I am 30 years old. I am coming from nothing and doing everything to become a commercial pilot here in Denver. It's going to be incredibly expensive, and take a long time. But this has been my dream and I'm finally pursuing it. Thank you Matthew and everyone at Wings Over the Rockies for giving me more inspiration to continue my dream in spite of all the adversity. I'll see you all in the sky some day.
Stavi... Lie, cheat, and steal if you have to! I stacked 1,000 bales of hay to pay for my final CFI checkride. Do what you have to do and it'll be worth it.
I loved that he called a 98’ Cessna an old school Cessna. I flew a ton with a buddy of mine who owned a 68’ Cessna around a year ago. You could go even older, to like 59’ and find some still flying Cessnas.
I have over 250 hours in the last three years on my 1957 172. Three trips from NW Indiana to the Gulf Coast, once around Lake Michigan with an overnight inside 24 hours, lots of going out just to commit aviation. Does not cost a quarter million! Flying Doodles did a video on a similar plane
1999 in a 172P, old Brown and Red trim N51883 that I don't think EVER looked good. It's since had a repaint and new interior, but it will always be Gross faded 70's brown to me.
Great video, thanks. Just amazing to think they are actually hand made like a Steinway Piano! I flew the 172 years ago. Like flying in a Cadillac. Really comfortable and stable plane.
This is great. Airframe manufacture in America. Not junk made overseas so corporate offices can have more cash in their coffers. All starting more or less with the 172.
I flew out to Colorado and did some light sport aircraft training with Ted Wilson in a powered parachute. I would love to see an episode done on that specific type of aircraft. It's very docile quite affordable and a great way for people to get into Aviation. It's one of the best experiences of my life, I hope that more people could get to find their dream.
Captain Mindy! I kept waiting for Steveo to pop in and lose to her in a contest :) I'm currently flying a 1964 C172 (not mine). It still flies great. The Venturi powered vacuum system takes a little getting used to and the non-standard instrumentation messes with my can but I still like flying her.
Jet airliners from the 1960's look the same, bolt action rifles from 1906 look the same. They are all refined, of course. Orion spacecraft is like the Apollo spacecraft.
I'm training in a g1000 right now, most people like the steam gauges, but I'm a glass cockpit junkie. According to the director of my flight school though garmin are a bit... iffy? I still personally like the glass cockpit, but I'd highly recommend any new fliers use the steam gauges first. The G1000 should come later. G1000's are expensive, and your first plane is probably gonna have steam gauges, unless you have money laying around. Get good with steam gauges until you get into the G1000, that's my advice to newer pilots. (Take this with a bit of skepticism, I still haven't even solo'd at the time of this comment, and this advice might not be for everyone.) Another note, the planes transponder broke and it took a shitton of time to replace it, so if you do have a G1000, don't expect to get parts fast.
Love the show, and it's good to see them do some GA aircraft. While the military aircraft are awe-inspiring, not many people will ever fly one. I have time in a 172 and loved it! I now have a J-3, which I love more..maybe a BTW for that one?
It's incredible to see all these locations, becuase I am in a Civil Air Patrol squadron near these places, and have been to the locations he's hosting. Not interesting to many people, but hey.
should of asked why the 172's the same plane it was 40 years and go and why today with inflation it should only cost about 90k but they are selling them for 400k ? thats the real question
It's the same plane because it's being manufactured under the pre-existing Type Certificate. As to the cost, a little liability, a little raw materials cost increases above inflation, a little much more expensive avionics, fancier leather interiors, easy credit, they're selling primarily to companies using the aircraft as a revenue source, and a little of breakdown of economy of scale on basically EVERY component on or in the aircraft. And then a little more liability costs because in any crash Cessna ends up sued no matter who's fault it was, and that just costs money in basic legal costs even if they don't get found negligent in any way.
Zack Riden It’s a solid aircraft when new and the avionics really bump the price. With the newer engines, new frame, and what not it racks up. You see the cheap 172s from the 70s and get the ides it’s really cheap.
One of the things about the 1966 Skyhawk is that the rear seats folded down “almost” flat. . . I could stuff two bicycles (with wheels removed) back there, for truly “remote start” bicycle rides. . .
The Cessna 172 wasn't made to be a flight trainer, the Cessna 152 was. Student pilot's fly the C152, a lot cheaper. Don't need electronic gauges to learn how to fly. You can learn the fancy glass cockpit after you get your pilot's license.
gmcjetpilot ...my instructor and I were too fat to be under gross for the 152, I had to learn in a 172.... LOL :) Good thing it was college and didn’t cost me extra.
I am 250, vast majority of my dual instruction was in an over gross 150, full fuel, usually in the summertime. We were taught all about weight and balance, but it never came up when it was time to fly! Seems times have changed, primary instruction is in elderly Warriors these days around my area. I have a buddy that flips a lot of parts, the demand is still there for the 150. He explains they are good for insurance purposes, you only risk killing 2 people rather than 3.
@@davidvicari5139 Yep when I was cfi full time, one of the 152s in the fleet was a 152 aerobat. It was a little heavier than a regular 152. At the time I was 160lbs, but you are right, headset, flight bag, etc. Most students were slim and trim, but they had some gear; we were at gross. Well the 152 aerobat had a very tired engine. I decided to give my student ready for check ride an emergency landing into grass strip. It had rained the day before. The strip had 100ft trees at end. Well he used questionable soft field technique. We were committed. He is climbing straight for the tree tops. I take the plane and bank with stall horn going off intermitantly to head for a cut in tree line off to side (where house was). We wallowed out looking at the taller trees to either side. The tired acrobat O235 115hp was making 80hp on a hot humid day at best. Add our weight, temp, runway condition it was not wise. The engine was removed for rebuild a week later. The 152 is a fine trainer but you are so right gross weight is easy to exceed. Even within gross it's not a soft short field plane at gross in summer. Never had an accident yet in 12000 hours. That was closest I ever want to come. I looked at poh and we should have made it, but the engine was a dog. The poh does have genetic soft field data... last 50ft obstacle in north west is 150 foot
Thanks! Mine is similar, I availed myself some dual in a club owned PA28-140, retired Purdue trainer. I had just jumped in it and sorta checked myself out, thought it would be a good idea even after the fact some hrs later. He was showing me a grass strip, We too were looking at approaching tree tops in a questioning fashion, when I noticed we had departed with carb heat on. Power got much better when that was corrected. On debrief, the instructor did allow we woulda had branches up the ass.
Only will add, I got PPL ride October 1985 in a 150 Aerobat. I had been on the ground for 20 years raising family etc when I retired, got the urge to fly again in 2015. That same Aerobat was still on the flight line 30 years later.
@Alan formula1 I would love to own any 182 however if painted the same, they look pretty much identical and they could literally be 45 years apart in age. That’s not innovation. Even the paint scheme is pretty weak when you compared to some of the experimental products that are out there not even mentioning Cirrus.
@Alan formula1 your not wrong in theory but there’s a reason why they get out sold now by Cirrus significantly . And because of the lack of innovation one could argue that’s why Cirrus has a better GA safety record. Personally I would still rather have the 182 for me but it would just be nice if they “ modernized” things just a tad.
@@kdrapertrucker I hear you but that philosophy allowed Cirrus to come into the marketplace and pretty much match their sales or outright pass them by depending on year.
Hi I'm over in the UK I love these and Scott does an excellent job and it would be great if he could do some episodes over here! We have loads of museums and other bits for him to explore. I should know I work on them.
It's amazing how you've maintained the aviation footprint with the unfortunate closure of Lowry AFB . . . however, the later creation of 'Wings over the Rockies' community ! Hopefully you'll soon include the Air Force rotary mission . . . in my case - Air Rescue & Recovery Service, a mission within the Military Airlift Command . . . based outta Scott AFB, IL.
I wish you had asked some statistics...how many airplanes do they produce a week? A month? Since there's enormous demand for the 172, how many shifts do they work? I'm surprised they don't have more automation in that assembly line...interesting!
There's "Demand" like there's a "Pilot Shortage" which is to say there's any demand, which was more than Cessna expected this far into new manufacture again. In order to automate they would need to rectify the manufacturing process which is expensive enough that it doesn't really pay itself back. And in a plane built under such old Type Certification you would probably have to start from a clean slate to design something optimized for automated manufacturing, like the Next Generation stuff Cessna was concepting back in the mid 2000's. Which then means a complete recertification of the design and the manufacturing. Cessna tried that with the 162 Skycatcher and that ended up just costing them a lot of money they didn't get back.
longshot7601 Actually the 152 is impossible to get any bug spatters on. The bugs bounce off the surfaces, shake their head wondering what they ran into and then fly along...
Q. WHY does your 172 have a three bladed prop? The first years, up through 1967 were powered by the fabulous Cont. 0-300, FLAT SIX engine of 145 h.p. Then beginning in 1968 Cessna decided to alienate most of their customer base by switching to the Lyc. flat four. That's the 0-320. Engine ran louder, rougher, vibrated lots more, etc. But all of those birds sported an all metal, fixed pitch, TWO BLADED propeller!
Robin Jacobs : I was wondering about the three-bladed prop too! I owned a 1966 Cessna 172 G Skyhawk. It had the Continental O-300 flat 6. The down side of those was that they had a hard time making TBO. An overhaul cost me $28,000 CDN in 2008. I sold it in 2010. It’s now being used by the local Community College for A&P instruction.
I am flying an O300B 1984 hours since the last overhaul in 1974. It was disassembled for a prop strike in 1977. It sat 13 years until I bought 3 years ago, over 250 hours. Oil and fuel consumption are well within norms, it makes book performance, it is signed off at annual.
It has needed 2 jugs and a generator. Seems the O300 cylinders often need overhaul, but the bottom end is forever. I will keep operating until my mechanic says otherwise, then yes that pricing for an overhaul does apply. But the 1800 hr TBO is just a number for private use.
...bueno que suministrarán Kits de actualización, para dejar instrumentos análogos por digitales, al fin y al cabo ellos tienen los planos de cada modelo... Gracias por compartir...
Matthew took his left hand of the yoke like 2 years before DU student finished his sentence about using one hand. Haha nice Matt, show him you know what's up.
I loathe the 172, done enough hours in them to last me a life time. Ironically, analog or “steam” driven gauges are more intuitive and easy to read for professional pilots. It’s why often even on a digital display, the software is designed to draw round steam-like gauges as opposed to the vertical tapes. Southwest Airlines if I’m not mistaken had their 737 NGs (at least years ago this was true, not sure now) programmed to show the classic “6-pack” primary flight instruments, instead of the standard vertical tapes normally used in Boeing glass cockpits. Although the real reason for this was to have commonality between the old -300 series and the newer -700 series back in the early 2000’s, so that the pilots could fly both variants within the same day;s worth of flying. There’s a whole section in our Human Factors study as pilots that goes into flight deck and instrumentation design. When shooting an instrument approach in IMC, I definitely prefer analog gauges. All this extra stuff on the Nxi like synthetic vision is incredibly distracting during your instrument scan, something that IFR pilots spend a lot of time practising and perfecting.
So, when the PIC (not a CFI in this case) sez "why don't you make a slight right turn" when he obviously means a left turn, do you simply let it go and turn left anyway, or do you call him out on it? The next time he may tell you to enter the upwind for runway 36, when the obvious instruction should have "down wind", or really whatever, should you call him out for that too, or just go look for another instructor?
It was probably an editing error that got overlooked. No telling how many times they flew over downtown, turning left, and right. They probably got the wrong audio in that shot.
Tom Clark ...They were very obviously left of downtown as the PIC clearly pointed out the right side of the aircraft. They then proceeded with a right turn towards downtown, with a later left turn that was filmed. Ya picky jerk.
![Flying The Cessna 172 Skyhawk In Independence, Kansas | Behind The Wings [4K]](/img/1.gif)
I am 30 years old. I am coming from nothing and doing everything to become a commercial pilot here in Denver. It's going to be incredibly expensive, and take a long time. But this has been my dream and I'm finally pursuing it. Thank you Matthew and everyone at Wings Over the Rockies for giving me more inspiration to continue my dream in spite of all the adversity. I'll see you all in the sky some day.
Stavi... Lie, cheat, and steal if you have to! I stacked 1,000 bales of hay to pay for my final CFI checkride. Do what you have to do and it'll be worth it.
It doesn’t have to be expensive or take a long time. I’m doing it at 51.
Very glad to see a show on PBS about general aviation. Please keep it up!
That's our mission! Currently making season 2.
That second skyhawk you showed was N855CP used to be out at Erie. I have about 30-40 hours in 855CP and it’s a great airplane.
I received my license in 1984 (a 152 ), love Cessna Aircraft and Kansas!
I loved that he called a 98’ Cessna an old school Cessna. I flew a ton with a buddy of mine who owned a 68’ Cessna around a year ago. You could go even older, to like 59’ and find some still flying Cessnas.
I have over 250 hours in the last three years on my 1957 172. Three trips from NW Indiana to the Gulf Coast, once around Lake Michigan with an overnight inside 24 hours, lots of going out just to commit aviation. Does not cost a quarter million! Flying Doodles did a video on a similar plane
‘98 Cessna is a rich fella Cessna. I look forward to being rich enough to fly a Cessna that’s younger than me. I’m 38.
I love the Cessna 172!!! I soloed in a Cessna 172N back in June of 2000. They are amazing airplanes.
I soloed in a 172R back in 2004. Going to go fly one this weekend.
1999 in a 172P, old Brown and Red trim N51883 that I don't think EVER looked good. It's since had a repaint and new interior, but it will always be Gross faded 70's brown to me.
Once a resident of the greater Denver community, you give me motivations in returning ! This activity . . . is overwhelming !
Thank you, Sir! MB
Oh WOW It's Pilot Mindy!
This man aggravates me.
Great video, thanks. Just amazing to think they are actually hand made like a Steinway Piano! I flew the 172 years ago. Like flying in a Cadillac. Really comfortable and stable plane.
This is great. Airframe manufacture in America. Not junk made overseas so corporate offices can have more cash in their coffers. All starting more or less with the 172.
I flew out to Colorado and did some light sport aircraft training with Ted Wilson in a powered parachute.
I would love to see an episode done on that specific type of aircraft.
It's very docile quite affordable and a great way for people to get into Aviation. It's one of the best experiences of my life, I hope that more people could get to find their dream.
Captain Mindy! I kept waiting for Steveo to pop in and lose to her in a contest :) I'm currently flying a 1964 C172 (not mine). It still flies great. The Venturi powered vacuum system takes a little getting used to and the non-standard instrumentation messes with my can but I still like flying her.
Mindy! Love watching her fly with Steveo1Kenevo.
Yeah, she's bad-ass! =D
I like watching her beat Steveo1Kinevo in every contest lol
I have seen so many of these fly in to Hawkins field I always loved that they were accessible to every day people
I’m reminded of the alligator. The shape has been perfect for hundreds of millions of years. The Cessna here hasn’t changed much for a long time.
Jet airliners from the 1960's look the same, bolt action rifles from 1906 look the same. They are all refined, of course. Orion spacecraft is like the Apollo spacecraft.
The 172 is the Ford Ranger of the sky...small, easy to work on, lasts forever. (My ‘97 ranger is at 241k miles!!)
Excellent production hooked now thank you
What a COOL video...... LOVE the factory tour..... BIG THANK YOU.
I'm training in a g1000 right now, most people like the steam gauges, but I'm a glass cockpit junkie. According to the director of my flight school though garmin are a bit... iffy? I still personally like the glass cockpit, but I'd highly recommend any new fliers use the steam gauges first. The G1000 should come later. G1000's are expensive, and your first plane is probably gonna have steam gauges, unless you have money laying around. Get good with steam gauges until you get into the G1000, that's my advice to newer pilots. (Take this with a bit of skepticism, I still haven't even solo'd at the time of this comment, and this advice might not be for everyone.) Another note, the planes transponder broke and it took a shitton of time to replace it, so if you do have a G1000, don't expect to get parts fast.
Love the show, and it's good to see them do some GA aircraft. While the military aircraft are awe-inspiring, not many people will ever fly one. I have time in a 172 and loved it! I now have a J-3, which I love more..maybe a BTW for that one?
It's incredible to see all these locations, becuase I am in a Civil Air Patrol squadron near these places, and have been to the locations he's hosting. Not interesting to many people, but hey.
Former Michigan Wing member here!
I’ve never seen anyone so excited about a 172...
One of the best VIDEOS you have post!!! Thanks Matthew!!!! Please keep going!!!!
it's CRAP (you must be a relative)
Stayed at the Holiday Inn, on East Kellogg, when picking up 150s and 172s, to fly them back to CBus from Wichita, in the mid-70s
Didn’t expect to see Captain Mindy. Nice treat!
I have owned my K model Hawk for over 30 years now! Can’t think of a single reason why anyone would not want one!
should of asked why the 172's the same plane it was 40 years and go and why today with inflation it should only cost about 90k but they are selling them for 400k ? thats the real question
liability insurance for it and all the planes built previously
It's the same plane because it's being manufactured under the pre-existing Type Certificate. As to the cost, a little liability, a little raw materials cost increases above inflation, a little much more expensive avionics, fancier leather interiors, easy credit, they're selling primarily to companies using the aircraft as a revenue source, and a little of breakdown of economy of scale on basically EVERY component on or in the aircraft.
And then a little more liability costs because in any crash Cessna ends up sued no matter who's fault it was, and that just costs money in basic legal costs even if they don't get found negligent in any way.
Liability insurance is big part of the cost.Cessna almost went bankrupt in the 80's over the lawsuits.
Zack Riden It’s a solid aircraft when new and the avionics really bump the price. With the newer engines, new frame, and what not it racks up. You see the cheap 172s from the 70s and get the ides it’s really cheap.
They don't make much money off of the piston Cessna's anymore. All income comes from the jets so they still sell them but just as sky high prices.
Awesome episode thanks.
Great job! My 1957 C172 rocks.
I got my license in a 172M. Loved that plane.
One of the things about the 1966 Skyhawk is that the rear seats folded down “almost” flat. . . I could stuff two bicycles (with wheels removed) back there, for truly “remote start” bicycle rides. . .
I LOVE these! And the host is perfect for this job!!!
The guy is an idiot! Doesn't understand that people click on the subject to watch the planes, not his childish antics!
Stupid people impress other stupid people!
The Cessna 172 wasn't made to be a flight trainer, the Cessna 152 was. Student pilot's fly the C152, a lot cheaper. Don't need electronic gauges to learn how to fly. You can learn the fancy glass cockpit after you get your pilot's license.
gmcjetpilot ...my instructor and I were too fat to be under gross for the 152, I had to learn in a 172.... LOL :) Good thing it was college and didn’t cost me extra.
I am 250, vast majority of my dual instruction was in an over gross 150, full fuel, usually in the summertime. We were taught all about weight and balance, but it never came up when it was time to fly! Seems times have changed, primary instruction is in elderly Warriors these days around my area. I have a buddy that flips a lot of parts, the demand is still there for the 150. He explains they are good for insurance purposes, you only risk killing 2 people rather than 3.
@@davidvicari5139 Yep when I was cfi full time, one of the 152s in the fleet was a 152 aerobat. It was a little heavier than a regular 152. At the time I was 160lbs, but you are right, headset, flight bag, etc. Most students were slim and trim, but they had some gear; we were at gross. Well the 152 aerobat had a very tired engine. I decided to give my student ready for check ride an emergency landing into grass strip. It had rained the day before. The strip had 100ft trees at end. Well he used questionable soft field technique. We were committed. He is climbing straight for the tree tops. I take the plane and bank with stall horn going off intermitantly to head for a cut in tree line off to side (where house was). We wallowed out looking at the taller trees to either side. The tired acrobat O235 115hp was making 80hp on a hot humid day at best. Add our weight, temp, runway condition it was not wise. The engine was removed for rebuild a week later. The 152 is a fine trainer but you are so right gross weight is easy to exceed. Even within gross it's not a soft short field plane at gross in summer. Never had an accident yet in 12000 hours. That was closest I ever want to come. I looked at poh and we should have made it, but the engine was a dog. The poh does have genetic soft field data... last 50ft obstacle in north west is 150 foot
Thanks! Mine is similar, I availed myself some dual in a club owned PA28-140, retired Purdue trainer. I had just jumped in it and sorta checked myself out, thought it would be a good idea even after the fact some hrs later. He was showing me a grass strip, We too were looking at approaching tree tops in a questioning fashion, when I noticed we had departed with carb heat on. Power got much better when that was corrected. On debrief, the instructor did allow we woulda had branches up the ass.
Only will add, I got PPL ride October 1985 in a 150 Aerobat. I had been on the ground for 20 years raising family etc when I retired, got the urge to fly again in 2015. That same Aerobat was still on the flight line 30 years later.
Pilot Mindy took my mind off the lack of innovation or change with the Cessna company.
@Alan formula1 I would love to own any 182 however if painted the same, they look pretty much identical and they could literally be 45 years apart in age. That’s not innovation. Even the paint scheme is pretty weak when you compared to some of the experimental products that are out there not even mentioning Cirrus.
@Alan formula1 your not wrong in theory but there’s a reason why they get out sold now by Cirrus significantly . And because of the lack of innovation one could argue that’s why Cirrus has a better GA safety record. Personally I would still rather have the 182 for me but it would just be nice if they “ modernized” things just a tad.
If it isn't broke, don't fix it.
@@kdrapertrucker I hear you but that philosophy allowed Cirrus to come into the marketplace and pretty much match their sales or outright pass them by depending on year.
Excellent video. Very entertaining and informative. Thank you.
Fascinating video. Thanks bud.
Thanks, Mike! MB
I want to but o e just fly w Mindy!!! Awesome video!!
That's a lotta airplanes. Hetty! Tanya says hello! Love your smile!
Thats the first 172 ive ever seen with a three blade prop. Cool
That's for the diesel engine. What a plane! MB
The host is agonizing! Good video. Ya Capt. Mindy!
And people make fun of my online name... I love the skyhawk....
skyhawk311 I also used that name for years bro, love it.
Awesome episode! Thank you
Thank the lord so very much for Cessna @
Incredible Video Production !
A++
Hi I'm over in the UK I love these and Scott does an excellent job and it would be great if he could do some episodes over here! We have loads of museums and other bits for him to explore. I should know I work on them.
We would LOVE to come to your side of the pond! MB
great host and show
Great episode!
Too bad a pilots license cost too much...
Keep doing this great job!
such an intimidating name for a training aircraft
OUTSTANDING on the upgrades! I might just have to visit some time!
Hey its Mindy from Stevoes Channel! Now thats cool!
I subbed just from the enthusiastic intro.
It's amazing how you've maintained the aviation footprint with the unfortunate closure of Lowry AFB . . . however, the later creation of 'Wings over the Rockies' community ! Hopefully you'll soon include the Air Force rotary mission . . . in my case - Air Rescue & Recovery Service, a mission within the Military Airlift Command . . . based outta Scott AFB, IL.
I wish you had asked some statistics...how many airplanes do they produce a week? A month? Since there's enormous demand for the 172, how many shifts do they work? I'm surprised they don't have more automation in that assembly line...interesting!
There's "Demand" like there's a "Pilot Shortage" which is to say there's any demand, which was more than Cessna expected this far into new manufacture again.
In order to automate they would need to rectify the manufacturing process which is expensive enough that it doesn't really pay itself back. And in a plane built under such old Type Certification you would probably have to start from a clean slate to design something optimized for automated manufacturing, like the Next Generation stuff Cessna was concepting back in the mid 2000's. Which then means a complete recertification of the design and the manufacturing.
Cessna tried that with the 162 Skycatcher and that ended up just costing them a lot of money they didn't get back.
Another great thing my friend, so seriously when I'm I going to see the most stunning F 111, and keep up the great work!!!! Cheers
The VW Beetle of the skies
I would put the 152 into that category. That plane would get bug splatters on the rear windscreen.
My original comment was "VW Super Beetle", but I figure most viewers wouldn't get the context one way or the other
Hitler didn't endorse this one. 172 was born out of FREEDOM
There have been over 20,000,000 beetles produced. The numbers aren't even comparable.
longshot7601 Actually the 152 is impossible to get any bug spatters on. The bugs bounce off the surfaces, shake their head wondering what they ran into and then fly along...
Ah the planes I fly. I'm going to be in one for at least three years while I work on my PPL. Nice job Mathew on this episode (if you read this)
You can certainly do worse than a 172. What a great little airplane. :) Thanks for watching! MB
Cool video
Dude, you NEED to get your Private Pilot license (or at least a Sport Pilot ticket). It's not that difficult.
A 1977 Grumman Tiger had bonded metal technology. So over-hyped!
Yes!
very informative video on the 172, thank you.
“You can’t just be in the plane, you’ve got to fly the plane!” Ok, but now apply that to every military jet in the museum... please!
Excellent content! Thank you.
Thanks for watching! MB
This is what I took on my first ride and then two years later, I did my first solo! I wish I could afford t have one lol!!!
I was watching this with one of the CFIs at the flight school I work at, and his first reaction at 3:00 was "Yikes, prop safety"
Another amazing video as always
Mindy! 👍 👍 (I'm a big fan of Steveo's channel.)
Yeah, Captain Mindy. You Rock.
Yeh!! Mindy
I have to admit - I love the 172 but I solo’d in a 150/152. Yeah... I’m old. :)
Ohhh, the 150 and 152 are awesome looking little birds! MB
Thanks Matt - They totally were!
Hey Kids at Kent State are still Soloing in 152s as long as you keep em fixed they don't die. No matter how hard college aviation students try.
liked an subbed, love the humor/ laughs and fun, + aviation / planes... thats a win-win good buddy
Ah the classic minivan of the sky. I got my PPL in a 172, nice planes.
Great host and the coolest subjects!!!
BAAAAMMMM!!! this guy is a great host
Thank you! I appreciate the kind words. MB
Nice video👌🏼 Greetings from Germany✌🏼️
It's "Captain Mindy" to you land lubbers... ; )
Great video!!
Be nice if they would have taken a tour of the Textron Scorpion while they were there. Coolest Cessena ever!
We wanted to. They didn't trust us to leave it with them! ;) MB
Q. WHY does your 172 have a three bladed prop?
The first years, up through 1967 were powered by the fabulous Cont. 0-300, FLAT SIX engine of 145 h.p. Then beginning in 1968 Cessna decided to alienate most of their customer base by switching to the Lyc. flat four. That's the 0-320.
Engine ran louder, rougher, vibrated lots more, etc.
But all of those birds sported an all metal, fixed pitch, TWO BLADED propeller!
Robin Jacobs : I was wondering about the three-bladed prop too! I owned a 1966 Cessna 172 G Skyhawk. It had the Continental O-300 flat 6. The down side of those was that they had a hard time making TBO. An overhaul cost me $28,000 CDN in 2008. I sold it in 2010. It’s now being used by the local Community College for A&P instruction.
I am flying an O300B 1984 hours since the last overhaul in 1974. It was disassembled for a prop strike in 1977. It sat 13 years until I bought 3 years ago, over 250 hours. Oil and fuel consumption are well within norms, it makes book performance, it is signed off at annual.
It has needed 2 jugs and a generator. Seems the O300 cylinders often need overhaul, but the bottom end is forever. I will keep operating until my mechanic says otherwise, then yes that pricing for an overhaul does apply. But the 1800 hr TBO is just a number for private use.
It's the Turbo Diesel. More torque, more blades, less noise.
SkyHawk is the best
I was hoping for a military part but this is amazing
Thanks, Isaac! MB
Woo hoo its Mindy!!
Me gusta la aviación soy de Ecuador
Love the 172! I had My training in one.
This dude is in finger gun mode 24/7 lol. Great content!
LOL! It's kinda true. ;) MB
...bueno que suministrarán Kits de actualización, para dejar instrumentos análogos por digitales, al fin y al cabo ellos tienen los planos de cada modelo... Gracias por compartir...
Question:Is Cessna still building the "oldschool" C172 AND the new C172 with the G1000 or ONLY the new with the G1000?
Sadly, they are not building 172s at all right now. MB
You can only buy new ones with the G1000 NXi
@@Wings_Museum What happened? I can't find anything about them stopping production.
Matthew took his left hand of the yoke like 2 years before DU student finished his sentence about using one hand. Haha nice Matt, show him you know what's up.
Mindy needs her own show - and SteveoKinevo should be her co-pilot...
17:35 what a body
She's a cute piece of an aircraft. I had no idea the whole assembly line for C127 is essentially manual, rather than automated
A great American innovation and American made!.... Good choice.
I don't remember the 172 being a 3-bladed prop. The one I learned on back in 1977-78 in Santa Monica definitely DID NOT look like this!
you are not looking at a Skyhawk you are looking at a "Turbo Skyhawk JT-A"
@@kasamoht Whaaaat? Never heard of this mod for a 172. Also, who would waste the money to "upgrade" such a pitiful aircraft anyway?? [shrug]
Mindy turns up everywhere. Love Mindy
I loathe the 172, done enough hours in them to last me a life time. Ironically, analog or “steam” driven gauges are more intuitive and easy to read for professional pilots. It’s why often even on a digital display, the software is designed to draw round steam-like gauges as opposed to the vertical tapes. Southwest Airlines if I’m not mistaken had their 737 NGs (at least years ago this was true, not sure now) programmed to show the classic “6-pack” primary flight instruments, instead of the standard vertical tapes normally used in Boeing glass cockpits. Although the real reason for this was to have commonality between the old -300 series and the newer -700 series back in the early 2000’s, so that the pilots could fly both variants within the same day;s worth of flying.
There’s a whole section in our Human Factors study as pilots that goes into flight deck and instrumentation design. When shooting an instrument approach in IMC, I definitely prefer analog gauges. All this extra stuff on the Nxi like synthetic vision is incredibly distracting during your instrument scan, something that IFR pilots spend a lot of time practising and perfecting.
It's the sedan of airplanes
this guy is proof of what is wrong with today's world
I really enjoy these episodes. The host gives a great presentation ! 😃
Thank you, sir! MB
So, when the PIC (not a CFI in this case) sez "why don't you make a slight right turn" when he obviously means a left turn, do you simply let it go and turn left anyway, or do you call him out on it? The next time he may tell you to enter the upwind for runway 36, when the obvious instruction should have "down wind", or really whatever, should you call him out for that too, or just go look for another instructor?
It was probably an editing error that got overlooked. No telling how many times they flew over downtown, turning left, and right. They probably got the wrong audio in that shot.
Tom Clark ...They were very obviously left of downtown as the PIC clearly pointed out the right side of the aircraft. They then proceeded with a right turn towards downtown, with a later left turn that was filmed. Ya picky jerk.
Is that 3 blade prop constant speed?? Where can I find the specs on this turbo diesel 172? This truly knocked my socks off!