MTV, your right. I should do a weight and balance for just me and fuel in the plane. I know everyone else here does that and I don't know what I was thinking.

Is Water, a Visa and a SPOT considered a survival kit? Most of my flying is still in the 150 and no, I don't have a survival kit in it. The 175 is pretty well torn apart monthly to fix stuff and test fly it. I bought a photography vest and have a few things in it. It goes with me but as far as a survival kit, I have been working on that too. I would be very uncomfortable putting anything behind the bulkhead without a baggage kit no matter how well it was tied down. Bolted might be a different but how messed up would it be to have stuff rolling around on the cables!!

TCJ, good advice. Guess I'll keep saving my penny's for a baggage kit.

There is a guy in Provo building a 2/3rds scale Mustang. To get the W&B right they have the ends of the Horizontal Stab full of lead. when I told my mech that, he thought that was a bad idea because the weight was right at the ends. Lots more force would be put on the Stabilizer because of the distance from the tail. Makes a lot of sense.

I guess I need to get the plane loaded with what will stay inside it (SURVIVAL KIT, motorcycles, raft, portable pools, billard table, etc) and then do the W&B. Then I will know if I still have a forward CG problem.

1. Get and install extended baggage - add the back seat

2. Get a accurate Weight and Balance done with real certified scales

3. If you keep adding oversized nose wheel assembles get a set of barbells and do lots of curls to build up your muscles

4. My experience is that by adding VG's you can have better elevator control at low airspeeds (like landing) -P.S. VG 's do nothing for takeoff performance -get a Sportsman STOL kit for that.

Thanks Bill

I did get a W&B with certified scales when we put the tanks back in. I don't have it here but it seems like I was right inside the forward limit. I was actually surprised that it was inside the limit. The W&B was done with the seat in and empty fuel. I just took out the seat to weigh it (23.5 lbs) and now I need to do another W&B for when I fly with it out.

I have been buying a lot of survival junk for the last year. I got a Postage scale from ebay (up to 50 lbs) and I am going to weigh everything thats going to stay in the plane and inventory it on the lid so I know what is packed inside and what it weighs. It will go into two of the Rubbermaid Plastic ("Action Packers) from Wal Mart. They fit real nice behind the seat but still leave just enough room for my ladder behind them and stuff on top. That is how it was set up in the 172.

My annual is coming up so I need to get the last few items taken care of before I can buy any "toys" for the plane. I finally got a full set of usable instruments in it and got rid of the "non op" stickers on everything. If I can swing it I will try to get a extended baggage soon but first things first.

Jerry











0

Get a pair of these http://www.usbattery.com/usb_usl16hcxc.html about 60 pounds each.

Tim

I am lucky as I have an experimental and can do things certified planes can't. After putting on the fire breathing Ford on the front of my Zenith 801 I needed both extra weight in the rear and as a hard core racer I demand alot of power..... This battery is the best one I have ever seen or used.. You can arc weld with it if you are crazy enough.

In fact when the DAR was inspecting my plane for its airworthyness certificate he saw I was running MSD ignition and not mags. He asked how long I could fly if the alternator failed and ran on battery power alone. My calculations showed I could fly 6 hours, land, fill up, fly 6 more hours, land, fill up and fly about 5 more hours. I told him if I was dumb enough to try that I needed to just surrender my license right there in the spot,,,,

After he quit laughing he agreed I had " plenty ' of endurance in my electrical system...

http://shop.optimabatteries.com/product ... 3659.0.0.0?

Am I the only person who thought of a case or two of wine?? Some hydration, some food value, and oh so relaxing.

All good info guys, I did call Selkirk yesterday and they only have the one kit for my plane and it it $1,300 without sides. She said they were working on getting the fiberglass one approved for a 175 and it will be cheaper. I called around and found a few for 172's in the junk yards but all were for the newer models with rear windows. If any of you guys with newer 172's need one, Wentworth had one for $995 and the guy thought it has sides too. You would have to come up with your own paperwork.

My battery is the bigger one and it is in the back. I thought about having a dual battery setup but I think I better pass on thoes Monster batteries Tim suggested. Unless I want to make it a Hbryid? Sounds like the forward CG is just part of owning a Avcon 175. I wanted to keep the plane as light as possible but I guess it will stay loaded up in back.

Any of you guys (or your buddys) mounted a gun rack? I figured a rifle and shotgun would be good weight to keep in there. I would like to find one that would mount under the parcel shelf in back. It would be high enough to be out of the way and still easy to get to. I am going to try to go up to a shop in Salt Lake that sells Cop stuff. They used to have tons of mounts.

Floatflyer, I quit drinking a few years back so the wine is probably out. Maybe a case of Diet Coke?

Jerry

Stol wrote: fire breathing Ford

your talkin about when they cough, sputter, and die as the chev in the other lane wins the drag right... Just messin with ya.

When I was going to put a 0-320 in the luscombe i was looking over the STC and it required some weight in the tail. I have no idea if the Avcon conversion requires it but it might be worth checking. I don't like the idea of having to put weight back there which is why I chose to use a modded C-85 instead of the 0-320.

I may have access to the APU out of a G2, that would solve the balance part of your problem.

for what it's worth, my Cessna 180 flies nose heavy with just me and gas in it. I use the extended baggage to put a large tool kit with enough stuff to change tires and the basic stuff that will leave you stranded. I also have a makeshift survival kit. Adds up to about 50 lbs. That solved my problem. My airplane also has the battery relocated to the firewall which of course made the situation worse.

Bill

Jaerl wrote: I did get a W&B with certified scales when we put the tanks back in. I don't have it here but it seems like I was right inside the forward limit. I was actually surprised that it was inside the limit. ....

With some airplanes, I don't believe the empty CG has limits-- it's the loaded CG that matters. With my C150/150, everything loads behind the empty CG so even if that empty CG was a bit forward of the loaded CG parameters it moves aft into the envelope when you put any fuel or people on board. With a 4 place airplane like your C175, it may be that with the empty CG just inside the forward limit, it might be out-of-limits forward with just the pilot & minimal fuel on board. Unfortunately I can't remember any of the W&B info from my 170, so I'm kinda going from memory here.
Like someone pointed out, they seem to fly better with a bit aft CG: slower stall speed, higher cruise speed, etc. Unfortunately, most people seem to want to set them up if possible with the empty CG as far forward as possible, in order to optimize loading capacity. I had the same idea & was considering relocating my battery to the firewall-- however, since the airplane flies so nice with the CG somewhat aft, I decided to leave it behind the baggage area which still leaves me enough aft-loading flexibility to suit me.
Jaerl, where is your empty CG & what are the fore-and-aft CG limits? Keep in mind that the limit(s) may change with the aircraft weight. My forward limit moves aft as the airplane gets heavier: from 31.5" @ 1280# to 33.6" @ 1760. There is also a 1600# limit on "utility" category op's - any heavier & it moves into "normal" category. Different G limits, etc
There's lots of things to consider when dealing with W&B issues.

Eric

AKGrouch wrote:... We ran it as a two place with just the front seats in it. To stay in the envelope and have enough elevator, there was an ammo box with 70 lbs. of lead bolted to the floor in aft baggage. I finally got all that fun of dealing with the forward cg and the lack of rudder authority on the swept back tail conversion to tailwheel out of my system by groundlooping the crap out of it.....

Another possible example of "the law of unintended consequences". Forward CG makes an airplane nose heavy: hard to flare, cruises slow, stalls fast,easy to nose over, etc.....but an aft CG makes them more prone to groundloop, with the CG farther beind the mains, & also harder to recover from a stall (& therefore a spin).
I know a guy who was having a helluva time learning to fly his Starduster 2-- the CG was within limits and he & his instructor were wracking their brains trying to figure out what was wrong. What finally tamed the beast was welding the gear fittings on the fuselage a few inches aft of where they'd been. It was a pussycat on the ground after that, relatively speaking.
Water under the bridge now, but food for thought for the rest of us: I wonder if you hadn't so drastically aft-loaded your Buzzard, maybe you wouldn't have had the groundloop?

Eric

hotrod150 wrote:

AKGrouch wrote:... We ran it as a two place with just the front seats in it. To stay in the envelope and have enough elevator, there was an ammo box with 70 lbs. of lead bolted to the floor in aft baggage. I finally got all that fun of dealing with the forward cg and the lack of rudder authority on the swept back tail conversion to tailwheel out of my system by groundlooping the crap out of it.....

Another possible example of "the law of unintended consequences". Forward CG makes an airplane nose heavy: hard to flare, cruises slow, stalls fast,easy to nose over, etc.....but an aft CG makes them more prone to groundloop, with the CG farther beind the mains, & also harder to recover from a stall (& therefore a spin).
I know a guy who was having a helluva time learning to fly his Starduster 2-- the CG was within limits and he & his instructor were wracking their brains trying to figure out what was wrong. What finally tamed the beast was welding the gear fittings on the fuselage a few inches aft of where they'd been. It was a pussycat on the ground after that, relatively speaking.
Water under the bridge now, but food for thought for the rest of us: I wonder if you hadn't so drastically aft-loaded your Buzzard, maybe you wouldn't have had the groundloop?

Eric

I agreed with everything you had to say until you said "so drastically aft-loaded your Buzzard." Read my post again. It wasn't aft loaded. In fact, the CG stayed about 2 inches behind the forward limits and that's where it was when I looped it. The real problem was that there was apparently something crooked with the fuselage. We think it may have been bent as the left main weighed over 100 olbs more than the right main and there was nothing unusual anywhere in the wings. There was a problem with it for sure. What I think caused the ground loop was my big size 13 cliping the edge of the left rudder pedal, i.e, brake when I shoved full right rudder to stop the tail from coming around. The plane would try to come around on you every time you did a wheel landing, no matter whatg. Wasn't a cg problem.

sorry about the double post....puter burped or something. Any way, the only reasonable explanation we could come up with was that the fuselage was bent with the tail a bit to the left of the longitudinal fuselage axis. That would explain the constant turn to the left, the built in left roll, and the heavy left main gear. I always knew exactly where the cg was in the envelope and I never got it back to even the middle of the envelope, usually about 2" to 3" aft of forward limit. Glad it's gone now.

Well, I got some hard facts on Weight and balance now. I have the original W&B from Cessna for my plane. With the Avcon conversion, and the way it is configured now, it moved the planes CG forward 2.9 inches from where it left the factory. As much as I hate to admit it, MTV is right, I should have done a W&B before I flew it. With just me in it with full fuel, I am right on the line of the forward limit. With two in it, I am out of the forward limit without anything in the baggage compartment.

I have been trying to figure how I can balance it with as little weight as possible. I have done a lot of scenarios and even if I add 10 or 15 lbs to the tail (230" ARM) it will help a little but it's still near the forward edge of the envelope with just me in it. I wouldn't dare go any more than that.

I called Selkirk and got the ARM for the extended baggage compartment (124"). If I put in the extended baggage, and max it out with 50 lbs in it, max out the baggage with 120 lbs that will get it near the rear limit with just the pilot. Pilot and one passenger will be just aft of center. So much for a light plane.

As the plane is now, I am limited to 120 lbs in the baggage compartment. If I could put 180 lbs in there I would be balanced right on center. It would have been nice if the Avcon conversion moved the engine back a few inches but then you would need to shorten up the cowling. Guess I need to get the extended Baggage compartment and some more camping stuff to haul around.

Besides being nose heavy, maybe your airspeed indicator is reading a bit fast.

Perhaps a Skytech starter, lightweight model. I too, have a C175 O-360 CS, and have the same forward CG issues. I keep a tool box in the baggage area which helps much. I load the baggage compartment when traveling, and pick up a knot or two.
Dave

Jerry,

You don't have to get the airplane to the center of the CG range, you just need to get it inside the forward and aft limits. Granted, within those limits, the airplane will exhibit slightly different characteristics, but nevertheless, it should behave predictably. Talk to your mechanic about "installing" a 30 pound survival pack inside the tail cone somewhere just aft of the main baggage, as if you had a Selkirk baggage. If you can gin up a field approvable platform or attachment method back there, I think you'll have got what you need, CG wise, AND it keeps the survival gear out of sight, behind the aft baggage bulkhead.

AK Grouch,

I'm betting that airplane you described had landing gear misalignment problems, as opposed to a bent fuselage. I've known mechanics to disassemble the axles on Cessnas, and forget to mark where the shims went and in what alignment. Voila!! a potentially unmanageable airplane on the ground, just looking for a ground loop opportunity.

If ANYone has a spring gear Cessna with what appears to them to be squirrelly ground handling, have a SMART mechanic put the thing on grease plates, and do a gear alignment. It really doesn't take all that much to do it, and it will make life (and especially landings) SOOOooo much better.

MTV

Guys, thanks for all the ideas.

Rangeflyer, I did buy a lightweight starter and it will go on at annual. Is your plane the yellow and white one in Texas that's for sale?

Porterjet, you might have something there. The airspeed gauge is the only one I didn't replace and it does seem to read a little fast. I'll try watching the GPS next time. I could even live with landing a little faster but the nose just flat out drops when you run out of airspeed. My old 172 would come down flat even without power. I'd lots rather bounce off the mains than the nose. I went up the other day and tried some stalls. Even with 120 lbs in the baggage compartment it will not stall no matter what without adding power.

MTV, I think I will just have to bite the bullet and pay for the extended baggage. My FSDO wouldn't sign off the nosefork and 6:00 tire even with a DER calling them and explaining I had an Existing 337 from another 175 that was EXACTLY what I wanted to do down to part numbers and brand of tire. Selkirk is going to have a fiberglass compartment certified for the 175 soon and that will be about $400 less than the aluminum. It is 2.7 lbs more but adds weight at 125" instead of 124". All that will help.

I am in Sandpoint right now and I think I am going over to Poulsen, MT on the way home to talk to the guys about the Sportsman STOL and check out Flathead Lake. Some more wing might help a lot for this plane.