The most POWERFUL Cessna 172 ever MADE! | Walkaround & Flight

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 11 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 91

  • @DeadstickAdventures
    @DeadstickAdventures  2 роки тому +10

    Hey guys. If you're readying this, please consider leaving a LIKE for the YT algorithm! It helps us out very much! - Ash :)

  • @larryblanks6765
    @larryblanks6765 Рік тому +5

    My father worked for Bill Flint at Flint airmotive at Gillespie airport in the early 70,s and put the Flint tanks on Cessna's and when Bill retired my Dad Bought the company in the middle of the 70's and continued the sell the tanks and install them on theri planes. A lot of aviator actors like George Kennedy got them on their 205,206, and 207s. I worked there too parts cleaning. I was a kid.

  • @commandftoperations1692
    @commandftoperations1692 2 роки тому +11

    Awesome video guys! We're proud to be sponsoring you, keep up the great work.

  • @garysmith8455
    @garysmith8455 3 місяці тому

    This presentation was GREAT to see! Rusty pilot from the late 70ies here. I remember when this model was introduced. NOTE: my long time buddy owns a genuine COAST GUARD issue (1979), and still sports the red and blue stripes and wing bars. It is a real performer for sure!
    I fly at home in a very detailed flight sim now, and it is all configured as a Hawk XP. I bought the Reims Rocket mod Hawk for MSFS. One of the liveries looks just like the one you're flying there including same burgundy interior too. Thanks again for the insight on one of Cessna's most beloved airplanes 👍!

  • @CameronPerdue
    @CameronPerdue 2 роки тому +9

    As an XP owner I think your W&B numbers are for a float plane. And not the wheel version. Mine had 740 usable on floats. And over 900 on wheels (can’t recall the specific #)

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  2 роки тому +3

      Thanks for bringing that up. I’ll have another read of the Flight Manual. I wouldn’t be upset if I discovered another bunch of useful load! I’m unsure of the history of the aircraft but would be interested to find out if it was on floats at some point!

    • @RAPR117
      @RAPR117 2 місяці тому

      typically the 172XP weights approximately 1600 pounds with the wheel configuration, leaving 950 pounds for flesh and fuel.

  • @a.geddes6201
    @a.geddes6201 Рік тому +1

    I've been flying a Rocket recently, man that thing has a kick to it, engine is an absolute pleasure.

  • @Wpilot673
    @Wpilot673 Рік тому +2

    I have a fair amount of time in a rental XP and was always impressed with the climb and useful load. Still slow though. All that HP has a hard time overcoming a draggy airframe. According to the owner it was a expensive on maintenance too.

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  Рік тому +1

      Yeah I was also disappointed that it wasn’t faster. Still a great plane though

  • @jackbrainassociates8806
    @jackbrainassociates8806 2 роки тому +5

    I owned an XP for several years. It’s a great airplane your video brought back some good memories. Keep up the good work I’m looking forward to your next video.

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  2 роки тому

      Glad to hear! Thanks for the comment. We’ve got some more great ones coming up!

  • @lcprivatepilot1969
    @lcprivatepilot1969 Рік тому +1

    If I ever decide on a 172, it will have at the very least, a 180-HP power-plant with the addition of a Power-Flow Exhaust system.
    Thanks for sharing this!

  • @hectorvillePS3
    @hectorvillePS3 2 роки тому +1

    My long term girlfriend and I look forward to these videos, they help us sleep when we are restless. Really enjoy his tone of voice. Would love to meet him one day.

  • @gabimoreno9895
    @gabimoreno9895 2 роки тому +4

    My flight club owns a couple of FR172J Reims Rocket. One hour (wet rental) is 10 euros more expensive than one hour on a 172N and 10 cheaper than a 172S with G1000.... By the way, I hate glass cockpits... so guess which one I fly 😎

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  2 роки тому +2

      That’s a pretty easy choice! Rocket all the way! Steam cockpits are the best 👌

  • @drsuessl
    @drsuessl 6 місяців тому

    I loved flying. One night got to flight a Cessna 184. One time tried the Caravan. ❤❤❤

  • @philipkinney8361
    @philipkinney8361 2 роки тому +1

    Great video. I’ve owned a 1976 Hawk XP II for 3 yrs. It’s been a great 1st plane. Sometimes it would be nice to go faster, but overall it’s a pleasure to fly and economical. The POH useful load (on wheels) is 977lbs. With full tanks (49 gals) allows for 683lbs of people and cargo. As another poster mentioned, you may have been referring to the useful load with floats rather than wheels.

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  2 роки тому

      Yes I think you’re right there Phil. Interesting stats nonetheless!

  • @alexlefevre6492
    @alexlefevre6492 2 роки тому +2

    Wicked video as always guys.

  • @exploring9to593
    @exploring9to593 2 роки тому +5

    Very informative, love the videos guys 🙌🏼

  • @Murphy_Peoples
    @Murphy_Peoples 2 роки тому +3

    Excellent review, thanks for posting this.

  • @skyskipper1423
    @skyskipper1423 2 роки тому +2

    Great video guys. I have the 195hp version. Great climber and short-field performer.

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  2 роки тому

      Awesome! You’d know just how great they are then. Thanks for the comment! :)

  • @victoreduardourquhartvilla6976

    172 con 180 hp corresponde a los últimos modelos del Skyhawk. A los que certifican como C-175, pueden adaptar les motores de hasta 235 hp( 6 cilindros O-435) sin reductora.

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  Рік тому

      ¡muy interesante!

    • @victoreduardourquhartvilla6976
      @victoreduardourquhartvilla6976 7 місяців тому +1

      El hawk XP no es un 172, corresponde por igual al cutlass, cutlass RG, al Reíms (210 hp) fabricado en Francia ( motor Rolls Royce bajo licencia) y a la versión militar . Todos estos son C-175, en esencia un Skylark modificados y muy semejantes al 172. El 172 Skyhawk es único porque certifica como C-172 propiamente. Los demás usurpando el nombre, no pertenecen al modelo porque el fuselaje no es el mismo. Las alas y el empenaje hacen que parezcan un 172. Pero NO. No son 172 de manera alguna.

  • @pimzoutendijk
    @pimzoutendijk 2 роки тому +1

    In Europe this version was called F172 RR (Reims Rocket). I flew it in the 70th as a para-plane.

  • @richard8181
    @richard8181 2 роки тому +1

    Love it and the extra ballast in the back really make mine fly great especially when landing VH-RWG 😀

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  2 роки тому

      Great to hear another supporter of the venerable XP! Such a good aircraft 😁

  • @lawrencebillson6224
    @lawrencebillson6224 2 роки тому +2

    Love the videos, keep ‘em coming.
    A rocket or XP would be pretty sweet to own - probably easy to get someone to maintain it. I do think I’d probably want something a little faster, either the 182 but probably something with retractable gear. I’ve recently started to fall in love with the Comanche.

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  2 роки тому +1

      Comanches are a very cool plane albeit getting a little old! Can’t ever go wrong with a 182. Versatile, fast and high wing 👌

  • @terryhall4525
    @terryhall4525 2 роки тому +1

    Nice video Ash, can't wait to see the walkaround on a Boeing

  • @MattyCrayon
    @MattyCrayon 2 роки тому +1

    Nice to come across another local content creator. I've seen this plane down at YADG quite a few times. Great video. Subscribed 🤙

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  2 роки тому +1

      Thanks man! We’ve got plenty more to come. Call in to the Command Flight Training office and say g’day if you’re ever in the Murray Bridge area! Cheers :)

    • @MattyCrayon
      @MattyCrayon 2 роки тому

      @@DeadstickAdventures will do. 👍

  • @oscarmedek7744
    @oscarmedek7744 2 роки тому +1

    Just passed my CPL systems exam so these walk around make a bit more sense to me now ahaha

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  2 роки тому +1

      Congrats! Keep slugging through them. Glad you’re enjoying the videos. Thanks for the comment!

  • @pilotmiami1
    @pilotmiami1 Рік тому +1

    Bravo.thenks

  • @mickybobby
    @mickybobby 2 роки тому +1

    Awesome video!

  • @jarvisfamilyhomevideos7879
    @jarvisfamilyhomevideos7879 2 роки тому

    At 10:09 where you mention the max demonstrated crosswind, "max demonstrated" simply means the maximum demonstrated crosswind that the plane safely underwent during flight testing. It could be that a certificated airplane could actually be controllable under greater crosswind conditions, but that those conditions were never present during flight testing. So the fact that the max "demonstrated" on the XP is greater than the regular 172 doesn't necessarily mean that the XP can handle greater crosswinds than the regular 172. It could simply mean that the regular 172 never "demonstrated" a 20-knot crosswind during certification flight testing.

  • @garysmith8455
    @garysmith8455 4 дні тому

    How is it that this Hawk XP is a MS-2020 mod? Same tail # 👍

  • @observer1242
    @observer1242 2 роки тому +2

    Sorry mate, it’s an engine not a motor. Beautiful plane.

  • @aroopghosh1381
    @aroopghosh1381 Рік тому +1

    We have one in Mumbai India. Have flown her . Call sign VT IJS . Skyhawk XP

  • @uscero89
    @uscero89 Рік тому

    Saludos desde cudahy california
    Canelo por decision en el 12

  • @victoreduardourquhartvilla6976

    El 172 XP es un C-175. No tiene nada que ver con un Skyhawk. Al igual que los Reíms Cutlass RG, Mescalero, certifican como C-175. El Skyhawk

  • @Pilotc180
    @Pilotc180 Рік тому +2

    A good flyer, big improvement over the 150 hp 172; but not close to 182 performance

  • @TooLowGear
    @TooLowGear 2 роки тому +1

    What’s are the differences between the Hawk XP I and Hawk XP II?

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  2 роки тому

      I definitely could be wrong but from the reading I’ve done - it was a change from the K to the KB engine which had a redesigned crankshaft. - Ash

    • @richard8181
      @richard8181 2 роки тому

      Also the radio equip fit out on XPII

  • @KimWentworth-y8e
    @KimWentworth-y8e 10 місяців тому +1

    That front strut is getting a little low.

  • @robinj.9329
    @robinj.9329 11 місяців тому +1

    The 172 only used 145 h.p. untill they switched to the 150 hp Lycoming O-320 in 1968. Gross was only 2,200 pounds at the start. Which is still a good, all around flying weight. At high density altitudes or high temperatures your best just not flying that day!!!

  • @bernardanderson3758
    @bernardanderson3758 2 роки тому +1

    I’ve flown the 172 XP

  • @rydstallion75
    @rydstallion75 Рік тому +1

    Why would they need a time limit on running the engine above 2600 rpm? I don't understand that. Aviation motors are supposed to be built good, what kind of engine can't run at 2800 rpm?

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  Рік тому

      For whatever reason, I guess continental decided to impose this limit on their engines. Interesting considering some of these engines rev a lot higher when modified.

    • @Bakes-z4c
      @Bakes-z4c 7 місяців тому

      It’s about heat dissipation under all conditions, whatever power you get out, it makes about 3x the heat

  • @jimwilson8984
    @jimwilson8984 2 роки тому +10

    Please, please turn off the music. Why do people think they need music when they are delivering a lecture? Remember, we poor Yanks also have to decode Australian into English. Give us a break.

    • @richard8181
      @richard8181 2 роки тому +1

      I would like to focus on the main content also, a lot of new youtubers make this mistake.

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  2 роки тому +1

      Haha that decode is harder than NOTAM to English! Thanks for the suggestion Jim. I’ve spoken to our editor who has toned down the music in future vids for you. ^MP

  • @zoozolplexOne
    @zoozolplexOne Рік тому

    Nice bird

  • @bernardanderson3758
    @bernardanderson3758 2 роки тому +1

    Let me know if it’s for sale

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  2 роки тому +1

      Absolutely! I don’t believe the owner has any plans to sell

  • @afsecaira
    @afsecaira 2 роки тому +1

    great video! PM me if you need help with audio.

  • @GLEX234
    @GLEX234 3 місяці тому

    In French, it’s “Rance”

  • @lifeingeneral9111
    @lifeingeneral9111 Рік тому +1

    Yes they’re a great plane but to every pro there’s is a con, fuel burn, and in the United States fuel is horrendously expensive

    • @DeadstickAdventures
      @DeadstickAdventures  Рік тому

      Yep, and I’m Australia it’s even more expensive than the US 😥

    • @cmtetaboaco
      @cmtetaboaco 3 місяці тому

      In Africa it’s 40usd the gallon

  • @shady0079
    @shady0079 Рік тому +1

    not your grand dadys sky hawk

  • @RandyLarsen-e4m
    @RandyLarsen-e4m 5 місяців тому

    cut the music when he's talking. Annoying.

  • @mitchschneringer
    @mitchschneringer 2 роки тому +1

    Great video!!