172 or Diamond?

Glory. · Post by **Glory.** » Fri Jun 09, 2006 11:25 pm

if you had the choice, would you train on a 172 or a Diamond DA20-C1 eclipse?

I think i would do the 172, due to the fact that i could claim to have time on type if it came to that, I dont know many operators that have a diamond in use...

I ask this because getting trained on the 172 is a little cheaper then the diamond, but somone else want to give me any more reasons? and please dont let your broke pockets influence your decision too much

monkeyspankmasterflex · Sat Jun 10, 2006 5:10 am

monkeyspankmasterflex · Sat Jun 10, 2006 5:14 am

THAN for the love of God.

Whatever's cheaper. If they were the same price I'd go with the Cessna. The other one looks like a something Saturn would make.

Miss Mae · Post by **Miss Mae** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 9:22 am

I instructed students for 5 years on Cessna and Diamond products. Both are good aircraft. If I were renting I'd go with a Diamond product, they are faster and more maneverable...but if you are big guy or girl you might find more comfort in the 172.

water wings · Post by **water wings** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 11:15 am

apples or oranges?

cyyz · Post by **cyyz** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:01 pm

@#$! it.. 172...

Why bother training on an eclipse? If you don't have friends, yeah diamond, if you have friends 172...

2 seats vs 4....

$$$ vs Less $$

faster and more maneverable

10 kts faster, as for maneuverability, during spins and spirals, but otherwise, going pt A to pt B, not much of a big deal, imo(and when you're building hours, speed is a negative factor in most cases)...

Take a fam flight in each and see which one you like.

As for "relevance of type," who is flying 172's in their charter business??? I think I know of 3 companys that have 172s 2 for pipe running and 1 for skydive.

If they get the twin star while you're there, I'd take that bitch in a second, price permitting, but otherwise... as water wings stated apples with worms and rotten apples... no comparison...

Spokes · Post by **Spokes** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:09 pm

I know of 2 outfits that use C172 for charter work. I am working at one of them, I know KD uses one.

cyyz · Post by **cyyz** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:18 pm

Spokes wrote:I know of 2 outfits that use C172 for charter work. I am working at one of them, I know KD uses one.

Lol, so they do, what do you guys use it for?

Hey who was the fake "CMA" called, the guy who had a 172 and you also drove the SUV for him??? Can't see him on PCC anymore.

Lurch · Post by **Lurch** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:36 pm

I have never seen "time on type" for 172 jobs. 172s are an easier A/C to fly so if you train on an C1 the conversion to 172 is nothing. I've found the Katana products more difficult to land they don't slow down and stop on a dime. 172s you can make do anything you want 120 kts full power to short final pull the power drop the flaps and still have plenty of room to stop. Try doing that with a C1 you'll float off the end of a runway.

What I'm trying to get at here is that I believe a C1 would make the transition to higher performance A/C easier in the future then a 172 ever could. A 172 flys like a shoebox with wings any idiot can fly one. I believe if you can fit in one you will find the C1 more enjoyable to fly. As for the 3 friends when your down get a checkout it will only take an hour.

cyyz · Post by **cyyz** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 12:46 pm

Lurch wrote: What I'm trying to get at here is that I believe a C1 would make the transition to higher performance A/C easier in the future then a 172 ever could. A 172 flys like a shoebox with wings any idiot can fly one.

First, not to sure about. But I'm sure some truth is in there...

Second, yup, that's why it's the trainer of choice.

BTD · Post by **BTD** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:20 pm

I am currently instructing on the Eclipse (not at empire or moncton). I'd take it any day over a 172. Ours rent for the same as most 172s. C1 is a hell of a lot more comfortable to fly, cruises at about 120kts IAS at the low end of cruise and I have seen (only briefly) 1700ft/min climb. But average this time of year with 2 big guys and full fuel is just shy of 1000ft/min. We also have the G430 GPS in ours. Gives you some experience with that. I have about 150 hrs in 172s and just shy of that in the C1. C1 all the way.

When your done your license then you can get a checkout on the 172. Thats just my opinion. 172s are still fun though. If its got wings and gets you off the ground, its all good.

Hope this helps,

BTD

jetway · Post by **jetway** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 4:42 pm

Lurch wrote:IWhat I'm trying to get at here is that I believe a C1 would make the transition to higher performance A/C easier in the future then a 172 ever could. A 172 flys like a shoebox with wings any idiot can fly one.

Yes. that's why 172 pilots take twice as long to get checked out on a Katana versus Katana pilots getting checked out on a shoebox.

That being said, it's all about money, really. No one cares what you did you did your private on. The constant speed prop on the Diamond is good background knowledge, though, should you choose to move on to complex AC. Enjoy your training.

chipmunk · Post by **chipmunk** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 5:49 pm

jetway wrote:
Lurch wrote:IWhat I'm trying to get at here is that I believe a C1 would make the transition to higher performance A/C easier in the future then a 172 ever could. A 172 flys like a shoebox with wings any idiot can fly one.
Yes. that's why 172 pilots take twice as long to get checked out on a Katana versus Katana pilots getting checked out on a shoebox.

That being said, it's all about money, really. No one cares what you did you did your private on. The constant speed prop on the Diamond is good background knowledge, though, should you choose to move on to complex AC. Enjoy your training.

Agreed!!

...and then you'll be a natural at one of these

:

. ._ · Post by **. ._** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 6:20 pm

172- on floats.

On wheels, whatever is cheapest. Single engine time is single engine time. (Unless it's a PC-12 or a Spitfire)

My $0.02.

-istp

WRX · Post by **WRX** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 7:46 pm

Our school has two and the price difference is only 25 cents for the summer.

And it is true that converting from C1 to 172 is easier than the other way around. However, I don't recommend C1 for Commercial Training. It is very hard to do spot landing. and difficult to lose altitude.

Otherwise, It is awesome plane to do spin

TC Guy · Post by **TC Guy** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 7:58 pm

chipmunk wrote: Agreed!!

...and then you'll be a natural at one of these

That is one sweet looking ride.

About time someone came up with a new muli-engine trainer that hasn't been recycled from the mid 60's.

-Guy

mellow_pilot · Post by **mellow_pilot** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 8:38 pm

C1. If you can drop that puppy onto a feild accurately, you'll have no problem with other A/C.

BTD, that's a pretty impressive climb rate, but have you ever seen 200ft/min? (with the throttle idle ofcourse

)

shitdisturber · Post by **shitdisturber** » Sat Jun 10, 2006 9:45 pm

Lurch wrote: What I'm trying to get at here is that I believe a C1 would make the transition to higher performance A/C easier in the future then a 172 ever could. A 172 flys like a shoebox with wings any idiot can fly one. I believe if you can fit in one you will find the C1 more enjoyable to fly. As for the 3 friends when your down get a checkout it will only take an hour.

A C1 isn't going to make a difference in a transition to higher performance aircraft. That 15 knot difference in airspeed is akin to saying; "driving an Impala will make it easier to transition to F1 Ferraris than a Chevette."

Go with whatever is going to be easiest on your bank account and worry about a checkout when you're licenced.

gowest · Post by **gowest** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 5:29 am

I 've seen rate of climb at 2000Ft/min on a C-172 (but VERY briefly!)

BTD · Post by **BTD** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:41 am

MP I have seen 200ft/min in a 150 at full power. LOL. In terms of procedures I don't think the C1 makes a difference from a 172. In terms of planning it sure does. It is a bitch to maintain engine temps while trying to get down to an airport. Takes much more planning ahead than a 172.

Keep in mind the C1 is not a Katana. There is no constant speed prop on the C1, but it has an extra 45 hp or so. It is just a regular IO-240 so no liquid cooling either.

I have never flown the Katana but I have heard it is like flying on the backside of the power curve all the time. The C1 Eclipse you are right out the other side. For most fresh RPP or PPL students its like strapping a rocket to your ass. As compared to a 172.

Dominic220 · Post by **Dominic220** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 1:50 pm

Pocketbook wise, whichever is cheaper of cours!

Safety wise - C1. I'd much rather be in a Composite aircraft if/when I have to put her down than a metal one.

. ._ · Post by **. ._** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 2:00 pm

Dominic220 wrote:Safety wise - C1. I'd much rather be in a Composite aircraft if/when I have to put her down than a metal one.

Why is that, Dom? Does composite absorb more energy or something?

-istp

BTD · Post by **BTD** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 5:08 pm

I don't recall crumple zones being installed on the C1s

Lurch · Post by **Lurch** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 7:06 pm

shitdisturber wrote:
Lurch wrote: What I'm trying to get at here is that I believe a C1 would make the transition to higher performance A/C easier in the future then a 172 ever could. A 172 flys like a shoebox with wings any idiot can fly one. I believe if you can fit in one you will find the C1 more enjoyable to fly. As for the 3 friends when your down get a checkout it will only take an hour.
A C1 isn't going to make a difference in a transition to higher performance aircraft. That 15 knot difference in airspeed is akin to saying; "driving an Impala will make it easier to transition to F1 Ferraris than a Chevette."

Go with whatever is going to be easiest on your bank account and worry about a checkout when you're licenced.

It's not the 15kts cruise that makes the differance it's the way the A/C handles on approach and landing.

Glory. · Post by **Glory.** » Sun Jun 11, 2006 7:57 pm

thanks alot for the replies

the school im planning on going to is moncton, and the costs are (This is including all the other ratings):

With Eclipse approx: 41,212$

with 172: 39,930