[simpits-tech] This is too cool...

[Matt Bailey]

Justin Messenger wrote:
> 
> My squadrons 3 year old 172 definitely has that problem. As I
> understand it the new 172s hold a bit more fuel. We never fill
> the tanks past the tabs or we cannot takeoff with three adults. I'm
> sure you would be okay with two adults and 2 small kids, but if you
> fill the tanks all the way your stuck with only two adults. Now our
> old 182's are another topic, they actually give you a kick in the
> pants on takeoff. :)
> 
> Have any of you flown in the new 172 with the leather seats and the
> car style shoulder strap rather than the traditional 4 point hookup?
> In the rear seat it is a real pain to adjust in our plane. The front
> seats they work OK, but I still don't like them. If I were in a crash
> I would feel safer with a strap over each of my shoulders.
> 
> Justin

	I've got some time in new 172's (no leather seats though!), having
car-style seatbelts seems a bit odd but it's convenient and I don't see
how it's any less safe than the old kind. The 172 never had any 4 point
designs as far as I know. The Tiger has 4-point harnesses though, which
I prefer to the standard Cessna seatbelt/single shoulder harness setup.
I did ride in the back of a new 172 once, as I recall it was fairly
comfortable. I don't remember having any trouble with the seatbelt,
although it's been over a year and a half ago. I will say the 172 is
more pleasant overall to fly than our older Tigers due to the reduced
vibration (it doesn't give you a headache after an hour of practicing
manuevers) as well as increased comfort. Sure aren't as much fun though.

	-Matt Bailey