Does anybody have a Cessna 170B, 172, 175, 180, 182, or 185 with the Sportsman STOL and Micro VGs installed? I have a 170B with the Sportsman STOL. I was thinking about installing VGs and was wondering if anyone has used this combination?

I have the combination on a '56 C-180, and have had for a couple years, and am very happy with it.

I fly with a friend alot with another old 180 without these mods, and he wants it. There is a signicant difference in the slow flight of the two, otherwise very similar planes.

Gary

I also fly a 180 hp 170-B CS with the VGs
I even have a rare field approval for the VGs on the Vertical Stabilizer.
I helps to know some real old old timers in the business down around the Fresno Calif area.

I also know someone who claims to have been in on the original design of the VGs most commonly mentioned. He states that they do not do much for the Cessna Wing.

What I do know is that having the VGs on the wing, allowed me to get them on the Vertica Stabilizer, and what that appears to have done is to get rid of the 170's tendancy to go OVER the NOSE on a hard slip with full flaps. They are worth it for that alone, to me at least.

Other rather major wing finding is that I am glad I ended up with the Knots 2U flap gap seals, as they are removeable. Problem with them on a short steep approach is that they limit the rate of descent.

Proved that last summer by taking them OFF after a summer of difficult short steep approaches.

If ya want info on how to do the VGs on the vertical give me a PM and I will tell ya how i did it.

Do not dally on this as I am loosing my job with Applied Materials after 33 yrs. at the end of Jan.

I have the VG's on a stock Cessna 170 wing, and I would NOT do that again. They really don't do anything negative, and in fact, they do sort of soften up the stall a little bit, but who cares, frankly? The stall on these airplanes was just fine to start with.

I have not been able to detect ANY reduction in stall speed with the application of VG's. And, I have substantial experience with the airplane before and after. And, I have a GPS, and yes, I've done four way trials. There simply is no reliably detectable difference in stall speed.

Now, the Sportsman cuff: This is a GREAT modification. Frankly, I wish I'd gone with the Sportsman cuff when I applied the VG's. Nevertheless, I've flown several Cessnas before and after the application of the Sportsman cuff. One of those airplanes was a 185 that I had about 2,000 hours in before the cuff and 1500 hours after, on wheels, skis and floats. That Sportsman cuff is magic, pure and simple.

I do not have the experience of the Sportsman cuff in conjunction with the VG's, though. Frankly, however, why would you want to mess up the top surface of your wing with VGs after you've applied a great STOL device like the Sportsman LE???

Go with the Sportsman. Forget the VG's.

MTV

[quote="Scolopax"]Does anybody have a Cessna 170B, 172, 175, 180, 182, or 185 with the Sportsman STOL and Micro VGs installed? I have a 170B with the Sportsman STOL. I was thinking about installing VGs and was wondering if anyone has used this combination?[/quoteT

Get a Sportsman STOL from Steen Fiberglass and forget the VG's. VG's only make airplane easier to control at low speed better than stock .
The SPORTSMAN gives you more wing area and better control >better lift and all around improvement. I've put on both VG's and /with Sportsman and differeance between adding or not to Sportsman is hardly noticable. I'd forget the VG's and go with the stright VG's or Sportsman . I perfer the SPORTSMAN STOL hands down. I've got a flight test (for FAA certification) for the SPORTSMAN -if you send me a email at [email protected] >something
like Sportsman Stol in subject line and your "N" number in subject line I'll send you a copy.

What's wrong with having better control at slower speeds. Isn't that one of the primary reasons for getting the stol kit, to fly at slower speeds. Now that you are there, wouldn't you like more/better control. Not really necessary in good conditions, but what if you are in adverse conditions. Wouldn't better control be welcome?

Gary

Sportsman STOL/Micro VG's on a '53 C180. Flew it 50 hours or so with just the Sportsman, then added the Micro kit, wings and horizontal. The vertical VG's weren't an option at the time, so I can't comment on that. Can't say that the VG's really made much difference, other than perhaps a bit more roll authority at slow speed, which of course is nice. Were I to do it over, I would not put on the VG's. I do really like the Sportsman, although lots of people that really work a 180/185 like 'em just the way Cessna sent them out the door. I'm not a very good pilot, so I'll take all the help I can get.

gb

Shortfielder,

Actually, where the VG's seem to help a little on the Cessna wings is in low speed roll control. And, that seems to be about it.

The Sportsman STOL kit actually includes a set of aileron gap seals, which also help augment low speed roll control, so the combination is sort of redundant, and the Sportsman actually does some things the VG's don't do.

Further, the VG's snag on wing covers, if you have to use them, and I have....and I am always in fear of snagging my wrist on the things while fueling, particularly when fueling on floats, with a long hose and hip boots, etc....

MTV

mtv wrote:... I've flown several Cessnas before and after the application of the Sportsman cuff...

MTV

MTV- If I added a Sportsman cuff to my 170B, would that screw up the fit of my Kennon spoiler mesh wing covers noticeably?

Also, I think you have the 180HP engine- do you still recommend this mod as highly for a stock O-300 170B?

Not today, maybe not tomorrow, but that's why they call it a wish list, right?

Thanks,

-DP

If you're looking for more Cessna aileron authority at low speed, try aileron seals. I believe Horton has an STC for this. I've also seen bootleg mods using silver foil tape, reportedly it works well.

Eric

Can't tell you about the combo of STOL and VG's but I Had a C-170 and installed the Horton with stall fences, aileron gap seals and cuffs in that order, flew it after every install phase. All is effective but noticed the biggest after the cuffs. After all the mods the stall had a very sharp break. Bought a C-180 (shoulda coulda woulda done it along time ago) with the stock wing, it mushes instead of stalls. Lands alot easier doesn't float. Only wing mod I've done is instead of silver tape to gap seal the ailerons I used a fabric type tape used on gliders for external gap seal, take bolt out of Heim joint lift aileron up as far as it will go, tape is about 1 1/2" wide, pull off enough tape as will fit between the aileron hinges, attach to trailing edge recess and to aileron. Alot easier than drilling out the rivets removing the filler and installing the gap seals drilling and reriviting (not quite legal but even more effective than aluminum gap seals can be removed in seconds and will never be noticed after the fire). My $.02 (can't find the cent symbol) can't find a XL shirt in the BCP store either and don't own a gun that will do that kind of damage to the shirt and don't play with matches anymore.

Wannabe:

Can you add some further details to your statement about the 170's wanting to go over their nose with full flaps and hard slip, that the VG's on the vert stab eliminates? My 172 is placarded to "avoid" slips with full flaps, but it has behaved itself for me so far with mild slips to a specific, power off touchdown point. Just wondering how it breaks loose and if it is a phenomenon limited to the round tail only.

Thanks in advance
Flynengr

Glidergeek wrote:Can't tell you about the combo of STOL and VG's but I Had a C-170 and installed the Horton with stall fences, aileron gap seals and cuffs in that order, flew it after every install phase. All is effective but noticed the biggest after the cuffs. After all the mods the stall had a very sharp break. Bought a C-180 (shoulda coulda woulda done it along time ago) with the stock wing, it mushes instead of stalls. Lands alot easier doesn't float. Only wing mod I've done is instead of silver tape to gap seal the ailerons I used a fabric type tape used on gliders for external gap seal, take bolt out of Heim joint lift aileron up as far as it will go, tape is about 1 1/2" wide, pull off enough tape as will fit between the aileron hinges, attach to trailing edge recess and to aileron. Alot easier than drilling out the rivets removing the filler and installing the gap seals drilling and reriviting (not quite legal but even more effective than aluminum gap seals can be removed in seconds and will never be noticed after the fire). My $.02 (can't find the cent symbol) can't find a XL shirt in the BCP store either and don't own a gun that will do that kind of damage to the shirt and don't play with matches anymore.

That's funny! I could not find a XL shirt either, I do own a gun that will do that kind of damage to the shirt and I do play with matches, but i would not use either of the last two mentioned unless I was going to eat the shirt

flynengr wrote:....Can you add some further details to your statement about the 170's wanting to go over their nose with full flaps and hard slip, that the VG's on the vert stab eliminates? ..........

I have heard reports about 170B with full flaps doing this on an extreme slip, such as turning final but with top rudder as to scrub off a buncha altitude in a hurry. The hypothesis was that the big flaps blanked out the elevator during the slip when the slipstream was just so. Anyway, the result was that the airplane took a severe nose-down attitude & the pilot crapped his pants before getting everything straightened out again, waaay too close to the ground.
Instead of a slip, my technique for losing excessive altitude involves slowing to somewhere about halfway between stall speed & normal approach speed to increase the sink rate (big-time!). It's counter-intuitive but works well, you just have to remember to lower the nose to recover airspeed when you get close to the ground, or else add some power to reduce the sink rate. Otherwise there isn't enough energy to do anything when you flare except increase the deck angle, the sink rate stays the same and wham! instant carrier landing.

Eric

I've done some pretty aggressive slips with my 170, and I've never experienced any untoward behaviour with it or any other Cessna. Cessna aircraft, depending on the model year, may or may not have the admonition to avoid slips with flaps extended. Early ones did not, but Cessna added this admonition later. Note that even the admonition to "avoid" is pretty mild by liability standards. I've never had a problem in any of the Cessna aircraft I've flown.

Frankly, with full flaps and a REASONABLE approach speed, as hotrod note, a slip is sorta irrelevant. A Cessna with full 40 flaps and 60 to 65 mph will come down like a brick. I can't imagine why you'd want to come down much more precipitously myself.

The other problem with slips is that your airspeed indicator becomes somewhat irrelevant, due to the angle of the probe to the relative wind.

Denalipilot:

The 180 engine makes the C 170 a whole different airplane, no doubt. The down side is that it is really expensive to modify nowadays, so you'd be better off to sell what you've got and buy one that's already been modified or something else.

A friend who is a mechanic in Fairbanks converted his a few years ago, using the Delaire kit. That is a very nice and complete kit. He did a lot of the work himself, but not all of it. I think he had $40 K plus in the CONVERSION, not counting the airplane when he was done. He is, nevertheless, very happy with the airplane. He knew what he was getting into from the outset.

Like most things in aviation, it depends on what you want to do with your airplane.

One other thing to consider if you're thinking of this conversion: The Lycoming is more thirsty than the O-300, so you'll also want more fuel once converted. Flint tanks, a Javelin baggage tank or Delliker's late model Cessna conversion will all take care of that--but again, those add even more to the cost.

MTV

Slips in some Cessna's should be avoided due to fact that the flaps can and sometimes will disrupt the airflow over the tail causing the tail to stall and the nose to drop so violently that on an approach, you aren't going to recover it. Sometimes a cross wind is what is needed to get yourself into this situation. I know this because I've had it happen, but on a different aircraft. During the certification test flights of the Thrush dual cockpit 660, we bumped into this event. We ended up putting a rather large dorsal fin on to keep it from happening. The dorsal fin keeps the aircraft from getting as sideways, which could have been accomplished by limiting rudder travel, but we had an idiot DER at the time.
We solved the issue with the dual cockpit 550 the same way Cessna did, with a placard.
Tail stalls can and do occur, and if one does with you low and slow, your not recovering it.
Be careful slipping aircraft with flaps that are placarded against it. Actually you can't be careful, unlike a normal stall, there was no pre-stall buffet or warning of any kind.

Thanks for all of the input on the VG/Sportsman combo. I have the Sportsman installed on my 170B. I flew it for 500 hours before and for 300 hours since installation. I feel that it is magical indeed. It changes the slow flight characteristics significantly.

Most notably, it peels off the ground in a lot less distance when the airspeed indicator reads low to mid forties (mph) at 1900-2000 lb without the stall horn blaring. Almost instantly it accelerates to 50-55 without pitch change, and is ready to climb or maneuver at that speed. Before, it would peel off at about the same speed if you really work it, but with the horn blaring and then required a pitch change to gain enough energy to climb or maneuver.

The Stene aviation website claims a 9mph increase in cruise. I have definitely not seen that, but no discernible decrease in cruise is evident. I do believe the other trends that they publish for the modified B-model, but not necessarily the numbers. http://www.steneaviation.com/fliteresea ... rmance.htm

I have heard the same thing about the VGs, that the most significant improvement is the aileron authority, which is definitely appealing, for the roll rate of the plane could be measured appropriately in deg/min.

I have experienced the rapid uncommanded pitch change with full flaps in a slip that is discussed here. It scared the hell out of me the first time it happened, but then I got used to it, and now I just sort of realize that it's going to happen in certain scenarios. It is most pronounced when slipping and flaps are in transition to full extension. I have come to think of it as one of the few quirks of the 170, as I usually have the landing configuration established and energy reduced by the time I'm really close to the ground.

The 172 I fly is equipped with the Air Plains STC, the O-360 upgrade that prevents operation at 40 deg flaps - 30 is all you get - the flap lever is limited in its travel. I believe the placard is based on the original configuration based on the POH.

As to why slips w/ full flaps, I was taught unless circumstances dictate otherwise to fly patterns tight and make damn sure that once you pull power abeam the numbers you fly a pattern that will make the field if the fan quits at any point on base or final. I have in my head where the visual clues are for setting up my base leg distance from the airport, and depending on what the wind is doing, it sometimes leaves me a little high turning off base onto final on a 60 kt approach to the numbers. The slip gives that extra level of control to put the mains down right where I want by being a little high without the risk of dragging it with throttle if the wind is a little stronger than I guessed. Granted, these slips are not the full deflection, screaming elevator rides - only 10 to 15 degrees of nose deflection if I had to estimate, but just enough controllable extra drag to put it where I want it.

I was taught to use this both in PPL training as well as recurrent training as another tool in the plot skills box, but I just want to make sure I am not abusing it or relying on something more risky than flying a lower approach and depending on throttle to get me home if I misjudge the wind, or just accept that its okay to land long sometimes.

HotRod150 mentioned operating closer to stall speed to get that enhanced the Cessna brick effect, but I find that approach makes me focus too closely on the airspeed indicator rather than making my touchdown point. It may be that I am just not skilled enough using it yet. Conversely, the slip seems to actually lower the nose, reducing the angle of attack (i.e. more laminar airflow over the lifting surfaces) and while a little extra speed is also developed, it bleeds off quickly on the roundout at the bottom. I rarely look at the ASI after transitioning into a slip from a 60 kt approach, as it seems based on deck angle I am getting further away from the stall.

Certainly having the flaps disrupt the airflow over the horizontal surfaces, especially on short final, would be a bad thing.

After all, don't we essentially set up a slip w/ full flaps extended in a x wind? I know, its a forward slip vs side slip, but in essence aren't they creating a similar airflow over the control surfaces?

I'm only a 150 hr pilot, so what the hell do I know, but the analytical engineering background in me likes understanding the reasons behind the warnings, and why these machines do what they do.

Back to the original question - how to the VG's on the vert stab help prevent the nose pitching down phenomenon, especially on the 170B's with the Fowler flaps?

Thanks for the feedback so far,
Flynengr

flynengr wrote:Back to the original question - how to the VG's on the vert stab help prevent the nose pitching down phenomenon, especially on the 170B's with the Fowler flaps?
Thanks for the feedback so far,
Flynengr

In my opinion, they wouldn't, it's the horizontal that stalls and gives the nose down pitching moment, and I think your natural reaction of pulling up elevator as the nose drops, makes it worse. With the Thrush, it took the complete, stupid sideways buried pedal kind of slip to make it happen, but it's not supposed to happen, no matter what you do with the controls.
On edit, I don't think the old Cessnas with out the Fowlers carry the restriction. I know you can sip my 140 with flaps. Good thing too as I don't see what the flaps on a 140 are good for

There is no restriction on the early Cessna aircraft WITH the "Para lift flaps". My 170 has none. That didn't appear till much later in production, and note that the verbiage used is "Avoid Slips with flaps deployed", not "slips prohibited with flaps deployed".

Frankly, if Cessna had really seen anything they were concerned about, liability wise, they'd have put placards all over everything they built and issue an AD requiring placards to be installed in everthing they ever built.

Also, note that the Cessna 206's, as recent as 1985, did not have any such admonition, even though they still have big barn door semi fowler flaps.

I've done really aggressive slips in several Cessnas at altitude to try to induce anything ugly, and have never gotten there. I've gotten some buffet over the tail with SKIS attached, but there is a no joke placard when skis are attached, that says don't slip.

flyengr is correct that a slip to land in a crosswind will have the same net effect as one to lose altitude in this regard.

The reason that later Cessnas with the big flaps went to a max deflection of 30 degrees is cause an inordinate number of pilots numb from the waist up crashed trying to do go arounds with full flaps on the 40 degree flap airplanes.

Again, look at the number of fuel drains on the new Cessnas--what? 14?? Look at the goofy placards Cessna requires as Service Bulletins for commercial operators regarding seat latches and fuel draining....

If Cessna really was concerned at all about slips with flaps deployed, they'd have a placard the size of a Bushwheel stuck to every instrument panel in every Cessna ever built.

MTV