Skycatcher Walkaround part 1
2023 ж. 1 Там.
10 404 Рет қаралды
In part 1 of this 2 part video, Mark takes a walk around this Cessna Skywatcher.
#pilot #cessna #skycatcher #flying #aircraft #airplane @skywagonuniversity5023
In part 1 of this 2 part video, Mark takes a walk around this Cessna Skywatcher.
#pilot #cessna #skycatcher #flying #aircraft #airplane @skywagonuniversity5023
A lesson in the pitfalls of outsourcing. Great video, I’ve been curious about these.
The trimtab is this way because the boundarylayer is quite thick at that location. So with this notch the trimtab has to be moved less to have the same effect. This causes less stress on the trimbtab/cables and allows for the smallest trimtab. During cruise the notch is smaller than the boundarylayer at that point so it practically does not increase drag. The new Diamonds including the DA50RG has it also, so also for fast cruisers it's not a drag penalty worthwhile. If it does not have this notch, the trimtab would be larger increasing weight and more interference drag, so the little bit more induced drag is really nothing.
Thank you for the explanation, like Mark, I was wondering the same thing!
Yes, Thank you. It looked very un-aerodynamic to me.
That's a far better explanation than mine! Thank you!
@@skywagonuniversity5023 In auto racing it’s called a Gurney Flap. Dan Gurney invented it (or at least used it for the first time in racing) to increase the downforce effectiveness of a rear wing. I would imagine the same effect is realized with a trim tab, i.e. small tab with the increased effectiveness of a larger tab without a major increase in parasitic or induced drag. Aerodynamics are a voodoo art (see propeller design and “I don’t know what I don’t know” as an example).
Yes like how a ballbus bow on a ship adds to the hull but makes it better This reminds me of the Tesla Catamaran by Tech Ingredients in the build he explains how the shape of the hull encoureges the performance.@@mannypuerta5086
What a well equipped little plane! They should have continued making them. Whatever the price tag, still cheaper than a new 172 or Archer!
Yes, True.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 I mean, so many LSA's are made overseas anyway, Czech Republic, Italy, Austria...
I love this airplane! I even went back to KICT to get checked out at Yingling Aircraft. This was before they started to arrive around the USA. One of the ones that I was flying at KSNA had the right window come open in flight. It was truly a mangled mess!
Interesting little airplane, thanks Mark!
Thanks for continuing with one-part videos. If circumstances allow for an eventful, longer flight an occasional two-part feature makes perfect sense, though. Best of both worlds.
More to come!
Absolutely love your work Mark because I can go back to my 60s and 70s flying work at Moorabbin.
Excellent.
Excellent Mark, this works out perfectly. I was exhausted crunching the basics of aircraft maintenance watching Mike Busch - Savvy Aviation, before this came up. Nice!
Thanks.
Good decision on how to ‘part’ out the videos.
Thanks. Long flights equals two vids.
Another great vid!
what a shame they discontinued it. I think I would love to fly it instead of my 44 year old 152 trainer. but well that old lady has its noble charm :)
These were/are the Chevy Chevette, Ford Pinto of the sky. It does have a nice panel though.
Cool airplane. I like the "militarized" cabin with no plastic. Would have been nicer if they'd just used a lighter shade of paint inside to make the cabin feel brighter. Also, it really should have come with a Rotax 912S 100hp to allow more useful load and savings on fuel running mogas. Then, it would have been more popular with the schools as a C152 replacement.
Back then, most still raised their eyebrows with the mention of Rotax. They were not quite as accepted back then as they are today. I mean look at the warning labels that still come on/with the Rotax 912/914 engines. Reading them would make one think they shouldn't be mounted to the firewall of a aircraft!!!! Cessna wouldn't have touched that with a ten foot pole.Their lawyers wouldn't have allowed it!!!!
Excelente , saludos desde Argentina !
Always informative Mark…great job! 👍🏼
Glad you enjoyed it
the protrusion on the trim tab is called a Gurney flap, we have them on the Pilatus
What does it do?
@@skywagonuniversity5023 it increases the effectiveness of the control surface essentially making it act like a larger control surface. If I remember correctly the size of the Gurney tab is proportional to the cord of the wing.
Reduces control dead zone and increases response. There has been some recent discussion on the feature with regard to the Vans RV15 ongoing development.
Great content Mark. I love the throwback to the 1956 182. Fuel gauge. Manual flaps.
Same here!
I wouldn't mind one of these, and your walk-around only made it more so. I keep hoping they'll get a little cheaper. You didn't mention it, but I flew in one with the doors removed. Perfect for a hot day. Thanks for another excellent video.
Yeah I agree
doors were completely removed?
@@rhenry86 Yes, entirely removed.
Great review and flight test on your other segment Mark. I really enjoy the way you do these reviews and the information you provide is terrific. I used to own a Jabiru 230, made in Queensland Australia, love to hear a review of yours on one if you haven’t already. Biggest problem was the engine overheating/unreliable but the airframe itself in my opinion was quite good. Engine was a Jabiru made 6 cylinder 3300cc, 120hp. The last straw for me was when the leak down test failed due to all 6 cylinders being glazed up. I remember some company invented water cooled heads for them which I thought was a good idea, don’t know how successful they were. The Jabiru 160 had shorter wings and the same engine minus 2 cylinders 2200cc, 80hp. I sold it and bought a 182Q and got my PPL after that.
I did do a Jabiru review. It is on this channel. Let me know what you think.
Enjoyed it as usual 👍
mark THE SPLIT ON THE TRIM TAB FOR THE CESSNA SKYCATCHER ALLOWS THE AIRPLANE TOO STAY TRIMED STABLE IN FLIGHT BETTER THAN A CONVENTIONAL TRIM TAB. I AM AN A&p mechanic so i know this and i flew this airplane some time ago and its a great airplane too fly. mark from san francisco. i am based at hmb. great airplane reveiws mark.
Thanks for the info.
My new favorite "Markism" - Ohtoothinium.... BWAHAHAHAHAA!!!! Ranks right up there with my other favorite, "You don't want to try and go to Aspen in August with your Anvils."
Ha ha thanks.
👍
People forget these things (airframes) were "Built in China." That was quite controversial at the time. They were designed and assembled in the States.
One of my favorite training aircraft I’ve flown. So many people like to poo poo these without even flying them, they don’t know what they are missing out on!
Very true. I liked it very much.
The T shaped protrusion is called a "nolder" it makes the trim tab more efficient, allowing it to be placed only on one side.
Thank you.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 thank you for your amazing job.
Every day is s school day Mark. You taught me a lot about these little 'planes, reminded me of one or two things too. After having spent a fair amount of time in C150/C152's and a few hours in FW 3A microlights, I really like the look of this little Cessna.😊👍👍✌️ Good idea re the format too👍✌️😊💜
Thanks.
Hi Mark! Wondering when this beauty will be for sale? Don’t see it on the website yet.
Gordon, It's been on there and already gone because it sold.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 Bummer 😩
People complained about a new, certified aircraft at $149k???? Now many SLSA aircraft, nothing special mind you, are $200-$300k. Cessna was too early. This aircraft with a Rotax 100hp would be a real performer. Cessna wrecked some test flying with poor spin characteristics so the rudder was made bigger the single strake made larger. The wings needed strengthening. The end result was a highly developed very nice aircraft. At $149k it was a steal.
Very true. Wrong engine. Wrong market at the time.
I can think of a few other 2-place high-wing LSA aircraft that already are or can be equipped with dual ram horn yokes, doors of a more “conventional” nature, a centrally T-handle throttle quadrant and a few other features … that Textron-Cessna could or should have utilized, instead of the program they used and was destined to fail. Mark, if I’m designing a GA aircraft for both flight training schools/flight training in general and for personal use … some of the key selling features that would be in my design … optional dual side stick controls/Airbus or dual yokes/Boeing. In short … think both mental memory or familiarization and muscle memory. Hope all that makes sense.
Very true.
It looks like a great plane with some nice features…they need to resurrect it, but made in the USA.
Make it here.
O-200 under the cowling. 4+ lires to produce c100 hp. A Rotax is 1.2 for anything from 80 to 115 hp depending on version. The O-200 is 1930s tech about time the GA world progressed. One of the things that stopped it being more successful is in my opinion the idiosyncratic stick. Had they installed a conventional yoke or stick it would have sold better. I always feel that style of nosewheel leg is too delicate to be relied upon. The majority if wrecks I've seen with that style have collapsed it. That fuel gauge is one of the best features of the aircraft.
Rotax have overcome their reliability issues long since and they are quieter
@@GWN_Garage not to everyone's taste but still time aviation moved beyond 1930 where piston engines are concerned.
the stokes are very much enjoyed by their owners, theres no downside to them. considering the abundance of nose wheel assemblies available on Ebay I would say they hold up pretty good
Wow, I thought 162’s didn’t have cabin heat, the fact that they also have svt and autopilot I might actually get one instead of an older 150, especially cause they’re the same price if not the 162 is cheaper now on most sites
They are nice panes.
How did Cessna in all their experiance messup this project pricing for a plane that has only what you need and nothing flash and expensive ? It reminds me of the Erco or Tomahawk made to do a job and easy to service. I notice 2 seaters coming back in the market , maybe Cessna should dust off the cobwebs and rethink this idea, eg; I don't realy like Cessna's (Alon A2 / Mooney FAN 🤣) but I DO like this one !
They let the pen pushers and lawyers be part of the program.
Unfortunately for these planes the commonly wearing or first parts to break are impossible to come by now. Or at ridiculous prices. Over speed a flap. 30k for a new one. Let the door pop open in flight. Between 15-20k if you can get one. Still great planes to fly. Only 100 hp but it doesn’t need more!
Alternatively a sheet metal shop could easily make a flap other flat parts.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 this is true. The way they fail would make it a very very expensive repair. Not that it’s really a downside all planes are expensive. I still love the plane and know them extremely well and help maintain a fairly large fleet of them
The Skycatcher is the epitome of all that is wrong with GA. Modern materials matched to 1930's engine tech. Outsourced production, ridiculous logistical problems arising from that and all wrapped in reams of legal rulings. Resulting in an 2 seat aircraft costing $150,000.
Wow!!, you summed that up better than I could ever have in one sentence.
No parachute - they have cured the spinning challenges?
It would take a lot of work to get it to spin.
@@skywagonuniversity5023 I am a bit wary about spinning since I lost two friends to a spin in an ultra light. In my oponion it is more about how easy it is to get out than about how hard it is to get into one. I once declined spinning a C172 because it dropped left wing in a stall - not even full right rudder could keep left wing from dropping.
They installed the lower structure on the rudder system. They did test with the chute and the guy testing it pulled the chute and made it to the ground… till the wind cought it and dragged the pilot and the plane across the ground. Sad story.
@@airtonylee I saw the after photos of that incident. There was one more, but I cannot remember what happened there.
can it be used as an IFR training platform?
yes, very much so, but no heated pitot.
Unfortunately since it’s in the slsa category it is not allowed to go imc
It doesn't look like that would be a good trainer to withstand a firm porpoise landing
Not many planes are good at porpoising.
You're right
Still much prefer the Cessna 152 "Skycart"
"skytrolley" for the Brits
Skywaggonette?
Those elevator trim tab bends increase effectiveness at the expense of drag. Never was impressed with this plane.
is horrible... Cessna just needed to take a 150 or 152 and improve everything that had failed over the years and release it for sale. rightly there was no market. people fly from inside. interior aesthetics are very important
Yes, and perhaps not Light sport.
Nothing from china is excellent.
Pointless plane: way more expensive, outperformed and with an embarassingly poor level of finishing when compared with most of its european and south african competitors...they would have made a better decision upgrading the good ‘ol 152 since one of those, with 10k+ flight hours, still sells for almost 60k USD overseas 😅
A modern 152 would do very well.