Grumman Tiger?
Agree with what NTTams said, but you can also add:
1. really hot/hot in summer - you must have a canopy cover and some upper canopy sun protection
2. not a good paddock aircraft
happy days,
1. really hot/hot in summer - you must have a canopy cover and some upper canopy sun protection
2. not a good paddock aircraft
happy days,
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: -28.1494 / 151.943
Age: 68
Posts: 463
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks mate, I got something out of that we should all share ....
Quote We NEED the Lane's of the world to remind us of why we REALLY fly. At least, it has done that for me. I too tend to read the columns in the back before reading the rest.
Maybe we should all take a step back sometime from all the bastardry that goes with the world of aviation pursuits and just relish why we all do it.
cheers
Avgas 172
ps need a co-pilot to do a 172 ferry from YBTL-Ycwr around 18-24/11 if anyone has a week off and will share the Avgas cost.
Quote We NEED the Lane's of the world to remind us of why we REALLY fly. At least, it has done that for me. I too tend to read the columns in the back before reading the rest.
Maybe we should all take a step back sometime from all the bastardry that goes with the world of aviation pursuits and just relish why we all do it.
cheers
Avgas 172
ps need a co-pilot to do a 172 ferry from YBTL-Ycwr around 18-24/11 if anyone has a week off and will share the Avgas cost.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Awstraya
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think some of youse must be mixing up Grummans - confusing: a. the AA1 series [Trainer, T-cat, Lynx] (2 seat, perspex above you, glides like a brick, limited range, fun to fly);
with
b. the AA5 series [AA5 Traveler, AA5A Cheetah, AA5B Tiger] ( 4 seat, got aluminium above you, glides OK, 600+ NM range, fun to fly).
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The AA5B is the pick of the bunch.
They all have nifty features like a bonded wing (no rivets to ruin the wing surface), use of honeycomb composites in some areas for less weight, and so on. Of course some of these features became liabilities, I seem to recall a few wings delaminated and the fix was often more expensive than writing the aircraft off. Some aircraft now have heavily rivetted wings - that would be the "ugly" fix!
Castoring nosewheel got a lot of newbies into difficulties, and there was a tendency to "porpoise" on landing if you were stupid enough to let the nosewheel hit the deck first.
Other than that, it was a great machine, much better vis from the cockpit than the competition, and cruising around with the canopy slid back was great fun. I personally prefer them to 172s and Cherokees, but there isn't a lot in it. They aren't good short-field machines, but then neither are the 172 or Cherokee (IMHO of course!).
They all have nifty features like a bonded wing (no rivets to ruin the wing surface), use of honeycomb composites in some areas for less weight, and so on. Of course some of these features became liabilities, I seem to recall a few wings delaminated and the fix was often more expensive than writing the aircraft off. Some aircraft now have heavily rivetted wings - that would be the "ugly" fix!
Castoring nosewheel got a lot of newbies into difficulties, and there was a tendency to "porpoise" on landing if you were stupid enough to let the nosewheel hit the deck first.
Other than that, it was a great machine, much better vis from the cockpit than the competition, and cruising around with the canopy slid back was great fun. I personally prefer them to 172s and Cherokees, but there isn't a lot in it. They aren't good short-field machines, but then neither are the 172 or Cherokee (IMHO of course!).
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: In the Hangar
Posts: 117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I flew an AA5B Tiger a few times that we called "The Chocolate Frog" out in Broken Hill. It was an interesting beast. Fast for the HP? Yes - most definitly faster than an Archer - although the Archer feels more solid to fly. The Tiger is light in the controls - has a sporty feel to it. The main spar is a big tube in wing that is also the fuel tank - if I remember correctly.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My uncle has recently purchased an AA-5B and importing it from NZ. Are there any operators in Victoria for a quick famil flight before I go charging around the countryside?
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: USA
Age: 67
Posts: 112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've flown over 750 hours in the Cheeta and just over 50 hours in the Tiger. Most of the hours on the Cheeta have been instructing.
I personally think the 4 seat single Grumman's are far superior to their Cessna and Piper counterparts.
NOtimTAMS has pretty well summed up their advatages. They have great forward visibility which made them an excellent trainer, especially when teaching the landing flare.
If you get the opportunity to fly one, I'm sure you'll enjoy it.
Cheers Sid
I personally think the 4 seat single Grumman's are far superior to their Cessna and Piper counterparts.
NOtimTAMS has pretty well summed up their advatages. They have great forward visibility which made them an excellent trainer, especially when teaching the landing flare.
If you get the opportunity to fly one, I'm sure you'll enjoy it.
Cheers Sid
