I currently rent a 172P for all of my flying needs. The FBO that I
rent at is getting a 172R. My question is what is everyones openion
of the 172R as an instrument platform? I know it should fly about like
the 172P. I am wondering about the systems and any added safety
features.

One thing that really encourages me is the dual vaccum pumps on the
172R.
I am currently using a Garmin 196 as a safety backup.

Thanks!

Jonr

Jonathan wrote:

> One thing that really encourages me is the dual vaccum pumps on the
> 172R.

That's a feature I like too.

But a lot depends upon the avionics in both planes if you're drawing a
comparison. IFR-certified GPS, for example, would be an improvement over
your handheld for IFR operations (but keep the hand-held as a backup).

Autopilot?

Another feature I like very much in the newer Cessnas are the nav/coms. The
nav side has different modes, one of which includes the ability to display
the current FROM or TO bearing. No futzing around with OBS-twisting; the
digits are there for you to see.

Two NAVs set up this way with a decent angle between the VORs in question,
and it's almost as good as a GPS for position awareness. It also provides
more warning of an intercept than just waiting for the needle to move.

Finally, the CDI mode permits one to have CDIs for Nav 1, Nav 2, and the GPS
concurrently.

- Andrew

Jonathan wrote:
> I currently rent a 172P for all of my flying needs. The FBO that I
> rent at is getting a 172R. My question is what is everyones openion
> of the 172R as an instrument platform? I know it should fly about like
> the 172P. I am wondering about the systems and any added safety
> features.

As for how the airplanes fly, I think you will find the pitch and roll
to be more "crisp", that is, the slop or free play will be gone.
The panel layout is "logical", with the circuit breakers and switches
grouped separately and located on the lower left side of the panel.
The 13 fuel sumps (five on each wing, three on the belly) make for an
interesting preflight ritual. Get a GATTS jar and return all that sumped
fuel back to the tanks.

Thanks for the feedback Andrew.

Jonr

The 172R is a better instrument platform. Dual vacuum pumps, failure flags
and enunciator panel lights for the vacuum gauges, IFR GPS, autopilots,
better seats, split avionics busses and so forth.

"C J Campbell" > wrote in message
...
> The 172R is a better instrument platform. Dual vacuum pumps, failure flags
> and enunciator panel lights for the vacuum gauges, IFR GPS, autopilots,
> better seats, split avionics busses and so forth.

I can't believe what my spell checker did to the word "annunciator."

john smith wrote:
> Jonathan wrote:
>
>> I currently rent a 172P for all of my flying needs. The FBO that I
>> rent at is getting a 172R. My question is what is everyones openion
>> of the 172R as an instrument platform? I know it should fly about like
>> the 172P. I am wondering about the systems and any added safety
>> features.
>
>
> As for how the airplanes fly, I think you will find the pitch and roll
> to be more "crisp", that is, the slop or free play will be gone.
> The panel layout is "logical", with the circuit breakers and switches
> grouped separately and located on the lower left side of the panel.
> The 13 fuel sumps (five on each wing, three on the belly) make for an
> interesting preflight ritual. Get a GATTS jar and return all that sumped
> fuel back to the tanks.

I forgot to mention that the fuel injected engine is better... and worse
when it comes to starting and landing.
Cold starts are easy with the boost pump, hot starts may be troublesome
until you learn where to set the throttle and mixture.
Lack of carb heat simplifies landing checklist. Fuel pump is not
required to be on for landing with the high wing.