Discussion
i only notched up about 4 hours in a chip. mostly from shawbury. i would love another go in one. such an easy aircraft to fly. only problem is most people who didnt go to cadets dont believe that a 14yr old has done loops rolls and stall turns! 
i think im going to look on youtube for the "jump jump john" video!
i think im going to look on youtube for the "jump jump john" video! LeftyGuns... I had a few trips in WP860 as a space cadet many moons ago when it was at 12AEF.
The "Jump, jump, John!" video: 'John' was actually a staff cadet at 6AEF when this film was made, and ended up over in RAFG as a Tornado pilot by the late 80s. I flew with his father on a course at 6AEF Abingdon in the 80s, as his old man was still a staff pilot there, still serving having initially flown Tempests in the 40s!
Of all the aeroplanes I've flown, the Chipmunk is probably my favourite from a handling and 'atmosphere' point of view. It's very easy to let your mind wander back to WW2 when strapped into the front seat, despite the lack of V12 soundtrack and performance. Those that have flown both reckon the Chippie & Spitfire have similar handling qualities.
I was lucky enough to convert onto an ex-Cranwell one a while back when I instructed at a 'vintage' flying school. Great for some lazy aerobatics, then back for tea and medals after surviving a crosswind landing on a hard surfaced runway (grass is much easier for taildraggers).
The "Jump, jump, John!" video: 'John' was actually a staff cadet at 6AEF when this film was made, and ended up over in RAFG as a Tornado pilot by the late 80s. I flew with his father on a course at 6AEF Abingdon in the 80s, as his old man was still a staff pilot there, still serving having initially flown Tempests in the 40s!
Of all the aeroplanes I've flown, the Chipmunk is probably my favourite from a handling and 'atmosphere' point of view. It's very easy to let your mind wander back to WW2 when strapped into the front seat, despite the lack of V12 soundtrack and performance. Those that have flown both reckon the Chippie & Spitfire have similar handling qualities.
I was lucky enough to convert onto an ex-Cranwell one a while back when I instructed at a 'vintage' flying school. Great for some lazy aerobatics, then back for tea and medals after surviving a crosswind landing on a hard surfaced runway (grass is much easier for taildraggers).
dudleybloke said:
what modern aircraft would you compare a chip to? iv not flown since '91 and want to have a similar experience with a stick control where i can do stall turns ect.
Handling-wise it's very broadly similar to the Firefly or Bulldog, although the Chipmunk is better harmonised than both IMO, and has absolutely zero slop or play in the flight controls, whereas the Firefly & 'Dog are merely great compared to dull American Cessna/Piper spamcan fodder. One of the advantages of the Firefly is that it has full inverted oil & fuel systems, and will fly upside down all day. You can push -3g and still have full-power available. Not sure about inverted systems on the 'Dog. The Firefly can be flicked with abandon, not sure about the 'Dog; I wouldn't have dreamt of performing any flick manouevres in the Chipmunk, in deference to the age of the airframe, and can't remember if it was cleared for them anyway. The Firefly M160 has broadly similar performance to the Chipmunk, the Bulldog has noticably more poke, and the Firefly M260 accelerates & climbs like a WW2 fighter in comparison. Another big advantage for aeros that the other two have over the Chippie is a variable-pitch prop, so that you can thrash about with full-power selected without worrying about RPM overspeed as you do in the Chipmunk.
Other 'fun' stuff to get your hands on: how about a CAP10, Extra 200 or 300, Zlin, Yak52 or Pitts? All are more 'purpose built' for aeros and most are available for dual instruction/hire in the UK if you have a poke about.
Edited by speedtwelve on Thursday 9th July 00:47
Can we compare the Chippie to a car?
Apart from half an hour at the controls of a 172 spamcan, the chippie is my only experience of flying so I don't have much to benchmark it against. It certainly felt direct and feelsome.
S1 Elise? Short on power, high on feel and a joy to fly?
ETA Oops I just noticed that a chap already compared it to a Lotus 7 in the third post!
Apart from half an hour at the controls of a 172 spamcan, the chippie is my only experience of flying so I don't have much to benchmark it against. It certainly felt direct and feelsome.
S1 Elise? Short on power, high on feel and a joy to fly?
ETA Oops I just noticed that a chap already compared it to a Lotus 7 in the third post!
Edited by Lefty Guns on Thursday 9th July 13:22
And MGA or a Lotus 7?
I've never flown in a Chipmunk but from seeing them up close they do seem to exude the air and smell of a typical British sportscar of the 1950s (even given the fact that they were, in fact, a Canadian design).
I think they lack a bit of oomph so I wouldn't compare them directly to a modern nimble, but fast accelerating sports car like a modern Caterham or Elise.
I've never flown in a Chipmunk but from seeing them up close they do seem to exude the air and smell of a typical British sportscar of the 1950s (even given the fact that they were, in fact, a Canadian design).
I think they lack a bit of oomph so I wouldn't compare them directly to a modern nimble, but fast accelerating sports car like a modern Caterham or Elise.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff