The International Cessna 170 Association

Hi guys. New member. Just bought a 1955 170B project. 2600TT, 200 SMOH, the plane has been sitting for 20ish years OUTSIDE!! Yes, I'm aware of the challenge ahead. Lol. Years ago, it got hit by a hail storm, so all the light skin components were pulled off for re-skin and stored inside. That's great! But..... The plane sat for years with no control surfaces attached. So...... Of course every bird that could fit in the lightening holes on the rear of the surfaces, took turns building nests in the wings and horizontal and vertical stabilizers and of course threw major bird parties in the engine compartment! Luckily....I am an A&P, so I won't have to pay an arm and a leg for the mountain of work that needs to be done, and as an avid homebuilder, having built several planes from scratch and restored several antique aircraft..... I know I have the "stick-to-it-ness" that it requires to finish a project like this. One of my favorite things is to see other peoples progress and journey in their projects.....so, I've decided to post my story, and progress and hopefully y'all will enjoy it. Stay tuned.....

Congratulations on your new project, and welcome to the group! I'm sure there will be much for all of us to learn through your eyes as you make progress. Please share your photos and stories as the project unfolds.

Where are you based, btw?

Congratulations...and Welcome!

I know that your project will proceed FAST...... (heh-heh). Keep us posted on the progress!

And for you 170 movers...... I'm sure you can relate!! Too wide for trailer. I put one ramp on the side of the trailer and rolled the offending wheel up on the angle iron bracket the gases the tail light assy and strapped it down like Gulliver!! Hey.....don't laugh....it worked!! Lol.

Of course......with the engine still attached and hanging off the back of the trailers like that....as you can imagine...anything over 50mph and she was doing her best free Willie imitation!!! And thanks to a prior post I saw....I stopped at Lowes and bought 600 pounds of sand and loaded in the front of the trailer to minimize the fishtailing. Now I could do a solid 72!! Yay!!

One of our Members thought of another solution.... ... reverse the axles on the landing gear legs. With the tires on the inside of the legs his 170 fit onto his trailer perfectly! (Don't recall if he used the original wheels/tires tho'. seems like they might contact the legs..?? also can't recall who it was... if he's reading...speak up!)

Thanks Brian. I'm in south central Louisiana. And Gahorn......it'll be done Tuesday at 2! I'll get back with you on the year!! Lol. Realistically..... I'm hoping for 18 months. I'm a Corporate pilot and have LOTS of free time, and I tend to work fast. There is a little sheet metal work on the right wing tip from a wind storm but not bad at all. Of course I'll go ahead and "re-major" the engine as it's been dormant too long. I'll know better once I open up the tail feathers and wings for corrosion inspection. My "plan" is to paint with a period correct scheme. Interior is already done. Planning a mild panel update as well.

Yeah...I thought about reversing wheels but it was cold and wet and at the time....just throwing it up there seemed like a good idea. Of course I stopped every 30 min to check the ride for the first 200 miles!!! I have NO idea what I would have done if it had fallen off the 2" Iron bar!!! I was by myself and it STORMED most of the way home! Every 18 wheeler that passed almost rocked me off the road! Got home at 1am and melted into bed I was sooooo wiped out!!!

Thanks. I love red/burgundy and white. Maybe some gray stripping with it as my interior is gray. Got it home and was pleasantly surprised to find it had (what I assume to be) a factory baggage door. Did Cessna put them in from the factory? It has the push button to open it in the pilot door jam. Also one piece windshield, solid axles and Cleveland wheel conversion done. No P Ponk gear mod tho. Is it worth doing?

But if the baggage door looks original that's a good sign Thanks for joining and thanks for expanding our knowledge base.

Jazasaguma, thanks for taking on the task of bringing another one back from the grave! Please consider writing a series of articles for the 170 News, as we have many members who, for whatever reason, do not frequent these forums, but who would love to see another 170 brought back to life. I am embarrassed to say that I’m am a couple of installments behind on writing articles on the rebuild of 3498C completed last year.

Good luck on your project!

(‘55s are the BEST!)

Jazasaguma wrote:Thanks. I love red/burgundy and white. Maybe some gray stripping with it as my interior is gray. Got it home and was pleasantly surprised to find it had (what I assume to be) a factory baggage door. Did Cessna put them in from the factory? It has the push button to open it in the pilot door jam. Also one piece windshield, solid axles and Cleveland wheel conversion done. No P Ponk gear mod tho. Is it worth doing?

Bag doors were never "original" by Cessna. It sounds as if someone has installed one from a 180 into your 170. They are fantastically, useful mods and it took me a few years to screw my courage up to the point of having it done.... one of the BEST mods, IMO. Be sure of your documentation on it... including STC paperwork... (Not just a 337 that says a a mod IAW STC was accomplished... but that you have the STC-approval, if applicable). Otherwise you'll need another basis of approval.

ALL 170's had a "one-piece" windshield. The center strap was a necessary structural component. The so-called "one piece mod" is a deletion of the center strap with additional strengthening at the top to prevent it from blowing out of the airframe.

The P-ponk mod has proponents and opponents. I believe it is a worthwhile mod and the Pponk folks have a convincing presentation for accomplishing it. I've never run across an opponent who has ever had one. Opponents usually argue that the Pponk mod will increase the structural damage in any accident sufficiently tremendous to destroy the gearbox.
I think that's an unsupportable argument: If you can tell me how hard you intend to run into that brick-wall... I'll tell you if a seat-belt is a good idea. The Pponk strengthens the inner attach-point of the landing gear leg so as to eliminate a minor landing event from becoming a major wreckage. If one should suffer an event so major as to rip-out the Pponk mod... then nothing would have saved you from the wreck anyway.
I'm going to guess your later-model has the solid-aluminum ski-axles...but if not, you should consider replacing earlier, hollow-aluminum axles with them or converting to steel axles.

I do not argue that the damage is not increased when a Pponk is torn out.
I agree that at some point an accident which defeats the beef-up will likely have resulted in increased damage as the result...but that the beef-up may have prevented the failure in the first case. (The observation that the non-Pponk airplane which had it's gear torn out was less-damaged than the Pponk-equipped airplane and therefore Pponk is not useful is subjective and not an apples/apples comparison.)

A non-Pponk aircraft with the gear torn out will also require a rebuild of the belly, gearbox, etc.... however a Pponk aircraft may have prevented the damage from occurring at all.

As I said, "if you tell me how hard you intend to hit that brick wall..."

http://cessna170.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=27&t=14025

Aryana wrote:

[/attachment]

photo%201%20(4).JPG

[/attachment]

photo%202%20(3).JPG

photo%203%20(1).JPG

Every time I see these photos, I present a different question about the PPonk mod.

Yes, the PPonk mod allows the gear box to endure higher loads than without.
Yes, when a gear leg with PPonk fails - it fails BIG.
The non-PPonk setup may fail sooner than the PPonk setup BUT what are the human risks between the two?

Without PPonk - gear bolt fails, leg collapses inboard, gear leg ripped out and gear box wrecked. More than likely the floor is still intact.
With PPoink, forces high enough to extend damage thru floor into the cockpit risking the pilot or passenger's legs.

Is it better for the aircraft to endure higher loads if the breaking point risks injuring the pilot or passenger?

Jazasuguma, Welcome to the 170 Association! I'm really looking forward to seeing your project progress. The PPonk debate should probably continue here. I'm on the fence regarding its merits. To get us back on topic tell us about your shop set up. I see you have 8.00 X 6 tires in the back of the SUV. Are you planning on setting it up for backcountry flying? STOL kit?