Friday, August 10, 2007

High Wing or Low Wing?

One of the more vitriolic debates that can occur in small plane circles is which is better, high wing, such as this Cessna:



or low wing, such as this Piper:


Each type has its advantages and drawbacks. Low wings are easier to refuel, you need to stand on a ladder to refuel a Cessna with wing tanks. High wings are easier to pre-flight, you can walk under the wing to draw fuel samples and check the control fittings. Low wings offer greater visibility in a turn (usually), high wings offer greater visibility downward (which passengers enjoy). High wings are generally far easier to board. High performance low wings have far simpler landing gear mechanisms. You can sit in the shade under a high wing.

Low wings look cooler.





High wings are almost universally used in rugged conditions.



So it really is a question of what your personal preference is and what your projected use will be.

Now if you really want to start an argument, get into which is better, Mooneys or Beechcraft Bonanzas.

3 comments:

  1. ::ahem:: You missed the coolest low-wing plane of all time. Also the fastest US production fighter of the war, I think.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Corsairs are nice, no doubt. All of the warbirds are pricey, these days, but Corsairs are up over $2million.

    Waay too rich for my blood.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If you think Corsairs are steep, try pricing a P-38 Lightning, or F-4 Phantom. ;)

    ReplyDelete

House Rules #1, #2 and #6 apply to all comments. Rule #3 also applies to political comments.

In short, don't be a jackass. THIS MEANS YOU!
If you never see your comments posted, see Rule #7.

All comments must be on point and address either the points raised in the blog post or points raised by commenters in response.
Any comments that drift off onto other topics are subject to deletion.

(Please don't feed the trolls.)

中國詞不評論,冒抹除的風險。僅英語。

COMMENT MODERATION IS IN EFFECT UFN. This means that if you are an insulting dick, nobody will ever see it.