Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Aviation History and Nostalgia
Reload this Page >

Aircraft recognition (I-VIRA)

Wikiposts
Search
Aviation History and Nostalgia Whether working in aviation, retired, wannabee or just plain fascinated this forum welcomes all with a love of flight.

Aircraft recognition (I-VIRA)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 31st Jan 2018, 11:03
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Dorset, UK
Age: 65
Posts: 360
Received 7 Likes on 1 Post
Aircraft recognition (I-VIRA)

Please could someone tell me exactly what this is. Also is there somewhere I can look it up on the Italian register (like G-INFO)

Romeo Tango is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 11:21
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Wildest Surrey
Age: 75
Posts: 10,826
Received 98 Likes on 71 Posts
Looks like a tri gear Cessna 180 to me.
chevvron is online now  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 11:22
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ireland
Age: 76
Posts: 242
Received 15 Likes on 7 Posts
Looks to me to be an early Cessna 172 FF. 1955. 3757 produced, later versions acquired the swept variant tail and then even later the 'omnivision' rear window.

Ian BB
Ian Burgess-Barber is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 12:16
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,826
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
1959 Cessna 175 msn 56045.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 12:48
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ireland
Age: 76
Posts: 242
Received 15 Likes on 7 Posts
OK Dave so its a C 172 with a bigger geared 175 h.p.Continental motor stuffed in it - hence C 175.

Ian BB
Ian Burgess-Barber is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 13:09
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,826
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
Originally Posted by Ian Burgess-Barber
OK Dave so its a C 172 with a bigger geared 175 h.p.Continental motor stuffed in it - hence C 175.
That's it.

It's almost impossible to tell the two apart in a view from the rear like that one. From the front it's a bit easier.

I cheated.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 13:27
  #7 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Dorset, UK
Age: 65
Posts: 360
Received 7 Likes on 1 Post
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
1959 Cessna 175 msn 56045.
Thanks!
I would be interested to know where that information comes from .......
Romeo Tango is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 13:36
  #8 (permalink)  
Gnome de PPRuNe
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,666
Received 325 Likes on 179 Posts
Early Cessna 182 I think, as Chevron says it's very 180, especially that fin.

Oops, whole conversation gone on while I dithered...
treadigraph is online now  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 14:49
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ireland
Age: 76
Posts: 242
Received 15 Likes on 7 Posts
Dave

"That's it.

It's almost impossible to tell the two apart in a view from the rear like that one. From the front it's a bit easier.

I cheated. "

No you didn't cheat - you just went the reg. route while I relied on the Mark 1 eyeball- recognition- system, which as you say can't see the revised engine cowling from the rear view given.

All's fair.........
Cheers Ian
Ian Burgess-Barber is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2018, 16:20
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,826
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
Originally Posted by Romeo Tango
Thanks!
I would be interested to know where that information comes from .......
From a little-known source that I sometimes use called Google.

I-VIRA Cessna
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2018, 07:58
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,826
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
Originally Posted by button push ignored
The engine has a gearbox on the front to raise the propellor.
Though I suspect that's a side-effect rather than the primary purpose of the gearbox.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2018, 15:32
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,826
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
Originally Posted by button push ignored
I don’t even think it was a reduction gear box.
Just a displacement of the turning point.
The GO-300 has a 0.75:1 reduction gearbox.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 4th Feb 2018, 19:33
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ireland
Age: 76
Posts: 242
Received 15 Likes on 7 Posts
Here is what Wikipedia has to say about it:

An unusual feature of the 175 is the geared Continental GO-300 engine. Whereas most single-engine airplanes use direct drive, this engine drives the propeller through a reducing gearbox, so the engine runs at 3200 rpm to turn the propeller at 2400 rpm (4:3). The GO-300 engine suffered reliability problems and helped give the 175 a poor reputation. Some Skylarks flying today have been converted to larger-displacement direct-drive engines[3][4] though almost 90% still retain the GO-300.[5]
The GO-300's tainted reputation was largely undeserved, since its problems were the result of pilots who were unfamiliar with gear reduction engines, simply not operating the engine at the higher RPMs specified in the C-175 Pilot's Operating Handbook. Pilots unfamiliar with the engine often operated the engine at the low RPM settings (2300-2700) appropriate to direct-drive engines, while the 175's Operating Handbook called for cruising at 2900 RPM. The low RPM caused harmonic vibration in the reduction gear between the quill shaft (that turned the propeller) and crankshaft, and the low power resulted in low airspeeds that prevented the engine's air-cooling system from operating effectively, resulting in chronic reliability problems for engines not operated at the recommended power settings.


Ian BB






Ian Burgess-Barber is offline  
Old 5th Feb 2018, 06:38
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,826
Received 206 Likes on 94 Posts
Originally Posted by Ian Burgess-Barber
Pilots unfamiliar with the engine often operated the engine at the low RPM settings (2300-2700) appropriate to direct-drive engines, while the 175's Operating Handbook called for cruising at 2900 RPM. The low RPM caused harmonic vibration in the reduction gear between the quill shaft (that turned the propeller) and crankshaft, and the low power resulted in low airspeeds that prevented the engine's air-cooling system from operating effectively, resulting in chronic reliability problems for engines not operated at the recommended power settings.
This article would appear to bear that out:

"Unfortunately, pilots tried to operate the engine along the same guidelines as the non-geared O-300 in the C-172. How, or why, did they do that? I know that I am going to get some 172 pilots upset with me, but many of them shouldn’t be allowed to drive a car in Fargo, North Dakota, on a very slow day."

Geared Continental GO-300 175 hp Six-cylinder Engines
DaveReidUK is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.