Hello there,
as I am expecting “my” plane to be ready sometime in April, I am looking to build some hours and get more feeling with the type – a PA 28 180. Now, for some reason I don’t comprehend (yet), there are no Piper aircraft in use at any of the flight schools that I am decently close (LIPB, LOWI). If any of you have an idea where I could get a FI with a PA28 please let me know. In the future I also want to begin some IFR training, so maybe it could be a nice combination, too :)
Clear skies
Lukas
My club has a -180C. If you take come to the Frankfurt area, either me or somebody else from the club can give you a familiarization.
@boscomantico: Funny, I’ve met your club’s D-EAOP in Trento back in october :) Damn they were outrunning us on our DA40
Just out of curiosity what types do you already have familiarity with? The PA-28-180 is a really easy airplane to fly, especially if you’re transitioning from a 172. The only substantive differences would be the fuel pump / switching tanks and the preflight (don’t push on the rudder!). Otherwise it flies and lands pretty much the same. If you’re coming from a Diamond, it will be more stable/easier to land, or from a Robin you’ll find landing less forgiving. But in any case the 180 has been used for decades as a training aircraft for good reason.
@Luke: yes, correct. Just took it for a cross-country yesterday. Sadly, it is for sale.
@dutch: I would disagree. While they are both easy to fly, if look at them more closely, there are quite a lot of differences that I like to make pilots (especially novices) aware of when he only ever has flown a Cessna before. For one, the Cherokee sinks like a brick in engine-out scenarios, as opposed to any 172.
boscomantico wrote:
I would disagree
and so will I 
Other differences are low vs high wing (fuel management), flaps extension, panel layout, stall warning and behaviour, etc. Get a couple of hours with a FI and you’ll be fine.
The main flight school on my field has some Indians, the Warriors being diesel powered, might be less than ideal, but the 2 Archer II PA28-181 sure would do. And yes, the instructors speak English, maybe even some Italian 
I trained in both an Aquila A211 and a DA40, so all low-wings. No Tschässna for me till now.
@boscomantico: Yeah, great airplane, but you could also simply leave it at LIPB; I will find good use for it
boscomantico wrote:
Cherokee sinks like a brick in engine-out scenarios, as opposed to any 172.
This will also differ between Cherokee versions depending on the wing (new or old). E.g. on final approach with a Cherokee, you should not be too fast with the new wing and not too slow with the old wing. (Of course, not much too slow with the new wing either.)
boscomantico wrote:
I would disagree. While they are both easy to fly, if look at them more closely, there are quite a lot of differences that I like to make pilots (especially novices) aware of when he only ever has flown a Cessna before. For one, the Cherokee sinks like a brick in engine-out scenarios, as opposed to any 172.
Sorry I didn’t mean to imply there are no differences or that he shouldn’t get a specific check-out, only that the differences are relatively minor and nothing to worry about. Good point on the old chocolate bar wings. The newer tapered style is more Cessna like in glide characteristics.
