The International Cessna 170 Association

Nothing to do with 170's but I found it very interesting.
I had never heard of a Cessna 160 until I saw the Ebay add for the only prototype.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/RARE-CES ... 5fAircraft
I googled it and Wikipedia shows it. I seems to verify except I know Wikipedia is not alway accurate. It states that it was to be a lower cost 172 using a Franklin 125 and a free castering nose gear.
Does anyone out there have any actual knowledge of this airplane? It would be a very unique project.
Dan

The Cessna 162 Skycatcher is the new Cessna light sport airplane. I never heard of an earlier Cessna 160.

Here's one I would like to find, X210. Cessna supposedly built two. I would love to get my hands on those wings, they have semi-fowler flaps similar the C-170B.

Richard, was that a 195 fuselage with a 180 empanage, 210 wings and a flat 6 engine? I don't think I have ever seen that photo before

What ever it is it sure is ugly.

Bill Hart wrote:What ever it is it sure is ugly.

Wow! I was thinking just the opposite! What's wrong with me???

johneeb wrote:http://www.aerofiles.com/_cessna.html

Careful believing everything you read at aerofiles. According to them the 170-B got a swept tail in 1960.

gahorn wrote:

johneeb wrote:http://www.aerofiles.com/_cessna.html

Careful believing everything you read at aerofiles. According to them the 170-B got a swept tail in 1960.

George, I don't read em i just post em!!!!!!!

jrenwick wrote:Wow! I was thinking just the opposite! What's wrong with me???

John,
I was thinking on the same wave as you.....Brad

Sorry, I just had to make this comment, That aircraft didn't look that bad. A realy ugly aircraft is the 171....Sorry you guys! (I think there are two of you) A round tail on a tricycle, just doesn't look rite!....Brad

Bill Hart wrote:What ever it is it sure is ugly.

Careful, Bill comments about appearances can lead to a four page thread!

Bill Hart wrote:What ever it is it sure is ugly.

I think I have to agree with Bill, that bastardized 195 with a square tail and flat engine IS UGLY, but I would still like to have those wings! With the way Cessna recycled parts between airplanes, I bet the round tips would still fit and I would have the other 195 with good flaps. Check out this one in Argentina with a turbine and big flaps! If I didn't hate the smell of jet fuel I could really get used to flying that one.

Hey, wait a minute, maybe that's where those wings went!

170C wrote:Richard, was that a 195 fuselage with a 180 empanage, 210 wings and a flat 6 engine? I don't think I have ever seen that photo before

Frank, it was indeed a poor, butchered 195. That was Cessna's first attempt at a square tail and I'm glad they dressed it up a little before the 180 came along. The wings, are modified 195 wings with the barn door flaps and square tips. The later 210 wings kept the cantilever design but are the common Cessna shape, not tapered like the 195. Not sure about the engine, probably a 225hp O-470A.

4583C wrote:

Bill Hart wrote:What ever it is it sure is ugly.

Careful, Bill comments about appearances can lead to a four page thread!

It's just that square tail on an otherwise beautiful airplane WOW does it make a difference. Also now that Bruce's "Rat Plane" satus is questionable with the talk of new paint in another thread I just might be in the running for the much anticipated Rat Plane trophy, so I can talk ugly airplanes.