banner graphic
Airport Webcams
Who's Online
28 registered (Onebadjudge70, Will Johnson, Jim_1, TxHawk, Prorally, oilwell1415, Float Pilot, Singh, Ward Holbrook, Joeman434, Bigdoggh, Underdog, Luvrv8, V12diablo, Trapper, Teg916, Bman, JBAZ, IDontFly, multisync, OldCrow, flynal, 3.14 LET, claytargethntr, Don Tedrow, baboss, Doc Dairy, 3hawks), 170 Guests and 14 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Brian Rabinowitz, Aircraft Specialty, pasichnyk, gkahrs, JohnB
5941 Registered Users
Top Posters
Bargain Bob 83554
Cessna Dude 6628
Rusty Rudder 4844
vettdvr 4779
California Flyer 4640
Clyde Cessna 3203
wrecksum 2704
Willie 2333
XP Driver 2045
Ward Holbrook 2034
Nightowl 1826
ytodd 1822
Don Tedrow 1757
RodneyHooverCFI 1642
Lee T. Hargic 1628
November X-ray 1589
Nintendo Pilot 1570
Glenn Darr 1538
Bigdoggh 1407
oilwell1415 1380
Pilawt 1352
peedie montgomery 1205
EdW 1152
Jim_1 1108
Propduster 1041
Awkward Bird 985
Showboatsix 965
OldCrow 863
Renegade 9 860
Shuswap 779
Top Posters (30 Days)
Bargain Bob 3137
vettdvr 147
oilwell1415 102
Rusty Rudder 98
Willie 94
Luvrv8 65
Don Tedrow 49
Shuswap 48
Singh 47
Clyde Cessna 36
Float Pilot 36
California Flyer 34
Joeman434 34
Jim_1 34
Wayne R 33
magman 33
XP Driver 32
Birdman 31
Ward Holbrook 29
Onebadjudge70 28
3hawks 27
Henry M. 26
Joe K 24
JDC_Oklahoma 22
Pilawt 21
Teg916 19
tvpilot 18
Awkward Bird 18
Nintendo Pilot 18
Desert Hawk 18
Daily FAR - Test your knowledge!
Topic Options
#145173 - 09/10/13 10:37 AM Straight Tail vs.Swept Tail
Sky 21 Offline
Safety Pilot

Registered: 11/22/11
Posts: 24
Loc: Georgia
It has been my experience that the 1956 - 1959 straight tails (especially the 57 model) take less ground roll (as much as 400 feet) than the early 60's models when they first introduced the swept tail. All have the 0300 engines.

Other than the swept tail the main difference is that in 1958 the landing gear was moved aft by three inches. Any one else experience this or is it just the particular planes that I happen to fly. Engine time has been about the same on each plane.

Top
#145185 - 09/10/13 01:50 PM Re: Straight Tail vs.Swept Tail [Re: Sky 21]
Bryan Demurat Offline
Second in Command

Registered: 01/19/12
Posts: 119
Loc: Florida, USA
I do not know about the ground roll but the cruise speed seems faster for the straight tail planes then the early swept tail models.

Bryan

Top
#145190 - 09/10/13 02:11 PM Re: Straight Tail vs.Swept Tail [Re: Bryan Demurat]
oilwell1415 Online   content
Gold Pilot

Registered: 09/20/12
Posts: 1380
Loc: Tulsa, OK
I suspect the A model gained a little weight. The early planes are only about 1300lbs empty and the newest ones are nearly 1700. The A is somewhere between.
_________________________
1947 North American Navion N8747H. It isn't the fastest, doesn't have the biggest payload, burns gas almost as fast as I can pour it in the tank and requires lots of TLC, but it's cool as hell and that's why we play the game.

Top
#145247 - 09/10/13 09:10 PM Re: Straight Tail vs.Swept Tail [Re: oilwell1415]
combahee Offline
Safety Pilot

Registered: 07/29/12
Posts: 56
Loc: Lowcountry, SC
Straight tails are just cooler! :-)
_________________________
1959 172 straight tail

Top
#155860 - 11/19/13 11:15 PM Re: Straight Tail vs.Swept Tail [Re: combahee]
TracyA Offline
Safety Pilot

Registered: 03/02/12
Posts: 20
Loc: Bristow, Va.
The straight tails are lighter so they take off and climb a little quicker, typically.
My 1961 fastback is faster than the straight tails Ive flown in for the following reasons:
smaller [shorter] landing gear
streamlined fuselage and windshield
has vacuum pump [no venturis]
strut cuffs
fuel tank vent behind wing strut
brake lines behind gear legs

Top
#156086 - 11/21/13 08:39 AM Re: Straight Tail vs.Swept Tail [Re: combahee]
ces6508 Offline
Safety Pilot

Registered: 04/06/10
Posts: 89
Loc: S. Indiana
Originally Posted By: combahee
Straight tails are just cooler! :-)


Could not have said it better!

Top
#156278 - 11/22/13 06:24 AM Re: Straight Tail vs.Swept Tail [Re: ces6508]
Bush Pilot Offline
Safety Pilot

Registered: 08/03/10
Posts: 49
Loc: Arizona, Alaska, Various Place...
Take off, climb and cruise performance are subjective - as ya'll know, a plane with a cruise prop will cruise faster than the same plane with a climb or cruise/climb prop. Then, things such as parasitic & induced drag, engine condition, prop type/pitch, etc. need to be factored in. I've flown a nice 172 with a 180 hp conversion that was a real dud due to it being heavy (full instruments, leather interior, etc.) with no fairings and having a cruise prop. It's performance overall, even in cruise, was disappointing. I like my straight tail much better. The early models sit higher which has saved my head on numerous occasions. Plus, as Combahee said, straight tails are just cooler!


Edited by Bush Pilot (11/22/13 06:28 AM)
_________________________
You Have To Be Alive To Spend It

Top


Cessna172 Tribute
THIS MONTH'S SPONSOR
Special thanks to:
You!
Thank you for making this site great
Strother '14 Countdown
June 12-15, 2014 KWLD
Today's Birthdays
Nights
Member Map
Where in the world are the Cessna 172 Club Members?

View the map

Helpful Links
100LL Price Finder
AD Directory
Aging GA Aircraft
Aircraft Directory
Airplane Report
AirNav
Airport Facilities Directory
AOPA
Aviation Weather
Barnstormers
BaseOps
C172 History
Cessna
Controller
Crash Records
DUAT Voyager Planner
DUATS
FAA
FltPlan
Flight Aware
Fly-In Calendar
Flying Tools (Files)
Google Earth
Ground Speed Records
National METAR Map
Sky Vector
Trade-A-Plane
Uvalde Flight Ctr
All the Webcams
Shout Box

AOPA
AOPA
Weather Lookup
Airport code:
(separate multiple codes with spaces)

List of stations