by Pete Schoeninger
© Copyright 2023. All rights reserved!
Published in Midwest Flyer Magazine April/May 2023 Digital Issue
Q) I’ve always loved the Cessna 177 Cardinal and wonder why Cessna Aircraft discontinued manufacturing them. Enlighted me, please.
A) Yes, Cardinals are a great bird and I have owned one, and sold several over the years. But a real problem with early Cardinals is that they porpoise terribly. That was, with full flaps and in a specific center of gravity (CG) range, the airflow over the stabilizer during landing flare could exceed critical angles of attack and stall. When that happened, the negative load on the tail normally carried, would almost end, which resulted in a quick and nasty nosedive from a couple feet above the runway. If lucky, only a bounce and often a porpoise followed. But if the landing was hard, you could smack the propeller and damage the firewall, resulting in a sudden stop of the engine.
Cessna realized the problem and immediately (as I think I recall) issued a restriction on flap settings, did some testing, and then put inverse slots in the tail to prevent tail-stalling. This was done most of the way through the 1968 production run, if I recall correctly. They also shipped repair kits to owners allowing field repairs to early stabilators already in use on early serial number planes.
Too bad the aircraft got off to a bad start which otherwise is a good airplane. Cardinals offer much better visibility and more flexible loading with bigger fuel tanks and a roomy cabin. For some reason, I remember flying a Cardinal nonstop from Milwaukee Timmerman Airport or Watertown Municipal to Nashville and having a little bit of fuel still unused. I don’t think Cessna 172s of that vintage could go that far safely.
Q) A friend said there is a link on the internet with compiled information on operating, maintaining, and modifying little 100 hp and lower Continental engines. I am particularly interested in opinions on the use of newer oils in old Continental engines. Can you help me find this link?
A) I suspect your friend was referring to an excellent source from a very knowledgeable A&P mechanic named Harry Fenton, posted on the Internet about 6 years ago. Harry has graciously given me permission to share this link. Do an internet search for “Harry Fenton’s Hints and Tips for small Continental engines.” And when you’re done, consider sending Harry a thank you note for the excellent compilation.
Q) In the February/March 2023 issue of Midwest Flyer Magazine, you suggested a hangar be built on the top of a north sloping airstrip. One reason you gave was you didn’t want to be taxiing downhill on snow and ice and not be able to stop to get into a hangar in the middle or bottom of the strip. Is that really true? Frankly, it sounds like a stretch to me.
A) I should have added the airstrip owner indicated he would be using skis in the winter as conditions permit. Going downhill on skis on a snow and ice-covered runway may be a thrill you don’t want to experience. Thanks for nudging me to clarify this question and answer.
Q) I am on the highway committee for our local township. In addition to public works stuff, we supervise a small airport in our town. After a few FBOs failed, we did find a good FBO who assumed the contract of the previous FBO. This contract expires next year. We very much want to keep the guy we have and not go through the whole open bid process. Any ideas on how to do this?
A) What I have seen done is to negotiate an “extension” to the current contract. You may, or may not, be able to do this legally, but if you can, it is a good way to keep a good tenant. Be sure to check with your town’s attorney.
Q) There is a picture going around the Internet of an airplane in a STOL contest that has a brick attached to the tailwheel spring. Would this be legal to fly an airplane this way? And, legal or not, why do it?
A) Some airplanes used in STOL competitions are souped up versions of Piper Super Cubs or similar airplanes. A bigger engine may be installed, a bigger prop, and bigger tires. All of these parts add weight to the front of the airplane, and thus move the empty center of gravity of the airplane forward, sometimes forward of safe limits. The brick on the tail attempts to negate some of these effects but would NOT be legal on a production airplane with a standard airworthiness certificate. Other ways that have been used to keep the C.G. from moving too far forward is to use a shorter motor mount moving the bigger engine backward a little. Some other things that have been done is to move an oil cooler from the front of the engine to the firewall, the battery moved well aft of the C.G., and a composite prop installed at half the weight of a metal one. Owners are urged to consult with their aircraft technician and refer to the Federal Aviation Regulations before having a qualified aircraft technician with inspector authorization make any modifications to any aircraft.
Q) An individual 1,000 miles from me is interested in my 1963 Cessna 182. He is willing to send a deposit to hold the airplane until his mechanic can fly out and look at it. But he is insisting that I send all maintenance records to him for his, and his mechanic’s, perusal before sending his mechanic to make a personal inspection. I have offered to make copies of the last few years of airframe, engine, and prop logs and send them to him via email, but he is still insisting on seeing all original maintenance records at his location. Should I send them?
A) DON’T DO IT! I cannot think of any reason you should surrender your original maintenance records for the last 50 years to someone you do not know. Your offer to make copies of the last few years of entries and email them to him is reasonable. Tell the prospective buyer if his mechanic comes out, you will let that person review all the logs in person. If he balks, don’t worry…there are always buyers for Cessna 182s, and surely many are closer than 1,000 miles.
Q) A friend told me that the Lycoming 0-320 150 hp engine has been in production for more than 60 years. Is that possible?
A) Yes, it’s a good engine, found in many different airframes. My first recollection of them is on the Piper Apache in 1954. That’s 69 years ago! Back then you could get a new Piper Apache with two (2) 0-320 engines for about $35,000. The 0-320 has been offered in several versions, including some with fuel injection, some with turbo charging, some with counter-rotating crankshafts on the Piper Twin Comanches. Cessna went to the 0-320 with the 1968 C-172, replacing an older and heavier 145 hp engine and used it through 1986. The 0-320 was also used in the Cessna Cardinal beginning in its first year in 1968. Piper used the engine in a slew of Cherokees, as well as Tri-Pacers and Super Cubs, and Beech used them in the Beech Sport.
Q) A friend told me he read that if a pilot flies a final approach 10 mph or so faster than recommended, the aircraft could float for as much as 1,000 feet above the runway before touching down. Is that possible?
A) Absolutely correct. If a pilot approaches 10 kts or so faster than recommended, he/she will probably “float” (depending somewhat on flap deflection selected) maybe 5-10 seconds to slow to recommended “over the fence” speed. Do the math. At 70 kts, you are traveling a little over 100 feet per second. Floating over the runway for let’s say 5 seconds at an average speed of 70 kts = 550 feet, but if you float for 10 seconds, you will float about 1,100 feet. On a 4,000 ft runway, you might not notice the difference. But if you’re going into a relatively short strip, you might end up running off the end of the runway if you approach 10 kts too fast.
Q) I saw a picture of a snowmobile somehow attached to the right side of a bush plane. There was also a picture of a bush plane with a bunch of lumber attached to the belly, to be dropped over a remote site. I’ve seen numerous photos of snowshoes and skis and possibly rifles fastened to the outside of airplanes, but never a snowmobile! Is something as big and heavy as a snowmobile legal and safe to carry on an airplane?
A) It can be legal IF the operator has a restricted airworthiness certificate allowing it. There will usually be strict guidelines specifying loads and limits which must be obeyed by. You’ll need permission from the FAA or a Designated Airworthiness Representative (DAR).
Q) How about a market update?
A) From what I hear, airplanes are still selling well, but not at the wild pace of last summer. A shortage of inventory continues to be a problem. There seems to be a few less buyers because of higher interest rates, but good airplanes priced fairly are still selling promptly.
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. Pete welcomes questions and comments about aircraft ownership via email at PeterSchoeningerLLC@gmail.com
DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this column is the expressed opinion of the author. Readers are urged to seek the advice of others, including flight instructors, licensed aircraft technicians, airport managers, fixed base operators, and state and federal officials. Neither the author, Midwest Flyer Magazine, Flyer Publications, Inc., or their staffs, employees or advertisers assume any liability for the accuracy or content of this column or any other column or article in this publication.
