Train in 172 pa28, for lsa license?

[B747]

I can't find near my location any lsa training, so my qustion is I have a third class medical certificate, can I train in a regular single engine aircraft dual and solo , and only the exam I'll take in a lsa aircraft? What are the limitations and what are the minuses?

[drseti]

You will of course want to be proficient in the plane in which you take your checkride. In my experience, to accomplish this most Cherokee or Skyhawk pilots need about five hours of dual (and an equal number of hours of ground instruction on the plane's systems and procedures). So, in addition to the required two hours of dual in preparation for the checkride (which is supposed to be flown in the checkride aircraft), plan on a bit of extra transition training. These birds fly differently!

[jnmeade]

I think you exaggerate the transition time needed, especially as you imply this is dual or instructed time. If you mean total time, counting dual and solo, it would be better to say so. Even then, it may be too much.

If the planes are similarly equipped, what is different to learn? Does the LSA altimeter read differently than the GA version? No. Does the radio tune differently? Probably not very much a few minutes with the manual and some knob turning. If your implication is that most GA are steam gauge and most LSA are glass and that takes longer, you should say that. Even so, 5 hours is a long time. It's important to not confuse different presentations with different results. An ASI, VSI, etc. still mean the same no matter how they're displayed. How to adjust them - yes that needs to be covered.

If you mean that an LSA with glass has an HSI and the GA doesn't, then that's not a fair inclusion in the transition time - that's an additional skill to be learned and would be if an HSI was put int he GA plane.

If you mean an LSA flies differently than a GA, that is, for the most part, a canard, As we all know, most of the very oldest GA planes would qualify as LSA and no one thought they were "different" then. The issue is to be able to fly the airplane accurately and precisely on the low end of the speed spectrum and the backside of the power curve. So, if a person's experience is with Piper Cub, they already know the things that would let them fly an LSA well (unless they are determined to drive it on). If they fly a C150 and touch down with the stall horn chirping, they can already land the LSA. The difference, if any, with the PA 28 is because it is a low wing it stays in ground effect longer and gives the appearance of landing differently, but those of use who learned to fly Cessna and then transitioned to Pipers or vice versa did not agonize over it. A couple of landings and we probably had the mechanics about right.

[jnmeade]

One wonders why, in your situation, you don't just go for the private, but that is your call.
If you can find anyone to train you in a Piper Cub, Aeronca Chief, Ercoupe and a few other LSA compatible standard airplanes, maybe you can kill two birds with one stone. Could even get a tailwheel endorsement. May be hard to find that opportunity.
If you spend enough money transition training between airplanes, you may be as well off to go for the private and do your own transition training later.
One of the benefits of training as you propose is that you must use a Subpart H CFI and if you ever do decide to go for a private all the time will count. If you use a Subpart K CFI and later decide to upgrade your certificate, you won't be able to count that time.

[drseti]

I think you exaggerate the transition time needed,

That is, of course, your opinion, to which you are entitled. My numbers come from having transitioned a couple of dozen Private Pilots to LSA, and is based upon my observation of their comfort level in the plane (performing to PTS levels of proficiency).

If the planes are similarly equipped, what is different to learn? <snip> If your implication is that most GA are steam gauge and most LSA are glass and that takes longer, you should say that.

You just said it for me, so -- thank you! Yes, the 172 and Warrior jockeys I've transitioned have generally not seen an EFIS and EMS before, and that takes up a good part of the transition training.

If you mean that an LSA with glass has an HSI and the GA doesn't, then that's not a fair inclusion in the transition time - that's an additional skill to be learned and would be if an HSI was put int he GA plane.

Remember, we're talking not just about being safe enough to fly the plane, we're talking here about being able to pass a checkride. The DPE is expected to verify that you can safely operate all the equipment in the flight test aircraft. If that plane does contain an HSA, a CFI can't honestly sign off a student for a practical test in that aircraft unless he or she has taught use of the HSI.

The issue is to be able to fly the airplane accurately and precisely on the low end of the speed spectrum and the backside of the power curve. So, if a person's experience is with Piper Cub, they already know the things that would let them fly an LSA well (unless they are determined to drive it on). If they fly a C150 and touch down with the stall horn chirping, they can already land the LSA.

So far, I agree.

The difference, if any, with the PA 28 is because it is a low wing it stays in ground effect longer and gives the appearance of landing differently.

And it's the Cherokee pilots who seem to have the greatest difficulty transitioning. That is because the PA-28 is extremely forgiving of airspeed variations on final. Assuming the runway is long enough, you can come in anywhere from 50 to 90 knots and the plane will pretty much land itself. You can flare high and, because of the inertia, the plane will settle to the runway pretty gently. Not so in a PiperSport, Flight Design, SportStar, Gobosh, etc. In those, airspeed control on final is very critical, and if it hasn't been taught (or hasn't been learned, because the pilot was flying a plane that just doesn't care), then it takes a couple of hours of landings to get that skill mastered.

When I made the move to LSA four years ago, I had spent the previous 30 years flying mostly complex Beechcraft. Even though I had started out in a Champ, that was many decades ago, so I had acquired a completely different flying style. So, I really needed that five-hour transition (plus ground instruction to learn the glass panels). Of course, I was in my sixties making the transition; a younger pilot might well do so more quickly. Bear in mind too that, since I was intending to instruct in LSA, I set pretty high standards for myself. But, I would hope anyone transitioning would have equally high standards, and be willing to spend the bit of extra time acquiring not just competence, but mastery.

I know we have others on this forum who have transitioned from Cessnas and Cherokees to LSAs. I'd like to hear about their transition training experiences.

[jnmeade]

I think you confirmed my suspicion that you were giving a "worst case" scenario, comparing apples to oranges. I think it would be more accurate to say transition takes from a couple of hours to perhaps 10, depending on the specific case, for example:.
X hours to fly the airplane (depends on what was flown and what will be flown) - probably 1-3 hours.
Y hours ground to learn LSA glass if not already known - 2 hours at most if the instructor has his act together. We're not talking about ADF and NAV radio work, after all.
Z hours air to learn glass if not already known. - putting it to use while doing other flying, so not much time, just have to figure out how to change altimeter, call up various displays, etc.. More familiarization.
AA hours to learn aircraft systems (about 30 minutes of ground discussion, if that, for most transitions).

So - it's quite conceivable that a person who flies a Piper Cub or Aeronca Chief may learn to fly a plain Kitfox in a couple of hours. What's different? The engine and the feel.

A person going from a Cherokee 6-260 with steam gauges to a CTLSfi with dual Dynon's will have to learn to land differently, a different engine and fuel management system, and a different panel. That person probably needs a couple hours in the air and a couple of hours on the ground and then a number of hours of solo practice. That might all add up to 10, but maybe half needs to be dual. And, much of that 10 hours can be practicing other skills as well.

While a person should know the airplane very well, you and I know that most DPEs are not going to use a checkride for the place to have you show that you can use the EFIS as an E6B to calculate density altitude. That can be covered quickly and let the student develop the skill on his own.

[ct4me]

FWIW... I had about 32 hours in a C152 (solo'd in 25). I switched to the CTsw to finish up my PPL. According to my logbook, I did about another 15 in the CTsw before my instructor let me solo. (there was a 3 month break and change of instructors).
Aren't insurance companies requiring 5-10 hours for LSA transistions, regardless of prior experience? How about rental familiarity hours for first-time LSA renters?

[drseti]

So - it's quite conceivable that a person who flies a Piper Cub or Aeronca Chief may learn to fly a plain Kitfox in a couple of hours.

Although it's not inconceivable for some, I think it's important to emphasize that transition training requirements are highly individual. Just as you can't say in advance how many hours a student pilot will need to solo, or to be ready for the checkride, you can't set a fixed number of hours for a transition to LSA. It must be competency-based; YMMV.

Jim, just curious, how many hours of training did you feel you needed to transition from the Citation to an LSA? I know there was a lot of positive transfer of skills and knowledge, but how much additional technique did you have to learn?

[drseti]

Aren't insurance companies requiring 5-10 hours for LSA transistions, regardless of prior experience?

Yes, Avemco was the first to establish such a requirement (though I understand they are not currently writing new LSA policies ). They required 5 hours of dual for anyone, regardless of ratings or experience.

How about rental familiarity hours for first-time LSA renters?

The FAA has an advisory circular outlining specific transition training recommendations. AC 90-109 is available on my website at http://avsport.org/docs/ac/AC90-109.pdf, and forms the basis for what I require of rental customers.

I offer a three-day transition course for Private pilots or above downsizing to LSA. It conforms with AC 90-109, and satisfies my insurance company, as well as fulfilling a flight review and entire phase of FAASTeam Wings training. Curriculum at http://avsport.org/about/downsize.htm. Jim will probably say this is overkill, but hey, my airplane, my rules!

[jnmeade]

I had no insurance requirements to meet.
I hadn't flown the Citation for a year or so when I started flying the CT. I had been flying a T210 a lot, a PA12 glider tow plane, a couple of gliders and I don't know what all else without looking it up.
The Citation skills were the importance of a stabilized approach with the airspeed and thrust right on the mark and flying the attitude.
The PA-12 helped because it had to be slowed down a lot to land in a three-point attitude and that often happened after rope drop, so there was a little transition process there. Got some rudder work on it, too.
The gliders were good because like the CT they have low wing loading and often when I first started flying the CTSW it felt more like a glider than it did an airplane. Gliders also need good pitch control on approach. Unlike a heavy airplane, where when you set it up it often seems to stay that way, gliders respond to the vagaries of wind as you descend so you are always tweaking, adjusting to keep the right aim point and airspeed and attitude.
The T210 had the most similarity in rudder response. I find some CT pilots don't want to set rudder trim. They want to hold it with their feet. OK for pattern work, I suppose (whatever good that is for) but not much good for those of us who like to fly out a ways and often climb to altitude.
In my own case, I flew a Tecnam P2008 for about 20 minutes, a Jabiru 250 for the same and my CTSW for the same before I bought it. My next flight was a ferry flight to a grass runway for the annual. My subsequent landing was probably my worst as it was in a high crosswind on a paved runway. That was a bit of a come to Jesus experience because I'd allowed myself to get lazy on crosswind landings.
I'd flown enough different avionics that I didn't need any transition there. Some book work, of course, at home and talking with other Dynon pilots.
I'd have probably benefited from half a dozen really challenging cross wind landings before I took off on my own, but in the end I got that done myself.
I'm not against transition training. I'd have gone up with an experienced pilot had there been one around. My entire point on this all is that I'm not comfortable that there is a one-size fits all box to be fit in.

[CharlieTango]

I'm not trying to dispute the importance of transition training. We tried to do a quick transition of an old time CFI into my CT but he couldn't 'get it' on a few tries and quit. He needed transition training.

When my CT was delivered I had a 30 min demo ride under my belt. John, then a 747 pilot for Japan Airlines signed me off in less than an hour even though he was scheduled to stay 2 days and train me.

My experience in very light home builts made the CTSW seem familiar right from the start. It can be highly personal, things like glider experience and experience with power and lightly loaded wings are a big plus. No or little experience under 2,000lbs GW is a negative.

Back to the thead, I recommend going for the PPL if you are training in non-LSA anyway.

[drseti]

Back to the thead, I recommend going for the PPL if you are training in non-LSA anyway.

I concur. If you already have the Class 3 medical, just go for the private. You can always fly LSA afterward (and I still recommend transition training!)

[drseti]

it felt more like a glider than it did an airplane. Gliders also need good pitch control on approach. Unlike a heavy airplane, where when you set it up it often seems to stay that way, gliders respond to the vagaries of wind as you descend so you are always tweaking, adjusting to keep the right aim point and airspeed and attitude.

I agree that glider training makes for a much safer LSA pilot. When I transitioned to LSA, I had very limited glider experience. Last summer I took a bunch more glider training, and would recommend it highly to anyone flying lightly loaded wings.