Archive for category Training
Finally A Nice Day
So we finally got a nice weekend of sunny weather here in London. Blue skies forecasted for both Saturday and Sunday with one booking on each day. I decided to get some cross country time in by planning a trip to Chatham (CNZ3) which is a 5,000′ uncontrolled strip 60 NM southwest of London. I had a direct tailwind heading to Chatham and a not-so-fun direct headwind coming back. I managed to clock my fastest groundspeed yet at a whopping 150 knots. Yeah yeah.. so it’s not really that fast for a lot of people, but for a little tiny DA20, that’s pretty good! Anyways, I’ll try and get in another cross country flight on Sunday which will boost my XC time over 23 hours PIC. Looking forward to the long cross country that I get to do as part of my CPL requirement (3 intermediate stops and at least 300NM in distance).
Here is the evidence.
Followed by the shear excitement derived from such speed.
First Experience with Glass
To my surprise, my flight school recently received a brand new Diamond DA20 equipped with the Garmin G500 glass cockpit. Apart from flight sim, I have no glass time but I’m pleased to say that I’ve fallen in love.
Aside from this new aircraft, the only other glass cockpits reside on the DA40’s at my flight school, which rent for close to $200/hour. Needless to say, I’ll stick with the $145/hour DA20 even if it means the old six pack steam gauges. But now I have another option and I’m sure it’s going to be tough to get rental time on it.
The G500 is the little brother to the G1000 system that Garmin is famous for. It’s not as complicated and is only certified on single and multi-engine aircraft under 6,000 lbs. It consists of two 6.5 inch LCD displays: the Primary Flight Display (PFD) on the left and the Multifunction Display (MFD) on the right. Between these two displays, pretty much every bit of flight information imaginable is at your finger tips… at least that’s what it seems like to a low time Garmin virgin like myself!
The G500 grabs it’s GPS information from the GNS430 which is something I’m already used to. This is the GPS/avionics system installed on the other DA20’s at our flight school. All in all, it’s quite the system. I’m sure that when I get a chance to fly the DA40’s, I will marvel at the awesomeness of the G1000, but for now, the G500 will do just fine.
So how is it to fly with the G500? Well it’s a bit weird getting used to. I found myself wanting to look at the standby instruments because they were what I was used to looking at. I find that executing manoeuvres such as steep turns are a little bit trickier as well. I’ve got to be switching my view from outside to inside and then to back outside, but I find myself searching for where to look on the displays. I’m not completely comfortable yet with the system but it will come in time. Navigating your way around the various options is pretty simple to do. It’s the same sort of system on the GNS 430 which utilizes scroll wheels to change fields. I’ll have to explore all of the options one day when I have the time because there’s so many of them (traffic alerting, terrain alerting, synthetic terrain vision, etc.)
To end on a completely unrelated note, here is an audio file I came across recently. It’s old but it’s still funny. Enjoy. Cockpit Announcement
Winter Training [Video]
I think it is finally starting to hit me that I’m training for a commercial pilot licence. To think that I’ve been dreaming of being paid to fly and now it’s all starting to seem within reach. Last weekend marked a winter miracle here. Both Saturday and Sunday were beautiful and sunny with few clouds in the sky. The wind was a bit gusty but you couldn’t ask for a more perfect winter weekend to fly. This gave me the perfect opportunity to get some dual instruction time in on the first day and practice solo the next.
My last handful of flight have been solo cross countries or solo airwork sessions. It was nice to have 200 lbs of knowledgeable instructor sitting to my right as I went through the manoeuvres that I would eventually have to demonstrate to an examiner. Steep turns, slow flight, stalls, and a spiral dive recovery to finish it all off. I’ve mentioned before that the CPL steep turn exercise is different than the PPL exercise. For the CPL, we do a turn through 180º at 45º of bank and then flip the wings back the other way to turn another 180º back to the heading we started on. It’s a little more complicated and involves more manipulation of the controls that the standard 360º steep turn.
Another new experience was a regular turn with 30º of bank in slow flight. For my PPL flight test, I only had to demonstrate a rate one turn in slow flight. This is a standard turn that will bring the aircraft through 360º in 2 minutes every time. It’s a fairly shallow bank angle and doesn’t require much thinking to get right. That said, when you’re hanging in the sky at 40 kts and have to execute a turn with 30º of bank, it’s a little tougher. The first time I tried, the nose dropped a good bit and the airspeed picked up 10 kts at least. Second time the nose still dropped but I tried my best to hold it up there while not stalling. Third time was the charm and wow does that airplane turn when you do it properly. I would estimate it can get through 360º in around 10 seconds. That said, a higher bank angle at a lower airspeed and nose high attitude is a lovely equation with the word “spin” on the other end of the equals sign. It’s a rapid turn and requires quick reflexes to keep the airspeed and altitude pegged while still operating safely. Something I’ll be practicing lots in the future.
As for the ground portion of the CPL, Transport Canada requires me to have 80 hours of classroom instruction and a letter of recommendation to write the written exam. Since my flight school isn’t currently offering CPL ground school, I’m doing mine online with pilottraining.ca. They’re run by Harv’s Air out in Steinbach, Manitoba. I plan to write up a thorough review of their CPL product when I’ve delved a little deeper into everything it has to offer. So far though, I’m impressed with the amount of content. They’ve got slides, videos, audio, and quizzes for each chapter along with a bunch of other useful stuff. I will say though that the content delivery method is a little rudimentary – they’re using .swf files to deliver powerpoint slides. I would much prefer to view a PDF file. I managed to deduce that the first video was made in 2003 so it may be a bit dated, but as long as the rules haven’t changed, it still works just fine.
Below is a video I took of the airwork practice I mentioned above. I used some stick-tack to fixate my iPhone on the right wing. You’ll notice there’s lots of vibration but until I can get a proper mount, I’m afraid that’s as good as it’s going to get. About the only interesting thing to watch is the aileron and the right flap that you’ll see comes down during the second stall and during slow flight. The high pitch whine that you hear is the stall warning horn. And yes, it’s still that loud and annoying with a headset on.
A Day For Airwork
Posted by Colby in GPS Tracks, Training on December 14th, 2009
With all of the cross country flights I’ve been doing lately, I thought it would be a good day to go up and practice some airwork instead. It’s been a while since I worked on my steep turns and slow flight so a brush-up flight was in order. My handy iPhone recorded my track, altitude, and speed for this one so you can see my track overlayed onto google maps. Crosswind component was up there around 16 kts so I did two circuits before calling it quits.
Overall a good flight. Need to practice my commercial steep turns though. They consist of a steep turn 180º followed by a roll out and a reverse steep turn 180º back to where you started – all in one smooth motion. They’re looking passable right now but I can do better. You can see them as ‘S’ shapes on the GPS track below.
I See Trees of Green, Red Roses Too
A few days ago I received my new medical and licence in the mail. If you read my post from a few weeks ago, you’ll know that I was marked as failing my colour vision test on my last medical examination. As far as I’m aware, I can tell the difference between red and green, so I had to take a different test (which I passed) and send in the results. I was restricted to day VFR flight only which you can see in my other post on the pictures of the medical/licence I posted.
We recently switched to a passport type aviation booklet that holds all of our licences in Canada. It has pages for renewals and type/rating endorsements. When you get your licence/medical renewed, Transport Canada sends you a little sticker that you can place in the next blank spot. Along with those little stickers, they send you a bill for $55, which if you don’t pay, they turn your debts over to the Canada Revenue Agency (our taxation authority). Right now I work for CRA on internship, so I have to admit it was a little tempting to try and let the invoice lapse. Obviously I would never do that, but you can’t blame a guy for not wanting to pay those ridiculous fees.
Lately I’ve been flying smaller cross country flights in order to build my XC hours. You need 20 PIC XC hours as a requirement for your CPL here in Canada. As of last weekend, I’m at 19.8 hours. There are a few small uncontrolled airports within about 50NM of CYXU, so they make for the perfect 1.2 hour XC flight. No need to make a double booking at my flight school in order to go somewhere. Last weekend I got to fly both Saturday and Sunday. I can count the number of times that has happened on one hand.
Winter is fast approaching so the cancellation rate on my flight bookings is going to go up over the next month. Our first snowfall came two days ago when Southern Ontario was blanketed by a huge storm. A Colorado Low swept through bringing that lovely green, orange, and red pixelated radar screen that I’ve come to loathe over the years. The winds aloft at 3000′ were 57 knots. The low stratus was whizzing by above our heads at a pretty mighty clip.
My logbook just went over 120 hours total time. To be honest, that number is low for someone who has been flying for 27 months or so. If you’ve got the money and time, you can be fully licensed and working as a pilot in that time frame, but I’m not one of those people. I’m a full time student, albeit on internship right now which has given me some extra time/money before I graduate. Ideally, I’d like to have my instructor rating and be teaching by the time I graduate university. I need 100 PIC hours, amongst other requirements, before I can obtain my CPL. As of today, I’m halfway there with 50.1 hours in command. I can’t wait to get this flight test out of the way!
On a side note, I wanted to plug a new aviation blog that I’ve recently started following. Ian is a B777 pilot for British Airways and has started writing about his experiences. The great thing about the aviation community is that most people genuinely love sharing their passion for flying. It’s even better when pilots in such a senior position in the industry reach out and motivate the up and coming students. Getting advice from someone like Ian or Doug is invaluable in what is arguably one of the toughest industries to establish yourself in. So, I just wanted to welcome Ian to the blogosphere, and you should definitely be reading his posts if you’re interested in aviation or are an aspiring aviator yourself. Both Ian (The Flying Scotsman) and Doug (From The Flight Deck) are listed in my blogroll in the right sidebar, along with my other recommendations.
A Peek Around the Cockpit [Video]
Here’s a short video of the DA20’s cockpit in flight. I’m on the return leg of a cross country flight from Goderich (CYGD) to London (CYXU) at 5,500′. Groundspeed is a massive 130 knots – pretty fast for a DV20.
It should be noted that although the aircraft is called a DA20, it’s symbol on the flight planning form is actually DV20. I think that DA20 was already taken by a Dassault Falcon 2000.
Cat. I Screw Up
I got my category III medical back in 2007 when I was working on my PPL, but now that I’m working towards my CPL, I needed to go and get my category I medical. There aren’t many differences between the two categories. For starters, the cat I needs to be renewed yearly whereas the cat III can be renewed every five years. Since this was my first time getting a cat I, I also needed to get an audiogram (hearing) and EKG (heart).
As far as I was aware, I had passed all of the tests I was given and my doctor said I would be receiving my new medical sticker in the mail within a month, depending on how busy Transport Canada was. Within two weeks, I got a little brown envelope in the mail with TC’s return address on it. I opened it up to find a letter and no renewal stickers. To my surprise, the letter said that I had failed my colour vision test and I was being issued a restricted medical and licence.
This was news to me. My doc told me there were no concerns and I should expect my medical in a months time. Weird. So I call my doctor’s office and explain the letter (which he also got a copy of) and he is just as confused as me. He tells me to come in and take a different colour vision test that is more accurate.
When I get there, he explains that there was a mixup on my chart and I was marked as having incorrectly guessed that last four Ishihara tests in his book. If you’ve never seen what an Ishihara test looks like, here’s a link to one.
I was under the impression that each page in his book contained a number within the coloured circles. The reality was that each of the last four pages contained no number. I noticeably struggled to find a number with those last four tests, so I just guessed a number that I thought I might have seen. The doc usually gives people a second chance if they didn’t know about the “no number” possibility but I was administered this test by the nurse, so I never got that chance. I was marked as having four mistakes out of 21, which is above the threshold. The doctor never double checked this before he sent in the medical form so I was marked as a fail.
My new licence restriction limits me to day VFR only with two way radio communication into and out of control zones. With winter fast approaching and daylight hours virtually gone by 17:00, this severely restricts the available time I can fly – I worked until 16:00 every day.
We sent in a new Farnsworth colour vision test about three weeks ago, so I should hopefully be receiving an unrestricted licence and medical in the mail by early December. I’ve attached pictures of my restricted licence and medical. They’re stickers that you place in the new booklet type licences.
My instructor said it took him 6 months to get a”corrective lenses required” restriction removed from his licence when he was still in training. I really hope my problem doesn’t take that long to fix.
Landing in YXU [Video]
Posted by Colby in Cool Stuff, Training on November 16th, 2009
I took a video a while back of myself approaching London, joining the circuit, and landing. It’s nothing terribly exciting and you may want to just skip ahead to when I get into the circuit, but I thought I would post it anyways. The video is from my iPhone so you won’t find any HD or HQ buttons on youtube.
The yawing at the end is actually a slip – I was a bit higher than I’d liked. You’ll also hear the stall horn go off just as I start the flare. Wasn’t a bad landing at all if I do say so. Opinions?
The Sticky Note Method
Posted by Colby in Cool Stuff, Instructional, Training on November 7th, 2009
One of the first things you learn as a pilot is that a good landing stems from a good approach. In the jet world, pilots aim for a stabilized approach whereby the pilot configures the aircraft to travel at a certain airspeed and rate of descent straight down to the threshold. I recently read an article (that I can’t seem to find anymore) stating that the term “stabilize” really didn’t apply to a prop driven aircraft. The reason being that jet engines have an inherent lag between adding power in the cockpit and seeing that throttle movement translate into actual power. Jet engines need time to spool up if they are idling and pilots may not have this time if they need to execute a missed approach. Thus, power is left on during the approach to help reduce the lag time if a spool up to full power is ever needed.
In the prop world, the article suggests that the term “collected” is more appropriate. We want to configure the pitch and power settings so that we’re descending at an optimal rate, and at an optimal speed, as outlined in the aircraft’s operating handbook. So how do we know exactly what power setting to use and exactly how many degrees of nose down pitch to apply in order to touch down at a certain point on the runway which could be miles and miles ahead of us? For a lot of people, it’s simply a matter of using your gut feeling to configure the aircraft when it feels right. We have a mental picture of what things should look like at certain times and distances from our waypoint and based off these pictures, we act accordingly. This is how I’ve always set up my approaches and it’s how we usually learn. However, I recently learned of a pretty easy way to guarantee hitting your landing target that takes all of the guesswork out of approaches. Some may call it by another name, but I have dubbed it “The Sticky Note Method”.
Imagine that you’re coming to the end of a long cross country flight and you’re ten miles out. Tower clears you to a straight in – Runway 33. Using this method, you’ll be able to hit your target every time… even from ten miles away. Here’s how it works.
What you’ll need: a few sticky notes and the inside of the windshield should be nice and clean. On a day when you can take a plane up and just practice your flying, trim the airplane in straight and level flight. Reduce power so that you maintain straight and level flight, but your airspeed should be exactly the same as it is on final approach. Configure the airplane how you would normally (ie. full flap, gear down if applicable, etc). Use the minimum amount of power possible to keep the airplane at this desired speed and straight and level. Make sure you’re trimmed out.
Take a sticky note and tear off a small amount from the adhesive part (the top). Place this little dot on the windshield in front of you so that when you’re sitting normally in your seat, the dot sits right at the level of the horizon. This may take a few tries as you probably won’t get it right on the first try. Keep readjusting the dot until the stickiness wears off, or you get it right. As best you can, try and memorize this position on the windshield. For practice sake, leave the sticky there while you shoot some approaches and test this theory out.
Let’s get back to our situation. You’re on final and a ways back from the runway. Once you reduce power and start your descent, pitch the airplane in order to move this dot over the spot on the runway where you want to start your flare. Keep in mind that your touchdown point will be beyond this point, so based on your aircraft’s characteristics, place the dot however many hundred feet before your touchdown point you deem necessary. The spot on the ground that is covered by the dot represents where the aircraft would travel into the ground should you leave the aircraft in its collected state and never start your flare. The trick to keeping the aircraft on course is to never adjust your pitch and only adjust your power. Your pitch should always keep the dot over the same place on the runway that you’re aiming for. You will adjust your power to control airspeed. This is contrary to how you’re taught when you first learned to fly. Power controls altitude, pitch controls airspeed.
So assuming you keep your pitch steady with the dot over your aiming point, and you adjust power to maintain optimum approach speed, and assuming you correctly placed the sticky on the horizon when you first set this little test up, you should be starting your flare exactly where you planned.
I have to admit that I was skeptical at first. And I know I sound like I’m selling something on an infomercial, but this really does work. My instructor and I were given a 7 mile final – straight in with lots of time to test this method. We set it up exactly how I described it, and what do you know, I hit my flare point +100 feet. It wasn’t perfect, but from 7 miles away, 100 feet is pretty accurate in my mind. We did a few more circuits and confirmed that it works just as well from close in than it did from far away.
Now obviously you’re not going to fly with a sticky note on your windshield every time you go flying. This method helps you understand the principle of a collected/stabilized approach and how to fly them with greater accuracy. With practice, you’ll know exactly where that spot is on your windshield without the sticky even being there.
A cheaper way to test this out would be to do the exact same thing, but in a sim. Just place the sticky note on the computer screen’s horizon and shoot some virtual approaches. I think you’ll end up finding it’s pretty accurate there too. In fact, you may want to test this out on a computer before you even go flying.
I’m interested in finding out if other people out there have tried this, and to what avail. It’s certainly an interesting technique to try out and I want to hear some feedback if you’ve got any. Also, any other techniques/tricks that you might use regularly and want to share would be most welcome.
Diamond Katana DA20 – An Overview
Posted by Colby in Instructional, Training on August 30th, 2009
As I’ve written about before, I started my training in Diamond DA20s and later transitioned to the Cessna 172 after I switched flight schools. At the time, I had no other experience in any other aircraft so I couldn’t write a valid comparison between the two. Now however, I have about 60 hours in the DA20 and a little over 40 hours in the 172, so I feel I’m now allowed to express my opinion and provide a brief look at some of the differences. Take note that the 172s that I fly were both made in the late 1970s, so my comments are strictly related to these models and not the newer models.
The C172 is the most popular training aircraft in the world, hands down. First introduced in the mid 1950s, over 43,000 have been produced according to wikipedia. For this reason, I’m going to assume that the DA20 is the least known aircraft in this comparison, so I’ll be focusing more on it’s characteristics compared to the 172’s. So let’s get started.
The first big difference you’ll notice about the DA20 is that it’s made from carbon fibre and glass fibre, not metal. The Diamond POH (Pilot’s Operating Handbook) calls the material Carbon Fibre Reinforced Plastic (CFRP) and Glass Fibre Reinforced Plastic (GFRP). From a pilot’s perspective, I love the carbon fibre. The approximate empty weight of the DA20 is 1,153 lbs compared to the 172 which weighs in at around 1,530 lbs, depending on equipment installed. A two seater will obviously weigh less than a four seater, but the reduction in weight is definitely beneficial for a number of reasons (fuel consumption, maneuverability, etc.)
The second thing you’ll notice right away is that the DA20 is a low-wing aircraft while the 172 is a high-wing aircraft. In fact, you’ll probably notice by the end of this post that pretty much every design option is opposite between the two airplanes. There are certain advantages and disadvantages to both wing designs. Visibility is a big one. Low wing, combined with a bubble canopy on the DA20 gives you great upper visibility but seeing the ground or traffic at your 3 o’clock and 9 o’clock low positions is tough. Conversely, the same statement applies for the 172 at positions above to your left and right. It’s much easier to inspect the wing and landing gear in a high wing aircraft as well; with the DA20, you have to get down on your hands and knees to see everything. The big factor in the high vs low wing debate for me is handling characteristics. I find the DA20 to be a little more responsive and snappier than the high wing Cessna. Don’t get me wrong… the 172 is a very stable airplane, but when it comes to having a little fun or making quicker maneuverable turns, the DA20 wins.
Maneuverability usually comes with a cost though. Just as most fighters are design to be inherently unstable, the low wing is inherently a bit less stable than the high wing in this case. Where you’ll really notice the difference is on the ground during your takeoff roll. I’ve noticed the DA20 is a bit edgier throughout the yaw axis while taking off, so good rudder control is important. The 172 is a bit more relaxed and doesn’t tend to swing about as much. It’s not so much of a hindrance as it is something you have to get used to. In the air, the DA20 has a quicker roll-rate than the 172 I’ve found, but this can also be attributed to the smaller size and lighter weight. It’s the same thing you encounter in a car: lighter two seater vs a four seater sedan. The two seater will win in the turns but the sedan usually has a higher top speed. I’ll get to the speed bit later. Oh, and the DA20 is way more fun to spin than the 172!
Moving on from the wings, the empennage (tail section) is different as well. The DA20 has a high T-tail while the 172 has a conventional low tail. Again, both have their own advantages and disadvantages which I’m not going to comment on.
Let’s move from outside to inside the aircraft. Again, we’ll see that the design choices made here tend to be a little different. The DA20 uses a Continential IO-240 engine. This engine is a four cylinder, fuel injected, four stroke engine with horizontally opposed air cooled cylinders and heads producing 125 HP at 2800 RPM. The C172N uses an Lycoming O-320-H2AD engine. This engine is a four cylinder, carbureted, four stroke engine with horizontally opposed air cooled cylinders and heads producing 160 HP at 2700 RPM. Most of these characteristics are the same, but you’ll notice that the DA20 engine is fuel injected and the 172 engine is carbureted.
When it comes to fuel injected vs carbureted, I’ll take the fuel injected engine any day. It’s easier to use, gives you better performance, and is safer when it comes to icing conditions. With a carbureted engine, you have to always be conscious of icing conditions and the application of carb heat is essential. In the DA20, I don’t have to be as worried about carb icing. Of course, like any other decision, fuel injection has it draw backs. It’s harder to maintain the system; dirt in the fuel lines can adversely affect fuel flow to the cylinders. Starting the DA20 is also an art you have to master compared to starting the 172. A five year old could start the 172, but starting the DA20 is a little bit more of an experience.
Coming to the control surfaces, there isn’t too much of a difference. All three major control surfaces in the 172 are controlled by cable and pulley. In the DA20, the rudder is controlled by cables, but the ailerons and elevator are controlled by push rods. Inside the cockpit, the 172 uses a yoke control column while the DA20 uses a stick.
When it comes to stick vs yoke, I’m a stick man. There’s just something about the stick that I like more than a steering wheel. While sitting in the DA20 cockpit can be a little weird compared to the 172, I find that it’s easier to operate the aircraft in general. The throttle lever is located comfortably between the two seats whereas the 172 throttle knob is located on the dash. I’m someone who likes to keep my hand on the throttle most of the time, so having to hold my arm out in front me in the 172, just to rest my hand on the throttle, is extremely annoying. In fact, it’s the first thing I noticed when I started flying the Cessnas. I couldn’t figure out why the designers would make such an uncomfortable design decision. Having the stick sit comfortably between your legs is a plus too. To be fair to Cessna, there is much more room in the 172 cabin if you’ve got charts, clipboards, a CFS, an E6B, etc. floating around that you’ll need to access at different times throughout your flight. The DA20 cabin is a little cramped when it comes to this. In the end, I still like the design of the Diamond cockpit better.
I think I’ve gone over most of the major talking points when it comes to Diamond vs Cessna. Now let’s have a look at some of the numbers. Here is a sample of the main V Speeds between both aircraft:
Best angle (Vx) and best rate (Vy) of climb are within 5 knots of each other for both aircraft. The DA20 climbs out at a slower airspeed which makes sense due to its lower max weight and lower fuel capacity. However, maneuvering speed (Va) is higher for the DA20 meaning the control surfaces can be deflected fully at a higher airspeed should you ever need to. This brings up the issue of load factors. The DA20 can sustain G forces of -2.2 to +4.4 Gs while the 172 can sustain -1.7 to +4.4 Gs. Not much of a difference here.
The maximum flaps extended speed (Vfe) for full flaps is a bit higher in the 172 which can come in useful. The 172 is great at dropping altitude and airspeed if you’re too high on final. With flaps down to 40º (or 30º), a nice slip with make it drop like a rock. The DA20 is a bit harder to slow down and reduce altitude at the same time.
The maximum safe operating speed (Vno) is 10 knots higher in the 172 as well, giving it an edge in that category. It’s always nice to have the option of going a bit faster when you need to. To be fair, this speed can be exceeded in calm air should you ever need to. Finally, the top of top speeds to never exceed (Vne) is 4 knots higher in the DA20. This likely won’t ever affect anyone but if you’ve ever come close to Vne, then you’ve got 4 extra knots in the DA20.
Looking at the big picture, you’ll notice the speeds in general are a bit higher for the 172. The DA20 has a less powerful engine, smaller fuel tanks, and a smaller range. When given the choice of which aircraft I would take on a cross country, I’d probably take the 172. It can go further, with almost twice the fuel capacity of the DA20, and it can do so at a faster cruising speed. Now obviously there will be situations where the DA20 will be faster, but in terms of taking passengers and cargo on a cross country, the 172 is more capable in my opinion.
When all is said and done, I’m a DA20 fan. I haven’t flown them in a while but I plan to start again soon. I hope to be able to do the majority of my next 100 hours in a DA20 while working towards my commercial license. They’re a bit trickier to master, but they’re also a bit more fun to play around in. The design choices in my opinion are better in the DA20, but it’s hard to knock the most successful aircraft ever produced. To be clear, I like the 172. I think it’s good at certain things and bad at others. Same goes for the DA20. But when it comes down to which one I would choose on a regular basis for a training aircraft, I’ll take the Diamond.
Recent Comments