Re: [COUPERS-FLYIN] Continuous training

[Charles Waldo]

----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----

Ron

 

  Its funny you bring this subject up! I learned to fly and have hundreds of hours in a 172. I knew it cold, and could land it anywhere anytime. I purchased a coupe about a year ago. Since then all my time was in the coupe. Well, 2 weeks ago a friend and his son wanted to go for a ride together with me. I needed 3 seats, so I rented a 172. Lucky for me I went to the airport early and spent a couple of hours getting refreshed in the habits of a 172 before they arrived! It took 6 times around the pattern before I started to feel good about my landings. The two things that "got me" where the way the 172 "floats" more than the coupe and how much I really love that trailing link landing gear over the 172's spring gear.....I agree...practice...practice...practice....

 

Chuck

94191

Ron Hynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----      

Ed, initially when I flew Alons as well as 415C's etc  they were very challenging.  I found that Both myself and my very professional {twin engined son ] had trouble even on final.  I think that may have been because we flew heavier stuff as well as float planes which of course provide a great deal more stability in gusty slow flight. Even after all these years the coupe can still keep me very wide awake landing.  I can easily see that what you say is accurate.  The Ercoupe was designed not necessarily as an aircraft that was going to be everyman's machine but was designed to prove a concept.  Walt Mooney tried to convert Fred's design to be more conventional, but the market had already shifted to Cessna when 150's became predominate in the training schools.  The numbers and the Markets tell the real story.  Notice how the Market has changed again because of "Sport Pilot".   Here in Canada, were it not for the Ultra-light movement, general aviation would have a very decided negative growth pattern.  Training schools here are as rare as hen's teeth,and no new schools have started up for several years as far as I recall.   Personally, I believe that flying everything that has wings is the best way to go.  The other alternative of course is to only fly one type exclusively.  I say this because we are all creatures of habit and our brain does what it has been trained to do [especially] when an emergency occurs. I think that it is safe to say that any and all behavior of any pilot  in the air is a result of his training, be it self training or any other kind.  I have experienced serious trouble in the air, and later back on the ground I had been quite surprise to realize that every one of my responses to the emergency were automatic responses.  It was as if I myself did not take the corrective action, but I sure recall being very quick and very accurate. Such is the result of keeping up on the training in the air.   I believe that it is just as troublesome to a Cessna pilot to try flying a "coupe for an initial few flights as it is for a "coupe pilot to try flying a Cessna for some initial few flights.. They are different machines and the "ol brain has to have time to adjust to the differences.  AND BOTH PLANES ARE NOSE WHEEL TYPES.   Incidentally Ed, when ever someone talked down the Ercoupe to me I simply mentioned that the Lockheed P38 Lightning had many of the same design features as Fred Wick's Ercoupes.    We didn't stop improving aircraft with the invention of the tail wheel, and we won't with the invention of the "sport pilot types"   Ron Hynes

==============================================================================  To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm  

==============================================================================
To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm