A Kansas jaunt

[kath]

I spent the holidays with my sister, who recently moved to rural Kansas (she's a park ranger on the Prairie). Like me, she has just moved to a new place and hardly knows anybody, and didn't get enough days off to travel home... so I flew down there.

I found a place in Manhattan, KS which rents Cessna "SuperHawks" -- that is a regular SkyHawk with a 180 HP engine stuck on front. It was a very nice plane. Shiny. Everything works. Flies like a dream. Climb performance... holy cow! The best part about the extra horses is the added 250 pounds of weight it can carry over the regular SkyHawk... it's a four-seat airplane that can actually carry four adults and full fuel.

I needed the standard CFI checkout first, and I asked my CFI if I could bring my sister and a friend of hers along for the ride, and he said sure. He asked if I was interested in landing on grass and I said YES! I asked him if I could shoot an approach or two during the checkout just for practice (I'm out of IFR currency and very rusty). So we took off, headed south, and did the standard assortment of proficiency stuff (stalls, steep turns, etc.)

I had warned my passengers that we'd be doing a bunch of maneuvers, and that they shouldn't be alarmed, for instance by the brief "plummeting" sensation of a stall. At one point my CFI pulled the power and said "You've just had an engine failure." We glided towards a field and went through the emergency procedures. The usual stuff.

After the flight was over, my sister confessed that she had thought the engine failure was real, and that we were actually going to land in some guy's field or on a road. She said she was actually impressed. "Everyone's so calm! Everyone's so calm!" I had to apologize for that one...

After the checkout, we took off again, this time with my sister in the front seat. She's been wanting to go up with me for a long time, but the last opportunity (in San Francisco) was one of those pile-everyone-in-the-plane, look-up-at-the-clouds, pile-everyone-back-out-of-the-plane kind of days. This time, the weather was great, we flew to Topeka for lunch, and then flew over her house in Council Grove. She was really excited to take the controls, but hesitant to bank the plane more than about 5 degrees. B)

A good time had by all...

--Kath

 

[fgcason]

It sounds like you had fun Kath.

Those 180hp 172's are fun aren't they? I use to rent one here in COS that had stall fences, leading edge cuffs and a brand new engine. Throttle in and it would jump off the ground at 100F ground temps at 6183MSL and leave the ground behind. I regularly had to pull the throttle back during climbout to keep the plane ahead of me in sight...and above me. You could literally land on the numbers and get it stopped before the first stripe.

 

[Anthony]

Sounds like a nice trip Kath. Glad your sister got to fly with you.

 

[Toby]

Happy New Yeark, Kath! That sounds like fun. It's easy to forget how weird any amount of bank feels to someone who's not used to a small plane. Glad you got back down here to the extended sunlight (!) for a bit.

I'd never heard of a 180 hp 172. It sounds fantastic. Why don't they make more of them?

 

[TDKendall]

I'd never heard of a 180 hp 172. It sounds fantastic. Why don't they make more of them?

I'd like to have one, that's for sure. Probably about the same operating costs as a 182 but without the larger initial purchase price as a 182.

 

[etsisk]

I'd never heard of a 180 hp 172. It sounds fantastic. Why don't they make more of them?

Yeah, they're a more rare, and a bit more pricey than the std 172s. My glider club (NC Soaring Assn) just got a 180 hp 172 for use as a tow plane and everyone really likes it, from what I understand! I've not yet flown behind it, but will Saturday, God willing!

 

[kath]

I'd never heard of a 180 hp 172. It sounds fantastic. Why don't they make more of them?

That's what I've been wondering. You'd think that the 250 extra pounds of useful load would be worth a LOT to people. Enough to pay a little extra for...

--Kath

 

[Toby]

Yeah, they're a more rare, and a bit more pricey than the std 172s. My glider club (NC Soaring Assn) just got a 180 hp 172 for use as a tow plane and everyone really likes it, from what I understand! I've not yet flown behind it, but will Saturday, God willing!

Please let us know what it's like. I wonder how much they go for. Find out what the fuel burn is, too, while you're at it.

[edit - I just realized you said you're flying behind it, not in it. Maybe you can get to fly it, too, just for research.]

 

[deafsound]

I flew one at Flagstaff, AZ. The airport is at 7k'msl there as some of you know. It certainly made the takeoff a lot quicker. The guy who owned it had the upgrade done from a lower hp. I guess they commonly have DAs in the summer there of over 10,000'.

 

[Anthony]

The 180 HP 172 conversions are very popular here in Colorado. With field elevations from 5,000 ft. to 10,000 ft. and DA's well above that much of the year, its nice to have the extra HP.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

I'd like to have one, that's for sure. Probably about the same operating costs as a 182 but without the larger initial purchase price as a 182.

...without the performance of a 182.

 

[Anthony]

...without the performance of a 182.

And without the fuel burn of a 182.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

And without the fuel burn of a 182.

I've never done it but I wonder how close the two fuel burns would be if one throttled back the 182 to the cruise speed of the 172 ?

Our club had a 172 with a 220 Franklin on it that was quite fast and popular except the Cessna drivers couldn't keep from repeated hard nosed LDGs with damage, and the owner understandably jerked it from the line !

 

[Ghery]

I learned in a 180 hp C-172N. It's about 25 knots slower than a 182. Burns less gas (supposedly about 8.3 gal/hr at 65% power, where it will do about 114 KIAS). The extra 250 pound gross weight is nice. We have long range tanks in the 172N (50 gal useable) and also long range tanks in the 182 (75 gal useable). With full tanks (plan on it, the club requires that planes be put away full so the next pilot doesn't have to get gas before flying) the 180 hp 172N has a significantly higher payload than the 182. A surprise, but that's what the numbers show. About 750 pounds in the cabin with full tanks. 6 hours endurance at 65% power. About twice as long as I'm going to sit in it without landing, stretching my legs and visting the rest room. I've had it up to 12,500 MSL with two aboard on a warm August day and it would have climbed higher.

Don't know about the fuel burn in the 182 when throttled back to the 172s cruise speed. Never cruised that slow in the 182.

For a clue on operating costs, we pay $80/hr wet for the 182 and about $55/hr wet for the 172. Burns less gas and doesn't have the constant speed prop to maintain. But I like the 182 better for cruising as it has a lot more room for the pilot and passengers.

 

[kath]

we pay $80/hr wet for the 182 and about $55/hr wet for the 172.

Holey Moses! Sign me up! Here, I pay $83/hr for a C-150.....

--Kath

 

[jdwatson]

The Skyhawk 172SP has 180HP... it's one of my favorites.

BTW, sounds like a great time had by all! I'm jealous.

 

[tom.]

I found a place in Manhattan, KS which rents Cessna "SuperHawks" -- that is a regular SkyHawk with a 180 HP engine stuck on front. It was a very nice plane.
--Kath

Would that be the constant-speed prop version? Flew one out west; it was sweet but had sticky aileron cables. But it sure did climb

 

[Ghery]

Holey Moses! Sign me up! Here, I pay $83/hr for a C-150.....

--Kath

Hey, we're just a little south of you. Come on down!

Would that be the constant-speed prop version? Flew one out west; it was sweet but had sticky aileron cables. But it sure did climb

Is there a constant speed prop mod for a 172? I get great climb with just the 180 hp mod and a fixed pitch prop.