Why are Piper aircraft less popular for flight training?

[Deltawidget]

Peninsular used to run em. Toronto airways has a few archers? But other than them seems to be all 152/172, even the da20 has about the same presence in training environments. Seems like the transition from cherokee to arrow to Seneca seemed reasonable. What are people using these days for more advanced training? Or do most cpl/ifr students stay with the 152/172 all the way through?
Thanks.

Dw

[iflyforpie]

There are a number of reasons why Piper aircraft are not as popular for training.

-Lack of spin certification on many models.
-Less utility for 700 ops if the flight school also does aerial work or air taxi.
-Less downward visibility for forced and precautionaries.
-More complicated fuel systems (elec pump and left or right only).
-Less airframes and support available for the above reasons.

Also:

-The one door really sucks.
-Low wings look cooler, but grow tiring the hundredth time you climb over them.
-Lack of pitch authority makes soft field landings difficult.

I transitioned from a 152/172 to a Turbo Seminole. I didn't think it was too bad considering (I did have constant speed time from my float rating on a 172XP). I had always wondered if the wings on the bottom made a difference in how you land. I didn't ask, wasn't told, and turns out it doesn't.

[Norwich]

Perhaps another, albeit minor reason in favour of Cessna over Piper is the name recognition. Everyone on the street knows Cessna, you have to know GA at least superficially to know Piper. Flight schools have the benefit of saying the 172 has been around since Biblical times and is the most popular aeroplane ever as well. Of course, some of those same clueless people believe Cessnas are death machines from what they hear on the news so the benefit of recognition might be offset by that.

It's been a year since I've sat in a cockpit and it's been even longer since I've sat in either a 172 or Cherokee but I seem to remember that the C172 has somewhat better climb performance than the Cherokee. I wouldn't really say it's a brand thing that Piper is less popular than Cessna. Cessnas are certainly more popular for SE training but for ME Piper dominates all other manufacturers. I just think the Cherokee family isn't as well designed as the small Cessna singles and after over 50 years on the market flight schools have come to generally prefer Cessna singles. Plus, when it comes time for trainees to "graduate" to a new plane, there is a very good chance it will be a Cessna, whether it is a 177 or 182 for personal flying or a 182, float 180/185, 206, etc. for entry-level professional flying. None of these planes are particularly hard to learn to fly but 50 or 100 hours on their smaller cousin can do wonders for confidence.

[126.7_STFU]

I suppose it depends on what Piper product you are talking about? I think the Archer and Warrior are the only two which are used in conjunction with 172s on a somewhat "regular" basis. Seminole obviously for twin training.

Most of their products seem to be for cruising , not air work.

[Deltawidget]

Thanks for the replies.

I wonder if there is a noticeable increase in accidents due to the left/right fuel tanks..
By now its just automatic to switch every 15-30 mins...

The 140 spins but the warrior/archer (tapered wings) dont..

Maybe wing walks and the elec fuel pump, less parts availability just make it more expensive to
Run??

On the aspect of name recognition, yikes.. U should at least have heard of
Piper if you're starting your flight training! Kinda scary if you have put in the diligence to
Know one if the biggest (second biggest?) GA manufacturer

[5x5]

Another reason is that the Cessna singles are used by a lot of small charter companies as entry level planes for new pilots. Hauling small freight, pop and chips, etc is often done with them. Although it's more often the bigger 206, it's still the same design and familiarity is a good thing. And if you want to do float flying, it will also commonly be a Cessna 180 or 185 or 206 that is entry level. And most pipeline inspection companies use 172s for economy and visibility.

Not a strong enough reason on it's own to determine what flight school to go with, it's much more important to consider the quality of training and the company management and program. But first jobs are always a consideration.

[Colonel Sanders]

Piper Cherokees are often available for very attractive
prices. They are easy to fly, and provide very good bang
for the buck for a low-time or newly-licenced PPL!

However they are not the best short field performers,
especially when it's hot and they're heavy. They are
happiest operating off a 3000 (or longer) paved runway.

[Old Dog Flying]

I've managed 2 FTUs using PA-28-140s plus other Piper produces and when the winds exceeded 20 kts the Cessna FTU chained their spam cans down while we continued operating.

There are 2 schools here in the Fraser Valley operatin the same equipment but they are all very old machines..one is based at Langley and they operate out of a 2000' runway without problems. It is the visiting Cessnas that have trouble.

The Warrior Cadet replaced the -140 as a trainer and were spin certified,

Barney

[Colonel Sanders]

they operate out of a 2000' runway without problems

Wow - that would require some pretty low density altitudes
and some pretty sharp flying - and no obstacles! That's the
only real complaint I have about the Cherokees - their Hershey
bar wing does not work very well at higher angles of attack.
You slow it down, and the drag sucks you down. Hopefully
to a good place to land on, because even full power may not
be enough to stop the descent on the back side of the power
curve.

A guy I know, tried to take a Cherokee off a short grass strip
on a hot day a few years back. Crashed, and it actually burned.
Crushed the vertebrae of a friend of mine who was pax. Took
him years to recover (fusing operations) he's still not the same.

It is the visiting Cessnas that have trouble

Well, the Cessna pilots need to have about one tenth the
skill of your Cherokee pilots! We have a grass strip at my
home airport, parallel the paved runway. It's 1000 feet long,
and I happily land the 172 on it and easily get it stopped with
lots left over.

The long, tapered Cessna wing, IMHO, works far better at
high alpha (and on short strips) than the Cherokee Hershey
bar wing.

Short fields ops seems to be something of a lost art for
many pilots - they're used to landing on very long runways,
so they get sloppy with their takeoff and landing technique,
and end up using a lot more runway than they really need to.

Case in point: today I landed a Pitts (not known as a short
field performer) at Peterborough, Ont (CYPQ) which has a
7000 foot runway. Despite the threshold of 27 being displaced,
I was stopped and turned off at the first intersection, which
is 1600 feet according to the CAP diagram.

It seems to be SOP for so many pilots to approach much too
fast, and float for at least the first 1000 feet of the runway.

I wince when I see someone try to force an aircraft onto
the runway.

[Shiny Side Up]

Piper Cherokees are often available for very attractive
prices. They are easy to fly, and provide very good bang
for the buck for a low-time or newly-licenced PPL!

This is very true of the 140, and to some degree the larger hershey bar winged siblings. Unlike Cessna though, there are a lot of "Piper guys" though, many who pride themselves on not flying Cessnas or being "low wing only pilots" which I always found to be a strange phenomenon. I've never heard someone call themselves a "high wing only pilot" before. Consequently the higher powered versions and especially the tapered wing ones tend to have an inflated price.

Not mentioned yet is the fact that Piper has a lot more competition in its market. If you want an all metal high wing four place airplane, with the exception of the rare Luscombe, you're pretty much after a Cessna. If you're "Low wing only" however, Piper has some big competition with Beechcraft and the orphaned Grummans, not to mention the prevalence of the Vans homebuilts and Mooneys, to say nothing of the more recent Cirrus and Diamond incursions into the market. As of late one might add, Piper has not been as stable as Cessna for supporting its product, the recent demise of the Piper Sport aircraft has certainly hurt their market share when it comes to the training market, as a result new Pipers aren't appearing as much as fleet aircraft, though the Arrow still seems to be the main choice for the "Complex Aircraft" requirements south of the border since Cessna no longer has any of their overly complex retractables in production, but has notably added their own low wing competition with the addition of the Corvalis to their line up.