banner graphic
Airport Webcams
Who's Online
36 registered (abertx, Shuswap, OldCrow, Ranz Alami, jlf, Randy Crosby, Tom Downey, Willie, vettdvr, twiggle, rwbristol, MrOutdoorsie, Jim OBrien, Singh, sunchaser, Lyle, Todd, VanDy, Teg916, TxHawk, Desert Hawk, 3.14 LET, JD Casteel, Stingray Don, Cbray, oilwell1415, theboys3, EdW, BGF Yankee, Ward Holbrook, Kinhop, IN2FLYING, Joeman434, Kansas Zephyr, multisync, F16CrewChief), 149 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
abertx, Jim OBrien, Dale Porter, Glider292, touristsis
6536 Registered Users
Top Posters
Bargain Bob 100773
Cessna Dude 6628
vettdvr 5749
Rusty Rudder 5088
California Flyer 4788
Clyde Cessna 3317
Willie 2710
wrecksum 2704
Ward Holbrook 2193
XP Driver 2122
Don Tedrow 2030
Nightowl 1826
ytodd 1824
RodneyHooverCFI 1645
oilwell1415 1640
Nintendo Pilot 1638
Glenn Darr 1630
Lee T. Hargic 1630
November X-ray 1589
Bigdoggh 1440
Pilawt 1399
Peedie Montgomery 1308
Jim_1 1246
EdW 1209
Propduster 1063
Showboatsix 1020
Awkward Bird 1018
Shuswap 965
Renegade 9 893
OldCrow 887
Top Posters (30 Days)
Bargain Bob 3142
Joeman434 132
vettdvr 121
Willie 58
Rusty Rudder 47
JD Casteel 40
Jim_1 29
Luvrv8 29
Curious1 28
Peedie Montgomery 27
Pilot110 26
N5479R 24
Don Tedrow 23
Dave W 22
Teg916 21
California Flyer 21
Ward Holbrook 20
Rikochet 20
3.14 LET 20
Henry M. 19
EdW 19
Tom Downey 17
Kev63125 16
Rachel L Payne 15
Kansas Zephyr 15
Renegade 9 15
MrOutdoorsie 14
phillipny 14
Topic Options
#145173 - 09/10/13 10:37 AM Straight Tail vs.Swept Tail
Sky 21 Offline
Safety Pilot

Registered: 11/22/11
Posts: 27
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.

#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: 127
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.


#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: 1640
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.

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

Registered: 07/29/12
Posts: 64
Loc: Lowcountry, SC
Straight tails are just cooler! :-)
1959 172 straight tail

#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

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

Registered: 04/06/10
Posts: 94
Loc: S. Indiana
Originally Posted By: combahee
Straight tails are just cooler! :-)

Could not have said it better!

#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: 60
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


Cessna172 Tribute
Special thanks to:
Thank you for making this site great
Strother '15 Countdown
June 18-21, 2015 KWLD
Today's Birthdays
Babyman, Jen Niles, KCSkyhawk, n1acguy, Tom Campbell
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
Airport Facilities Directory
Aviation Weather
C172 History
Crash Records
DUAT Voyager Planner
Flight Aware
Flying Tools (Files)
Google Earth
Ground Speed Records
National METAR Map
Sky Vector
Uvalde Flight Ctr
All the Webcams
Shout Box

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

List of stations