highest flight in a cessna 152/172?

[Pilot.Lyons]

Just one for curiosity.... Whats the highest a ppl has flown in a , say, cessna 152 or similar sep?

[Pilot DAR]

I've had my 150 just over 13,000 feet. I've had a C180 amphibian to 17,500, and climbing (but ran out of airspace), and a C185 on Mogas to 20,800 during flight testing. I'd been over 21,000 in it, but it would not stay up there. None of those were turbos.

[S-Works]

I generally fly mine between 10-14k but have done a few at flights at 18k.

[Pilot.Lyons]

Wow! Im a newish ppl and not been over 5000 yet!
Mind you i only rent my c152 from my club so only fly after ive saved for a bit... Would cost me loads to get that high (take so long and charged by the minute :D)

[Genghis the Engineer]

I've had a C152 up around 13-14k in California.

Much more exciting, I've had a 2 stroke Rotax engined flexwing up to 10k a few times over the south of England.

G

[A and C]

You need a good reason to take a non supercharged aircraft above about 8000ft so unless you have to get above mountains or have a very big tailwind going up to 18,000 ft is a bit pointless.

I find the best place to be in a SEP is between 6-8000ft.

Having said that I took a PA28-161 from Glasgow to Booker in 2 H 07 Min one day by taking advantage of the very big tailwind at FL115.

[fernytickles]

Would cost me loads to get that high (take so long and charged by the minute

But then you could switch everything off & just glide down, with no hobbs running :}

[peterh337]

TB20, non turbocharged, 20k

http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m74/peterh337/f200.jpg

Does take a little while to get there though (maybe half an hour) and it won't make it in say ISA+10 conditions.

I did climb up to about 11k in a PA28-161 in Arizona, in ISA+8 conditions. It would have gone a bit higher.

Flying high is great for going places, both VFR (across the Alps) and IFR (where you tend to get much better routings above FL100). In both cases it helps to stay above the weather.

You do need oxygen (http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/oxygen/) to go much above 10k though.

[Genghis the Engineer]

You do need oxygen to go much above 10k though.

I have functioned for several minutes at a time at FL200 in an unpressurised cabin without Oxygen, but it wasn't fun and I am in no hurry to do it again. Ever.

FL80 is fine for pretty much everybody, then performance degrades between about FL80 and FL140. Night vision is one of the first things to go, but you tend to be largely unaware of which bits are stopping working.

UK law is FL100, with a few exemptions, mostly for parachute dropping. In reality, around FL140 is about where things may start getting nasty for a fit adult.

G

[peterh337]

It depends hugely on the individual.

I used to fly with one unfit chap who said he doesn't need o2 but could not read the altimeter at 12k.

A few years ago I participated in an informal flight test of about 10 pilots, to FL120, where heart rates etc were measured. There was a very large variation.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Absolutely, I used to do regular baro chamber sessions as part of our training in a previous job; no two people ever responded identically.

G

[average-punter]

3200ft! in a 152 :ok:

[Pilot.Lyons]

But then you could switch everything off & just glide down, with no hobbs running

Haha true :D

[C-dog]

11500 in a 172B then the engine started wheezing so I stuck the nose down and descended to a sensible altitude!

[Halfbaked_Boy]

I've taken a PA28R to 15,000' without oxygen. It's very true regarding the lack of ability to perceive hypoxic effects - after a few mins at 15,000' flying around and taking pretty pics of the clouds, I became 'aware' of things not being quite right with my body, but couldn't pinpoint what it was. Very mild nausea and headache started to set in, so we dropped back down! Then again, I'm a smoker who wasn't flying that regularly at the time so it was expected I guess...

Just keep firing maths problems at each other as you climb :p

[thing]

Took a 172 to 7,000 once to get above the haze layer. Never thought about going any higher. I find that the view down starts to diminish a bit once you're 5 or 6 thousand above the ground. Three to four thousand is a good height for interesting ground looking along with enough height to do something in the event of an emergency. I don't like to be much lower than that. Two thousand feels like I'm on the ground.

[Ultra long hauler]

So far: 2000 feet.

However, a few hours NNE from where we fly……….you´ll find this:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3820316/Screenshot%202010-12-11%20om%2018.53.36%20kopie.jpg

A volcano of 6.300 meters……..which is often overflown by LSA.
That is one of my flying goals.

I have climbed (walked) to 5800 meters without any problems, so I expect to have no oxygen issues at least.

###Ultra Long Hauler###

[old-timer]

I managed 14700' in a PA 28 flying solo in N.California (with oxygen)
Climb rate was down to +100 fpm but it may have gone a little higher with time however my route didn't allow that alt' to be maintained further on.
Good experience but take care folks as hypoxia sneaks up without oxy'.

[VMC-on-top]

These figures are really impressive! The highest I've managed in our PA28-161 is 9k, two up, half tanks, ISA + 5 deg, and by then we were climbing at approx. 50 -100ft / min! Maybe I'm not leaning properly?

[Katamarino]

The highest I have been in a 172 was 12,500ft for an extended period. I've been rather higher in a 182 for shorter periods of time. I'm curious where in the world some of the above posters have flown without oxygen to, say, 15,000ft. This would be dodgy in the UK and the USA, at least...

[S-Works]

When I am flying straight and level toruing I use O2 all the time above 10k feet.

When I am parachute dropping I do 15,000ft 30 times a day and don't use O2.

[FullWings]

I have climbed (walked) to 5800 meters without any problems, so I expect to have no oxygen issues at least.

I wouldn't count on it. At 19,000' density altitude the partial pressure of oxygen in the air is down to 75mmHg/10kPa before it gets near to your respiratory system. You're already well down the saturation curve.

If your goal is simply to remain conscious, then yes, you should be OK. Making critical decisions while operating complex machinery, not so much.

I'm reasonably fit and spend a fair amount of time exerting myself at significant altitude. If I'm planning to spend more than a trivial amount of time above 10,000' I go on oxygen - if it's fitted then use it! I've experimented with someone else (with them on oxygen) flying at various heights and found I'm just not as good at complex tasks, even at what seem like comparatively benign levels. Map reading becomes more difficult, even with a GPS moving display in front of you... Imagine attempting to deal with a serious emergency at the same time.

Starving your brain of oxygen is not a good idea under any circumstances, let alone when flying an aircraft. Those who have run sessions in an altitude chamber will tell you that it affects everyone in a different way but no-one improves!

There are some really good portable electronic oxygen systems around, for purchase or hire. You can put on a cannula, turn the kit on, then forget about it... No excuses, really.

[peterh337]

There is a big difference between walking up a hill and flying up to the same altitude.

In 2002 I walked up Mt Kinabalu - 14000ft or so I think. No problem at all - when I wasn't moving :) But it took ~20 hrs to walk up there, with breaks etc, so you get a chance to get used to it. A plane would have got to 14k in some tens of minutes.

The walks up Mt Kilimanjaro (~20k) are done over 5 days.

I have flown to 20k on cannulas (I do have a mask with a mike but it is pretty naff) and you really have to breathe deliberately. A deep inhalation before each ATC readback :)

[vihai]

A volcano of 6.300 meters……..which is often overflown by LSA.
That is one of my flying goals.

I have climbed (walked) to 5800 meters without any problems, so I expect to have no oxygen issues at least.



:eek: You mean you want to fly there without oxygen?

[jxk]

Flew around Mount Cook in New Zealand 12,316 ft (Wikipedia) in a C172 with the Penn Yan 180 HP.conversion + 3 POB courtesy FLYINN.

[mary meagher]

20,300 feet. No engine. I cheated, used a glider instead of a Cessna.

[Piper.Classique]

Not in a Cessna, but 4800 metres in a glider. Missed my diamond height by 800 metres or thereabouts with a tow to 600 metres. Lots of flights to around 4000 metres in gliders. Oxygen, decent warm clothes. Minus 40 c isn't unusual. :cool:

[thing]

Ah yes, forgot about that, I've been higher in a glider than a light aircraft. Got up to 8,300 for my silver height and was still going up like a lift. Daren't go any higher as it was

1. Bloody cold

2. Didn't have any O2.

[david viewing]

I've flown the corridors at Grand Canyon a few times in the 152 up to 11,500. Once a tour pilot replied "How'd you get up there?" Solo, on a cold winter's day, it's no problem to the lovely little 152.

I've also crossed the Sierras in the 160HP 172R at 14,500 for 30 mins or less, solo and in the winter. But nowadays I look for lower routes, like the Donner pass, because of the hypoxia issues already discussed and because in winter, the terrain only 2000' below looks very uninviting.

14,500 is about the practical ceiling for the 160HP 172 although the SP might go a bit higher. I did have to go up there for a few minutes in the summer a couple of years back to remain clear of a dust storm, but it's really grasping for air in warm temps, as is the pilot.

[peterh337]

You guys should really look at a portable oxygen kit.

It really improves your options, and makes flying much safer because you can go above the weather and terrain.

My notes on oxygen systems here (http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/oxygen/) are a little old now but they cover the basics and nowadays one would go to Mountain High every time as they make the best stuff. Get the 48 cu ft. carbon/kevlar cylinder, the 1st stage regulator, and either oxysaver cannulas or the O2D2 demand reg and plain cannulas. This kit is described at the end, and also in a comparative test here (http://www.peter2000.co.uk/aviation/oxygen2/) which really upset one of their competitors but when I kept asking him for data to support his assertions he kept telling me he was on his way to the airport and would get back to me :E

[Ultra long hauler]

There is a big difference between walking up a hill and flying up to the same altitude.


Definitely. Let me be more precise: I would spend a few days at 3.000 meters; just like people that prepare for climbing / walking the mountains over here. It wouldn´t be from sea level to 6000+ meters in a few hours.
Plus, I would have gathered numerous hours at slowly incrementing altitudes before even considering a fly-by like that……..

:eek: You mean you want to fly there without oxygen?

Well, that would be the plan; yes. HOWEVER, that is the final stage of a period where I would test myself and the aircraft at 3000 meters, 4000 meters, 5000 meters etc. Not that I´m going there next week and just "give it a shot". I intend to take mountain flying in general real slow, and very serious……..as I said, it would be a future goal.


You guys should really look at a portable oxygen kit.

Point taken………I will.

###Ultra Long Hauler###

[ArcticChiller]

Ultra Long Hauler, I like your attitude towards mountain flying. Although I want to point out that you really can't train yourself by flying a few times at 3000m then 4000m and so on. Similar to high altitude training of athletics you would need to stay at this altitude for some weeks. Then, your lung would adapt to air cointaining little oxygen. Also I strongly recommend to have another pilot with you. I believe you would not realize the lack of oxygen until it's too late.
I live in the Swiss alps above 5000 feet, I'm young, don't smoke. When flying e.g. to Italy over the alps at up to 12500ft I don't feel any changes in concentration. Still I would fly according to the FARs.

[AN2 Driver]

Highest I ever did in Winter with my Cessna 150 at the time was FL160 for a few minutes. With the Mooney (180HP non turbo), 140-150 is normal over the alps.

I got myself a little pulse oxymeter (http://www.quirumed.com/en/Catalogo/articulo/37822/finger-pulsoxymeter) to get all doubt out of the way. They are quite cheap these days at 34 Euros and I got them within a day or two delivered from Spain.

These you can carry along and see what happens. Anything below 93% is considered to indicate reduced reactions, below 90% is no good. Usually, that happens above about 10'000 ft. At FL140 expect about 85%, which is definitly not enough anymore.

[peterh337]

Gosh that is cheap. I must have paid 300 euros for my Nonin one, some years back.

But.... they have come down. I see some on Ebay down to £16.

I am normally happy at the low 90s. A mask is a lot better; I've seen 98-99% at FL180 with a mask (not me though).

[Ultra long hauler]

Ultra Long Hauler, I like your attitude towards mountain flying. Although I want to point out that you really can't train yourself by flying a few times at 3000m then 4000m and so on. Similar to high altitude training of athletics you would need to stay at this altitude for some weeks. Then, your lung would adapt to air containing little oxygen.

Yes, I know what you mean.
However, 3.000 + meters is where I need to go to even land in the Andes anyway.
I don´t see a problem because the road I normally take reaches 4.000 meters, and I drive that on a weekly basis sometimes. I spent huge amounts of time around the 3.000 meter level (weeks on end), not 1 second did I ever notice anything different apart from a mild shortness of breath while running. No sweat flying a plane then either, surely.

So, if I would take off for some scenic trips from there, let´s say up to 4.000 meters (where I normally tend operate a car) and the plane feels good, I feel good, and I slowly get a feel for the stronger winds etc; I feel that the next step could be 4.500 meter etc etc. Again, I´m talking about harmless good weather trips, not complicated close mountain X-country flights. Just like everybody else in this thread, you first have to do it to know what it feels like and take your decisions from there, right?

I strongly recommend to have another pilot with you. I believe you would not realize the lack of oxygen until it's too late.

That is a good point, taking a 2nd pilot.

However, I do not agree that if you start to feel the consequences of altitude that it is somehow "too late"........unless you have yourself in a real bind which requires maximum concentration, THAT would be a BooBoo. My idea is to do straightforward flights in benign weather, low risk; not too far away from the airport and simply assess it from there.
I know for a fact I´m fine at 4.000 meters, so I´d go slowly from there.
There are a few people in this thread that have survived the initial symptoms whilst flying--> height sickness is the easiest disease to cure---> get "DOWN DOWN DOWN"!! That´s what I have seen with people I´ve taken up to 5000 meter and beyond (by car); anyway.

###Ultra Long Hauler###

[peterh337]

I do not agree that if you start to feel the consequences of altitude that it is somehow "too late"

I personally know a pilot (non UK) who climbed without o2 to quite an altitude (well within the figures discussed here), passed out, and woke up in a forest.

He is still alive - after a lot of surgery. He was incredibly lucky.

So, I wouldn't try it.

[Dg800]

I know of a few who weren't so lucky. Downplaying the risks of hypoxia is a really bloody stupid thing to do. No old bold pilots and all that...

Damn are those finger oxymeters cheap! I might just go and get myself one.

DG800

[Ultra long hauler]

I personally know a pilot (non UK) who climbed without o2 to quite an altitude (well within the figures discussed here), passed out, and woke up in a forest

So, I wouldn't try it.

Amazing! And yes, there are horror stories for sure.
But I doubt he climbed to an altitude where he usually used to drive, walk, and (for certain altitudes discussed) live! I don´t see myself passing out at an altitude where I spend quite a bit of time on a regular basis.
That would mean that every Private Pilot in the Andes would have to fly with oxygen……….and the majority doesn´t; with no horror stories that I can recall.

To go higher than the above, I already took your earlier advice to heart and I will definitely look into personal O2 units when the time is there!

I know of a few who weren't so lucky. Downplaying the risks of hypoxia is a really bloody stupid thing to do.
DG800

I am not sure if you were referring to me, but I have not been downplaying it. I already mentioned before in this thread that I would take certain advices to heart: a personal 02 device, and to take a pilot as co-pilot for when I were to go very high. (Or go as co-pilot myself, I don´t care--> my ego isn´t that big). Heck, I could invite a PPRune-er to join me!

However, you´ve got to understand that this issue is slightly different for people that reside in areas where roads quite easily climb 4000 meters in little over an hour. I am not downplaying the symptoms, and it would be "bloody stupid", to use your phraseology; to go to these altitudes unprepared for the 1st time. But having lived at 3.000 meters (still spending a lot of time there), driving and walking at 4000 meters (with excess to 5000 meters) and having not suffered from anything AT ALL in 10 years; I sincerely doubt that I will suddenly face problems flying around 4.000 meters, or there abouts; especially while operating from 3.000 meter high airstrips.

I am ONLY talking for me, the Ultra Long Hauler; because every body and every person is obviously different!!
As I said, I´ve had passengers in the car who got it bad, and we had to cancel the trip and come down as fast as possible; where soon after they recovered.

Cheers,

###Ultra Long Hauler###

[LTCTerry]

I see I'm right in the middle of the pack. I've taken a 152 to 11,500' on one occasion, for just a few minutes. The flight wasn't long enough to stay there very long. It made no practical sense to go that high, but it sure was fun at the time!

I've been a glider pilot for a bit over a year. The highest I've been is 6,000' with a winch launch from 1,000' msl. I could have gone higher, but there were airspace limits.

Terry

[neilmac]

After waiting for the perfect day a fellow PPL and me took PA28-161 to FL180did take ages after passing FL130 with FPM reducing. Completed with 2 portable oxygen kits.
:)

[peterh337]

FL180 in a 28-161 is hugely impressive.

Was it in ISA-20, and MTOW -10%?

[mary meagher]

Not in a Cessna, in an Archer, taking a teenage lad back to his home in the Florida Panhandle, after he had helped me sail a boat to Tampa Bay.

Approaching a very active naval air station, the enroute controller asked us, if it was not too inconvenient, to climb to 11,500 feet to avoid military traffic.
(Normally, in a glider, we start using Oxygen by 12,000 feet). So I agreed to the suggestion. And turning to the lad, I remarked "Air Traffic has asked us to climb higher, I'll be OK, because I am not a smoker, but you do smoke a lot. Let me know if your fingernails start turning blue......"

He spent the rest of the trip furtively checking his nails....

Don't suppose it had any effect on his addiction....