Favourite Aircraft to Fly? (Handling qualities)

I would say this but I like the TB20

There are many reasons I have had mine for 14 years.

One cannot claim the controls are balanced – as with most IFR tourers pitch is a lot more sensitive than roll – but it flies beautifully, is easy to fly accurately, and doesn’t bite.

I took a couple of flights in a TB20 during my initial IFR training and liked its short wings and the resulting solid handling in turbulence. Also has great visibility from the beautiful cockpit which is very nice when being in silly attitudes.
One reason I bought a DA40-180 was that I loved its handling.
It is a perfectly balanced aircraft that can be tossed around in clouds – feels like skiing on a black piste.
Its airframe is strong, controls are very well harmonised and the central stick is just perfect. I frequently use 2-3 fingers and even caught myself just applying knee pressure for aileron. This airplane flet like it was my own wings.
After exhausting the DA40’s growth potential as an IFR travelling machine in Europe (no de-ice = no dispatch) I looked for a capable travelling machine that would still like to go for a dance. Extra 400. You have to try this to believe it.

Aircraft that bring a smile to my face:

SF260
P2002JF
Bulldog
7ECA Citabria
EC130
AW109SP

You can keep the rest

The nicest handling aircraft I have flown, with the best control feel, was the Bücker Jungmann (although it first took me a while to get used to the sensitive controls).

I guess I am one of those “closet airline pilots” at heart, so what I like about handling characteristics is a stable and reasonably fast design.

From the airplanes I have flown myself so far I must admit that for most phases of the flight I do like the Mooney I now fly. It feels very stable, has a very direct handling due to the pushrods and is reasonably fast too. The thing you can get wrong with it is landings. The Mooney is not at all forgiving for high speed or less than optimum flare.

I would like to get some hands on experience on a Cirrus one day just to see how it is. I have heard some rather interesting things on it.

Larger planes, I have flown a lot of airliners in full flight sims and two hands on.

If I were an airline pilot these days, I’d love to fly the A330. It is very powerful, very agile and extremely versatile. It can get into rather short runways, climb very fast and is a pure joy to handle in things like visual circuits. Those I know who fly the A320/330 double rating are mostly very happy.

In days begone I would have loved to get a proper check out on the TU154. The few times I had the chance to try it on, it was a pure joy to fly. Stable, extremely turbulence resistent and fast.

Of the warplanes I’ve had a hand on, the Hunter wins hands down. A real pilot’s plane, also very elegant to look at. If I were a rich man, I’d get a double seater as my personal traveller :)

LeSving wrote:

I must say the Piper Pawnee. Very maneuverable, yet steady and lots of power. I remember the first time I flew it, had to go solo because it’s a single seater. It was rather exciting pushing the throttle of the O540 for the first time.

I would like to get some hands on experience on a Cirrus one day just to see how it is.

The SR22 has the highest wingloading of all comparable SEPs (at least this was true the last time I checked), which makes it a very stable IFR platform. Other than what many say I find the handling very nice, it’s has a high roll rate, no lag in the controls and has many other qualities. But it has to be in trim, always, otherwise it is no fun. Crosswind landings are a piece of cake, no matter how much wind. Some say that they don’t like the “springs in the controls”, but i never had a problem with that.

The SR22 has the highest wingloading of all comparable SEPs

According to google:

TB20 is 24.1 lbs/sq.ft.

SR22 G2 and G3 are 23.5.

Yes, you are right for the G2/G3 models. I was not aware of this (10.9 kg per square ft vs. 10.6)
What is the glide ratio (i found 8:1 by Google?) The Cirrus is 9.6:1, and mine (4-blade prop) is even worse than that. My Warrior is 14:1 …

Wing loading of the SR22 G5 is higher though (11.3 kg/sqft). MTOM is + 200 lbs, identical wing area.

Sorry for the kg per sq.ft… let me try again

TB20: 117kg per square meter
SR22-G2/G3: 115 kg/sqm
SR22-G5: 121 kg/sqm

Flyingfish wrote:

One reason I bought a DA40-180 was that I loved its handling.
It is a perfectly balanced aircraft that can be tossed around in clouds – feels like skiing on a black piste.

That is interesting because one of the things I actually dislike about the DA40 is how it handles in turbulence.

I have not flown too many diverse aircraft types. I started out in the PA38-112 (Piper Tomahawk as did Peter), then in chronological order moved on to C172P or N (and S much later) then Piper PA28-181, PA28R-201, PA28R-180/200, PA28R-201T, Mooney M20C, Beech F33A, Diamond DA40-180 DA40D, P210 (2 h TT), and finally DA42 both Thielert and Austro engines.

I thought the Tomahawk was great fun and continued to fly it also after I got my PPL. I liked the view and how responsive it was on the controls.

Among the Pipers I thought the tapered wing Archer and the Arrow were great airplanes, and really easy to fly. The Hershey bar models on the other hand I found somewhat scary because the only thing that held them up in the air was the engine. When the engine died, the descent rate at Vbg was spectucalar and I have an interesting memory of engine out landings at Auburn Muni (CA).

The M20C somewhat different from what I had flown before. It had the pneumatic stability augmentation system (wing leveler) and takeoff was made with 10° flaps. It was somewhat cramped, and the small windows limited forward visibility, and landings were a little more challenging that on previous airplanes.

When I first flew the F33A I realised what an airplane should really feel like Already during taxi it had an extremely solid feel to it, and that was reinforced by the steering column, that massive beam connecting the yokes to the central column which made it hard to read some of the instruments that were hidden behind. It felt like a car on the ground and high speed taxi was absolutely unproblematic which is important at a big airport like KOAK. It felt heavy on the ground but I was soon going to find out that it felt light in the air, although just as solid as on the ground. Easy to control, responsive, stable in turbulence and easy to land on that massive landing gear.

I found that the P210 had a similar feel to it as the Beech but with higher inertia which is a little intimidating at first.

My only twin experience is in the DA42 with CD135 and AE300 engines. Ground handling is very different between the two, and I have a preference for the Austros which develop less forward thrust at idle than the Centurions. Taxying the DA42 takes some getting used to, as the nose wheel steering is hard to control and takes some anticipation and strength. Using differential power to help steering helps. In the air I initially found a yawing tendency that was to control at first. It felt like I was trying to counter the gyroscopic effect of a rotating handheld bicycle wheel. But that was in the beginning. It in incredibly stable in the air and rides through light turbulence without requiring any effort from the pilot, and on the models with the GFC700 the ride is astonishing. Landing was surprisingly easy from day 1. I still have not made a bad landing in the DA42. I think it is partly due to the handling characteristics of the airplane, and partly due to the forward view which provides a very good depth perception.