On Mar 20, 10:15 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Well, they're roughly the same planform, though the 150s surely must be
smaller overall. I think they both use an old fat NACA semi-symetrical.
In fact, I think Cessna only used one airfoil for all the strutted
pistons, so it would be CG and elevator authority that dicated it's
ability to do one. I'd say you could do it, but the chances of pulling
something off would be pretty good. At the very least I'd say you might
find some slightly stretched metal wing mounting parts if you looked
after doing a few snap rolls at a good speed.

Well, that's certainly more than enough reason NOT to do that in this
172!


The 150 series certainly stall breaks cleaner, but I don't know if
that's due to CG or wing design.

Proly CG and the relatively limited elevator available compared to the
150. Neither will stay in a spin very long, but the 172, I dont think
I've ever managed over a turn in any of them, and a half a turn is more
par for the course. The added power in a snap would probably aid in the
elevator department and allow a complete rotation, but I'm only
guessing.

Bertie

The best spin wrung from the C172E (3 turns, tiny amount of residual
power going into the spin) was from a cross control stall to the left.
Full left rudder, full right aileron, full back elevator....

In a blink we were inverted, then into fairly nice high rotation rate,
low airspeed, very little pitch bobbing -- a by-the-book fully
developed spin.

Power off, full opposite rudder and simply release the back pressure
and the spin stopped.

Otherwise, you're right -- by turn 1 1/2 the 172 is pulling itself
into a steep spiral.


Dan Mc