Cherokee 140, fat man, low elevation

SkyHog

SkyHog

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
18,433
Location
Castle Rock, CO
Display Name
Display name:
Everything Offends Me
Can anyone tell me about the Cherokee 140 series of planes, specifically, how well they'd handle low elevations with a fat man at the controls?

I have a lot of time in a Cherokee 180, and only .5 hours in a Cherokee 140, but that was always at high elevations. I currently live at <1000ft MSL.
 
My airplane partner is a big guy, and he hasn't complained. Get two fat men in front and you might want to throw something heavy in the back though.
 
You're gonna want a 180.

srsly-40515.jpg
 
It's a really strange question, Nick. What do you expect?

I weigh 235 lbs (equipped with belly pack), and I have about 100 hours in a -140 (the 140 hp version - as you probably know there were -140s with 140 and 150 hp engines). It was all above 5000 ft too, but I do not expect much change down below except the need to enrich carefuly and not just leave the mixture halfway out all the time like we do here. A big issue with Cherokees is how they are pressed against the forward side of the W/B envelope with fat pilots. This does not change with altitude though.

Well, ok, the "shortfield" landings turn into real short-field landings at the East Coast. And shortfiled work is surprisingly tricky in Cherokee due to its high descent rate. So, it will require adjustment, but alas, I do not have the experience... yet.
 
EdFred said:
You're gonna want a 180.

srsly-40515.jpg
Click to expand...

$10-15k for not much speed increase is hard to justify, especially if a PA28-140 will fit the bill.

That's what I'm trying to figure out. If I stay to the lower elevations (which I will now), will a Cherokee 140 support a 260 pound man and his approximately (but slightly over) FAA Standard wife?
 
No problem at all. Just don't take off on any short obstructed strips on a hot day. If the 180 is in rig though it will go pretty quick, especially if it has a few mods.
 
Download WnB Pro off of iTunes for iOS. It has a Cherokee 140 profile. You can play with the weight and balance numbers and based on that decide if the airplane will work for you.
 
SkyHog said:
Can anyone tell me about the Cherokee 140 series of planes, specifically, how well they'd handle low elevations with a fat man at the controls?

I have a lot of time in a Cherokee 180, and only .5 hours in a Cherokee 140, but that was always at high elevations. I currently live at <1000ft MSL.
Click to expand...

A cherokee 140 with 235 lb pilot will operate quite comfortably down low. Depending on the 140, you may have to watch the forward CG limit before the max gross weight limit.

I have a '74 cherokee 140 and with me being 180lbs (mumble mumble) my 140 can take up to 225 lbs in the right seat and full fuel before hitting the forward CG limit and the airplane will be still more than 150lbs below max gross.
 
SkyHog said:
Can anyone tell me about the Cherokee 140 series of planes, specifically, how well they'd handle low elevations with a fat man at the controls?

I have a lot of time in a Cherokee 180, and only .5 hours in a Cherokee 140, but that was always at high elevations. I currently live at <1000ft MSL.
Click to expand...

Find the TCDS 2A13 for the correct 140 (year & serial number) and play games with it. With 2 adults in the front (cherokee 180) I always have ballast in the baggage area. Usually an 8 gal water tank filled with 7 gal or so, giving me 50+ pounds back there.
 
zaitcev said:
[snip]but I do not expect much change down below except the need to enrich carefuly and not just leave the mixture halfway out all the time like we do here.
Click to expand...

actually, down low (e.g., here at KBED field elev is approx 125'), you leave it full rich for take-off and landing. Lean as desired at altitude.
 
SkyHog said:
$10-15k for not much speed increase is hard to justify, especially if a PA28-140 will fit the bill.

That's what I'm trying to figure out. If I stay to the lower elevations (which I will now), will a Cherokee 140 support a 260 pound man and his approximately (but slightly over) FAA Standard wife?
Click to expand...

Remember 6Y9? And that was with 180hp. It ain't about cruise speed, it's about getting off the ground.
 
SkyHog said:
That's what I'm trying to figure out. If I stay to the lower elevations (which I will now), will a Cherokee 140 support a 260 pound man and his approximately (but slightly over) FAA Standard wife?
Click to expand...

You might need to move up to an LSA like mine if you want to get out of a 1000 foot strip with that kind of weight...
 
SkyHog said:
$10-15k for not much speed increase is hard to justify, especially if a PA28-140 will fit the bill.

That's what I'm trying to figure out. If I stay to the lower elevations (which I will now), will a Cherokee 140 support a 260 pound man and his approximately (but slightly over) FAA Standard wife?
Click to expand...

What is the FAA standard for wives? How many pounds? And how do they get this data?
 
SkyHog said:
That's what I'm trying to figure out. If I stay to the lower elevations (which I will now), will a Cherokee 140 support a 260 pound man and his approximately (but slightly over) FAA Standard wife?
Click to expand...

YES. Climb ability varies quite a bit from plane to plane. Depends on how strong the engine, rigging, modifications (such as VG's). Wouldn't think you would have much of an issue on weigt. They are nose heavy, making sure your not too forward on the envelope is a good idea.

Gary
 
There is an FAA document (SAIB?) that regurgitates a Piper bulletin on doing spins in a 140. The relevance of it is that it allows using the actual front seat position for weight and balance instead of the mid-position that is provided in the handbook. This allows you to take credit for the passenger seat being full back and your s being where ever it actually is. This can help a lot with the forward CG issues on the Cherokee. There are also some pretty inexpensive mods that improve Cherokee take off and climb. See pipermods.com. The prop tip mod is worth about 100 rpm static or 2 inch pitch increase and keep the same rpm.
 
kimberlyanne546 said:
What is the FAA standard for wives? How many pounds? And how do they get this data?
Click to expand...
It's 170 lbs. Note though, 1) for the FAA it's a standard husband as well, 2) they were going to re-regulate it about 2 years ago, after a crash of Beech 1900.
 
Gary and I have no problem getting airborne in his 140 with the 160hp even on hot days.
 
Where to you plan to fly to (i.e. the lower altitudes or up to the "mountains" around AVL or West Virginia)? What runway lengths? And short trips or long?

When it gets really hot (like the last couple of weeks), you'll find some pretty high DAs here on the east coast. If you're running close to max gross weight, you'll be wanting the extra HP. You can trade fuel for weight (and takeoff distance) to a point.

In my personal experience, I find myself wishing for extra HP some of the time, but it meets my needs most of the time. It's usually cheaper to buy more HP than you need right now than it is to sell the plane and buy something bigger a couple of years later. Are there any rentals of both types in your area so you can get a feel for how they handle?
 
It depends.

Ed nailed it. It is about getting off the ground, and the extra 30 HP helps A LOT. I had a 150 HP, 140B. Nice little plane except it climbed like a submarine, meaning not very well. With me at 175 lbs and a passenger, and full fuel, in the summer it was typically a "heart in the mouth" affair.

A good compromise is the 160 HP variants or STC'd planes. Gary's climbs a lot better than my old Cherokee ever did as Adam states. I'd go for a 160 HP version if you can't spring for a 180.

Or just get a Tiger, which was my solution to the entire issue. :D
 
Last edited:
Anthony said:
It depends.

Ed nailed it. It is about getting off the ground, and the extra 30 HP helps A LOT. I had a 150 HP, 140B. Nice little plane except it climbed like a submarine, meaning not very well. With me at 175 lbs and a passenger, and full fuel, in the summer it was typically a "heart in the mouth" affair.

A good compromise is the 160 HP variants or STC'd planes. Gary's climbs a lot better than my old Cherokee every did as Adam states. I'd go for a 160 HP version if you can't spring for a 180.

Or just get a Tiger, which was my solution to the entire issue. :D
Click to expand...

I thought we wanted to get Nick out of a short field. :D
 
EdFred said:
I thought we wanted to get Nick out of a short field. :D
Click to expand...


So now you're telling me I need to take the Tundra Tires off the Tiger? Great, more wasted $$$. Oy!

Nick. Find someone with a 140. Load your fat *ss in there, and a passenger. Fill the tanks and go fly it.

Or just lose weight. :D
 
If W/b are an issue, you can always move the right seat up and have your other half sit in the right rear, ala air taxi. We do this a lot in the 180....the cabin width is a little tight when anyone up front exceeds 200# (and I certainly do).
 
SkyHog said:
$10-15k for not much speed increase is hard to justify, especially if a PA28-140 will fit the bill.

That's what I'm trying to figure out. If I stay to the lower elevations (which I will now), will a Cherokee 140 support a 260 pound man and his approximately (but slightly over) FAA Standard wife?
Click to expand...


Yes, the only question is runway length.
 
  • You live in a mountainous state.
  • You're thinking of purchasing an aircraft.
  • You are considering normal category aircraft.
It just doesn't make sense to pay for a whole aircraft but use half it's utility. If you want to go that route it makes more sense to rent.
 
What you should look at is a 180-200hp retract. The Arrow, Mooney and Cardinal RG are all good choices. Kids comin.. where do Grandmas live? Might just buy that Bo... :D
 
Henning said:
What you should look at is a 180-200hp retract. The Arrow, Mooney and Cardinal RG are all good choices. Kids comin.. where do Grandmas live? Might just buy that Bo... :D
Click to expand...
Might as well, because in the end, that's what everyone wants :)
 
I doubt Nick is in the market for a plane anymore, considering.
 
EdFred said:
I doubt Nick is in the market for a plane anymore, considering.
Click to expand...

That is correct....however, I just did my checkout in a club with a 172. That'll do for a bit (really cheap flying).

Looks like I'll be in the air a lot more now :D
 
EdFred said:
So we'll see you in three weeks?
Click to expand...

attachment.php


I dunno.....That is 14 hours in one weekend. I will have to talk to my wife, but even at $50/hr dry, that works out to $700, plus fuel (approx $650).

I forget, is Mogas available there?
 

Attachments

  • AFP.png
    AFP.png
    113.1 KB · Views: 82
Yeah, Tommy has Ethanol free gas, but it ain't much cheaper than 100LL
 
Nick, are you planning to go diagonally across the lake in a rented 172? Just curious.
 
AcroBoy said:
Nick, are you planning to go diagonally across the lake in a rented 172? Just curious.
Click to expand...

That's just the direct routing, I would probably go north and across, but honestly, I would not hesitate to cross the lake any more than I would hesitate to cross the mountains.

Remember, the engine doesn't know its over water. :D
 
Yes, except you might survive a landing in the mountains, but you won't survive a ditching in Lake Michigan. However, don't want to dredge up this old discussion, it's your call as PIC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top