circling for purchase landing - A or B arrg!

futr_alaskaflyer · Post by **futr_alaskaflyer** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 7:33 pm

So, I am negotiating both a 1950 A model and a 53 B model for purchase...

I live in central Alaska where it is cold (well, not as cold as you Fairbanks folks but close) and am wondering if the difference between the cabin heat in the 50 and 53 is really that significant.

Also I've only flown in a B model and I wonder about the realistic difference in the barn door flaps? I'm not afraid of slips (matter of fact I rather enjoy working them even in the 172 I rent) but I want to eventually work myself into short strips. For now I will be working in and out of 2000 foot gravel or commuting to Merrill.

The 170A I'm looking at is a real cherry. And it is bare, something I've been looking for because of all the gravel here. The 170B has been rebuilt after an accident by a supposedly reputable 170 shop in Alabama which has all the usual advantages (corrosion treated, newish paint and interior, re-rigged) and disadvantages (were the repairs done well - who knows?) Both have the 7653 prop now but I would like a 8042 eventually.

Thanks for any advice. Of course with my luck they will both be sold out from under me anyway

but I'm sure I will come upon another really nice A model again and will be wrestling with the same questions.

cessna170bdriver · Post by **cessna170bdriver** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 8:19 pm

Check the first page of the directory (online in the Members Only section of cessna170.org) for the Maintenance Safety Officer. He's a retired FAA type from Alabama so he might give you some info on the shop that rebuilt the B model.

Miles

N1277D · Post by **N1277D** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 10:46 pm

It is my recollection that the B will get you into shorter strips but it has a similar takeoff distance as the A. The heater in my A model keeps the left foot perhaps too warm in a typical Idaho winter.

cessna170bdriver · Post by **cessna170bdriver** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:20 am

N1277D wrote:It is my recollection that the B will get you into shorter strips but it has a similar takeoff distance as the A. The heater in my A model keeps the left foot perhaps too warm in a typical Idaho winter.

I can't remember the published differences in performance, but I remember thinking that if there's a place that a B-model will get into that an A-model won't, I probably don't need to go there in anything. I seem to remember that both the A and B will get into places that neither could get out of with the stock engine. With 180 horsepower available for takeoff, that might change.

I've only flown an A-model once, and didn't use the heater. I'm happy with the heater in my 1955 B-model. It once kept the cabin at jacket temperatures (I'm guessing somewhere in the 40's) with an OAT of minus 20 at 8000 ft.

Miles

Post by **Bruce Fenstermacher** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:08 am

I wouldn't pass up a good A for a lessor B model because of the flaps unless you are going to REALLY REALLY push the envelope.

Make sure the B model your looking at has 3" scat coming of the back of the right muffler into a manifold that travels the width of the inside fire wall. That is the improved heat. If the scat is 2" and goes to a heat valve located above the pilots left foot it is not the improved heat.

Can't remember when in '53 they went to the improved heat.

futr_alaskaflyer · Post by **futr_alaskaflyer** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:12 am

cessna170bdriver wrote:Check the first page of the directory (online in the Members Only section of cessna170.org) for the Maintenance Safety Officer. He's a retired FAA type from Alabama so he might give you some info on the shop that rebuilt the B model.

Miles

Thanks, I sent him an email.

futr_alaskaflyer · Post by **futr_alaskaflyer** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:19 am

N9149A wrote:I wouldn't pass up a good A for a lessor B model because of the flaps unless you are going to REALLY REALLY push the envelope.

Make sure the B model your looking at has 3" scat coming of the back of the right muffler into a manifold that travels the width of the inside fire wall. That is the improved heat. If the scat is 2" and goes to a heat valve located above the pilots left foot it is not the improved heat.

Can't remember when in '53 they went to the improved heat.

Good tip, I'll ask the seller which one it has.

It's almost silly to make a purchase decision based on the heater in an airplane, but I plan on putting it on skis and flying it in the minus zero cold up here. I imagine that in the winter I would only occasionally have passengers. I guess the lack of cabin heat in the A model will cut down on the number of people wanting a free ride to town

Your (collective) comments about the flaps are well taken. I guess it is less of an issue for me after reading the comments here and in other threads. What a great forum!

Kyle · Post by **Kyle** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:13 am

Mine is a 52 B model and I only have the 2" scat with smaller heater above the pilots left foot. A couple of months ago (after seeing the post here with associated photo's) I fabricated a small scoop to enhance the airflow into the heater system which did improve the heat. It's removable for the summer season.

Out on the Cape, and I think typicaly for New England as a whole, we fly in the 20 degree range often. I'm just about keeping warm enough - really wish I had the other heating system

Oh well ....... just more layers till spring, but wait ...... springs upon us. Just feels like winter .........

Best of Luck

futr_alaskaflyer · Post by **futr_alaskaflyer** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:03 am

I saw that thread too. The A model I'm looking at has the stock winterization kit so if I buy it I would be making that mod first thing next October!

Well, the A is looking too good to pass up based on something as minor as potential frostbite! Perhaps an aftermarket heater will help do the trick. I don't know...is the janitrol heater available any more

Surely that would be a valuable field approval in the frozen wilds of Alaska!

blueldr · Post by **blueldr** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 3:04 am

Back in the olden days, I spent four years flying all over Alaska, except the pan handle, in all the seasons, mostly in a Noorduyn Norseman (C-64)but sometimes in a Dizzy Three (C-47), a C-46, Or a B-17.
My recolection is that no matter what kind of a heater is installed, it isn't enough!
I don't think it makes a tinkers dam which C-170 you are flying. In the Alaska interior winter the heater is not going to be enough.---- with the possible exception of the optional cumbustion cabin heater under the back seat. I know they were optional, but I've never seen one.
The older Norseman had an intensifier tube in the exhaust very similar to the one in the Canadian Harvard. (AT-6) The later C-64A had a Southwind combustion heater which was fairly adequate, but Alaska can be very cold in the winter. It takes one hell of a heater to overcome it in an unpressurized airplane.

Dave Clark · Post by **Dave Clark** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:03 pm

As far as takeoff in a B I can say that with the 180hp 10 degrees of flaps really shorten the takeoff and the power will allow it to keep climbing very nicely. With the C-145 and standard prop the 10 degrees didn't help much at all. The plane would get off maybe a little quicker but wouldn't climb out any better. In all a very noticable diference in short field work if you have the 180hp (or maybe a climb prop?).

Post by **Bruce Fenstermacher** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:27 pm

Richard please remember that for the most part I'd guess the collective wisdom here at the forum including me has not pushed the envelope of the 170 in Alaska. I'm sure there are exceptions and I've done some really cool stuff in my dreams.

So before you make a final decision on anything, whether that be the flaps or the heater I'd darn sure talk to people there who have done it.

N3243A · Post by **N3243A** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:29 pm

Depends on what you want to do with the airplane. If you really want to play in the weeds, I'd choose the B model and install an 80-42 prop. This prop also makes ski flying fun instead of scary in the deep stuff or overflow. Reasonably lightly loaded with this prop you can do some pretty good shortfield work that I think justifies having the larger B model flaps. The improved heating also includes a defroster which works Okay and is better than nothing. If both are stock, the B model will also have the better "lady legs" landing gear. Also, at some point if you wish to drop $50K and install the Lyc O-360, the B model is the better model to make this investment in, IMHO.

Bruce, '53 170B, Wasilla AK

Roesbery · Post by **Roesbery** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:02 pm

Having been there almost 30 years ago---, A stock 170 will teach you to use extreme caution with your loads, circling to out clime terrain, pay close attention to wind direction in the air and on the ground etc. Didn't take me long to upgrade to a 180 lyc. So "IF" you will be landing on gravel bars and ridge tops with a load of camping gear, a passenger or two and coming out with a load of meat a long way from a fuel source you need all the HP you can get. Which now days is Lyc O360, IO360, Con IO360, or Franklin 220 hp. There are a lot of places you might want to go that are 6 to 800 feet of usable runway. More that are 3 to 600 feet that cubs use and keep short just to prevent pilgrims from using their special spot. Now if you will be only going to long runways then it is not as important to have the higher HP

futr_alaskaflyer · Post by **futr_alaskaflyer** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:04 pm

N9149A wrote:Richard please remember that for the most part I'd guess the collective wisdom here at the forum including me has not pushed the envelope of the 170 in Alaska. I'm sure there are exceptions and I've done some really cool stuff in my dreams.

So before you make a final decision on anything, whether that be the flaps or the heater I'd darn sure talk to people there who have done it.

Roger that! Looks like I'm getting some good advice from fellow Alaskans too. Thanks!