe eyed. I have plenty of access to rent (6) different 172's and 2 different Arrows through the club and flight school. Building time is not a problem...and won't be a problem. I'll probably average 10-15 Hobbs/Week next Spring/Summer/Autumn. Now at an average of $113/hr wet and let's say 10 hours a week for 20 weeks....that's $22,600 plus club fees. (yes, I have the flexibility to log that many hours per week) Granted, it's also 200 hours. I also plan on doing IFR and MEL in the Spring/Summer next year...factor in those hours and costs as well.

So once again this is not something I am stumbling into blindly. I won't need a commercial rating, unless I plan on being a pilot for hire (I haven't ruled that out, but it isn't on my radar in the foreseeable future). Here is the deal, I want a 6-seater because I have a family of 5. Buying a 172, while good for time building, doesn't have any practical application for me other than building time. I can't take the family....as a unit....anywhere. I would like my certificate to have SOME sort of practical application other than just allow me the opportunity to "joy fly".

Ken, you have a point about a 15 year old and a Lamborghini or Ferrari, however neither one of these planes is a Lamborghini or Ferrari. They are "high performance" based on horsepower rating alone. They are single engine, fixed gear, entry level 6-person aircraft. Think of them more as a Odyssey or Sienna not a Ferrari or Lamborghini. Also, 12-18 months is my time frame right now. My time frame for the NSX was 3-6 months and it turned into 14 to find the one I wanted. This could very well turn into 24-36 months because, as well all know, a lot can happen in the next 12-18 months.

So once again, I do understand the concerns you guys raise, but I have thought this out and am not just grasping blindly. Believe me, if I could get away with buying a C172 or a Piper Warrior II over a 206/Cherokee 6, I would.....it would save me ALOT of money in purchase price, however, a 4-seater is not practical for a family of five. It would be like me having bought a Civic instead of the Odyessy to move my family around. Sure it's cheaper, smaller, better on gas, and cheaper to insure.......but would be far less practical than the minivan. If you can show me a smaller plane with less horsepower than the 206 or Cherokee to get 5 people from here to there, I'll gladly look into them.

 

[ChopsJazz]

Get the Lambo! :biggrin:

 

[JeffShoots]

Uncle is a training pilot...so my limited experience...high wing "I can see more shit on the ground" low wing "this step is great for getting in" oh and why are these things so boring :biggrin:

 

[jukngene]

Having owned both (a Piper Cherokee and a Cessna Cardinal), even though I learned to fly in the Cherokee, I greatly prefer the high-wing Cardinal for the visibility and the ease of ingress it provides. It seems you have researched this matter pretty carefully, so my suggestion is to try to find an on-line forum where you can hook up with owners of both, fly them, and then see which one meets your requirements best. Just hope you are completely aware of the true costs of owning an airplane. Have you considered going in to partnership with one or the other? This is a great way to keep the fixed costs reasonable.

 

[CL65 Captain]

I wouldn't buy either. Having owned a C310Q for 12 years I swore I would never buy a small plane again. There is more to owning a plane than the acquisition cost and fuel. Don't forget - hanger/tie down, annual inspections, engine overhaul, prop overhaul, insurance and almost every other time you take it out something will break. It's like a boat, a big hole that you throw money into. You have no idea how much parts are until you see a bill for plane maintenance. Like a boat the happiest days are the day you buy and the day you sell it.

BTW: I have many hours in both the C206 and the Cherokee 6. I have about 1300 hrs in small planes (almost everything that has wings - from Cessna 150s to Citations, Piper Cubs to Malibus, and Beech Sundowners to King Airs) and now 8000+ in jets.

The first thing I would do is WAIT! Insurance won't let you touch either of those planes for quite a while - probably 300 hrs+, plus 20+ in type solo before you can even take passengers. As well, more than likely one or more of your family is not going to like traveling in a small plane so then your criterion has changed from a Family Truckster to something smaller and faster. I started flying when I was 15 and the first time my Mom every rode with me was sitting in 1st Class being served lunch.

She's been in small planes - my uncle had a C310, then a MU2, Merlin, King Air C90 and a finally a Citation II. She didn't even like flying in the Citation. Your wife and/or the kids may not like traveling with out Flight Attendants, a Lav and A/C. Hell, I remember sitting in the back of a Baron when I was 10 and yakking all over my Dad's coat - but I kept going because I wanted to be an airline pilot - because I'm lazy.

Big planes are for traveling - small planes are for fun. Ask any airline pilot what he would like to buy and you will hear - Stearman or Piper Cub.

Just remember this:

<img src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_SHj1lk_e2XQ/SOIxCNqHJVI/AAAAAAAAF28/J8j5hsw2J8w/s400/JFK_Jr_2.jpg align="left" height="303"><img src="http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2006/11/06/business/600_penguin.jpg">

They both look good in a Tuxedo, but neither can fly worth a crap.

Get an Instrument rating right after you get your private. And get some actual time with a CFII, not "Under the Hood" time - it's not the same.

 

[CL65 Captain]

Also the high-wing planes are cooler on a hot day.

Ha!... Having spent many days flight instructing in both, neither are cool on a hot day. :tongue:

 

[jukngene]

Ha!... Having spent many days flight instructing in both, neither are cool on a hot day. :tongue:

^^^I agree! The Captain makes some very good points, except for my neighbor, a retired United Airlines Airbus Captain, who says that as far as he is concerned, one engine is an emergency! I still have not been able to get him to go flying in our Cardinal.

 

[CL65 Captain]

^^^I agree! The Captain makes some very good points, except for my neighbor, a retired United Airlines Airbus Captain, who says that as far as he is concerned, one engine is an emergency! I still have not been able to get him to go flying in our Cardinal.

As far as I'm concerned. An Airbus is an emergency - the tails keep failing off.

If an't Boeing, I an't going. :biggrin:

 

[CL65 Captain]

. I won't need a commercial rating, unless I plan on being a pilot for hire (I haven't ruled that out, but it isn't on my radar in the foreseeable future).

No!!!!!!!!!!!! Don't do it. EVER.

To all those who know my story - the saga continues. Displaced back to First Officer last year, today I passed my re-upgrade checkride and am back to Captain. However, the airline just announced they are parking half our fleet starting in April so that means back down to First Officer next spring and then furloughed sometime in 2012. This job sucks! Don't ever consider flying for a living. Oh, I have friends that were flying Corp too and they were out the door on the street last year.

 

[NSX-Files]

^^^I agree! The Captain makes some very good points, except for my neighbor, a retired United Airlines Airbus Captain, who says that as far as he is concerned, one engine is an emergency! I still have not been able to get him to go flying in our Cardinal.

I absolutely love the Cardinal - my favorite airplane of all time! Runner-up is the Rockwell Commander 112. Anyways, to the OP, I always preferred Cessnas because two doors are more convenient and I like to watch the ground go by. But you should look at the true costs of ownership as already stated. Figure out the break-even point between renting vs ownership. You have to have the plane in the air a certain number of hours per year to justify the costs. There are plenty of books (I have a two volume set of Consumer Aviation's Used Aircraft Guides that has thorough reviews of most light airplanes. Get a copy and you'll be able to compare them on paper. As others have said, see if you can test fly both and see which you prefer. The lure of owning your own plane is strong for most new pilots but the reality is that you likely won't use it enough to make buying worthwhile.

 

[jukngene]

As far as I'm concerned. An Airbus is an emergency - the tails keep failing off.

If an't Boeing, I an't going. :biggrin:

Actually, he was a reserve captain on the Trip 7 before he was bumped to the Airbus, and he said that was his all-time favorite aircraft, so I'm sure he would agree with you.:smile:

 

[robr]

What about time-sharing a plane? My old boss went in on a plane with a bunch of other guys and they would all split the costs and work out a schedule for who got the plane when.

 

[Gofastguy]

+1 on above. I've been thinking of getting into flying (wanted to since I was a kid) and a freind that belongs to a flying club is taking me up and letting me get the feel of it...more like getting the flying bug, really. Anyhow, the club splits all the insurance and maintenance, etc... Sure, Its not yours, but as stated above, if you're not flying it 2 or 3 hours a day then it works out to a pretty nice deal. Oh the club has a Cessna 172 and a 182.

 

[HIJACKER]

Advice from someone who is never one private planes and is not a pilot and strictly from a cosmetic point of view, I think the lower wing plane looks MUCH better and the higher wing plane looks retarded.

 

[NSX-Files]

Advice from someone who is never one private planes and is not a pilot and strictly from a cosmetic point of view, I think the lower wing plane looks MUCH better and the higher wing plane looks retarded.

Agreed that most low wing planes are "sleeker" but the Cessna Cardinal was pretty exotic looking for a high wing. Besides, with a low wing (Piper) it really is a PITA to climb up onto the right wing to crawl into the tiny single door. Plus, when it's on fire, it's much harder to trample over the passenger to get out the door.

 

[92 white 0650]

Re: GD, I havent' laughed this hard in weeks

You're asking car guys, many of whom don't fly and almost none having owned one? Are you also getting help deciding on NSX mods from the guys down at the airport cafe??

But that aside............

Having owned a C-182 for 12 years, I have to ask: are you sure you've thought thru all the reasons to violate the 3 F rule? Seriously. :wink:

 

[fullracehonda]

do you want to have a nice view of the sky or the ground is the only real decision i see:wink:

 

[Sulley]

I had a Cardinal RG for 12 years and for the past 10 years a Bellanca Viking Turbo. I've had a license since I was 17, flew and instructed in the USAF, and Delta(retired early).

CL65 made some good points about family wanting to fly with you. My daughter's first flight in our plane was when she was 4 days old and my son was less than a month old. My son goes flying, but he usual feels airsick to some degree on most flights(he's 17 now). My daughter never had a problem.

I've flown a 206 a few times. Hauls one heck of a load, but not very fast. I've always preferred Cessna's, but that just me. I don't recall it flying any different than other Cessna's.

I still like high wings better. Both are hot in the summer, but my Bellanca just seems hotter than the Cardinal was. I think it's because the high wing shades the side windows and reduces heat gain in the cabin.

Access is much easier in a high wing. Checking fuel is tougher, you probably need to carry a small step ladder. You can stand under the wing for shade and cover from rain. View of the ground/sightseeing is better.

I would check with insurance carriers to see what minimums they will require. Tiedown/Hangar costs in your area. Rough estimate from some shops on basic annual costs(basically labor before any repairs they discover during inspection). Property taxes. This will give you an idea of fixed costs.

I don't try to justify what my plane costs. It's for my pleasure, as is my NSX. Other people dirt bike, surf,or name any other activity that people do for enjoyment. None of this stuff is an investment. If you have the time, money, and enjoy it, great. I would just make sure that you can afford to maintain it properly.

I would certainly pursue an Instrument rating after a Private. I don't think I'd bother with a Multi-engine. No one would ever rent one to you, and unless you're buying one or looking for a job, I think that would be a waste. Even though you said you're not planning to get a flying job, I would work on a Commercial before a Multi. It requires more maneuvers flown to more precise standards.

I know it's rare to find a plane like what you're talking about for rent, but I'd check around to see if you could find one. Everything I've heard says to buy something that fits most of your flying and rent for the other times. I probably fly solo 90% of the time.

Just some random thoughts,

Sulley

 

[tosugrad]

I much prefer the Piper and a Lycoming.