New 170B owner

How to keep the Cessna 170 flying and airworthy.

Moderators: GAHorn, Karl Towle, Bruce Fenstermacher

User avatar
GAHorn
Posts: 20968
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm

Re: New 170B owner

Post by GAHorn »

My "wisdom" is limited to the ability to purchase store-bought shine and boldly correct a "typo". :oops:
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
goodair
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2018 5:32 pm

Re: New 170B owner

Post by goodair »

It's a 74 -56! No wonder is so anemic.

Now, do we want a 53 or 51... decisions.

Also could really use some help.
We are having feed problems in the tanks. Last long leg of the flight from MA to TX was 3 hrs. Took off on both, flew 45 minutes on the left tank and then switched back to both.

After landing we had 2! Gallons right tank, 9 gallons left. No apparent leaks at the caps. What's up?? Did this all the way. Really favors the R tank in both.
User avatar
170C
Posts: 3182
Joined: Tue May 06, 2003 11:59 am

Re: New 170B owner

Post by 170C »

These Cessna 100 series seem to always feed more from one tank than from the other. As long as you have some fuel in one tank or the other you will be OK.
OLE POKEY
170C
Director:
2012-2018
User avatar
n2582d
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2002 4:58 am

Re: New 170B owner

Post by n2582d »

Neal,
A belated welcome to the Association!

You might try swapping your fuel caps to see if the problem follows the cap so to speak. As Frank has said, uneven fuel feed is pretty common with these aircraft. This has been discussed here as well as other places on this forum. Try using the search function using terms like “uneven”. Let us know what you find to fix - or minimize - the problem.
Gary
User avatar
GAHorn
Posts: 20968
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm

Re: New 170B owner

Post by GAHorn »

goodair wrote:It's a 74 -56! No wonder is so anemic.

Now, do we want a 53 or 51... decisions.

Also could really use some help.
We are having feed problems in the tanks. Last long leg of the flight from MA to TX was 3 hrs. Took off on both, flew 45 minutes on the left tank and then switched back to both.

After landing we had 2! Gallons right tank, 9 gallons left. No apparent leaks at the caps. What's up?? Did this all the way. Really favors the R tank in both.

WHOO-Hooo..!!! That prop is likely a Sensenich???? If so, they do not perform as well as a McCauley. If it's a McCauley it's also TOO SHORT. The min diameter is 74.5".
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
goodair
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2018 5:32 pm

Re: New 170B owner

Post by goodair »

Well....we may have some issues here. The prop is clearly a Mccauley, but the logbook for the aircraft says Sensenich. When I get home I am pulling the spinner to get the numbers off the prop because I dont trust any of it. A little cleanup of the books are in order as there are a few mistakes here and there. The prop, whatever it is, was recently overhauled and painted. Although it has the McCauley stickers on it the jury is out until I look at the hub.
Installed the spin on filter first thing yesterday. That was easy. We have a small list of things to be done, but most importantly, fly it as much as we can.

Thanks to all for the help. We will get her dialed in soon.
User avatar
ghostflyer
Posts: 1390
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:06 am

Re: New 170B owner

Post by ghostflyer »

I disagree about the Mc Cauley being a better prop. While the McCauley is a better prop for static thrust and climbing but the sensenich prop [metal] is a better prop for cruise at altitudes plus the surface of the prop is a lot harder and is less subject to stone damage. They also do not crack as readily . However one prop we should look at is the MT prop with its nickel leading edge . They pull like a train on steroids. I have been flying a Cessna 180 with the standard prop for about 3 years until age and damage required re-placement. A MT prop was fitted , OMG what a difference . So much quieter and vibration free .
goodair
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2018 5:32 pm

Re: New 170B owner

Post by goodair »

Well after further invenstigation, I have found out that our prop is actually a MCcauley DES 1A170 DM 7651. So, a 51 pitch 76" . I put a tape measure on it and it comes in at 76...and change, but we will round down beacuase the type cert says max dia is 76". Not sure why this thing is a little over 76 when the part number calls it a 76 and this exact part number is approved on the T.C.... But thats why I am here. Reading and learning. Are these just a tad over 76 at the beginning of their life? Also, we have come to the conclusion that we like it. It does not really turn up that much for take off, which is surprising to me with a 51, but the airplane still climbs real well and we can just about touch 2600 full throttle level flight at sea level, std day. I think we are getting about 2400 in climb at around 80 mph. All in all a good all around prop for what we are doing.

The log book for this aircraft obviously got mixed up with another as it is not even the correct prop. So I have a prop with no logs. I have a receipt in the books for a recert and repaint so maybe I can contact them for details, or call the manufacturer with the serial number. Then I just start a new logbook. The prop actually appears new as there is not a scratch on it.

Switched from the Maule tailwheel to the Scott (ABW) 3200 this week. The steering for takeoff and landing appears very similar, but ground handling and taxi is much easier with the scott. Like I have read here in many places, the 170 just does not have alot of tailwheel steering through the rudder arm. It now breakes to a caster with a tap of the brake and will click back to stearable as soon as it trails straight behind. Something the Maule would never do regularly. All in all we like it. I would have liked a more pronounced difference because of the cost of the darn thing, but at least we found a used one in good shape and didn't have to pay for a new one.

We have put about 30 hours on the 170 already since the ferry back from the east coast last month. My partner and i have both been on vacation and we both have 19 year old sons that have now been checked out. Such a great transistion aircraft. Lots of wide grass strips in North Texas and we have been visiting many of them.

I still have a list of items to do but will hit them one by one. I have a new gascolator for it. I hate glass bowls, although no problems for 64 years is kinda hard to find fault with. Still gona put it on. We have a bit of a hornets nest under the panel. Not the bugs, its the wires. Still have the fuses and lots of soldered connections. I found some scary cigar lighter thing clamped up under the panel, in addition to the one in the panel. Also need to deal with some loose flap tracks/rollers and a few other items. The joy of aircraft ownership! Good thing I enjoy the work.

Again thanks to all for the help and input.
User avatar
GAHorn
Posts: 20968
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm

Re: New 170B owner

Post by GAHorn »

goodair wrote:Well after further invenstigation, I have found out that our prop is actually a MCcauley DES 1A170 DM 7651. So, a 51 pitch 76" . I put a tape measure on it and it comes in at 76...and change, but we will round down beacuase the type cert says max dia is 76". Not sure why this thing is a little over 76 when the part number calls it a 76 and this exact part number is approved on the T.C.... But thats why I am here. Reading and learning. Are these just a tad over 76 at the beginning of their life? Also, we have come to the conclusion that we like it. It does not really turn up that much for take off, which is surprising to me with a 51, but the airplane still climbs real well and we can just about touch 2600 full throttle level flight at sea level, std day. I think we are getting about 2400 in climb at around 80 mph. All in all a good all around prop for what we are doing.

The log book for this aircraft obviously got mixed up with another as it is not even the correct prop. So I have a prop with no logs. I have a receipt in the books for a recert and repaint so maybe I can contact them for details, or call the manufacturer with the serial number. Then I just start a new logbook. The prop actually appears new as there is not a scratch on it. …
Although a separate logbook dedicated to the propeller is a good idea (and a common practice with larger/more-sophisticated airplanes) it is not mandatory, and it is very common for the propeller info to be entered into the airframe logbooks. I've also seen it entered into the engine log...but that makes for complicated record-keeping, and I suspect that may have happened in your case? If so, the prop information is likely lost completely. The Cessna factory will not have the info for you....I wouldn't bother them with this request....and it's also unlikely the prop mfr'r will be able to help either with anything other than confirmation of what you have in the sales-receipt. If there was a Prop recert… that shop might have info, but the problem for you will be to correlate it with engine times, and that can be difficult if engines have been changed, etc.
There's nothing wrong with you creating a new log for the prop,... do your best to estimate the total time and make such a reference, then keep all prop records from that point on.
goodair wrote:...
Switched from the Maule tailwheel to the Scott (ABW) 3200 this week. The steering for takeoff and landing appears very similar, but ground handling and taxi is much easier with the scott. Like I have read here in many places, the 170 just does not have alot of tailwheel steering through the rudder arm. It now breakes to a caster with a tap of the brake and will click back to stearable as soon as it trails straight behind. Something the Maule would never do regularly. All in all we like it. I would have liked a more pronounced difference because of the cost of the darn thing, but at least we found a used one in good shape and didn't have to pay for a new one.

We have put about 30 hours on the 170 already since the ferry back from the east coast last month. My partner and i have both been on vacation and we both have 19 year old sons that have now been checked out. Such a great transistion aircraft. Lots of wide grass strips in North Texas and we have been visiting many of them.

I still have a list of items to do but will hit them one by one. I have a new gascolator for it. I hate glass bowls, although no problems for 64 years is kinda hard to find fault with. Still gona put it on. We have a bit of a hornets nest under the panel. Not the bugs, its the wires. Still have the fuses and lots of soldered connections. I found some scary cigar lighter thing clamped up under the panel, in addition to the one in the panel. Also need to deal with some loose flap tracks/rollers and a few other items. The joy of aircraft ownership! Good thing I enjoy the work.

Again thanks to all for the help and input.
The tailwheel steering sounds pretty normal. The glass bowl gascolators are not smiled on up at OKC but they have lasted 70 years for most folks without difficulty and they DO allow one to see the fuel inside. :wink:
As for your RPM with that prop... what is your STATIC RPM? And have you confirmed the accuracy of your cockpit tach?
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight Convention.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
goodair
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2018 5:32 pm

Re: New 170B owner

Post by goodair »

No, I have not checked the tach yet and I really need to do that. Keep forgetting my checker when I fly. It is reading 2200 static. I will see if I can check it in the next few days.

Why is my 76" prop, 76.5 inches long? I was thinking of the McCauley factory for the call to check the serial number and date of manufacture. Maybe they could help. I no longer believe it is new because they changed the serial number designations back in 2000 and this one has the older numbers, I think. There is mention of swapping to a Sensinich prop in the airframe log and mention of it being inspected yearly, but no mention of its removal and replacement with the McCauley.

I am checking for ADs, and if there are none I believe I can just start a book or start using the airframe book as a log. If there is an AD then we may have to pull it to comply if necessary. There is one SB, but it is NA for our serial number. I still need to look some more.

It is interesting that the last annual was signed off this month on the east coast, and an entry was made in the Sensenich logbook that is was inspected IAW the Sensenich manuals. The prop has fresh paint and brand new McCauley stickers on it. HMMM....need to make some calls.
User avatar
gfeher
Posts: 571
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2014 9:19 pm

Re: New 170B owner

Post by gfeher »

Sensenich Propeller Services of Lititz, PA (there was also a Connecticut location until recently) is a certified McCauley repair station. It's not affiliated with Sensenich Propeller Company. It's a different compant that was spun off in the early '90's. I know because they overhauled and repitched my McCauley prop last spring. That may be causing some confusion here. Check the exact name and location of the Sensenich in your logbook.
Gene Feher
Argyle (1C3), NY
'52 170B N2315D s/n 20467 C-145-2
Experimental J3 Cub Copy N7GW O-200
goodair
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2018 5:32 pm

Re: New 170B owner

Post by goodair »

Oh! Didnt know that. Let me double check but I believe the part numbers dont match. I will check
User avatar
ghostflyer
Posts: 1390
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2008 3:06 am

Re: New 170B owner

Post by ghostflyer »

In all seriousness when measuring prop lengths or sheets of aluminum be careful of what measuring tapes you use. I was caught out when we were measuring out on large sheets of aluminum and cutting them up and my “assistant “ was measuring one side with his tape and marking and I was doing the same . When being sliced it was apparate it wasn’t square. My “aero harbour freight tape “ wasn’t accurate and was out by 1/2 in every 80 ins. It seem to stretch at the 40in mark.
User avatar
cfzxo
Posts: 137
Joined: Sat Oct 19, 2002 3:29 pm

Re: New 170B owner

Post by cfzxo »

ghostflyer wrote:In all seriousness when measuring prop lengths or sheets of aluminum be careful of what measuring tapes you use. I was caught out when we were measuring out on large sheets of aluminum and cutting them up and my “assistant “ was measuring one side with his tape and marking and I was doing the same . When being sliced it was apparate it wasn’t square. My “aero harbour freight tape “ wasn’t accurate and was out by 1/2 in every 80 ins. It seem to stretch at the 40in mark.
I used to get all my carpenters to hook their tapes off the same point to see if we were all on the same page. Especially the men that were doing the layout. :oops: I have seen some stupid things
because of tapes.
goodair
Posts: 49
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2018 5:32 pm

Re: New 170B owner

Post by goodair »

Well I finally got the prop thing all ironed out. I checked the ADs on this prop and there are three. One was N/A due to not in the serial range listed, and the other two cover different part #s. I simply started a record of this prop in the current airframe log. It turns out to be right at 76" (yea, bad tape measure skills here) and is a 51. I checked the tach with an electronic hand held and it is within about 50rpm. I now think the pitch is just fine for our purposes.

After about 10 hrs of flying with our new Scott 3200 tailwheel, we all believe that it makes very little difference in the ground handling of the aircraft during take off and landing, and most taxi operations. It does handle better during taxi at slow speeds as the brakes seem to get it unlocked, and re-locked easier. Of course this tailwheel is much more robust and I realize why the bush folks like it. It is easier to maintain and will probably last as long as the airframe. Was it worth 800 bucks (used)….well.....I dono.

Our new toy, 8WW, will be due for its first oil change in a few hours. Not bad for a little over a month! Our boys are in love with it and it does not spend much time in the hangar.

I have owned a Pitts S1S, and have over a thousand hours in super Cubs and am now starting to feel at home in the 170. One thing I have learned is that this airplane will just probably always have dismal tailwheel steering with the rudder peddles. Just the way it is. It does not detract from the fantastic handling properties of the aircraft in my opinion. It is a great transition trainer and our boys have done well. One alteration of my habits that I have realized is that the airplane seems to prefer wheel landings in gusty winds. Both crosswind and headwind, if above 15 to 20kts, are very uncomfortable in the three point attitude. Even when the flaps are dumped on landing, a gust can render you airborne in a heartbeat, only to re-land the a/c and start over. We have been wheel landing with and without flaps, leave the tail up during deceleration while the flaps are retracted. Only when airspeed has bled off substantially, usually when the elevator looses all effectiveness, the tail is lowered and the gusty winds do not have a chance at getting you airborne. I have always used a three point, or two...upwind wheel and tailwheel, in significant crosswinds. This has worked in many aircraft I have flown. There are a few that just don't work this way. The Swift is another that I can think of. Anyway, my son and I spent an entire day bouncing around on a gusty day doing wheel landings and feel much more confident with this technique, so that's what we are sticking with. I believe the three point attitude is just not a deep enough stall to prevent substantial lift in gusty wind.

We are also making our next annual list. Its gona be extensive but nothing to ugly. Flap rollers, bearings, a few cables etc. One thing that is evident is that the engine runs DRY. Not a drop in the cowl since we got it. It does use a little oil but the cylinders are that channel chrome which is not my favorite, but the compression is real good and it is using about a quart in 7 hours. Not too bad right?

Thanks again for all the input and advice from the club here. I can't say how nice it is to find folks interested in the same little details about owning and operating this type. My other type club is not nearly as active, and it takes months to get questions answered.
Post Reply