|
|
|
|
|
#1
23rd March 2008, 03:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Trip Report - YSBK-YPPF-YSBK
Hey Guys,
Last Thursday the 13th of March, i set on a voyage to Parafield in Adelaide from Bankstown and Back. The aircraft was a Cessna 177 Cardinal - WWZ. Thursday 13th Waking up at around 5am to finish my flight plan and drive out to Bankstown, the weather was looking good for the entire journey apart from some forecast early cloud, which was non existent. I took off at 0820 Local from Bankstown off runway 29R, with a nice long climb to 8500ft. The CSU seemed to have some issues on climb, with the RPM momentarily dropping 30-40 RPM periodically. Increasing the RPM seemed to fix this problem and the rest of the climb was uneventful. Unfortunately for the cruise, i had a headwind! Planning TAS for the 177 is 125kt, but i was only achieving around 105kt GS. After numerous in flight calcs i was satisfied i was going to get to Swan Hill with my reserves in tact. 4.1hrs later, i touch down on Swan Hill's runway 08. After a refuel and toilet break, i accepted a slight tailwind to achieve a straight out departure and once more a climb to 8500ft. RPM seemed stable during this climb. Inbound to Parafield via Substation, i got cleared a visual approach runway 23L. 2.5hrs later i shut down and was met with 40degree temps and a whole lot of wind. Saturday 15th On Saturday the 15th of March, 0800 local, My passenger and I walked out to the aircraft. 30mins later we got a hold of the re-fuellers there, ordered full fuel and learned that he didn't have an air compressor that i could use to fill up my somewhat low right main tire. I taxiied over to the FTA hangar who were nice enough to supply me with some gas. (Thanks also to Bob the refueller!) An hour and 15mins later, we are cleared for take off from runway 03L via Dam Wall. This time we climbed up to 9500ft with somewhat smooth flight conditions. After planning my descent, we made a straight in on runway 08 at Swan Hill. Lovely flight - bit late but hey, plenty of time left... right? After refueling, we discover that the trusty 177 didn't want to start. I found this interesting after having just flown for 2hrs and not noticing any abnormal ammeter readings. I am positive i did not leave the masters on to all you skeptics. Now a can of worms are opened... who is 'brave' enough to prop start us?! After a visit to the Mid Murray flying club, the ever so helpful Grahame volunteered to come out and give us a swing  . Unfortunately after his much appreciated attempts to get us going, it refused to start. He was nice enough to give me the number of the ONLY engineer in town (who was on his day off) - if he couldn't help us we were on our own. "Yeah mate, i don't think i can help you out sorry."  Although after some 'negotiating skills' , he came out and was happy to give us a hand. A quick jump start and we were up and running.The flight back to Bankstown was uneventful, other than those lovely thermals that insisted on making our flight bumpy. Cleared to land runway 11L, the 6hr Journey was over. Here is a video of the YPPF - YSWH - YSBK portion of the flight. (Excuse the dodgey quality). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKuDCNMjRKk I'd Like to extend a massive thank you to the people of the Mid Murray flying club, they were a great bunch of people who have such a positive culture when it comes to aviation! 
|
|
#7
24th March 2008, 11:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
#8
25th March 2008, 10:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thanks for posting this very interesting report, Daniel! How does the 177 compare performance-wise with the 172 and 182?
|
|
#9
25th March 2008, 03:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Glad you enjoyed it! The 177 is basically a big 172. The main difference being the strutless wings, CSU, larger engine [O-360](depending on what model 172), and it being heavier. There are also little things like it utilizing a stabilator rather than a conventional tail plane/elevator construction. It is noticeably heavier to fly than a 172 also. Inside is very comfortable - much more so than a 172. 4 people fit comfortably. It also has quite a good payload. Performance wise it cruises along quite nicely at 125KTAS @ 38L/hr. Can't comment on the 182, never flown it... but it's bigger and faster still.
|
|
#10
27th March 2008, 11:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
The Cessna 177 was designed to be a trendy looking C172 replacement....but it never happened.
One of the intial problems was the all flying tailplane, leading to stability problems. They eventually got it right. The initial 150 hp version was underpowered, I was once a part-owner of one converted to 180-hp with a CS prop, even then it was only just adequate. Used to plan on 125 kts, very comfortable seating for the rear passengers.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
