Pietenpol-List: Early morning flight.
Posted: Sun Jun 13, 1999 3:07 pm
Original Posted By: baileys(at)ktis.net (Robert M. Bailey)
Tammy Yedinak , Renee Beanlands , Pietenpol Discussion AIRBORN AGAIN! After 10 weeks of waiting, I finally got in the airyesterday morning. I had been flying a Citabria last summer out ofSpringbank, near Calgary. Not particularly liking winter flying, I left ituntil late March. I went back for a 1 hour checkout and was signed off. Ibooked the plane for the following weekend with hopes of getting some solotime before the fly-ins started. However, the day after my checkout, theplane was sent out to repair a leaking tank. Every weekend since I havebooked the plane, and every weekend I was told that it would be "one moreweek". Fortunately, at the last local RAA meeting two weeks ago, one ofthe members mentioned that there was a PA-18-135 available for rent inHigh River, 1 hour south of my place. When I was once again informed thatthe Citabria would be one more week, I called High River.High River Flight Center is owned by a relatively young entrapeneur, KevinVarey. He has about 10 planes including an ultralight, two Zlin 142's ,172's etc. Kevin actually did my check-out and insisted I do wheellandings. This was welcome news to me as he Citabria owners prohibittedwheel landings. This Super Cub is equipped with 8.00 tires giving it quite a nose hightattitude on the ground. Further inspection revealed safety wires throughthe bungee struts to prevent the plane from collapsing if the strutfailed. Another neat feature is the swing out engine mount which ishelpful for maintenance. Continuing around the plane revealed springloaded flaps. THey are not as large or powerful as those found on Cessna172's or 180's, but do provide a reasonable degree of lift and speedreduction on final.High River itself is quite refreshing after flying out of the relativelybusy, controlled airfield at Springbank. I felt a lot more comfortable asit was simular to the procedures I was familiar with flying the Cessna 180on floats. There are two runways there, 06-24 is paved, 3000'x75' and14-32 is a gravel strip of the same length. The weather was perfect, sunnyand 0 winds.Getting in the plane was my first challenge, and it is harder thananything you'll do in the air
. The landing gear is right in the way soyou either have to stretch in over it from the rear, using the step, ortry and get in from on top of the tire. Part of the problem is the smallamount of space between the seat and roof as well as the narrow width ofthe cockpit. The Citabria certainly wins here. The second thing I have toremember is to wear a ball cap the next time as there is no shade from thesun in the front or top.The instruments are well placed, but the controls seem to be scattered inall the most awkward places. Throttle, fuel selector and flaps are not toobad being located on the left hand side in easy reach. Mixture is on thepanel and the electric panel is in the right wing root. Sight guages inthe wing roots are calibrated to show quantity of the 18 gallon tanks bothin the 3 point and level flight position. However, the trim is a wind uphandle located at your left hip. The trim position indicator is invisibleto the pilot. The mags, carb and cabin heat are located above the trim inan equally akward position. once again, the Citabria wins.Taxi was relatively the same althought the plane is definitely heavier anddoes not respond as briskly to braking. The heel brakes were a lot easierto use than those in the Citabria I first flew, but I still prefer toebrakes. Forward visibility is good and I do like the door arrangement thatallows flying with them open. We started the flight by applying full power and full forward stick to getthe tail up as soon as possible, quite contrary to how I had been taughtin the CItabria. The flight went well and Kevin had me fly approaches toabout 3-5' off the ground and then keep it strait and level down therunway. Next, we actually tried a couple of touch and goes. After flyingboth floatplanes and three pointers in the Citabria, it was really hardfor me to push the stick forward on landing. Next lesson was to keep theplane rolling down the runway with the tail up as long as I could beforeapplying power for a take-off. After half a dozen of those, it was back tothe hangar for the sign off. It was then out for another hour of solo circuits. The take-off and climbwere down right amazing without the instructor. I actually got to thepoint where I was greasing on a few landings. I even greased on 3 landingsin one approach . As it was getting closer to 10:30, there was a littlemore traffic, but it was still a lot easier to work this uncontrolledfield. I did make one bad bounce on what was to be the final landing.Quick application of power and a go around was all that was needed to getthings back under control.The PA-18 has far better STOL capabilities than the 7-ECA I was flying.I'm sure that the extra 20 ponies, 3' of wingspan and flaps certainlyaccount for much of this. Climb speeds are similar with the edge going tothe PA-18. However, once in the air, the Citabria is more maneuverable andcertainly faster even with the smaller engine making it a better crosscountry ship. It's also a little more comfortable. Baggage room is alsobetter in the Citabria although the 10 gallons and increased gross weightof the PA-18 give it a better range and endurance.When it comes to landings, there is no clear winner. The spring steel gearof the Citabria can certainly bounce you back in the air quick enough butit's short coupled tail tends to make it a little les prone to the dreadedground loop. The PA-18, on the other hand seems to be easy to pin on theground but you can certainly feel the yaw in any minor rudder movement. Ofcourse, I have never wheel landed the Citabria, so I can only compare themin 3-point attitude.Given the choice, I think I would favour the Citabria for it's betterergonomics and better cross country performance. Ideally, the 150 hpCitabria with flaps or even the 115 hp flap equipped Citabria might wellbe the best of both worlds. However, if short or unprepared fields are inthe future or a need to do low and slow, the PA-18 wins hands down. Therewas an amazing feeling of hovering when we deployed the 30 degrees of flapand flew alond at 40-45 mph. It was so easy to keep that speed and theview withthe door open was fantastic.Ken________________________________________________________________________________
Tammy Yedinak , Renee Beanlands , Pietenpol Discussion AIRBORN AGAIN! After 10 weeks of waiting, I finally got in the airyesterday morning. I had been flying a Citabria last summer out ofSpringbank, near Calgary. Not particularly liking winter flying, I left ituntil late March. I went back for a 1 hour checkout and was signed off. Ibooked the plane for the following weekend with hopes of getting some solotime before the fly-ins started. However, the day after my checkout, theplane was sent out to repair a leaking tank. Every weekend since I havebooked the plane, and every weekend I was told that it would be "one moreweek". Fortunately, at the last local RAA meeting two weeks ago, one ofthe members mentioned that there was a PA-18-135 available for rent inHigh River, 1 hour south of my place. When I was once again informed thatthe Citabria would be one more week, I called High River.High River Flight Center is owned by a relatively young entrapeneur, KevinVarey. He has about 10 planes including an ultralight, two Zlin 142's ,172's etc. Kevin actually did my check-out and insisted I do wheellandings. This was welcome news to me as he Citabria owners prohibittedwheel landings. This Super Cub is equipped with 8.00 tires giving it quite a nose hightattitude on the ground. Further inspection revealed safety wires throughthe bungee struts to prevent the plane from collapsing if the strutfailed. Another neat feature is the swing out engine mount which ishelpful for maintenance. Continuing around the plane revealed springloaded flaps. THey are not as large or powerful as those found on Cessna172's or 180's, but do provide a reasonable degree of lift and speedreduction on final.High River itself is quite refreshing after flying out of the relativelybusy, controlled airfield at Springbank. I felt a lot more comfortable asit was simular to the procedures I was familiar with flying the Cessna 180on floats. There are two runways there, 06-24 is paved, 3000'x75' and14-32 is a gravel strip of the same length. The weather was perfect, sunnyand 0 winds.Getting in the plane was my first challenge, and it is harder thananything you'll do in the air
. The landing gear is right in the way soyou either have to stretch in over it from the rear, using the step, ortry and get in from on top of the tire. Part of the problem is the smallamount of space between the seat and roof as well as the narrow width ofthe cockpit. The Citabria certainly wins here. The second thing I have toremember is to wear a ball cap the next time as there is no shade from thesun in the front or top.The instruments are well placed, but the controls seem to be scattered inall the most awkward places. Throttle, fuel selector and flaps are not toobad being located on the left hand side in easy reach. Mixture is on thepanel and the electric panel is in the right wing root. Sight guages inthe wing roots are calibrated to show quantity of the 18 gallon tanks bothin the 3 point and level flight position. However, the trim is a wind uphandle located at your left hip. The trim position indicator is invisibleto the pilot. The mags, carb and cabin heat are located above the trim inan equally akward position. once again, the Citabria wins.Taxi was relatively the same althought the plane is definitely heavier anddoes not respond as briskly to braking. The heel brakes were a lot easierto use than those in the Citabria I first flew, but I still prefer toebrakes. Forward visibility is good and I do like the door arrangement thatallows flying with them open. We started the flight by applying full power and full forward stick to getthe tail up as soon as possible, quite contrary to how I had been taughtin the CItabria. The flight went well and Kevin had me fly approaches toabout 3-5' off the ground and then keep it strait and level down therunway. Next, we actually tried a couple of touch and goes. After flyingboth floatplanes and three pointers in the Citabria, it was really hardfor me to push the stick forward on landing. Next lesson was to keep theplane rolling down the runway with the tail up as long as I could beforeapplying power for a take-off. After half a dozen of those, it was back tothe hangar for the sign off. It was then out for another hour of solo circuits. The take-off and climbwere down right amazing without the instructor. I actually got to thepoint where I was greasing on a few landings. I even greased on 3 landingsin one approach . As it was getting closer to 10:30, there was a littlemore traffic, but it was still a lot easier to work this uncontrolledfield. I did make one bad bounce on what was to be the final landing.Quick application of power and a go around was all that was needed to getthings back under control.The PA-18 has far better STOL capabilities than the 7-ECA I was flying.I'm sure that the extra 20 ponies, 3' of wingspan and flaps certainlyaccount for much of this. Climb speeds are similar with the edge going tothe PA-18. However, once in the air, the Citabria is more maneuverable andcertainly faster even with the smaller engine making it a better crosscountry ship. It's also a little more comfortable. Baggage room is alsobetter in the Citabria although the 10 gallons and increased gross weightof the PA-18 give it a better range and endurance.When it comes to landings, there is no clear winner. The spring steel gearof the Citabria can certainly bounce you back in the air quick enough butit's short coupled tail tends to make it a little les prone to the dreadedground loop. The PA-18, on the other hand seems to be easy to pin on theground but you can certainly feel the yaw in any minor rudder movement. Ofcourse, I have never wheel landed the Citabria, so I can only compare themin 3-point attitude.Given the choice, I think I would favour the Citabria for it's betterergonomics and better cross country performance. Ideally, the 150 hpCitabria with flaps or even the 115 hp flap equipped Citabria might wellbe the best of both worlds. However, if short or unprepared fields are inthe future or a need to do low and slow, the PA-18 wins hands down. Therewas an amazing feeling of hovering when we deployed the 30 degrees of flapand flew alond at 40-45 mph. It was so easy to keep that speed and theview withthe door open was fantastic.Ken________________________________________________________________________________