Cessna 209 POH and hire
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 36
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cessna 209 POH and hire
Hi,
I was wondering if anyone knows where I can find a Cessna 209 POH and also where in Australia one can be private hired?
I'm suppose to be starting a job over in India flying them late next month and wanted to get familiar with the machine. I've never heard of them before but apparently they're a stretched c207 but with the same engine.
Any help would be appreciated. I have a photo that someone sent to me, apparently they are quite rare.
Cheers,
Tiger.
I was wondering if anyone knows where I can find a Cessna 209 POH and also where in Australia one can be private hired?
I'm suppose to be starting a job over in India flying them late next month and wanted to get familiar with the machine. I've never heard of them before but apparently they're a stretched c207 but with the same engine.
Any help would be appreciated. I have a photo that someone sent to me, apparently they are quite rare.
Cheers,
Tiger.
Ha ha, you crack me up. I think though you forgot the Photoshop editing on the front of the aircraft like you did on the back. The way it looks it wants to sit on it’s a**e.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Perth WA
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SHADOW
Must agree Titan
Trailing edge of wing to TE wing Shadow, then TE of elevator to TE elevator shadow.
Does not seem to work out hay Mr Tiger 77.
Unless of course the sunlight refracts differently over there in India, was it.
What a shame, KAK AIR would make a killing with them on the senics.
richo
Trailing edge of wing to TE wing Shadow, then TE of elevator to TE elevator shadow.
Does not seem to work out hay Mr Tiger 77.
Unless of course the sunlight refracts differently over there in India, was it.
What a shame, KAK AIR would make a killing with them on the senics.
richo
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Melb
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you'll find that the photo above is genuine. I have seen a 209 while visiting the US and it's a weird machine. Theres a very critical loading procedure and a strict weight limit for the most rear seats. The engine has also been moved further forward when compared to the c207.
Sorry Tiger, can't help you with your questions. Don't think there would be any 209's in Aus, but good luck with the new job.
NK.
Sorry Tiger, can't help you with your questions. Don't think there would be any 209's in Aus, but good luck with the new job.
NK.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 240
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
N1517U
1969 Cessna 207
Serial Number 20700117
and the FAA has never issued a type certificate for the 209.
www.faa.gov if you don't believe me.
1969 Cessna 207
Serial Number 20700117
and the FAA has never issued a type certificate for the 209.
www.faa.gov if you don't believe me.
Originally Posted by bellsux
N1517U
1969 Cessna 207
Serial Number 20700117
and the FAA has never issued a type certificate for the 209.
www.faa.gov if you don't believe me.
1969 Cessna 207
Serial Number 20700117
and the FAA has never issued a type certificate for the 209.
www.faa.gov if you don't believe me.
Sprucegoose
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 59
Posts: 3,485
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Just watch out for those reduced power take offs, the book says that you can do it, but I don't know.....
As to the Kak Air scenics, thank god for thermals, sometime it was the only thing that got you over the escarpement!!
As to the Kak Air scenics, thank god for thermals, sometime it was the only thing that got you over the escarpement!!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kununurra
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C209 Weight and Balance
Rumaging through some old files I came across a copy of a page from the weight and balance section of an old C209 POH, heres the weight and balance extract:
3.5.1 Balance
Aircraft must be loaded front to back. If at or below maximum take off weight, aircraft is is balance, provided that:
a) Balance test is carried out as below*
b) MTOW is calculated by the formula: MTOW-fuel-pilot=pax+frieght weight*
a) Balance test is carried out as below*
b) MTOW is calculated by the formula: MTOW-fuel-pilot=pax+frieght weight*
*The balance test is as follows. Load the aircraft until all required pax and freight is on board. Lock barn doors and while walking around the rear of the aircraft to pilot door, casually lean on the elevator. Push down on the elevator so that the tail is forced toward the ground and then let go. If the tail rises again on it's own accord, so that the nosewheel is contacting the ground, the aircraft is in balance.
** If the tail does not rise after being pushed down, ask the pax to move their seats as far forwad as possible and try again.
***If this still does not work, consider the weight of the pilot at his/her station. This weight in most cases will be satisfactory to put the aircraft back into balance.
** If the tail does not rise after being pushed down, ask the pax to move their seats as far forwad as possible and try again.
***If this still does not work, consider the weight of the pilot at his/her station. This weight in most cases will be satisfactory to put the aircraft back into balance.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Crookwell
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Remember the footnote there:
In some marginal 'in balance' cases, the nose oleo will be extended so as to no longer be connected to the rudder pedal steering mechanism. In addition to poor forward visibility problems when taxiing, steering must be done cautiously with differential braking only. Turning off runway may only be done at very low speed.
...Disco
In some marginal 'in balance' cases, the nose oleo will be extended so as to no longer be connected to the rudder pedal steering mechanism. In addition to poor forward visibility problems when taxiing, steering must be done cautiously with differential braking only. Turning off runway may only be done at very low speed.
...Disco
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Navajo King
I think you'll find that the photo above is genuine. I have seen a 209 while visiting the US and it's a weird machine. Theres a very critical loading procedure and a strict weight limit for the most rear seats. The engine has also been moved further forward when compared to the c207.
Sorry Tiger, can't help you with your questions. Don't think there would be any 209's in Aus, but good luck with the new job.
NK.
Sorry Tiger, can't help you with your questions. Don't think there would be any 209's in Aus, but good luck with the new job.
NK.
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0212461/M/
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 36
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Montyjames,
The photo which you found on airliners.net is actually about 5 years old and I have been told that particular aircraft (the 207 - cn 20700117) was re-registered about 2 years ago and sold.
The Cessna 209 in my photo was re-registered as N1517U and purchased by the same company who owned the 207. I guess they painted it the same colours, and took the photo outside the same hangar so it looks similar. I guarantee you're looking at two different aircraft.
As for the earlier post regarding the registration details showing it as a c207, the reason is a C209 is also officially known as a C207-900 (or stretched 207) and has the same engine and wing as a c207. Bit like a Navajo and Chieftain known as a PA31, even though the chieftain is a stretched Navajo.
Hope this clears a few things up. BTW I'm still waiting for answers to my original questions!
Cheers,
Tiger.
The photo which you found on airliners.net is actually about 5 years old and I have been told that particular aircraft (the 207 - cn 20700117) was re-registered about 2 years ago and sold.
The Cessna 209 in my photo was re-registered as N1517U and purchased by the same company who owned the 207. I guess they painted it the same colours, and took the photo outside the same hangar so it looks similar. I guarantee you're looking at two different aircraft.
As for the earlier post regarding the registration details showing it as a c207, the reason is a C209 is also officially known as a C207-900 (or stretched 207) and has the same engine and wing as a c207. Bit like a Navajo and Chieftain known as a PA31, even though the chieftain is a stretched Navajo.
Hope this clears a few things up. BTW I'm still waiting for answers to my original questions!
Cheers,
Tiger.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wasn't arguing the existence of a C209, but rather point out that the photo you posted IS infact an edited photo, Everything in it is exactly the same, from the paint scheme to the Rego, that car is in the same spot, as well as the shadow in exactly the same spot, even look at the nose wheel, pointing the same way in both photos.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Age: 36
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are many things the same I agree, but theres a perfectly logical explanation for everything.
1. The car is in the same spot because the company CEO has parked in that spot everyday for the past 10 years.
2. The shadow is similar because both photo's were taken at the same time of day and year.
3. The nosewheel is turned the same way because whenever a plane is parked in that spot the pilot must make a tight turn to get in, and theres not much room to straighten the nose wheel.
4. The paint scheme is the same because its the same company and they like all their aircraft painted the same way.
5. See my previous post regarding same rego.
Not arguing, just giving out the facts.
Cheers,
Tiger.
1. The car is in the same spot because the company CEO has parked in that spot everyday for the past 10 years.
2. The shadow is similar because both photo's were taken at the same time of day and year.
3. The nosewheel is turned the same way because whenever a plane is parked in that spot the pilot must make a tight turn to get in, and theres not much room to straighten the nose wheel.
4. The paint scheme is the same because its the same company and they like all their aircraft painted the same way.
5. See my previous post regarding same rego.
Not arguing, just giving out the facts.
Cheers,
Tiger.
Not quiet the same monty, the pic you showed was obviously taken before the hangar was jacked up, moved to the right and extended.
