There are reasons for high owner satisfaction among Grumman Tiger owners. A sliding canopy alone lends to decent ramp appeal, plus with snappy handling and 180 horsepower it easily runs with Piper Archers and Cessna Cardinals. With plenty of approved aftermarket retrofits for avionics and speed mods, reliable engines and enthusiastic owner groups to help with field support, expect to pay top dollar for upgraded Tigers and Cheetahs that sit at the top of the AA-5 food chain.
David Fletcher gave me my first job (lineman) in aviation at the original Fletcher Air at Hobby airport in Houston. I traded work time for lessons with John Wege and David’s mother gave me my PPL checkout, FYI that women could fly absolutely anything. My job interview with David consisted of “can you drive a truck? and do you know how to use a screw driver? Good, be here Saturday morning at 6 am”.
Although I do agree that this aircraft is a nice looking airplane, although I have never flown one, if I was in the market to purchase one, I think I would take a pass. Due to a number of reasons. No longer in production, and when it was in production, the low volume numbers. A Piper Warrior, Dakota, Arrow, Or a 172 or a 182 would be on my shopping list.
I trained exclusively in the AA1 and AA-1B’s and got my certificate within 3 momths.
Unfortunately when I started to look around and rent, I could only find were 172’s and 140’s.
Those felt like driving 1950’s trucks and I saw how the phrase “I’d rather be flying” came to be.
I bought the AA5A and never looked back. Simple, fun, reliable, 7’ cargo for sleeping or bikes, and sexy looks.
THANKS David Fletcher for your insane devotion to parts so my family can keep flying!
After 18 months in Vietnam, some of which involved being in, out, and around various helicopters (lots of fun for a 19-year-old, absent the part of being shot at), I came home and for a period of time attended the Rochester Institute of Technology in Rochester, NY. One day out of the clear blue (to turn a phrase) an AA-1 landed on the grounds of the campus (with permission I assume) and taxied up to the student union. The flight instructor slid back the canopy, hopped out, and began passing out brochures advertising the local flight school. $17.00 an hour ‘wet’. Cool. So I started my flight instruction. I did not last long in school, but I flew for 50 years (as a private pilot). I have not flown in a while, but I still should. And I miss flying every day that I am not.
The bend in the nose gear reminds me of the Liberty XL-2 on which I worked as A&P at a flight school in Ormond Beach years ago. First GA ship I ever worked on with a FADEC.
A friend and hangar neighbor of mine had a nice Tiger that we would fly on occasion. Great airplane and economical to own and maintain. My only wish would be that they put a constant speed prop on it instead of the fixed pitch. On a hot summer day with that cruise prop, it could eat up a lot of runway before breaking ground. I believe there is a STC for a CS prop for the Tiger, but I’ve never seen any performance data for one.
Got checked out in a Tiger as a very inexperienced pilot, around 50 hours total time. I always loved the look of the plane. After flying it about 3 hours I got signed off to solo. Took my daughter on a local sight seeing flight once, then the company sold the plane. Never flew one again. I did like the way it handled and felt. I would certainly fly one again.
Contrary to your comments, the wing fuselage junction of a Grumman actually includes a dedicated aerodynamic, non metallic fairing/fillet with a compound radius along the root and trailing edge to smooth airflow. It also reduces the junction of the wing and fuselage to roughly 90 degrees on the upper surface, somewhat mitigating the interference effect of the dihedral angle, as well as providing a level surface for the wing walk area. The fillet is possible, in part, because the wing flaps are positioned further outboard from the fuselage than with some other popular aircraft. With respect, your description in this area is not accurate.
Do you drive a Chevy or a Ford, or maybe a Honda? Sorry, but seriously, quantity does no equal quality, necessarily anyway, and parts are not hard to get. I hardly ever have to replace anything.
I owned a 172. When I got my Tiger the 172 was for sale the very next day. I can honestly say that I don’t miss it one bit. My friend has a turbo arrow and we flew together he outpaced me by 5 mph. That’s because I don’t have wheel pants. He, meanwhile has the expense of retractable landing gear, and a constant speed prop (not to mention his insurance is 3X more). Also, it’s one of the few aircraft that doesn’t have an in-flight break up. It’s a very tough airplane. It’s a simple, tough, fast, and great handling airplane.
You forget that ownership means maintenance. Most replaced parts (engine, wheels, avionics, prop, filters, oil, lights) are generic and the very same ones you’ll use on the other planes you mentioned. The few unique parts that may be needed are in pma production with FletchAir, Roscoe, and some others. the NICE thing is that they supply those parts at a lower price than you’d get from brand B, P or C aircraft. Sure they still make the C172 but have you priced their parts lately?
Actually their was an AD issued for the tail incident, but only for AA1x’s and the AA5 Traveler. AD 2021-14-12, referencing SB 195A. It only applies to part B of the SB not part A. The FAA issued a NPRM in December of 2021 for part A of SB 195A which would have included the AA5, AA5A and AA5B but this was withdrawn by the FAA in April 2022 after efforts by GOPA, AOPA and others convinced them it was unnecessary.
Grumman was the plane in wich I’ve started flowning 42 years ago. Although now I’ve a relative new aircraft (builted already in this century), if I’ll find one in good conditions (including the finance ones), I surely will buy her.