Cessna 172XP

MarcoDA40

MarcoDA40

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Apr 14, 2015
Messages
143
Display Name
Display name:
Marco
Ill be getting checked out in a Cessna 172XP tomorrow morning.
I have never flown a high wing. ever. Very close to 150hrs, Most of it is in a DA40, some in a DA20 and a maybe 15 hours between a Warrior and a Cherokee.
What are some things to expect? I know ground effect and the view is different but anything else? Harder to fuel up?
Im afraid of edges(not heights) so will the "lack" of wing under me make me feel uneasy?
I've never had the chance of flying a high wing until now but i like low wings better(up to this point, by the looks alone),
Ive searched some about the 172XP and seems that the main differences are 1) Bigger engine 2) CS Prop and 3) that it is a different airframe

advice/input?
Thanks!
 
i have some time in 172, i have a fear of fall (and the sudden stop at the end of it) and i like low wing LOT better. from what i know about XP, use some rudder trim. between 172 and PA-28, i feel PA is lot stable while rocking and roiling. fueling up high wing is a pain, you either need to carry a small ladder, or get one from FBO, or climb on the strut and balance yourself while fueling. dont know now many sumps are there in XP, the 172 i was training in had 13 (THIRTEEN). if you have fear of edge and when you look straight down and see mother earth, your fear could kick in, but you wont know until you try it out :p
 
You’ve never flown a high wing ,but you like low wings better. I think you may be starting off with a biased attitude towards the XP.
 
WannFly said:
i have some time in 172, i have a fear of fall (and the sudden stop at the end of it) and i like low wing LOT better. from what i know about XP, use some rudder trim. between 172 and PA-28, i feel PA is lot stable while rocking and roiling. fueling up high wing is a pain, you either need to carry a small ladder, or get one from FBO, or climb on the strut and balance yourself while fueling. dont know now many sumps are there in XP, the 172 i was training in had 13 (THIRTEEN). if you have fear of edge and when you look straight down and see mother earth, your fear could kick in, but you wont know until you try it out :p
Click to expand...
Will do tomorrow :)
frfly172 said:
You’ve never flown a high wing ,but you like low wings better. I think you may be starting off with a biased attitude towards the XP.
Click to expand...
I like low wings because of their looks
 
Ground effect, fueling, and sticking the tanks is the only thing I can think of, but I have never flown a low wing. I am interested in hearing how it went. In a few weeks I was planning on a DA-40 checkout and have only flown the C172S. The S still has 13 sumps. Have a slight fear of heights and the only time it comes into play is when trying to not fall off the little step on the strut during fueling or checking fuel level and caps. I like low wings better ;)
 
jaymark6655 said:
Have a slight fear of heights and the only time it comes into play is when trying to not fall off the little step on the strut during fueling or checking fuel level and caps.
Click to expand...
Seriously? That step on the strut is less than three feet off the ground. How do you fly without getting the bumblebee's?
 
Ryanb said:
Seriously? That step on the strut is less than three feet off the ground. How do you fly without getting the bumblebee's?
Click to expand...
Its different, I know I am not going to randomly fall out of the plane unless I open the door and get tangled up in the belt while trying to exit. On the step, its small and nothing really to hold onto and there is about nine feet between my head and the pavement for acceleration. Even worse recently due to ice and frost being on the planes in the morning.
 
The main difference, for me, between a C172 and a DA40 or a P28A is visibility during turns, especially in the pattern. In the low-wing, as you make your turns, you get to see below, ahead of you. In the C172, the wing will partially block your view which is annoying when you turn base-to-final because you cannot see the runway.

But overall it's pretty straightforward to go between the different aircraft.

Other things to consider:
  • It's easier to get in an out the C172 than a Piper or a Diamond Star.
  • The C172 has actual windows.
  • It's easier to inspect tanks in the Piper and the DA40 than the 172 -- as our age and, more important, weight increase, climbing on those blessed struts of the C172 is a pain.
  • It is a matter of time before you bump your head against the trailing edge of the 172's wings. Most likely to happen when the flaps are lowered and you are doing your preflight inspection. Will hurt.
  • Do not stick your hand in the gap between the wing and the aileron in the 172, while testing aileron movement with the other hand. Sharp edges. Will hurt.
  • The trim wheel in the C172 is more ergonomically positioned than in the DA40 or the P28A (at least for me).
Having said that, I love flying the Archer but I do fly the C172 once in a while especially when taking friends for a sky tour of Chicago. Let us know what you think once you are done with the checkout flight.
 
Last edited:
The model number is R172K, marketing name "Hawk XP" -- so some unofficially shorten it to "172XP".

The type has an interesting history. It started out as the R172E of 1967. It was a beefed-up version of the 172 (built under the type certificate of the old Model 175), with a fuel injected 210 hp Continental engine with constant-speed propeller. It was sold to the US Army as the T-41B Mescalero.

cessna_r172e_t41b.jpg

In 1968 a civilian version went into production by Cessna's affiliate in France, Reims Aviation, as the FR172E Reims Rocket. It sold relatively well in Europe for several years, but was not available on the US market.

cessna_fr172g_1970.jpg

The USAF ordered a version of the R172 for flight training at Colorado Springs, but for whatever reason they insisted on a fixed-pitch prop. That version was called T-41C. As Cessna engineers had warned, the fuel injection system did not play well with the fixed-pitch prop, and they had to do a lot of tinkering with the fuel metering system to get the T-41C to run right. The T-41D was an updated T-41B, intended for the military transport/support role instead of training. It was operated by USAF and various foreign air forces.

By the mid 1970s Cessna had decided to discontinue the Cardinal, a design more complex and costly to build than its stablemates. To take the Cardinal's slot in the catalog between the 172 and 182, Cessna "Americanized" the Reims Rocket by de-rating the engine from 2800 rpm (210 hp) to 2600 rpm (195 hp) for noise reduction*, and introduced it in the US for the 1977 model year as the R172K Hawk XP. The French version also took the name "Hawk XP" that year. Both the US and French versions were discontinued after the 1981 model year.

(*An STC is available to restore the full 210 hp and all the noise.)
 
You already have experience with the DA40, so you’re already acquainted with constant speed props. The 172 XP is a 172 on which they put a bigger engine and a constant speed propeller. The bigger engine makes the thing slightly more nose heavy, but also generates more heat in an airframe not originally designed to dissipate it. So you will have to deal with cowl flaps and watch the temps closer than the DA40. As others have said, visibility is not as good as on a DA40.

The DA40 controls ailerons with rods while the ailerons on the Cessna are controlled via cables and pulleys. You will find the response to be somewhat more sluggish.

Also, the Cessna will slow down and drop more readily than a DA40 when you reduce power. This is an advantage if you like carrier landings on short runways. While the DA40 will happily float in ground effect for half the runway length if you come in too hot at the threshold, the 172 is easier to slow down and l and in that situation.
 
Last edited:
Have some time in the XP and its the usual piece o cake to fly. CS is no big deal......but the downside of this bird is you don't get any hi-performance out of it with 195hp. You'll like the Cessna......
 
Vf6cruiser said:
Have some time in the XP and its the usual piece o cake to fly. CS is no big deal......but the downside of this bird is you don't get any hi-performance out of it with 195hp. You'll like the Cessna......
Click to expand...
It's only takeoff and climb that are affected. Cessna quoted cruise power at 80% rated power on the R172K instead of the customary 75%. 80% of 195 hp is virtually the same as 75% of 210 hp.
 
Note that in severe crosswinds, the downwind wing is "blanked" by the fuselage, which can lead to some interesting wing lifts while landing. I have a propeller in my music room that I modified in such a situation to "Q-Tip" configuration.
 
You might wonder why all that noise isn't translating into speed.

On the other hand, if you cruise in the DA40 with the vents wide open then the noise should be right at home for you. :)
 
You will definitely enjoy the better views of the ground, but you're probably going to be disappointed performance wise unless it has the STC for 210 HP...

Let us know tomorrow after your flight what you think!
 
When you pull the yoke back on the 172 the plane will go up like the DA and the piper. So there’s that.
Seriously only thing I find is landing. That big high wing can act like a sail on a crosswind landing and get you in trouble. Key is you have to turn yoke into wind all the way and keep it there on touchdown then Get flaps right up. I’ve seen ppl land and neuralize Airelons or turn opposite of wind and that with the right gust will flip ya.
 
Maybe it's just me, but to me there's not much different between flying a low wing vs. a high wing. Particularly a PA28 vs a C172, they may handle a tad differently in a crosswind but you put in the necessary control inputs regardless. I don't think, oh gosh, I'm flying a high/low wing I'd better make sure I'm extra careful when taking off/landing in a crosswind/cruising/sitting in the pilot seat making airplane noises.

The biggest issues for me between a DA40 and a C172 has more to do with the sight picture when landing which really has little to do with where the wing is. The Diamond you're sitting deep down and low where a C172 you're sitting upright and looking over the cowl. I'd say, you'll probably flare a little low on you're first couple of landings but as long as you're 60-65KIAS at touchdown (many will say slower still but I think that's a comfortable landing speed when you're first flying it), landing a C172 is easy peasy.
 
I've flown a XP with the 210 hp Isham STC on amphib floats. I really enjoyed flying it. Wouldn't mind owning it.
 
Oh yeah, one other thing you will notice is that the flaps are much more effective...
 
One other thing, get used to the extra space for your knee board. Also get used to not being able to see parts of the panel.

(i.e. stick vs. yoke)
 
It’s a 172 with a bigger engine and CS prop, but still a 172.

Legit, IMO it’s a bad trainer because it’s too easy to fly. Think you’ll be aiiight
 
MarcoDA40 said:
Ill be getting checked out in a Cessna 172XP tomorrow morning.
I have never flown a high wing. ever. Very close to 150hrs, Most of it is in a DA40, some in a DA20 and a maybe 15 hours between a Warrior and a Cherokee.
What are some things to expect? I know ground effect and the view is different but anything else? Harder to fuel up?
Im afraid of edges(not heights) so will the "lack" of wing under me make me feel uneasy?
I've never had the chance of flying a high wing until now but i like low wings better(up to this point, by the looks alone),
Ive searched some about the 172XP and seems that the main differences are 1) Bigger engine 2) CS Prop and 3) that it is a different airframe

advice/input?
Thanks!
Click to expand...

Have a little faith. Don't think I've ever heard of a fuselage falling off the wing above it. Enjoy the view. Will it make you feel uneasy? I dunno, fly it and then you tell us. It don't bother me. Harder to fuel yes. Easier to pre flight? Yeah, except for fuel level. "By the looks alone." Yeah, to some they don't look 'cool' like real airliner type big iron airplanes. Up to you if that's important.
 
I fly both on a regular basis. A DA40 is light, glider wings. A C172XP is comparatively a heavier airplane, especially at the nose. You’ll notice it in the flare.

The XP has more power, don’t forget the rudder in the climb.

Yes you are blind in the turns, look before you turn.

Not to worry about fear of height, sitting on a low wing or hanging from a high wing. In 44 yrs of flying I’ve never really thought about it.

Learn to land, sitting height does make a difference to some people for the flare or round out for landing. You’ll get used to it.
 
Probably too late to matter to you, but in my mind the biggest gotcha in transitioning from a low wing to a high wing is the danger of smacking your forehead on the trailing edge of the wing.

The rest ... eh. It's like renting a sedan when you're used to driving an SUV. (Or vice versa, depending on your biases.) Way too big a deal is made out of the difference in wing position, IMO.
 
midwestpa24 said:
You can always tell a Cessna pilot by the diamond shaped scars on their forehead.
Click to expand...
Have avoided it so far, came really close a couple weeks back. I walked out from under the wing with the flaps down, turned and felt them brush against my forehead before performing something worthy of the Matrix while my passenger yelled to "look out". Need to switch to low wing before my luck runs out.
 
Oh yeah and those little steps on the mains to get in plane don’t bend when you whack your shin, right below your knee into them. You will see stars and say words!!!
 
The Hawk XP is a great airplane. It takes the most recognized training plane ever and adds enough thrust to make it a good performer. I had one for a few years. Loved it. Drop the preconceived notions and enjoy the ride.
 
Everyone has been so nice. I'll say it. High wings suck, tough to fuel, fly like trash, and you hang your head.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top