What is better to fly, a piper tomahawk or a cessna 172?

Answer 1

Barring the whole high wing vs low wing debate (for what it's worth, I'm a low wing guy), I would suggest the Tomahawk. The Cessna 172 is a very stable, very reliable aircraft, but I think that is it's detriment as a trainer. The Tomahawk (notoriously known as the "Traumahawk") is a bit tricky to fly, especially when doing stalls. The reason I suggest it is that it keeps you honest. Whereas you could just lazily do maneuvers in the 172, in the Tomahawk you need to be very precise otherwise you might be in a spin. Similarly, when landing the Tomahawk has a pretty tight range of speeds you should be at otherwise you'll either sink and plunk it or you'll float. Again, a good way to keep the pilot honest. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the Tomahawk makes better pilots (and I add jokingly, "because it kills the bad ones").

That having been said, if you do decide to go for the Tomahawk, try to go with an instructor that has lots of time in them. As an example, in a Cessna 150/152 when spinning, you apply the spin recovery and within a second it's recovered or clearly recovering. In the Tomahawk, you may need to apply the recovery technique and wait a few seconds before it does anything. That has bit a few people who, when nothing happened right away, thought they were applying the recovery wrong and applied opposite recovery, thus aggravating the spin and possibly going flat. (And despite popular myth, it IS possible to break a flat spin in a Tomahawk, but I wouldn't recommend trying... it involves unbuckling and throwing yourself at the dash and begging for the plane's mercy... just not a pretty sight.)

Answer 2

Since this is an opinion question, I will say the 172. The reason being is the Tomahawk has more ADs than any other comparable craft. They are forbidden to spin, there have been cracks found in the fuselage behind the cabin. At one point they were grounded by the FAA for recertification, because something was changed on the plane that affected the spin qualities.
One of the strange quirks of the aircraft is the reaction when you push the throttle forward in flight, for example , when you see you are a little short on landing, the tail is just out of the propwash and force is applied to the underside of the tail. When that happens the craft goes nose down instead of nose up as in others. Not good.
All this should be considered when looking at price. Note how cheap Tomahawks are.
If you are a low wing pilot, get a Beech Skipper instead. Although the same designer designed both, all the bad qualities of the Tomahawk were engineered out.

Answer 3

The Tomahawk compares more to the Cessna 152 trainer. So, you have a bit more room in the 172.

The big difference is low wing vs. high wing. I personally like the high wing (I fly a P-210) for three major reasons; 1) You can get in and out in the rain (I travel for business) without getting soaked and the interior wet, 2) the high wing keeps the cabin cooler at altitude, and 3) I can watch the ground go by without a wing in the way.

The only detriment to a high wing - is at a left pattern airport, when you make the turn - it partially obstructs your view. But if you fly a lot of IFR (as I do), then your approaches are straight in anyway.

Answer 4

The Tomahawk is a fun spinning machine with nice spin entries and recoveries. The 172's spinning abilities are OK but not as responsive as the "T" tail design. I prefer high-wing Cessna airplanes over low wing Pipers in general. I've always liked Cessna type airplanes the best... but if you want to have some fun with spins - the Tomahawk is your airplane! Happy flying.

Answer 5

I'm told (but have no personal experience) that the Tomahawk is a challenge for new or student pilots. The 152/172 is easier to learn in.

I'm also told that its reputation, while deserved, is probably overstated. My guess is it's like any other airplane -- once you get used to its quirks it's not that big a deal.

Answer 6

I've only flown a Tomahawk once and found it a little small like a 152. I own a 172 and love it. Easy, stable flyer and better ground visibility.

Answer 7

we are selling an cessna 182 here in NZ, great plane, slightly better then a 172, we have flown it all the way to australia, and quite a few times around new zealand, but the CAA is making the ownership of this craft a bit to high for how much my mum flies it, so she is sticking to her Grumman AA5, a nice cheap aircraft very easy to fly (the cessna used to belong to my father who passed away)
For passangers in the back the high wings are nice but the low wings in the grumman make it easier to see out the front. (the grumman cant fly to australia, nor is very quick, but the enjoyment of flying is definetly there with the grumman :)

Answer 8

It definitely is not the Piper Traumahawk....I mean the Piper Tomahawk , spins way too easy, and it does not have enough rudder and elevator authority for me. Many swear by them as trainers. I flew one for a total of about 6 hours on a couple of occasions, NEVER AGAIN!!!!
This plane scares me !!!!

Answer 9

172 is your best option.

And they really don't spin. They more or less fly like a fat lady walks. If you try and spin them most you get is a wing drop and the plane straightens itself out. More so, anyone attempting basic acro in a 172 needs thier ticket revoked. Simply nothing but risk for yourself and passengers, and endangering every pilot who flys that plane after you....