by Pete Schoeninger
© Copyright 2022. All rights reserved!
Published In Midwest Flyer Magazine February/March 2022 Online Issue
Q) A friend told me you did some unusual marketing when you were the longtime manager of a fixed base operation. What was your most successful marketing idea?
A) The hands-down-answer was re-painting a rental Skyhawk green and gold during the year the Green Bay Packers won the Super Bowl about 25 years ago. For months thereafter, that airplane was by far the most requested of the 3 or 4 Skyhawks we had for rent. (If you happen to be so unlucky as to be a fan of “Da Bears,” the Packers’ colors are green and gold.)
Q) Someone told me that a guy recently crunched a Cessna 150 when he had 40 degrees of flaps extended, and for some reason could not retract them, and thus could not climb. Is that a possible scenario?
A) Under some conditions of density altitude and load, climb is not possible with 40 degrees of flaps extended in a Cessna 150, and others. Most single-engine Cessnas through the mid 1970s had flaps that could extend as far as 40 degrees. 40 degrees of flaps produces a massive amount of drag, allowing a steep descent without a lot of speed increase and then a short landing. In later years most models had flap travel limited to 30 degrees, which in my experience was always plenty. With the average lightplane in this country now 45 – 50 years old, it is possible that a flap motor could burn out, wiring or connections or switches could fail, making flap retraction impossible. Lots of people, including me, suggest application of 40 degrees of flaps only when landing is assured.
If you have 40 degrees of flaps extended and then had to make a go-around, most owner’s manuals recommend immediate flap retraction to 20 degrees to allow some climb capability.
Q) You (and my instructor) have recommended carb heat be applied before power reduction. Why can’t I wait until after I pull power back to apply carb heat (as in landing)?
A) The air induction system on carburetor-equipped aircraft engines, to meet certification requirements, should be able to raise incoming air 90 degrees Fahrenheit when the engine is operating at 75% power. If you wait until power reduction to add carb heat, there may not be enough heat to melt any accumulated ice. Remember that hot air is thinner, so applying carb heat in effect richens the mixture a little. In some airplanes I have flown (old C-182s), you may need to lean fuel mixture a bit after carb heat application.
Q) The styling and looks of the Cessna 177 Cardinal have always appealed to me. Some people have told me the aircraft was intended to replace the C-172 but failed miserably. Is that true? Have you ever flown one, owned one, or had one in a rental fleet, and if so, how did they fare?
A) Yes, to all your questions. The folks at Cessna intended that the Cardinal would replace the stodgy model C-172, but that didn’t happen. Cessna made 1150-plus Cardinals – the first production year of 1968 beating the C-172 production number for 1968 of 650. But thereafter, Cardinal sales took a nosedive and never recovered. 1969 production numbers of Cardinals dropped from 1150 to 200, while C-172 production numbers doubled from 650 to about 1300.
Problems on the initial (1968) airplanes included a powerful tail that in the hands of a ham-fisted pilot could produce pilot induced oscillations, resulting in a hard landing, sometimes so hard firewall damage occurred. At some combinations of weight, speed, C.G., and flap setting, the tail could stall during landing flare, resulting in a nose-first thump on touchdown, again with the possibility of firewall damage. The stabilizer problems were corrected under warranty, but the bad reputation was not corrected. With only 150 hp, the airplane was somewhat of a weakling on takeoff and climb. (1969 models had 180 hp, a major improvement.) These early problems negated some wonderful characteristics of the airplane which included great visibility, a roomy cockpit with easy entry through wide doors onto a low floor, and crisp control responses.
I enjoyed flying the Cardinal (1968 model) I owned personally, and many others we rented and sold. The C-177 was not as tolerable as the C-172 to ham-fisted renters, and in my opinion were best suited to individual ownership. With more room, and more fuel, and more room than C-172s (but 100 lbs. less useful load), Cardinals were better cross-country airplanes than C-172s for mom and pop and bags or kids but lacked the versatility and safety the C-172 offered and offers today.
Q) Friends are suggesting that I install a larger diameter prop with a smaller pitch on my 1975 Cessna 172M, like a seaplane prop for better takeoff and initial climb performance, even though I’m on wheels. What do you think?
A) Your friends are correct in that a larger diameter prop with smaller pitch allows the engine to turn up about 125 more RPMS, giving more thrust for takeoff and climb, which seaplanes need, but you cannot put that prop on your landplane! You won’t have enough ground clearance from prop tip to the ground to be legal, or even safe. Your airplane, in land configuration, came with a 75-inch prop model 1C160 CTM 7553. The approved prop for seaplane operations is the 80-inch diameter 1A175 ATM 8042.
Any prop change from standard must be legal, either via manufacturer’s optional equipment list, Supplemental Type Certificate (STC) or Field Approval from a local FAA maintenance inspector. The approved seaplane prop (in this case approved by Cessna) for the C-172M cannot be used on landplanes because the increased diameter (5 inches in your case) would put the prop tip closer to the ground than the certification requirement of 7-inch clearance when loaded to gross weight and leveled require. (For tailwheel airplanes, the clearance requirement is 9 inches.) In some instances, for some airplanes, a larger prop installation will require bigger tires and maybe even different landing gear legs/location to get the required prop clearance. The dollars on a project like this can add up very quickly. For only a few hundred dollars, you can get a little more thrust out of your current prop by getting it repatched to a finer pitch, but you will lose a little cruise speed.
Q) I am a new private pilot; I do not have an instrument rating yet. A couple of times flying alone this winter, I have been tempted to fly through a snow shower. Is this dangerous? Will snow stick to my airplane?
A) NEVER fly through a snow shower unless you can see through it to the other side! Otherwise, you could be flying into a whiteout, where you will need instrument capability to survive. IF you are instrument rated, flight in or under clouds with snow may be done safely, but you must be aware of perils that are beyond the scope of this column. I have never had snow stick to my airplane when flying through snow showers in cold temperatures. But as temperatures warm, snow showers could contain freezing rain, sleet, and other bad stuff besides snow. Avoid those perils at all costs as they could be fatal.
Q) My friends think I am nuts, but I keep my airplane tied down inside a hangar. Who’s the wacko in our group?
A) If your hangar has one open side, then it’s not a bad idea. But if your hangar is sealed, I think it is overkill.
Q) I recently got my private pilot certificate with all my flight-time in a Piper Warrior. Now, I want to rent the flight school’s Archer. The flight school requires a minimum one-hour checkout to rent their Archer. Isn’t that ridiculous? I mean, after all, I just spent $12,000 with them! Aren’t they virtually the same airplane except the Archer has a little more power? Why the hour minimum requirement?
A) Archers and Warriors share many components and have very similar flight characteristics. Many pilots have stepped into an Archer from a Warrior with no problems. But there are weight differences, fuel burn differences, different speeds on climb that a pilot should be aware of. An hour of dual instruction never hurt anybody, so go along with their requirement, which might be from their insurance carrier, or their management. Afterall, it’s their airplane, not yours!
Flight instructors are usually paid by time with the customer/renter. If you were a flight instructor, and you were scheduled to give a checkout to a pilot, and it was obvious he was completely competent after 15 minutes of flying, if you let him go, you only earn a quarter of an hour of pay, but you probably have the whole hour blocked off. So, some flight schools have gone to a minimum dual instruction time of one hour, if for no other reason than to protect their CFIs from tight-fisted renters beratement.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Pete Schoeninger is a 40-year general aviation veteran, starting out as a line technician as a teenager, advancing through the ranks to become the co-owner and manager of a fixed base operation, and manager of an airport in a major metropolitan community. He welcomes questions and comments via email at PeterSchoeningerLLC@gmail.com.
DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this column is the expressed opinion of the author only, and readers are advised to seek the advice of others, and refer to aircraft owner manuals, manufacturer recommendations, the Federal Aviation Regulations, FAA Aeronautical Information Manual and instructional materials for guidance on aeronautical matters.
