New Sport Pilot Questions

Greetings all...New to the forum but not new to flying. I am 51 yrs old and and am looking to get my Light Sport License. Lil about myself. Not a pilot yet but have rode in and flown a 61 Piper Colt, 2013 Cessna 172 and a 79 Piper Archer II. I Feel like I have the basics down so do not consider myself a total newbie. Here are my questions. There is 1 flight school in Peoria, IL that SP trains in a 46 Champ. Their rates are reasonable and they are about 30 min drive. My next options will be to drive 2 hrs to Chicago area where I found 3 LSA Pilot schools. 1 school trains in Cessna Skycatcher, the other two train in Evektor Sportstar

Option 1 Stay local and fly in 46 Champ (taildragger)

Option 2 drive 2 hrs and fly modern LSA (tri-gear)

Looking for advice on which platform would be better to learn on. (Old Champ) vs (Modern LSA)

Lastly the owner of one of the Chicago schools tried to telling me it would take 60 hrs to get my SP license even though the FAA min is 20??? I told him I knew 20 was on the low number but his estimate of 60 was high. Can you experienced pilots enlighten me on how many hours would be reasonable to obtain SP?

Thanks All!!

What's the best trainer depends on what you plan to do once you are a Sport Pilot. If you will mostly be flying one the new egg shaped LSA's, I would recommend training in them. If you plan on flying the old LSA eligible taildraggers, train in those. Without regard to type, I favor the closest one.

The guesses as to how long it will take are just that. The school owner is basing his number on his experience, that may or may not be representative of your ability. From my experience, no, you will not pick up the skills as fast as a 18 y/o kid, who can probably finish in 20 hrs. with no problem. If someone tells you 60 and you finish if 40, you'll be happy, no? Perhaps a good strategy is not to set a hard number goal. Just plan for the worst and enjoy the ride.

I want to wade in here with a confirmation on flight time. As a very adult learner I have had many "extra" hours added to my training time with development of new muscle memories. Our brain development highly plastic initially become more structured in the mid 20s and continues to be less plastic with time. That said new skills can be learned just a bit longer and "harder". The biggest factor on training time (IMHO) is the frequency of lessons. Stretched out over many months it might head toward 60 hours. As has been said on this topic before - find an instructor who you feel comfortable with ( shop around) and then fully commit to the new challenge with time (naturally $$) and focus.
jim

How long it takes...Such a personal question. What takes one person a few hrs might take someone else a lot more. I soloed in 10 hrs. But not everyone can do that. To some flying is easy to others its hard, like math.
This is me but I like starting with the low and slow crowd and then go up. You learn how to feel the airplane. Its much harder for me anyway to get this feeling in say a 172. Then once you learn these slower crafts then you move up to something faster.
Just me again but I believe this is the safest and most cost effective way to approach aviation. You take it in bites so to speak. When you feel you have a mouth full you stop. I read and hear so many stories of folks trying it the other way and getting frustrated and dropping out all together.
Just my way of thinking or my 2 cents.

The Champ is a fun and simple and cheap way to learn to fly.
If someone tells you it will take 60 hours, it seems to me one of 3 things:
1 The person has little confidence in their ability as an instructor.
2 He is try to discourage you since you are a basic student and don't represent as much return.
3. He wants to drag you out for the maximum revenue for him.

.

I do not believe this poster once mentioned PP certificate. Why does everyone push the PP certificate. Why not start low and slow and work your way up. I do not get it people.

I don't see anyone "pushing" the PP. At least not in THIS thread. So far. What I see is a comparison or two, but that is all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg Bockelman

I don't see anyone "pushing" the PP. At least not in THIS thread. So far. What I see is a comparison or two, but that is all.

---

Doing this is a diserves to the SP Certificate. PP and SP are so different you really can not compare the two. You need so much more training for PP then you do for SP. Sport Pilot can cover such simple things as a single seat MXL quicksilver. Telling this person that x amount of hrs was need for one person to be a PP is a waste of time. Lets compare the hrs from another SP flying something faster not from a PP. flying instruments or doing IFR or under the hood training.

The problem with it (just as with the immensely popular recreational certificate), is the time consuming/expensive part is already included by necessity in the SP training. While a few pilots might be inherently gifted and learn landings in the regulatory minimums, most will spend a bit more time getting that down. The omitted parts (mostly crosscountry navigation) are a breeze comparatively.

The second problem as maligned here, is that finding a SP rental (even with instruction) is immensely difficult. Once a commercial operation needs to insure a SP aircraft for instruction, you'll find the insurance is GOING TO BE HIGHER than much of the conventional training fleet. The reason: it's petty proportional to hull value. Your $100K 162 is going to be 3x the price to insure as your $30K 152. Believe me, I was paying $3600 or so a year for the latter when I was handling leasebacks for a flying club.

SP certification currently makes sense for only those who either: are disinclined to get a medical *OR* who already have access to a LSA aircraft. Otherwise, it's not really getting you anything. I'm not PUSHING anything, I'm just telling you why it's not being immensely popular.

Thanks for the replies so far. Bill I agree with you assessment about why one school is telling me 60 hours. I questioned the owner of that school about that very subject in an email. His answer was that was the "norm" for his school and they were not in the business to rip people off. I said thanks, but no thanks and crossed them off the list of schools I am considering. I have a discovery flight at one of the other schools in a Evektor Sportstar set up for next weekend. Talked to the owner at length on the phone and so far its positive. He has 6 CFI's working for him. I will give an update here once I get done with my discovery flight and decision on this school. My plans are to fly 2-3 times a week once I pick my school. Keep those suggestions coming in as I appreciate any advice from you guys/gals that are pilots.

Thanks
Dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlyingRon

The problem with it (just as with the immensely popular recreational certificate), is the time consuming/expensive part is already included by necessity in the SP training. While a few pilots might be inherently gifted and learn landings in the regulatory minimums, most will spend a bit more time getting that down. The omitted parts (mostly crosscountry navigation) are a breeze comparatively.

The second problem as maligned here, is that finding a SP rental (even with instruction) is immensely difficult. Once a commercial operation needs to insure a SP aircraft for instruction, you'll find the insurance is GOING TO BE HIGHER than much of the conventional training fleet. The reason: it's petty proportional to hull value. Your $100K 162 is going to be 3x the price to insure as your $30K 152. Believe me, I was paying $3600 or so a year for the latter when I was handling leasebacks for a flying club.

SP certification currently makes sense for only those who either: are disinclined to get a medical *OR* who already have access to a LSA aircraft. Otherwise, it's not really getting you anything. I'm not PUSHING anything, I'm just telling you why it's not being immensely popular.

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgOoH9hQxm4


Yes I do have to agree with what you say here. We indeed do not only have a lack of LSA training fleet but SP trainers or CFI's with an LSA to airplane to train in.

But saying that there are those working on the problem. I myself am moving my training from fixed wing to rotor. I will then after I receive my certificate get an endorsement on my SP certificate to fixed wing. Why do it this way. The instructor will fly to me, so no more 4 hr drives for training. I can do a 4 hr trip to get my endorsement and then be done with it for I will already hold a SP certificate. I will then have a rotor craft endorsement and fixed wing endorsement.

My experience was somewhat differently...I stopped flying in 1971 having about 200 hrs starting in a J-3 and moving all the way to a G model Bonanza. When I started again 3 years ago in a L-2 tail dragged, it took me 14 hours to solo, unlike my first solo at. 8 hours. It will take more time than you think, but probably not 60. So much has changed in the last 20 years or so I strongly urge you to get an excellent ground school/private on line course to take while flying. Also I suggest you go with the Champ- closer, cheaper, and make you a better pilot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1600vw

......... PP and SP are so different you really can not compare the two. You need so much more training for PP then you do for SP. .........

---

I do not agree about the great differences between SP and PP. The basic training is the same. PP just adds in requirements for radio work, Simulated instrument and night and a few hours and miles to do the additional traiining. The basic aircraft operations are nearly identical depending on the type of aircraft used. The new SP does not need to start with a SP CFI or LSA. I would recommend getting two or three hours in a Cessna 150/152 for starters if you have difficulty finding a LS trainer. You do not need the LS until ready to transition for solo.

The number of hours required for proficiency can vary widely depending on the training environment. At a busy Class D airfield you may only get two or three takeoffs and landings in an hour lesson. At a good grass uncontroled field you may get 10 landings in the same hour lesson. At some airports it may take 20 minutes to get to the practice area in an LSA. At the old pea patch you may be doing ground reference maneuvers in five minutes. I have seen students take 30 minutes and more from engine start to taxi in a glass cockpit. The J-3 can easily be airborne in 5 minutes.

If you want to learn to fly an airplane the Champ is a good option. You will learn the piloting skills needed to fly the plane. You need not get all the time in the Champ however.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 1600vw

I do not believe this poster once mentioned PP certificate. Why does everyone push the PP certificate. Why not start low and slow and work your way up. I do not get it people.

---

Jeez, all I was trying to do was make a point that if you take a break in training it will cost you more flight time and money towards the rating. Some people are really touchy.

Never mind.

Its all good Jim. I understand what you are saying about taking a break in training. Thanks for your advice sir!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim Hann

Jeez, all I was trying to do was make a point that if you take a break in training it will cost you more flight time and money towards the rating. Some people are really touchy.

Never mind.

---

Sorry if I came off as being " Touchy" It just every time I read someone wanting to go after the SP certificate someone jumps in and start comparing SP to PP.

It would be like me walking into a DMV saying I want a class D license to drive my car and the man said, in order to get a cdl you need x amount of hrs and thousands of dollars.

I did not ask about a CDL.

But the training is the same. You learn to go forward, backward, shift gears, read maps, park, the training is the same so you want a CDL. It will make you a better driver.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RV12fb

My experience was somewhat differently...I stopped flying in 1971 having about 200 hrs starting in a J-3 and moving all the way to a G model Bonanza. When I started again 3 years ago in a L-2 tail dragged, it took me 14 hours to solo, unlike my first solo at. 8 hours. It will take more time than you think, but probably not 60. So much has changed in the last 20 years or so I strongly urge you to get an excellent ground school/private on line course to take while flying. Also I suggest you go with the Champ- closer, cheaper, and make you a better pilot.

---

What on-line course would you recommend?

Hi Sempfi. I'm a 72-year old in training for Sport Pilot and have just over 70 hours; I'm within a couple hours of taking my check-ride. I've flown several different planes in the course of my training, some of which you mentioned.

Why do I have over 70 hours and no ticket yet? In a word, Cessna C162. My first 50+ hours were in a 162 and after a little experience with other planes, I can tell you STAY AWAY from it - it is a PIG with wings. It is top-heavy, has an abysmal useful load, and gives very little tactile feed-back to your inputs. The rudder pedals are extremely stiff and take altogether too much pressure; very easy to overdo input.

I only learned all this by flying some other planes. I basically gave up on the C162 and the instructor I was flying with when I got my own plane. I flew about an hour of pattern work with another instructor in his Grumman Cheeta (a nice old low-wing 4-seater). Then we climbed into my plane, a Zenith CH601 XLB (a newer, nicer low-wing 2-seater) for about another hour. Then he got out and told me to take it around the field by myself.

Once I got into a decent plane with an instructor who was looking for "consistently safe" instead of "consistently perfect" I was flying solo within 2 hours. In planes I had never even sat in before! In the next two weeks, I logged more than all my requisite solo-time and cross-country time, and even flew my plane solo 550 miles to my "home" airport.

I've lately flown a couple of hours in a 3rd instructor's Evektor Sportstar Harmony (a real dream-machine low-wing 2-seater). I can tell you that plane just almost flies itself! I thought my plane was (and is) great, but the Harmony blows it away! I'll be taking my check-ride in this plane.

Bottom line - you should be OK with whatever you choose, as long as you stay out of the Cessna 162. The old Champ will likely be a good traineer, and I doubt you'll have any real problem transitioning from it to any other plane after you get you certificate. The principles of flying are the same for all planes; just some details of handling and avionics differ.