Cessna 172 Is One Of The Best Training Aircraft

[@steven2145]

The landing gear is a miracle of engineering. Countless students hard land on these trainers day after day but the plane stays good!

[@benderaviation]

Guilty

[@rolandocrisostomo2003]

Its simplicity at its best.

[@ghostrunner2138]

I can attest. I am yet to break a landing gear!

[@cardoncarl]

Conversely, the front landing gear is very delicate.

[@Ulbre]

Not just students!! My first hard landing....which is so embarrassing even though nobody else saw it, was after I had my PPL.....I made some fundamental errors.....some of the things we had been trained to do I didn't do.......I don't understand why I did this because i have always been so methodical in everything i do.....but I did.........some people are meant to fly.....me?....I'm meant to work at it!!!!

[@batymahn]

My Grandpa's first Cessna was a 180 which was a powerful warhorse but bumpy as hell. Then he got a 172 and it was like going from a Model T to a Cadilac. The wings had much more give!

[@ThalassTKynn]

The Toyota Corolla of the aviation world.

[@AprendizDeLoQueToca]

Well earned prestige :)

[@sammyboi886]

Yes

[@Dagrizzb]

Kawasaki Ninja 250 of the sky.

[@jpusar]

Someone's watched RCR

[@muhammadsteinberg]

I can vouch for that. Little extra care required for non T-modded 0-320-H2ad models though.

[@RodClarkson]

Just purchased a 1973 Cessna 172 Skyhawk. I’m putting in all new interior, and new paint. Then I will move onto new avionics. Thanks for the video, Mike!

[@maxrudder6091]

The Cessna 100-series (including the 172) derived from the 140, first produced in 1946. The structures are similar. In 1948, Cessna added 2 seats and a couple of bays in each wing and called it a 170, and put a 145 HP Continental C-145 on it. In 1956, they put a nosewheel on the 170 and called it a 172. The round tail became square. In 1959 or -60, the tail was swept back, and a couple of years later (1963, I think), the rear window added. But that basic structure began with the Cessna 140, which first flew in 1945.

[@EJWash57]

Thank you!

[@pappybo49]

How about the 120? Fabric wings and no flaps. But other than that, it was a 140. My 1st airplane ride was in one when I was 8yrs old.

[@mitchschneringer]

The $20-30k price mentioned is misleading. I’ve been looking at 172’s and $60-110k seems more realistic, depending on times and panel.

[@rodtimmer2456]

Nebraska Pilots Supply Co. Agreed. I just bought a 77 N model with a 180 conversion and stock avionics for 59900 and felt I stole it.

[@Dave-bf2lc]

@TylOOOr D he said 77

[@user-NCC-1701-D]

he corrects this in the vid @ 13:00 says 40k-100k

[@RodClarkson]

@@rodtimmer2456 My 172N was 95K, but had good avionics. New interior and paint cost 26K, but she’s a beauty.

[@benderaviation]

That's one of the nicest panels in a 172M I've seen.

[@Account4096]

Didn't know you used to be active around PVG! Shortly after this video was uploaded I became a regular with Protocom. N75938 was sold to someone up in NY but eventually made it back to the Protocom fleet in late 2021. As part of the transfer back into the fleet, the avionics needed some redoing, which I performed. The GTN650 was removed but the dual GI-275 and GNS430 stayed. We reconfigured the autopilot (which wasn't working super well up till then) to cooperate with the GNS430. Protocom Aviation is no more today but part of the fleet (4835G and 75938) is now part of Fiedler Aviation.

[@hell5torm]

I grew up worshiping the 747. I trained on the da-40. My first job was on the DCH-2. I’ve loved a queen, learnt the new girl, had my fun with a classic, but the best aircraft I’ve ever know is an icon, and it’s the 172.

[@kentwilliams4152]

I first flew the 152, but after flying the 172 I never went back. Great airplane! Back then one cost about $20,000! Now they are $260,000 or $300,000 depending upon the model. I sincerely wish that they were available still with analog instruments as an option. - kw

[@doctaran]

They are…. Almost all the used ones are analog.

[@randc47]

Crazy how the design has been the same for almost 60 years. I’m a student flying a 172 w/ glass, but outside of that, it’s so much the same.

[@joeroscillo4015]

Almost every time I check out one of the classic crafts, Your the Man doing the Show!! Great work!!

[@planeair100]

I own a 1956 C-172. It has a Continental O-300-A 145 hp power plant. That was standard out of the factory at that time.

[@gregwarner3753]

When I was taking lessons the Cessna 172 had one major and several irritations. The biggest problem was the undamped spring landing gear created bounces on all except very smooth landings. The throttle was a continous irritation by being located almost out of reach with no support for the arm. The push pull is about the worst type of control for fine adjustments. There was also no support for the arm controlling the yoke. For contrast I flew a Beech Sundowner on a traing flight. My left arm was supported by the canopy sill so i could co trol the yoke with fingertips. The throttle was a quadrant directly under my right hand. I was flying in mild turbulence and did several mild crosswind landings on aa partially ice covered runway and did not bounce the airplane or lose steering control. That was an easy airplane to fly and a much better trainer than the Cessna.

[@bhc1892]

Did you just say you can't land a 172 without bouncing, and then blame the 172? Land slower.

[@scottfranco1962]

Just brief comment: When turning on the master on the ground, not intending to fly, hit the right or "battery" side of the master only. The reason why is there is no reason to power the alternator if you are not going to run the engine, saving battery power.

[@Jeffopar]

Thanks, I just started training this week. I will do this from here on out.

[@BLAMBERRY]

it really doesnt matter. all he did was close the circuit to include alternator power. as the engine was not running, no power was made or lost.

[@scottfranco1962]

@PozPoz I'll agree that is kinda true, you are applying power to the alternator field coil, so the loss is small but not zero. For those not familiar with what an alternator does, a generator has field coils and permanent magnets, and it generates electricity whenever it rotates. An alternator only has field coils, one static and one moving. The static coil is powered by the battery, and thus it can only generate power if the battery powers it. So how can you prop a plane by hand? Its because the magnetos that power the spark plugs are a separate system, and they have permanent magnets. Technically, if your battery is dead and you prop the airplane, it would run but the electrical system would still be dead (!), since the alternator does not have power.

[@muhammadsteinberg]

Actually the air pressure system (pitot tube) is pretty solid. I think Mike is actually referring to the vacuum system. If you're flying a 70's or older model the vacuum system is most likely troublesome by now. My heading indicator precession was every 5mins. Installed G5's, gtn-750, gtx-335, 255a and pma 8000bt. Lost about 30lbs and parasite drag (antenna removal). Also the earlier models started out with 150hp not 160hp.

[@adrianpolinski9600]

This one has the the lycoming O-320 H2AD 160hp engine, factory for the 172N models. This particular airplane is a wreck waiting to happen

[@muhammadsteinberg]

@@adrianpolinski9600 My 1978 172N has that engine. My engine doesn't have the T-mod to correct cam issue. The trick with that engine is to add additive in oil or use oil with additive already added. I use Shell 100(+) and religiously change oil and filter at 50hrs. The most important thing is to keep that engine moving. Supposedly the cam is highly susceptible to pitting if not lubed. I'm flying once every two weeks minimum to keep it lubed. People have gone past the 2000hr TBO with non T-modded 0-320-H2ad engines.

[@mohabatkhanmalak1161]

I like the engineering of the Cessna 150-172. They made it simple, robust and universal. I remember it as a 13 year old in my 1972 "Janes Commercial Planes". I never flew in one but have seen it at airports many times. I did fly - the pilot let me take the controls for a few minutes - in a Piper "Navajo"? single engine, this was also in the late 70's.

[@chrissanchez9935]

Thank You for the video and putting the Cessna 172 to its rightful recognition.

[@duncandmcgrath6290]

It’s a love hate love relationship with me . I’ve rebuilt so many crashed Cessnas that I cringe looking at the aft bulkhead ,carry though, torque box. These are the Chevy Cobalt of the sky. Like so many of you , I got my PPL in one .

[@discerningmind]

I think you mean Toyota Corolla of the sky.

[@duncandmcgrath6290]

discerningmind Toyota’s are a much higher build quality than a Chevy . Piper , Beech or Mooney would be closer to a Toyota .

[@davidjolliffe9622]

@@duncandmcgrath6290 Nothing wrong with Cessna build quality. They’re built in the same Textron factory alongside Beechcraft, using exactly the same robots & people. Maybe you’re thinking of Piper?

[@trim406]

Did all my training in a N and SP, Hoping to buy a N sometime in the future.

[@homehaha7886]

Mike get your hands on a cirrus vision jet

[@StrikerSG]

Love this little plane, wish I could have one...

[@prodbyadrv]

Save up

[@lucasjacques808]

damn thats a beautiful 172, the 172m i rent has like half the instruments inop

[@brianjc4346]

Just curious, how much does it cost you to rent? Looking to do it myself.

[@Superxpninja]

It's a garmin 650 and a 430.

[@droge192]

The GPS units were a GTN650 and a GNS430 (not a 630 and 330).

[@gringoloco8576]

I thought that was a 430 and yeah that's definitely a GTN 650, 630 doesn't exist.

[@muhammadsteinberg]

1978N sits in my hanger. My baby needs a new stack though. 😢 Cruise is actually around 121kts at 75%.

[@stationmanager2567]

The C172 is great general training aircraft, but for anyone getting into charter with a CPL, Cessna provided the perfect 4 seat work hoarse the Cessna182 a brilliant airplane. Full load and 125kts on the ASI, one can't go wrong.

[@Savage_Viking]

Probably my first plane. Thank you for the video. A little wear on the propeller.

[@flexairz]

So, glass panels need no maintenance? How about software, map and database updates every AIP cycle? Those 'steam' gauges have been very reliable the last 100 years.

[@CascadiaAviation]

I agree but there is just less moving parts in general. No need to replace vacuum pump for example. Also glass panel tends to be lighter with all the hardware you remove.

[@bobvorwald9737]

Timely video for me, I’m currently considering buying a share in one. I have a lot of time in these, including getting my PPL in one a couple decades ago.

[@metalheadmalta]

Thanks for this. Such a beautiful aircraft!

[@EVELYNEMIL]

Very, very good always loved the172

[@blackhairedgoon8218]

Came here after using it in Microsoft Flight Sim. The accuracy in that game is second to none, its unbelievable.

[@michaelquillen2679]

I trained on the 172. Was suppose to do it in the 152 but my instructor didn't like sitting in the 152 with my 250 lb. ass. Still paid the 152 hourly price, so I didn't complain. The 172 is fun to continue to fly after training, as one of the club's planes.

[@quinnsvlogs3055]

Cool video

[@nate9352]

Hey mike! Great video as always! Keep up the great work!

[@msahakim]

Hey bro, nice vid talking about GA planes while we’re stuck at home

[@Strong-jw3et]

My gosh, this is a pretty bird 🦅 that tail end to the rear looks good.

[@skydawg727]

500 HP C172..... we put a V8 Corvette engine on our C172. It’s a durable airframe. There’s some test flight videos showing some hard landings on corsairpower.com website showing just how durable it is. The airframe is essentially the same since 1960’s for a reason.

[@scottadams5858]

Nice look at a tired and true plane, I'd like to see you do this for a piper arrow

[@kenbit667]

Yes Mike, please do such a video for a Piper PA28R-200 Arrow.

[@laur-unstagenameactuallyca1587]

I want this plane when I'm old enough

[@larrysouthern5098]

I hope you do too!! In the meantime get a cheap flight simulator program for a laptop ( FSX..XPlane..etc) and get some joysticks( all for less than $300.00...).. and read the manuals very carefully!!! Get your parents to help you look for this on the internet... ok?? "Jonfly" is a good source of information!!! Good luck and happy FLYING!!!!...

[@laur-unstagenameactuallyca1587]

@@larrysouthern5098 thank you :DDD

[@laur-unstagenameactuallyca1587]

@@larrysouthern5098 I'll use all the recomendations :)

[@jaimeduenas4162]

beautiful plain, goes to show if it ain't broke don't fix it. Ben in use since the 50's that's a dam good plain!

[@azbas]

you don't even know how to spell plane. you are not serious.

[@azbas]

I remember Mike you were trying to find a plane in this price range but it was not a good idea so you started building Sling.

[@martyryan2529]

Much nicer and safer than the Bristell. Stay safe Mike.

[@mikeausra6950]

thanks keep flying keep away from the drags >

[@Kleboniskis]

In Lithuania you can find Cessna 172 in any airport, it very popular, like sharan

[@christianbenn316]

Well i,m 6ft 2" & i can relate to the 172 for it,s leg room capacity i sat in one of them & it was way better than a 150 that is couped up & complexed

[@sanBastian123]

sweet finest beginners aviation video!

[@phil413running]

Great overview! Thank you!

[@RichardSanthosh]

Can we customize the cockpit panel

[@dylanrudney]

Hey Mike I’m looking at a plane with a 2 blade prop and can’t find much information on it. Seems pretty similar in terms of performance but maybe a bit noisier? Thoughts?

[@hpijeep]

They didn’t start with 160hp. My 172 has a continental o-300 145hp. I find a lot of your information incorrect throughout your videos.

[@flexairz]

You are right. I have commented a lot with corrections too. Mike is a very nice person. But he must realize that there are people that know a lot more than he does on a lot of subjects on which he comes across as knowing it all. He must do better research. Way better.

[@christopherwilson6527]

flexairz make your own videos, then we can complain about you instead of just enjoying the video.

[@Superxpninja]

Theres a lot of incorrect info.

[@zutrue]

Then you should complain about what you see that you claim is incorrect and give the correct information if you actually know it. This guy mike seems to be very accepting of a correction, and will acknowledge the mistake. From what I've seen of his product. And yes he makes some. But I don't know anyone that doesn't. I have gone to discussions at MIT and a speaker misspoke and had to correct themselves. It happens. I have had to correct myself under similar circumstances. I have read many books with errors in substance or form.

[@hpijeep]

zutrue I feel like that’s what I did. I wouldn’t consider it complaining instead constructive criticism. KZbin comment section is a terrible platform for this type of conversation. Any criticism is taken as a negative comment.

[@th-fb1nl]

Make a video on bush planes or STOL aircrafts..i want to know about them from experts like you..

[@johnwilkens55]

Love your channel, keep it up.

[@dama_shares]

Great Video!! Thank You.

[@Joseph_Gibson]

Every time he says “nothing special about this airplane” I think, “anything that gets you flying is special”

[@situbes.972]

I remember flying in one as a young child. Does this one have a crank knob in ceiling (i am guessing that was the flaps) why are rpms so low?

[@SKYRIDER675]

Simtube S. Electric flaps so no.

[@leeway777]

Mike, would you review the ARCHER DX, the Piper Diesel Archer?

[@jonathanfriedman234]

How about RRD LX7? I might buy a used Lancair 4P and having it converted. What do you think. BTW, you have a great podcast!

[@fergman300]

Hey Mike..........are you going to the ACCA's in Benton KS ? Hope to see you there.

[@mikeausra6950]

turbo prop 172 find some ? climb rate 2000 pm ?

[@larrysouthern5098]

This is the "Airplane for the masses" they need to keep making them into future....if you cant fly this bird...you need to take up another recreation!!! Cya!!!..🐦

[@BRIGGS2710]

Timeless

[@getuliobr1213]

Lindo avião, bem conservado e atualizado. Parabéns. SBSL

[@peaceloveforever88]

nice demo and plane Hello CESSNA

[@jairo7997]

Nice planes mate

[@WhiskersAndWords]

I would love to own one of these :)

[@edwardarruda7215]

It's the only plane I flew.

[@muhammedashad4160]

Hey Mojo Are you from were? I always like to watch your vlogs I'm waiting for the Every Notification from you

[@aurboda]

American lagta hai bro

[@muhammedashad4160]

@@aurboda Are you from were

[@asanyal296]

Is it possible to get financing for a plane like this?

[@mojogrip]

Yes

[@wackaer25]

i'm interested in some takes on the tyson brummett crash in the 172

[@EJWash57]

AOPA story: www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2020/july/07/former-phillies-pitcher-and-cfi-tyson-brummett-dies-in-utah-aircraft-accident

[@mistercap5725]

please do a c182 video

[@robertbrown9827]

This thin is awesome.

[@mickycarter2365]

Ah the cessna 172 the plane that you start off in and sometimes might upgrade to a cessna 182 which is similar (for those who don't know but I'm pretty sure a majority of people waltching this video do so please correct me if I am wrong about something) but not I.E it's slightly bigger (wingspan and length) and has a more powerful engine.

[@pugmalley]

How does one plug in the Xbox controller? I think I could fly it right now if I could plug one in. Honestly I think anyone could fly it although landing might be a different story. MFS2020

[@after_midnight9592]

50 years old airframe?

[@Ravenscaller]

An old friend from long ago.

[@hunterfagan6272]

Thats in great condition considering its a flight school plane

[@hunarwithnaseema3090]

You have shown the Cessna 172. Now show the Cessna 195.

[@citabria4804]

2:36 Do I spy a J3 in the hanger

[@fehmibucakhan8205]

nice...

[@Kosmonooit]

You do get a RG version

[@droge192]

Correct, The C172 Cutlass RG.

[@davidgoettemoeller8881]

My flight instructor says cruise in a 172 is 70 - 80 knots

[@beboski02]

Except strait tail 172’s those look different

[@seandalejackson2525]

So why not a 3 bladed prop as time has gone on?!

[@chester8420]

3 blade props are less efficient than 2 for this horsepower and airframe.

[@seandalejackson2525]

@@chester8420 Really appreciate it!

[@markm.9458]

Can 'Mike' Fly? No bullshit, please.

[@bige6560]

This is the one I train in not the one in the video

[@maxwellstephens939]

You didn’t get into the avionics :(

[@leecoleman822]

Still researching, DOT / FFA regionals ..... , stay safe and free . amen

[@servicarrider]

What do you keep calling the analog gauges? Steam gauges? Please clarify.

[@gringoloco8576]

old school instruments on older airplanes operate off a vacuum system that is essentially air blowing over a gyro for the AI and Heading indicator, that's why most people call them steam gauges. I actually haven't heard analog gauges used very much.

[@EJWash57]

@@gringoloco8576 Used anymore. Analog instruments aren't being used much, anymore.

[@gringoloco8576]

@@EJWash57 incorrect because I'm talking about usage of the word analog which you're not interpreting in context properly. So what would clean up my phone comment that you feel the need to correct is if I'd used the word "term". I haven't heard the term analog instruments used much. There ya go.

[@EJWash57]

Gotcha. I only read what you wrote...

[@gringoloco8576]

@@EJWash57 yep and like a Nazi grammar police you chose to respond.

[@federalfarmer1741]

Best trainer? Diamond DA-40......mic drop

[@francescovilli5151]

A320

[@EJWash57]

Pretty negative review that borders on being offensive, Mike. I thought I was watching some reality TV junkyard-find show. I flew several flight school C-172s throughout college with friends. Seldom flew with less than four in the cabin, and full fuel. If we flew with baggage for overnight trips (including some memorable camping trips) yes, we had to carry less fuel, and make fuel stops. This is typical with so many aircraft designs - all the way up to transport category airliners. This fact does not deserve to be presented as if it were the end of the world. As far as calling all used C-172s "all beat up", well, that's like saying that all Toyota Priuses are beat up because a lot of them are used as taxi cabs. Even though the C-172 is a flight school staple, I'd dare to say that most of the 44,000+ of them built have never served in that area. There are a LOT of creampuffs out there, including the vintage "straight-tail" models from the '50s. IMHO, your airplane videos are now ever sub-conscience comparisons to your Sling project, which means you should just go ahead and title your videos as comparisons, and not reviews. Every aircraft has its limitations, and NO airplane performs according to factory specs - as you'll find out as you build flight time in your Sling.

[@cloudserph]

His review was positive. He speaks about the realities of any well used machinery that are decades old, but shows that these tried and true workhorses stand up. You can't ignore the context around his observation that you'll naturally find well used older aircraft to be exactly that.

[@EJWash57]

@@cloudserph Mike paints with a broad brush, and you just used a roller.

[@kaiden4932]

Mojogrip: go to an airport and you’ll probably find a Cessna 172 Me: *goes to international airport* me again: there are no Cessna 172s here

[@DanFrederiksen]

I detest cessnas :) their old junk engineering offends me. They don't pay for themselves, poor student pilots pay dearly for their junkdom. I was looking at part ownership and the tacho hours in a cessna was 5x that of my light sport and that's including fuel. The bulk of our cost is fuel. For some reason, the pos junk engine in a cessna is exceedingly expensive to buy and also maintain. and it's low efficiency and running leaded fuel that's double the price. If you've ever read the bible God often talks about how great his fury is because people can't behave and then he destroys them all. That's how I feel about cessnas :) and I aint wrong. We need GA revolution.

[@DanFrederiksen]

side note, here in Europe, the authorities have declared that light sport flying counts as PPL hours. It's yet unclear if that also means you can train in light sports. Or UL as they are called here. That would be a great step towards the eradication of cessnas.

[@droge192]

Pretty negative man! You're one person. Your opinion is yours but it doesn't mean that your views have inherent truth. Many people love Cessnas and have found then reliable and trustworthy.

[@DanFrederiksen]

@@droge192 no, it's positive. Flying a cessna is like swimming with an anchor. It might work but the situation could be infinitely better. What I'm proposing would be very beneficial.

[@gliderfs621]

Buying 30k for Cessna full equiped with IFR or 300k for a LSA that can only fly in sunny weather. Yep, I made my choice.

[@EJWash57]

@@texastyrannyresponseteam794 To be fair, Rotax engine are used in many, many other applications - in machines that pull over to the curb, or just bob in the water when they quit!

[@78779]

And the most boring