64 Days in a Cessna 172 without landing

[ZEEBEE]

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/aopa...?startpage=142

Fifty years ago two pilots spent 64 days straight in a C172B over Nevada to establish the World Endurance Record that stands to this day.

The article referenced from AOPA in the USA outlines the way it was done along with a pretty good movie clip.

Apart from the enormity of what they did, two questions arise?

a.) Would anyone want to try to break the record? and
b.) What aircraft would you use ?

[Fantome]

Soaring records for endurance were stopped when pilots fell asleep and died. One character was up for about 30 hours soaring the sandhills along the German coastline when he ran out of matchsticks.

The 64 day men in their C172, if I remember, flew down a strip and hooked their food and fuel up from a flat tray keeping pace. It must have bored the crap out of them. And they would have come back deaf for days. And think of the pong. Probably still the aeroplane of choice though. If a sponsor forked out enough, I'd have a crack at it. As long as Angelina came too. "Wake up. Wake up. It's your turn. No, we are both in the same movie."

[rmcdonal]

Try

http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/aopa/pilot0308/index.php?startpage=142 (http://www.nxtbook.com/nxtbooks/aopa/pilot0308/index.php?startpage=142)

[ZEEBEE]

Soaring records for endurance were stopped when pilots fell asleep and died. One character was up for about 30 hours soaring the sandhills along the German coastline when he ran out of matchsticks.

The 64 day men in their C172, if I remember, flew down a strip and hooked their food and fuel up from a flat tray keeping pace. It must have bored the crap out of them. And they would have come back deaf for days. And think of the pong. Probably still the aeroplane of choice though. If a sponsor forked out enough, I'd have a crack at it. As long as Angelina came too. "Wake up. Wake up. It's your turn. No, we are both in the same movie."

The link in my original post gives you all the info along with a movie clip.:ok:

The Gliding record was banned as it wasn't practical to support the infrastructure to make it safe as I understand.

Apart from the massive amount of fuel burned, my choice probably would be a Cessna Caravan because at least it would be liveable and the aircraft could be flown slowly enough to uplift the fuel etc required.
It would have to be over 64 days of course so it would be at least 230,000 litres of fuel burned as opposed to 46,000 for the 172.:ooh:

What would CASA think of such an attempt? :uhoh:

[Howard Hughes]

As long as Angelina came too.
Where would she put her 'handbag'?;)

[maxgrad]

who cares!

[rmcdonal]

Good way to hour build :}:ok:

[ZEEBEE]

Good way to hour build


Yeah, and it would look really great in the log book too ...

1600 hrs Takeoffs 1 landings 1:E

[Howard Hughes]

ATPL holders need not apply, how would you keep your 1 in 35 days current?;)

[Capt Hollywood]

The 100hourlys could be a bit tricky too!

[ZEEBEE]

The 100hourlys could be a bit tricky too!

They did Oil and filter changes inside the cockpit. Apparently there were a collection of hoses and taps to enable them to do in situ.

Spark plug changes might have been a bit more challenging.
Also, one of the two pilots (Cook) used to regularly stand on the strut and hang out the front to clean the windscreen that would have collected bugs like crazy. :eek:

[Jabawocky]

They did Oil and filter changes inside the cockpit. Apparently there were a collection of hoses and taps to enable them to do in situ.

Spark plug changes might have been a bit more challenging.

The spark plugs would not need changing unless of a plug failure, its about 1500 hrs of continuous running.

Now what if that were one of your beloved Thierlert diesel powered DA42's?

How would they have performed 5 gear box changes in that time? :}

J:E

[Howard Hughes]

I guess it beats 64 days in a Jab though...;)

[ZEEBEE]

Now what if that were one of your beloved Thierlert diesel powered DA42's?

How would they have performed 5 gear box changes in that time?

That's hitting below the belt,:= Jab

Simple answer is that there's no way anyone would dream of using the Thielert in its present state, but then the Continental 0-300 probably wasn't much to look at in its early days either (no blasted gearbox or clutch though).

However, if the engine was up to it, the advantage would be;

Instead of 46,000 litres it would be 30,000.
You could probably get by with one fuelling a day
Fuel is much safer and less flammable.

Truthfully now, would you do it behind any of the current Jabiru motors at the moment ?

[Capt Wally]

ok simple question here WHY?

Another question. Yr body creates quite a lot of bodily fluids & waste per day. Once secreted and outside of the body did the A/C's weight change & therefore did they make allowance for this weight change (if any) during topping up with fuel?

Dumb Q I know but the whole idea was dumb I reckon!:bored:
Just as a side note here if baby is born mid flight do you change the POB?
It's been done b4 !:)


Cw

[ZEEBEE]

ok simple question here WHY?

Why any record ? Because one can I guess...

Another question. Yr body creates quite a lot of bodily fluids & waste per day. Once secreted and outside of the body did the A/C's weight change & therefore did they make allowance for this weight change (if any) during topping up with fuel?

Who gives a sh*t :E

[Howard Hughes]

Just as a side note here if baby is born mid flight do you change the POB?
What if someone dies?:eek:

[Lasiorhinus]

If the baby was already in the womb when the mother got on board, surely you cant consider that as an update - the POB should already show the little one:ok:


Though, Mile High Club flights should definitely need to update their details...

[Capt Wally]

that's a good point 'HH', but I guess to actually not have the person/body no longer onboard are you going to open the door & throw 'em out?:E Then have to admit to that by way of saying, revised POB now X, can imagine what ATC would be thinking!:bored:

'Las' it's an interesting situation, one that has happened a few times over the years but I've never been directly involved (pilot only not the father:E) I would be interested to know what the authorities would think of that situation, do you change the POB if born in flight? I would say yes mainly 'cause the only reason the authorities would need POB is for the counting of say bodies at a crash scene, to make sure all is accounted for etc.

now now 'zeebee':E


CW

[man on the ground]

Just as a side note here if baby is born mid flight do you change the POB? What if someone dies?

We've had both situation's from Air Ambo's over the years:

Baby - yes, the pilot has amended the POB (always nice to share some good news; we don't get much!)

Check out - they didn't amend the POB, just, very honestly cancelled the MED1 status - very sad. [and for the record, we didn't cancel the direct tracking - couldn't have been pleasant for anyone up there).

[Capt Wally]

'MOTG' never pleasant when someone checks out in flight:bored: Happened a few times here, I guess it's to be expected, some are just not meant to live a full life, being foolish or otherwise & we see all types of fools too:bored:


CW

[ZEEBEE]

Thread drift alert !!!!

What I want to know is why this record has stood for 50 years.

Is it because aircraft were built better then? (Simpler, maybe)

Having flown modern C172's and compared them to the era of the 172B f'rinstance, I can't believe that the modern Cessna would last the distance :suspect:

This is a pretty depressing state of affairs really, since one would have thought that aircraft would get better as time went on.

Is it possible that the record will NEVER be broken ? :(

[Jabawocky]

Probably because nobody in their right mind wants to do it and spend that amount of money doing it!

You would have to pay me a lot of money to do it let alone fund the exercise!

I do not think its about reliability.

Besides some bunch of greenies would steal all the media exposure anyway:ugh:

J:ok:

[Kickatinalong]

No good hour building with Angie? I would be talking seconds.
Kickatinalong:mad::=:=

[ZEEBEE]

Probably because nobody in their right mind wants to do it and spend that amount of money doing it!

Yes, but that goes for climbing Mount Everest, tracking across Antarctica and many other schemes that are probably a whole bunch more dangerous as well.

I don't doubt you're right about the Greenies position (Greenies get up my nose :\ )

Just think of all the traffic reports you could do! .

I disagree though about the reliability issues. I don't know of any aircraft that is currently produced that could carry it off.

[OzExpat]

If there's a vote in the offing, I'd suggest that ZEEBEE should be the one to break the record! :}

[Jabawocky]

I disagree though about the reliability issues. I don't know of any aircraft that is currently produced that could carry it off.

OK go find me a late model C172, with a trusty old 4 pot up the front and lets go!

Just bring YOUR cheque book!:ok:

J:ok:

[ZEEBEE]

If there's a vote in the offing, I'd suggest that ZEEBEE should be the one to break the record!

Thanks for the vote OZExPat but I'm inclined to agree with Jab (At least until he had a change of heart) :E

OK go find me a late model C172, with a trusty old 4 pot up the front and lets go!

Just bring YOUR cheque book!

My cheque book isn't that fat :{, but assuming that you could find someone whose cheques stood up to the rigour;

Where would you do it?
Remember, the wx has to be acceptable for OVER TWO Months.

You have to be able to drive for 8 klms at a time unimpeded.

And, do you really think that a Lyc powered 172 would hang together that long without attention?
Most of the people I know who have them have trouble getting through two hundred hourly's without some issue.