PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - Cessna 177 Cardinal
View Single Post
Old 10th May 2009, 11:15
  #3 (permalink)  
Pilot DAR
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Age: 63
Posts: 5,656
Received 92 Likes on 56 Posts
The C 177 RG can have gear problems. I always got them down, though sometimes I landed with less than total confidence. Excellent maintenance is necessary. Hoever, as you did not mention the RG, I will presume you are considering the fixed gear 177.

I operated both a fixed gear 180HP 177 and an Arrow, among others for years from a 1600 foot turf runway. Both were perfectly fine with good technique. The only thing which made the 177 better was that later in its career it had a STOL kit installed. The STOL kit represented quite an improvement for turf runway operations. The 150HP 177 I flew was somewhat less enthusiastic in short runways, and I would have kept the load light had I operated one of those into such a runway.

The Arrow to which I refer was the older straight wing model, which is the best of all Arrows for this type of runway. On the otherside of that scale, I would never attempt such a runway in a "T" tail Arrow, particularly takeoff. We did have cracks in the engine mount in the area of the nosewheel attachment after a few years. I cannot say that the turf runway contributed, but it was probably a factor.

The 177 is a great flying plane, though a few soft field / short field circuits with a very experienced 177 pilot would be a good idea. They do fly differently that other Cessnas in slow flight.

Two factors which make both types equally poor choices for "softer" runways are: Neither have wing struts, which can be vital for pushing them around on soft ground. If you actually get them stuck, a towbar on the nosewheel could overload it - not advised! The other factor I have written about several times here is that both these types have a stabilator instead of an elevator stabilizer combination. This offers poorer soft field takeoff "feel", and in my opinion, less safety than the conventional set up. The early 177's were actually AD'd for a change to the stabiator to improve this poor characteristic. I never had a problem with this in a 177, but came very close to being a statistic in the very same Arrow, when the owner was flying it with me one day out of a longer runway. The previous post is #8 here

http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...p-setting.html

Pilot DAR
Pilot DAR is offline