High-Wing Versus Low-Wing

Discounting biplanes, canards, mid-wing models and other unusual configurations, there are two basic wing designs, high-wing and low wing. You probably have your own preference, though some pilots, us included, are agnostic on the question.  This doesn't mean that there's not a right answer to the question. Even companies that you think of as being evangelically committed to one setup have gone back and forth between the two.  Clyde Cessna's first airplane, Silverwing, was a low wing, and all of Cessna's turbofan aircraft are low wingers, too. Piper, which went big into low wings with the introduction of the Cherokee in 1960, became famous their first 30 years with high-wing taildraggers. There are good reasons for both configurations.

Structure

This one's easy. The design of a low wing, on top of which the fuselage sits, makes more sense. Less structure is required for things like landing gear and door reinforcement, though in all fairness, you don't need to reinforce the upper surface of a high-wing to account for people walking on it. Then again, there aren't many low wings with wing struts.

Convenience

Again, an easy one. A high-wing plane makes more sense for getting into and back out of, which matters in many cases with older pilots or passengers. The exception, one could argue, is with forced landings. In an off-airport excursion, a low wing is probably the easier setup from which to escape, though the variables are endless.

Training

It's an unwinnable argument on both sides which configuration lends itself better to training success. Those who learned in low wing planes tend to prefer those as step up models, and those who learned in high-wings, well, they tend to step up from a 172 to a 182, and on from there.

Visibility

This one's a no brainer, right? Well, in one sense yes (or in one way), not so fast. High wings are heavenly for sight-seeing and photo snapping, while the view can be blocked by low wings. But in a turn in the pattern the down wing of a Piper Pacer, for example, will block the view of the runway or obstacles between you and the runway.

Clearance

When it comes to clearing snow banks, fence posts and certain kinds of brushy, the winner is the high-winger. 

Safety Concerns

It's easier to fuel low wing planes, and it's harder to forget to put the fuel caps back on. That said, it's easier to drain the sumps with high-wingers. Fuel management tends to be easier in high-wing planes than in low wingers, though this can vary widely. It's also harder to scrape frost and ice off the upper airfoil surface of a high-winger. Some pilots who've flown both feel as though low wing planes are more forgiving in gusty conditions.

Shade

Unless you're doing a lot of flying inverted, the high wing keeps you cooler. This is especially true when comparing high-wing models against low wing types that have bubble-style canopies.

The Verdict

Based on the number of current production low-wing versus high-wing models, it's no contest. Low wingers are the present and probably the future, too, especially on business and commercial planes. That said, there remain compelling reasons for pilots who fly for sport, pleasure and transportation to go with a high-wing model. As is the case with so many things in aviation, unless you have a specific application that favors one or the other, like float plane flying or bush flying, it really comes down to personal preference.