The 170 as a primary trainer.

[lhusser]

Somebody parked a beautiful little 170A out on the ramp of our local field, this isn't usually a problem, except my fiance saw it and now she wants one.

We've been thinking about getting another plane in the next 18 months and need something that she can learn on and take camping with two adults and one Malamute. It looks like the 170 is a good fit (we travel light). I had been pushing her towards a PA-22/20, but since she's seen the 170s the piper is a no-go. She thinks those are ugly.

Has anyone had experience learning in or giving primary instruction in the 170s? I'm curious how their ground handling is compared to the T-craft, Luscombes, and Champs?

[N1478D]

Hi, I bought a C150 to learn in (primary training), but always wanted a 170. Figured it would take me a couple of years to find one in the condition I was looking for. After I had soloed in the 150 a 170 came available which I bought. At that point I had two airplanes and no license, but, boy was I happy. We started trying to teach me how to fly the 170 and it wasn't the ground handeling, it was the landing attempts that made my instructor say let's finish up your license in the 150 and then we will get you checked out in the taildragger. I do believe that if I had started out in the taildragger it would have been just fine. But, with all of my limited experience in the 150, the transition to the 170 was tough at that time. Later on, without the worry about earning the pilots license it was easier. But, there was a few moments earlier on that I thought I had bought an airplane I was not going to be able to fly. Short point, if she starts off in the 170 she won't have any problems. I think it would make an excellent primary trainer.

[GAHorn]

I learned to fly in a 150. A few years later I checked out in a C120. (No comments, you guys that know the story!) Twenty-five years later I bought my 170. In between I owned an Aeronca Chief. I've got some time in a J-5 Cub, which I considered pretty easy.
Without question the Aeronca was trickier than either of the Cessnas, and the 170 is the easiest of all Cessna taildraggers.
My wife and daughters want to learn to fly, and I intend to purchase a 150 or a 172 to teach them in, and then transition them. But if teaching a primary student in a taildragger doesn't concern you, then the 170 has got to be one of the best primary trainers.
And your wife is correct. Most Pipers are ugly. Those that aren't (Malibu/Mirage) fall apart in the sky.

[C170_PA]

I soloed a 195 on my 16th birthday, my son is going to solo our 170 on his. If your wife learns in the 170, the rest will be easy. Gahorn is right the 170 is one of the easiest taildragger to learn on. Don't start her with one that has a training wheel,(nose wheel).

[Rudy Mantel]

Thousands of people learned to fly in conventional (tail wheel) airplanes.
She'll be a better pilot for learning in a 170 but be sure to get her a good instructor.
Rudy

[flyguy]

Ask the "guru"(pres P------T) why one should "not" use a classic for a trainer.

The opportunity for a serious bending of the vital parts on a conventional geared classic airplane's body increased expoentially while being operated as a primary trainer by the "primary student".

GA Horn and many others with long time involvement in flying our old classics are no doubt highly qualified CFIs and very capable of training students in a 170. Even some qualified CFIs have problems. Right Eric? The danger of "bending" increases when the instructor is not in the right seat and the novice pilot encounters a situation that is beyond his/her level of skill. Too many of these classic airplanes have bitten the dust in the last few months to ignore the sudden appearence of MR. MURPHY and his bag of tricks.

I have always felt that the basic training in a craft with a conventional gear adds extra obstacles to a students workload. The intensity of "directional control" management while changing from a flying machine to a driving machine stretches even the ability of many "licensed" pilots. For a student who is learning the many facets of becoming a pilot, the addition of the "sneaky pete" tail dragger's bag of tricks is just begging for problems. I KNOW! I KNOW! "TAIL DRAGGER PILOTS ARE REAL PILOTS!" I have flown with only three or four pilots that I would let fly solo in my "Classic". And they ain't students! I flew with a new 170 owner from way, way, way, up north who came down here to buy a 170 cabin section (gear box included!) from me. I can fly my '52 from either side so I let him take the left seat. After that flight, I told him as kindly as I could, to go back up there and get with an instructor and get competent in another plane before getting back in the saddle of his "repaired" 170!

(My fwiw,) If you feel it is vital to train a student in a tailwheel airplane, find an instructor who has one to rent or buy a throw-away one like a maule, a citabria, or cub or whatever and then when the student becomes a competent tailwheel pilot, sell the trainer and advance to the 170 of your choice. There is never any guarentee that MURPHY won't jump out of the bushes and grab you but hedge your bet. George stated exatly what my sentiments are - Train them in a C150 or C172 then graduate them to the 170 when and only when they are able demonstrate "conventional gear competency"!

[flyguy]

GAY HORN - DEENINE SAYS TU SHUT UP BOUT SAYIN UGLY AND PIPER INA SAME BRETH. SHE SOLOED AND OWNED A COUPLA THEM MILK STOOLS AND HAS A SOF PLACE FER THEM. AINT SAYIN WHER THE SOF PLACE IS

[Dave Clark]

George
You are right on about the Chief. However it was the first airplane I owned and I bought it when I had about 15hrs toward my pilots license in a Cherokee 140 in 1974. I put 150 hrs on it in the one year that I owned it before I bought my 170A in 1975. I've owned the Chief, Champs, Decathalon, a Pitts-like Jungster biplane, several C195's, and have time in many other tailwheel types including Great Lakes, Luscombe, Christen Eagle, Stinson Detroiter, Supercubs, and more. Without a doubt the Chief is the squirlliest most difficult of all. But now with over 3,000 hours most of which in tailwheels and not an incident I can attribute it to the Chief. If you can fly that little thing you can fly any of the little GA airplanes.

Sure the 170 would make a good primary trainer!!! The insurance might be a problem but it probably would be with any tailwheel airplane. In addition to having a WELL QUALIFIED instructer you should be certain that the landing gear is properly aligned and that the tailwheel is in top condition with the steering cables on the firm somewhat tight side for the most positive steering possible. The brakes should be Clevelands and in top shape also. If you could find a rental Champ with an instructor for the first five or ten hours it might help ease your mind but in reality the 170 is just a big Champ. Be conservative in what conditions you fly in and build up your abilities before your confidence. Good luck.

Dave Clark

ASEL, ASES, Comm, Inst, CFI
A&P, IA

[jon s blocker]

when I began, I learned to "drive" a C150, I got my license in one and one half months start to finish. I then bought a 7AC Champ and it took me 4hours of time before I could land it safely, (this was a problem of coordinating turns because the 150 doesn't make you use much rudder). I feel I learned to "fly" in the champ. Since then I have owned 2 Super cruisers, 2 C170s, a J3, a tripacer, a Citabria, a 250 Comanche, a full IFR C152, and a Super Cub. My favorite plane has been the 170s, by far it has been the best handling of all of these planes, but I felt that learning to "drive" the 150 made it easier for me to concentrate on basics without having to worry as much about coordination and landing techniques, in the beginning. Bouncing your first landings in a 150 is much more forgiving in the long run, than struggling with a taildragger. after you get a feel for the three dimensional world of flying, (as oppossed to the stop,go,right,left), of driving, then a transition to taildraggers is easier and safer for student and aircraft. Sorry this got so long winded, but I wanted to get my 2 cents worth in.

[n3833v]

I started in a taylorcraft , a few lessons in a champ, then to the 170. I had only 20 some hrs before the 170. I liked it and eventually bought it from the club. I have flown a 172 and it seemed so easy, but the 170 has it's bag of tricks that you always are on your toes.
John - n3833v

[flyer170]

My son and I both started the same way, we soloed in a Chief and did our first student cross country flights in the Chief. We switched to a 150 to do our radio and instrument work. I passed my check ride in a 150 and he passed his in a 172. We flew the Chief for several years after that on wheels and skis and learned how to "fly".
We have had a 170 for 4 years and it is more forgiving on landings etc. BUT it is still easier to mess up landings with a tail dragger than a nose wheel aircraft..
My two cents: Get an experienced instructor that has a lot of tail dragger time if you plan to learn in a conventional aircraft. Get the license in a trike with lessons from an experienced instructor, a little less stress.
Either way, have fun and enjoy the adventure.
Bob

[zero.one.victor]

Ihusse,if you saw that 170A at Arlington,I'll tell something you might want to keep secret from your fiance--it's for sale! A gal from my airport has struck a deal with the owner,another friend of mine, they're just waiting on the bank to hand over some money and for the airplane to get annualed.
Training--I trained in a 152,bought a 150 right after getting my ticket,and flew it for about 300 hours/2 years,then bought my 170. It took every bit of 5 hours of dual to get me to where I was safe to solo the 170 (in calm winds), 5 years and 835 hours later I'm still learning!
The 152 was a good trainer for me,another choice might be a Champ. The flight school at Harvey Field has nosedragger Cessna's and a Champ--that might be something to explore. The 170 is a good trainer but they're getting to be worth an awful lot of money so insurance for a student ain't gonna be cheap.
By the way,the gal who's buying the 170A is the same one who was on board the 170B when it was nosed over last spring at my airport by the "qualified CFI".

Eric

[wa4jr]

I am presently teaching my wife to fly in our 54 170. Lesson 3 will be tomorrow. I plan to let her solo the 170 in calm conditions off of a local grass strip...no hard surface for a while. This is all assuming I can ad her on to the insurance policy with AIG without paying the King's ransom I though about saving our 170 some abuse and getting her started off in a Champ, but I decided against it because of all the differences...stick, tandem seating, and heel brakes. Just going to keep her in the 170. I wish many times that I had started primary instruction in taildraggers. I believe that by starting off in a trike, you develop a lot of bad habits that are really hard to shake. My transistion to taildraggers after 10,000 hours in trikes made me feel like a bloomin retard for several hours. I still have a problem with the flare to work out, but that is only because at work I deal with a T-tail jet that takes a lot of pressure on the yoke...then I come back to the 170 and WHOA that elevator is sure light and REALLY sensitive. I think my wife will be doing better than I am with the same time in the 170 because that is all she will have known. I don't like to think of the possibilty of her doing a ground loop in our classic 170, but they usually are not too bad. Wingtips can be replaced and the spring steel gear with solid axles and P-Ponk mods can take a lot of student....and airline pilot landings

Buy her that 170 and get her started off right. Don't let her get started on the road to bad habits in a nose gear aircraft.

[flyer170]

Using a grass strip is a great idea, much more forgiving of little mistakes.
I'll take the grass anytime I can find it.
Bob

[lhusser]

The yellow and white 170A at AWO is the one. It does look really clean, I hope the annual goes well for her.

I'm a low time CFI, however most of my Instruction Given has been in tail wheel transition, but in a T-Craft (an outstanding trainer IMO). However, I'm no where close to being current. I had an luscombe up to about two years and haven't flown much since I sold it.

I'm pretty confident in training her once I get current/competent again, but I will seek out a very good instructor to do her first six hours or so. I'll teach her basic attitude flying, then get someone with 170 experience in to get her first couple of landings.

I'm a structural engineer and have a good friend who is an A&P. He is very good with sheet metal. Our plan is to find a project next winter and put it back together. I wouldn't insure it beyond liability, I really doubt we could even get insurance for her training. A temporary, high risk hull policy for 3 months or so would be perfect. If we bend it, then we'll fix it. Prop strikes are my real fear.

I agree, Grass is essential, pavement and radios can be learned later.