Grumman AA-1 Yankee - History, Review, and Specs!

[@azzir325]

Never flew a Yankee, but really enjoyed my hours in the Grumman Traveler.

[@eaa2924]

I have owned an AA-1B for just about 43 years. 2 years after buying it I replaced the 0-235 with a 0-320. I am now restoring a '69 AA-1 Yankee and also have installed the 0-320. I also have a C-182, I call my Mac Truck. The Yankees are my fun to fly aerial Sports Cars.

[@firespraypilotcosplayandpr4195]

Hey there, How does the AA1B perform with the 0-320? What are the cruising speeds, climb rates, and useful loads like? I'm currently looking to purchase a airplane within the next year possibly, and Grumman is one that I'm looking into. Thanks!

[@eaa2924]

My AA-1B is a stock trainer with no wheel fairings. When I first got it the cruise speed with the 0-235 was about 120mph @ 75% power. ROC at sea level / gross weight was around 600fpm. After installing the 0-320 it would cruise at 135mph but with a much higher fuel burn. ROC is in the 1200 fpm range. I normally throttle back to around 125mph to get some range out of the 22 gal usable. My AA-1 Yankee project has a HC 0-320, will have wheel pants, tiger gear leg fairings and any other clean-up I can do. I also have aux tanks that will give an additional 10 gal usable. We will see, but I am hoping for a cruise of 165+mph.

[@firespraypilotcosplayandpr4195]

@@eaa2924 Wow, those are very significant increases in performance there. Was there a decrease in the useful load with the added weight of the 0-320, or did the useful load actually benefit due to the extra power. Thank you!

[@eaa2924]

For my AA-1B removing the 0-235 & prop, adding the 0320-A2B (narrow deck), Sensenich prop, oil cooler and some ballast in the tail added about 55lbs as I remember. The STC used (Collier / Fletchair) allowed for an increase of GW for the AA-1B of 40lbs to 1600. So net useful load lost was 15lbs. My current empty weight (last put on the scales about 15 years ago) is 1113lbs. I also still have the original starter and alternator, and the battery on the firewall. It will be interesting to see where the Yankee project empty weight ends up. I have done many things to save on weight like move the battery box to the back and using a light weight battery which should eliminate any ballast in the tail, removed the vacuum system and used uAvionics AV-30s, light weight starter and alternator, etc. My calculations say I will have an empty weight of 1085lbs. or so, we shall see. The STC I am using on this plane allows for a takeoff Gross Weight of 1579 lbs., but the landing weight remains 1500. If I fill the aux tanks I would not be able to carry a passenger unless they weigh under 100lbs and I would have to burn off 13 gallons of gas before I get it down to the legal landing weight.

[@firespraypilotcosplayandpr4195]

@@eaa2924 That is very useful information for me. Thank you so much for responding to my questions. I truly appreciate it! Take great care! 👍🏻

[@captbart3185]

I’ve flown the Yankee and like it a lot. It does have the stall characteristics of many homebuilts in that it has a sharp break and wants to spin. Spinning the AA-1 was forbidden so I figured it shouldn’t have been so prone to spinning. If you’re a low time pilot get a very solid check out before going solo.

[@chriskiwi2601]

I learnt to fly and got my PPL in a Grumman AA-1C way back in 1982. Brilliant trainer. Still see the odd one flying our skies here in NZ.

[@carlmclelland7624]

One thing; you've intermingled the AA-1 Yankee with the AA-1b TR-2, or "Trainer." You also show lots of images of the Traveler and Tiger. The "Yankee" had a symmetrical wing as I recall, didn't climb, was fast as hell in level flight, and landed like a T-38 (Fast!). The "Trainer" had a more conventional wing, and made an outstanding basic training plane, and economical cross country plane. The Traveler (4-place) made for an outstanding instrument training platform. EVERY student pilot I ever licensed received spin orientation, and I used a Cessna 150 Aerobat for that since spins are prohibited in the Grumman. The (Trainer) trained student was amazed (disappointed) at the performance of the Cessna, and literally fell asleep on downwind. (Are we there yet)? Given the choice, they chose the Trainer every time. The speed in the pattern and on landing was their norm in the Trainer, and they handled it with no problems. The Cessna 150 pilots I transitioned into Trainers over the years thought the Trainer flew like a fighter! Without exception, they loved it! It was a great airplane in every regard, except one... it wasn't a Cessna 150, you couldn't spin it. I loved flying... and instructing in them.

[@flywithtito]

That’s my plane at 0:25 lol. It’s super fun to fly

[@willhead9958]

Currently fly a 69 Grumman Yankee with the o-235. Can use ethanol free gas so its under 4 a gallon burning 6 per hour in cruise. Cant get a lot of weight in it but by myself its a fun first plane. It being Winter defiantly helps performance

[@willhead9958]

Stalls hard, wants to spin, spins are forbidden in plane. Keep speed up and it doesn't float down the runway like a 152 or 172 at all.

[@The1trueJester]

The grumman AA-1 is on my GA bucket list of planes I want to fly. They seem like such pleasant aircraft

[@onrivertime]

They're a sweet flying airplane - when you strap in and go flying it's like "wearing" the airplane. If you are ever in North Georgia - we could make this happen. Lots of AA1s and AA5s based at KPUJ.

[@The1trueJester]

@onrivertime my dude I may take you up on that. I'm in SC. But going to Atlanta in a few weeks. Full disclosure, still a student pilot