The Skyhawk turns 50
I want to thank you and your staff for an excellent special report on the fiftieth birthday of a classic aircraft (" The Skyhawk Turns 50," April Pilot). I enjoyed reading the main article by Peter A. Bedell and all of the personal stories about the Cessna 172. I learned to fly in a 152 and logged a number of hours in a 1958 172, and I know from personal experience the virtues of this great general aviation aircraft. However, if you carefully read the "Spec Sheet" on page 78, you will notice that the speeds listed for the 1956 Cessna 172 are incorrect as presented. All early models of the Cessna 172 had airspeed indicators in mph (not knots). Therefore, the cruise speed is 108 mph, the V NE is 138 mph, and the V SO is 50 mph. These speeds (especially the cruise speed) are exactly what I would expect from practical experience. Thank you very much for an excellent trip down memory lane.
Newark, Delaware
Peter A. Bedell writes: Like all older 172s, N5000A's airspeed indicator is calibrated in miles per hour. However, according to the AOPA Publications Stylebook, the preferred style in "Spec Sheet" is to use figures in knots. Some exceptions are cases of older airplanes and antiques. While N5000A falls in the category of "older" airplane, it was listed in this article side by side with a new airplane. For the reader to have an apples-to-apples comparison, I elected to convert N5000A's specs to knots. While those figures might look like they are read more accurately in mph, they are correct as they stand. A little explanation is in order, though. The V NE for N5000A is quite low because it was a prototype. Later models of 172s had higher never-exceed speeds as the design became proven. If you look at the photos on page 73, you'll see that N5000A's airspeed indicator has a redline just shy of 160 mph, or 138 knots. Likewise, the stall speed of the early 172s is higher than later models because of the lack of a cuffed leading edge on the older airplanes. While a new 172 would still be flying at 50 knots, the old ones can't claw the air any longer. The cuff appeared in 1973 and was one of the better upgrades to the Skyhawk.
Great articles on a wonderful airplane that was the first step up to "heavy iron" for so many of us. For a whole generation of Vietnam-era Air Force pilots, the first exposure to military aviation came in the left seat of the T-41 (the military designation of the 172) with a civilian contract instructor offering "encouragement" from the right seat.
For some, hopes of a career as a military pilot ended after a few hours of attempting to master the military approach to flying the Cessna. But for most of us, that was the beginning of the journey through another Cessna product, the T-37, the Northrop T-38, and then the "real" Air Force.
Sacramento, California
You did an outstanding job on commemorating the Cessna 172. On page 70 there is a picture identified as "Hundreds of 172s await delivery in the late 1950s." The airplanes in the picture are not 172s, but 175s. Even though they look similar to a 172, there are several structural differences. To prove my point, I ask you to look at the diamond-shape logo on the cowl (a 172's would have been a circle), the paint scheme, the open air intake, and the large air filter, not to mention the raised crankshaft for the propeller.
Grain Valley, Missouri
Miller is correct. Pilot regrets the error.
IFR in a modest airplane
I really enjoyed Rick Durden's article about the 1,100-nautical mile trip he took in a Cessna 150 (" IFR in a Modest Airplane," April Pilot). I currently own a 150 and am getting great utility out of it, both for local and long-distance flights. Durden is right — it is affordable. I have previously owned Cessna 182s and 172s, and while they indisputably have more payload and speed than the 150, they are a lot more costly to purchase and operate. For personal use I have found it difficult to justify the cost of a 182, and while the 172 is a great compromise airplane, it's not really a four-place airplane and it's not really all that fast.
I have hung around a lot of airports during my aviation career (some 40 years), and what I usually observe is that most GA airplanes arrive with one person — the pilot — and sometimes, a pilot and passenger. Rarely do I see a 182 or 172 with three or four people in it. So if the typical mission involves one or two people, all you really need is a two-seater. As Durden pointed out, the 150 works out fine for trips. Plus it is great for local airport hopping. With today's increasing costs in aviation, especially fuel, the Cessna 150 doesn't get the recognition it deserves.
Basye, Virginia
I just finished reading "IFR in a Modest Airplane." If Durden was embarrassed to be flying a Cessna 150 he should have stayed home.
Lakewood, New Jersey
A great big thank you to Rick Durden and his wonderful article about taking a long IFR cross-country in a 150. I get so tired of the mindset that says we shouldn't leave the traffic pattern without radar, Stormscope, deicing, anti-icing, two engines, and a parachute.
Durden proves that a pilot who is willing to do the homework, be attentive, and always have a plan B can venture out far from home in an airplane of any size. Pilots who insist on all the bells and whistles before they will open the hangar door need to rekindle the spirit of adventure that took them to the airport for their first flight.
Saline, Michigan
Saving Aircraft Inc.
I thoroughly enjoyed the article " Saving Aircraft Inc." by Alton K. Marsh in the April 2006 issue of AOPA Pilot even if his navigation is suspect — he wrote, "Hollywood is 30 minutes to the east." I assure you that Hollywood is west of Chino. When the next article in the magazine was on getting lost and written by the same author (" Proficiency: Oops, Wrong Airport") I thought, "Oh, the April issue."
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Alton K. Marsh writes: As you know, Easterners recognize only the direction "east," even when they (I) are in California. I wish I could say it was simply a matter of loyalty to the East Coast that I made the error. You noticed, of course, that I did get it right in the introduction, where I noted that Chino is east of Los Angeles, because that played right into my East Coast bias.
I am glad you enjoyed the article and hope you continue to enjoy AOPA Pilot (the headquarters of which are located 2,000 miles east of Los Angeles).
Test Pilot
In April's " Test Pilot" quiz, the answer to the first question bugs me (pun intended). Spiders, mites, and scorpions are all arachnids, not insects.
Winchester, California
Barry Schiff writes: You are obviously correct in that spiders are technically not insects. Having said that, we are allowed to use the word insects to include spiders and other such critters when using the word in a general sense. I didn't want to refer to those airplanes as being named after bugs. That would sound too irreverent. So I used the generalized sense of insects, which I hope you will forgive and understand.
The great mechanic shortage
I enjoyed Matt Thurber's article, " The Great Mechanic Shortage" (April Pilot). I have perhaps an unusual perspective on the subject as an A&P, married to an A&P. My (brilliant) wife had an engineering job at a major avionics firm when she graduated. She has never signed a logbook, and has little interest in doing so. I worked part time as an A&P for a year and enjoyed it, but took the pay raise to be a CFI. I have no desire to take a significant pay cut and accept worse working conditions to be a mechanic again. Thurber is basically correct, though; there will never be a shortage of mechanics for jobs where they are well paid and well respected. Personally, we take our airplane to the folks at the single most expensive facility within 50 miles, because of its superior work.
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Erratum
In " Cessna Turbo 206: Panel Truck," February Pilot, it was written that the T206 could fly six 200-pound passengers 350 nm. In fact, 1,200 pounds of passengers leaves room for approximately 16 gallons of fuel, depending on the empty weight of the airplane. That's enough for a trip of just 0.7 hours — or about 100 nm — at a 75-percent power setting at altitudes below 10,000 feet. Pilot regrets the error. — Editors
We welcome your comments. Address your letters to: Editor, AOPA Pilot, 421 Aviation Way, Frederick, Maryland 21701. Send e-mail to [email protected]. Include your full name, address, and AOPA number on all correspondence, including e-mail. Letters will be edited for length and style.
Related Articles
