C-170B on skis

[Flat Country Pilot]

Areo Skis in Brooten MN does not have a web site. Their phone is 320-346-2285. Call and talk to Troy Reese, he knows everything about aero skis.

I bought the M2000s with 3/16" poly bottoms this winter and have them on a stock 170B.

The 2000s are 12" wide, 67" long and 20lbs each. The total weight of the installation was 62lbs with all the rigging and poly bottoms.

The 3000s are 16" wide, 72" long and 29lbs each, no poly.

When I bought the 2000s, there was a pair of used 3000s for sale on Barnstormers. I talked to a couple of experienced skis pilots that recommended the 2000s are a better match for a stock 170 in the snow conditions here in central ND.

I believe a stock 170 with 3000s in deep powder would struggle to move. And in the air the 3000s would be noticebly more drag.

If you need to know more call Troy. He is very helpful.

Bill

[mtv]

Nope, I'd say wrong on both those counts. Maybe in ND crusted, wind blown nasty snow the 2000s might be better, but only cause they're cheaper

I've run 3000 Aeros on Cubs, Huskys, Scouts, and a C-180. The bigger 3000 ski doesn't add any noticeable drag in the air, but it will make a HUGE difference getting airborne out of deep snow.

I wouldn't even consider putting the 2000 skis on a C-170, or any other airplane with a gross weight over 1700 pounds, myself.

The 3000's are great skis, light, float well, and are relatively inexpensive. First time you get bad stuck, you'll be wishing you had even bigger bottoms on those skis, trust me...

MTV

[once&futr_alaskaflyer]

Thanks. I got a fact sheet on the straight skis from Aero this morning. Their approved model sheet seems to say that the R2800 spring retractables aren't approved on the 170 but I'm waiting on clarification from them.

[mtv]

As I noted before, you won't go wrong with a set of those skis. That said, in your country, you need FLOATATION, and the biggest set of skis you can bolt on that airplane. In this case, that would be the 3000s.

The 2800 semi retractables can be a decent alternative if you really need a retractable ski, but they are definitely a compromise from a truly retractable ski. They are also a lot more expensive than the 3000 straight skis.

If you order, make sure you specify the plastic installed on the bottoms, and springs, not bungees. You may have to field approve the springs, since the stc calls for bungees, but I don't think Aero even offers bungees as an option any more.

Great skis, in any case.

MTV

[denalipilot]

Once&Futr-

You already know I've got 3000's, and am very happy with them. I got turned on to them by Hollis, who was pretty pleased with them on the park Husky. I will say that that particular pair of skis was pretty bent and mis-shapen. Hollis attributed it to lots of use, bumpy ice landings, etc... You might find him to be a good source of info, if he's even available to talk to right now.

As for Springs/ Bungees, Ward Of Ward's Aero on MRI did my install, and made a case for Bungees. MTV's advice is clearly the conventional wisdom, but Ward knows a thing or two. For the temps I operate in, bungees have always been fine

[mtv]

Denali,

Hollis is now in Bethel, working for FWS. He did indeed work those skis pretty hard, and the only down side I ever found to Aero skis is that they aren't as tough as some other skis around. Then again, they aren't as heavy as those skis either. It's a balancing act, and I think the Aeros do it well.

Bungees work fine, right up to the point where they no longer work fine. When that point comes, they will stretch out, and not rebound. That may allow your skis to nose down to the limit cables, and those had better be properly set.

For many years, bungees on landing gear and skis would last forever. For some reason, in the last five years or so, I've been hearing of bungees not lasting long at all. I suspect they've changed materials, or something, but...

The ski bungees are out there in the sun, if you park outside, so monitor them carefully, and at the first sign of deterioration, replace them. That may be several years, who knows?

I have nothing against bungees, and contrary to your comment, bungees are in fact the default that virtually all skis were approved with. Springs will just last forever, and you really don't have to worry much about them.

No huge difference, but I've found no benefit of bungees over springs. If your mechanic has some, please share them. I'd like to hear them.

MTV

[denalipilot]

Denali,

Hollis is now in Bethel, working for FWS.

I've found no benefit of bungees over springs. If your mechanic has some, please share them. I'd like to hear them.

MTV

MTV-

See my PM about Hollis.

As for Ward, I think his opinion was that springs do have all the benefits we associate with them, but that they generally have less elasticity than bungees, so in order to have them taught when they are in the air, they have to be under significantly greater tension when in a three-point attitude. His opinion was that the strain on the components, at least in my application, made bungees a better selection.

I knew going into it that bungees have a regular replacement interval. What I do notice is that each year it is a little easier to reach the bungees up to the attachment point when I'm installing the skis. Either that, or my technique is getting better

-DP

[mtv]

Thanks for the pm.

Ward may have a point. I like attaching the springs/bungees to the lower engine mount on these airplanes. If that area can't take the additional pull of a spring....we're all hosed anyways... .

You must have the bungees attached to the bracket on the top of the gear leg?

On the bigger Cessnas, the spring or bungee typically attaches to a bracket that mounts to the top of the boot cowl. I never liked springs on those, cause if the mechanic didn't get tension right, they'd beat the hell out of the cowl.

Nothing wrong with bungees, as long as you keep em fairly fresh. But, make absolutely certain the forward limit cables won't let the ski go over on you.

MTV

MTV

[denalipilot]

Here's my '53 170B on Aero 3000's, with bungee rigging. It sits on 180 gear legs, and now swings an 8042 climb prop, not the stock prop pictured here.

-DP

[denalipilot]

This thread reminds me of an article a few years back in AOPA Pilot about bungees. The color tracers in the fabric sheath are color-coded as to the year and month of manufacture. If you know how to interpret them, you can tell when any given bungee was manufactured. There are a bunch of other neat bungee facts as well. See the article here.

-DP

[once&futr_alaskaflyer]

This thread reminds me of an article a few years back in AOPA Pilot about bungees. The color tracers in the fabric sheath are color-coded as to the year and month of manufacture. If you know how to interpret them, you can tell when any given bungee was manufactured.

That must have been quite a few years ago - now all the articles are about flying IFR in a Socata or a Cessna VLJ

[mtv]

once and future,

Au contraire....take a look at the red airplane in the last issue.

MTV

[nofate]

I had a C170B many years ago. It had the Avcon conversion and performed very well. I really enjoyed flying it on skis. The only problem I remember was with the bungies which would start to vibrate at cruise and shake the plane. I did the Red Green mod with duct tape and it cured the vibration. The bungies in the pic were changed to ones that attached up at the cowling. The longer ones did the vibrating.

[ccurrie]

I was talking to the guy from airglass about there hydraulic wheel ski. it looks prity good but at that time it was not STCed on the 170 yet. Mabe on a field aproval. federal has the c3000 wheelskis STCed on the 170 now they are likely the best choice but terible expensive. I have the old AWB2500s and am quite happy with them but the c3000s are quite a bit more refined. There are pics in my gallery of my 170 on 2500s.
thats my 2 cents.
Did you ever get tundra tires Jr.CuBuilder?

[ccurrie]

AWB2500s come up on barnstormers quite often. I would stay away from fixed penitration skis they perform verry poorly in most conditions.

[hotrod150]

....... This season looks pretty good for getting some so long as no more unplanned financial disasters rear their ugly heads.

Those planned financial disasters aren't much better.

[denalipilot]

I'm thinking about getting some skis for my 170B. I will have to use some type of wheel skis. Does anyone have suggestions?
What are things to look out for, what are the pros and cons for different setups?
I already have steel axles, 180 gear, and an O360 with a CS prop.

Last spring in Talkeetna I saw an interesting take on wheel skis- I think the Mfr was Aero. They performed like hydraulic wheel skis except without the hydraulics. I think you took off from the pavement with the skis in the up position, and the wheels would effectively be in the penetration position, which would be ok for a snow landing. Then when you landed on snow, you manually levered the skis down into the down position, and proceed to take off and land on skis to your heart's content. Then when flying to a wheel site, you pulled a manual cable inside the cockpit and the skis popped back up (under spring tension) to the up position, with the wheels again back in the penetration position.

Sorry if that's confusing. Perhaps someone else here knows what these are and can provide a link. (BRD??) One benefit is much lower cost than hydraulic, and simpler install.

Good luck,

-DP

[denalipilot]

Here's the product I was thinking of. The original article is here: http://www.flyingmag.com/article.asp?se ... cle_id=872

-DP

[BRD]

Hey DP.. Those are Aero-Skis. Made in Brooten, MN (they don't have a website)

The guys I know here in central Minnesota flying them, really like them. I've used these wheel-skis in powder (not deep mountain powder of course) and with enough power they work well. I think they're a good compromise ski. (wouldn't put them on anything less than 150 hp)

Brad

[whee]

I think Matt7gcbc has those on his plane...