Originality Nut’s Nutty View on Modifications YMMV

A place to relax and discuss flying topics.

Moderators: GAHorn, Karl Towle, Bruce Fenstermacher

Originality Nut’s Nutty View on Modifications YMMV

Postby GAHorn » Wed Nov 04, 2020 4:59 pm

From another thread I almost hi-jacked”

Vertical wrote:So how do you originality nuts justify the baggage door?
.


You missed that “(mostly)”. :twisted:

That “mostly” modifies my preference. :mrgreen:

Here’s my thoughts on why I “mostly” prefer “originality”:
In my view, modifications are basically divided into Three CATEGORIES: APPEARANCE and PERFORMANCE...and IMPROMPTU which are subdivided into Engineered and Ad-Hoc (Owner Produced... or as BluElder might say “Farmerized”.).

I used to work with a British Airman who would remark “If it doesn’t LOOK right.... It’s NOT RIGHT!”
This was particularly humorous considering the incredibly ugliness of some British aircraft-designs. (Ever seen an Argosy? ...or a Beverly?)
I came to realize that, in most cases, that is quite true... the fit-and-function of a modification is as important as it’s purpose.

I like modifications that perform a particular purpose as long as it doesn’t detract from the “fit and function” or appearance of the airplane. Appearance is of major import in my view.... If I wanted a squared-off or swept-fin look ... I’d want an “original” 172/180/185/etc etc.... I wouldn’t want 172 tail grafted onto a 170 ragwing. 8O (Franks gets a “pass” on tailfeathers ... he has an “improved” 172 without ruining a 170B with a 172 tail.) :wink:

Examples of mods I personally like are:
Baggage Door (as long as it’s genuine Cessna in accordance-with methods/materials similar to what Cessna would have done (Harry Dellicker’s STC is the example I like.) I’ve seen two baggage door installations that were horrible installations, one “scabbed-on” with external patches, the other looked like it was installed using Flex-Seal and common hardware, both unfortunately dreamed up by one of our founders.)
Pponk gear beef-up, which strengthens the landing gear spring-attachment without altering the airplane’s appearance.
L.E.D. Lamps which does not detract from appearance but can improve visibility while reducing electrical load.
Cleveland Brakes which simplify mx and reduce mx costs, while improving safety without compromising appearance.
175 Fuel Tanks into 170 wings [or] by using 175 wings which are otherwise identical to 170B wings (extra-points for keeping mechanical gauges. I prefer this over the Javelin or Flint systems because of appearance and utility and operational-simplification, i.e., no pumps or transfer mechanisms needed.)
Tail-Pull Handles (either B.A.S. Or L-19 BirdDog) because they improve ground-handling without altering appearance.
TCM IO-360 because it makes the airplane into a homesick angel (fantastic T.O./Climb) without altering cowl or appearance. (My dream is this engine with the 175 fuel... I’ll never do it tho’ due to costs.)
Modern (Tefzel) Wiring w/Circuit Breakers This is a safety issue as far as I’m concerned.
Strobelight Anti-collision is so much better than old rotating beacons. Wing-tip and/or tail strobes are particularly good as they keep “flash-back” into the cockpit at a minimum.

Examples of mods I don’t feel “detract”:
”Bartone” exhaust because it’s almost invisible while keeping the lower cowl aerodynamically and physically cleaner. I.E. “It Looks Right!”
Lady Legs change from early to later spring-gear...slight improvement for ground handling. This “mod” is not something I’d spend money on unless my gear legs were in need of change for other reasons. Less “pilot technique” is needed for the later legs, but early legs are fine... spend the money on fuel for T.O./Land practice and you’ll have better “finesse”.
180/185 Legs especially if done for rough-country ops or to increase prop-tip ground-clearance. The weight-penalty is a good trade-off for that.
”Single-piece W.S. Actually ALL 170 W.S. Are “one piece”. The so-called “one piece” gets rid of the center-strap. While I don’t mind it, the CS does reduce visibilty some, and this mod is virtually unnoticeable appearance-wise, and a thicker WS can reduce noise in the cockpit.
Javelin Fuel because it was germane to the period for the type airplane. I don’t care for the fuel “in” the cockpit, nor do I like the loss of baggage-space, but it only barely changes appearance and is “nostalgic” in function. Despite the fact it was listed on the T.C.D.S., it was NOT genuine Cessna but was instead “aftermarket” and must be accompanied by the proper installation hardware and paperwork in lieu of STC.
360 Lyc while I don’t like this as much as the smoother-running 6-cyl TCM, it’s a dramatic improvement in T.O./Climb performance especially with a CS prop. Cowl “bumps” and fiberglass nose bowls are not pretty in my view, but are necessitated by the wider 4-cyl engine.
Large Tires/Wheels if operated off-airport/rough-country, these can certainly be useful.
Bubble Side Windows These totally violate my “appearance” criteria...but they drastically improve downward and aft visibility and contribute to safety, especially in “special ops” such as survey/photo/patrol work and glider/banner towing.
Camera port is a completely logical installation for mapping and such work.
Alternator conversion Not as necessary as it used to be due to reduced electrical demands of modern solid-state and L.E.D. equipment and improved batteries... but one to consider if you’re updating the entire electrical system anyway....along with...
Dual Land/Taxi LIghts Obviously since this is one of the most-visible (pardon the pun) mods on my own airplane. This is a mod to consider if you have any reason to replace the right-wing leading edge skin and/or that electrical system upgrade already mentioned. It’s a Huge improvement for ops in remote locations and unlit areas and make the airplane highly-visible to others in-flight.
Lightweight Starters are not my favorite conversion because of cost and reliability issues of some designs, but if you’re rebuilding an engine might be a time to consider one, especially the B&C version. Otherwise, I like the reliability and inexpensive repairs available on the original Delco-Remy, especially when mated-up with the....
Niagara 5-roller Starter Clutch. In fact, this mod probably belongs in the “must do/should do” list.

Examples of mods I don’t personally care-for:
TriCycle Gear is the ugliest mod I have ever seen. A large supply of barf-bags are needed for this one.
Vortex Generators have subtle handling-improvements, as does STOL wing mods, but they violate my appearance sensibilities for very small performance gains unless accompanied by more horsepower. The Unmodified 170 will get into fields it will never get back out of and those mods don’t improve that situation without big horsepower...and if big horsepower is available the airplane doesn’t need VG’s or STOL. Those mods require a little bit of addt’l mx and cleaning caretaking...and I already hate how difficult it its to keep these things clean.
EZ Flap handle goofy appearance, interferes with cockpit organization, and unnecessary with inertia-reel shoulder harnesses or if one is willing to slip one arm out of the harness for that first “click” of flap-handle deployment. (I do the latter and don’t mind it.... a flap handle shortened about 6” would do it for me.)
Flap Gap Seals are contrary to the aerodynamics of B-model flaps as they prevent the air flow over the flap which is how Fowler (or semi-fowler) operate.
Extensively Altered Panels Instrument panels of these “Classic” airplanes are one of the reasons I like this airplane...sorta like that pretty Round Tail. This is highly subjective and personal... but I simply have a preference for the “original look” of steam gauges and such. I was very disappointed to see how highly-modified some war-birds panels/avionics are such as “Doc” ..while I was thrilled to see the original vacuum-tube remote mounted avionics in the VC-118A (DC-6) on display at Pima Air Museum which served as Air Force One for Truman and Kennedy.
57238F05-B8BD-409F-B3B3-F1A8AE7A7060.jpeg
C93600D5-91AA-4741-B7F1-F66740869D3F.jpeg

EF7997AB-9CE2-4980-9903-8CFA9EBFF1DA.jpeg
REAL CLASSIC RADIOS (CLICK TO ENLARGE)

Mods I wish existed:
Gross Weight Increase The average American male is heavier than the FAA 170 in the Wt/Bal data. This airplane is structurally safe with a 10% greater gross wt., and should only require a paperwork limitation regarding performance considerations. I believe many operators regularly operate with that in mind, although technically not “regulation”. The CG must be carefully watched however.
Constant Speed or Elect. Prop would go a long way to improving T.O./Climb because the standard engine/prop will never achieve rated H.P. The static RPM hovers around 2350 or less and that only equates to approx. 120 HP for takeoff. (Kinda ‘splains things, heh?).

An owner gets to do to his airplane whatever he wishes tho’.... I get that... and I don’t intend my personal preferences to be critical of those owners or their choices.
But basically, if it LOOKS like Cessna COULD have done it in the decade this airplane was produced.... I probably like it.
YMMV
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
User avatar
GAHorn
 
Posts: 19312
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm
Location: Spicewood (Austin), Texas

Re: Originality Nut’s Nutty View on Modifications YMMV

Postby cessna170bdriver » Thu Nov 05, 2020 3:17 am

GAHorn wrote:...
In my view, modifications are basically divided into Three CATEGORIES: APPEARANCE and PERFORMANCE...and IMPROMPTU ...


I would add SAFETY to this list of categories. Shoulder harnesses are definitely in this category, and Cleveland brakes are arguably there.
Miles
User avatar
cessna170bdriver
 
Posts: 3825
Joined: Mon Apr 22, 2002 5:13 pm
Location: 45G, SE Michigan

Re: Originality Nut’s Nutty View on Modifications YMMV

Postby DaveF » Fri Nov 06, 2020 6:41 pm

LED lamps? Say it ain’t so, George! I thought you’d be the last holdout, running one 4509 and one 4461! :lol:
User avatar
DaveF
 
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:44 am
Location: Louisville CO

Re: Originality Nut’s Nutty View on Modifications YMMV

Postby GAHorn » Fri Nov 06, 2020 9:31 pm

DaveF wrote:LED lamps? Say it ain’t so, George! I thought you’d be the last holdout, running one 4509 and one 4461! :lol:
.

Oh no.... It’s worse than that! I’m running DUAL 4509/4461’s :lol:

(The L.E.D.’s I’m using are Nav and Interior lighting.... the wingtip Nav’s having recently been converted to uAvionix products. :wink:
'53 B-model N146YS SN:25713
50th Anniversary of Flight Model. Winner-Best Original 170B, 100th Anniversary of Flight.
An originality nut (mostly) for the right reasons. ;)
User avatar
GAHorn
 
Posts: 19312
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 8:45 pm
Location: Spicewood (Austin), Texas

Re: Originality Nut’s Nutty View on Modifications YMMV

Postby mmcmillan2 » Sat Nov 07, 2020 12:34 pm

Well said. I love the baggage door for ease of access.
mmcmillan2
 
Posts: 37
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2020 9:30 pm


Return to The Pilot Lounge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests