If experience in a full flight simulator counts, then I´d have to nominate the MD11, the landings in particular. It has a very high Vref (around 160 kts) and needs to be flared very precisely not to arrive with a big and embarrassing bang.
(Used to fly full flight sims quite a lot during my days working for a software development company who made training addons. Loved the DC9´s up to the MD80 and the Airbusses too. DC10 was also very nice to fly, very different than the MD11 in pitch control. Biggest challenge but lovely to fly was the Tupolev 154)
Of the ones I have hands on experience on the real thing, the AN2 was challenging at first, particularly due to it´s rather weird brake system. Once you get the hang of it, it is a delight to fly though but until you do, better have a wide grass runway to get the landings right. Working with the Russian instruments is also “interesting” until you memorize all the units and values. Engine management requires a 2nd pilot or a FE to do it right.
I must say this one. A Twin Stratus. It’s a twin engine, tandem microlight produced in Norway. 2 × 2 stroke Rotax. It wasn’t difficult, but very different/strange. It didn’t really fly in the correct sense of the word, it felt more like it was moving through water, no inertia , lots of drag and lots of control authority.
I found the Siai Marchetti 1019 to be very challenging. Between 20 and 5 knots on the runway, “straight” was wishful thinking, no matter what you did with the pedals. Luckily, with reverse for landing, if it headed off the runway, just use reverse to stop it, rather than needing to try to steer it more. Once off the ground, it had an alarming pitch control reversal with certain combinations of flap and power, which could result in a large push forward on the stick to the nose down stop, and the nose was still going up. Once you got the hang of it it was okay, but not relaxing.
Once off the ground, it had an alarming pitch control reversal with certain combinations of flap and power, which could result in a large push forward on the stick to the nose down stop, and the nose was still going up.
Would that be certifiable under today’s airworthiness specifications?
The Marchetti 1019 was an Italian military aircraft, probably never civilian certified. The basis for the design was the piston powered Cessna Bird Dog that is civilian certified but which flies more like a Cessna 170 according to the guy near me who has one. Interesting stories in relation to the Marchetti 1019 here
An almost “new” one for sale here:
This is the one I was testing:
I did some training to the company pilot from the back seat. 60 degrees of flap
I ran out of nose down pitch control
For those who like graphs, this was the plot I did during stability testing. These were stabilized pitch control forces. There should be no negative forces, as this is an indication of instability. The need to transition from a positive “pull” on the stick, to a negative “push” as you slow down makes the plane very unpleasant and unstable to fly. On the graph, “Pounds” is measured pitch control force, and “Tq” is engine torque in %, which equates to power.
As can be seen from the graph, and my photo of stable flight with full down elevator, it can be seen how you could be startled by a climb out, which you could only arrest with reduction of power. I believe this is one of the reasons that this plane did not receive type certification.
It also seemed to have only electric pitch trim. This is a little alarming, as a trim motor failure could leave you with a real handful. It was very late in the test program that someone told me that if you ripped off the velcro’d interior panel, there was a trim wheel hidden inside. It would ‘ave been nice if they’d placarded that!
The electric trim was under your thumb on the power lever. The other button on top of the power lever was the one, which if pressed, allowed you to pull the power lever back into beta (reverse) range. Ooops if you hit that one as you reduced power, while intending to extend the rest of the 60 degrees of flap. It just stops and drops! Happily I was only a foot or so up – no ground roll to speak of though! I paid much more attention to what that fidgety thumb was doing after that though!
It did not have a stall warning horn at all. I guess it did not need one, As long as the engine was running, it seemed impossible to stall.
Oh, and the wingtip pods on the one I was testing were “vertical gradient magnatometers”. They were used to record the position of “things” buried shallow under the ground (by bad people) and GPS each one, so the good people knew where not to step.
It was the plane I had dreamed of flying from the time I saw the photo in “Jane’s” of it taking off with the mains well off, and the tail wheel still on. I used to dream about it when I was a kid. After flying it, it was fun. but not relaxing….
