New from Alabeo: C172 Gutlass

As agpilot says, it was intentional. :wiggle:. The one I flew a time or two had a double tilt airframe. When I took off, the pilot's seat rotated a few degrees more than the rest of the airplane. If I remember right, the RG was worth only about 10 knots over the "down and bolted" airplane. I don't remember if it had a constant speed prop, but the intent was as an intro to a complex airplane.

Glenn
 
nice... the 'Gutless Cutlass' (heard that name a LOT of times at airfields before!) a worthy addition to my hangar! hope the Pipersport is next!

thanks for the H/U! :jump:
 
Here is the original "Gutless Cutlass". The early models were so under powered a carrier wave-off taught the pilot Real Terror!

Best, Paul

Cutlass.jpg
 
3wflZ.jpg


okjpQ.jpg


TdVsw.jpg
 
Ahh yes, the Gutlass, the only airplane I ever rode on where I felt uneasy. I was in the back seat observing an instructor/student. During his slow flight dirty manuvering, gear flaps down....full power would just maintain level lol. Sadly the 172RG was involved in ERAU Prescott's first fatalities. Felt much more comfortable in the 177RG. I even felt more comfortable as a passenger in a TU-154 LOL. Nonetheless, the Alabeo model looks like a fine rendition of the Gutlass, might grab during next year's Alabeo christmas sale.

Cheers
TJ
 
pilottj said:
Ahh yes, the Gutlass, the only airplane I ever rode on where I felt uneasy. I was in the back seat observing an instructor/student. During his slow flight dirty manuvering, gear flaps down....full power would just maintain level lol. Sadly the 172RG was involved in ERAU Prescott's first fatalities. Felt much more comfortable in the 177RG. I even felt more comfortable as a passenger in a TU-154 LOL. Nonetheless, the Alabeo model looks like a fine rendition of the Gutlass, might grab during next year's Alabeo christmas sale.

Cheers
TJ
Click to expand...

What made it so bad power-wise? Adding the equipment for the retracts? I just assume that adding that kind of weight would basically cancel out much of the "at speed" benefits and almost all of the lower speed benefits, because of the added weight. Just guessing though, looking forward to whatever insight you may have. Wondering why it would be so much different than the "regular" 172.
 
The Cutlass is not bad at all performance wise. She's 20kts faster than the 172, climbs better and can carry a 190lbs higher load.
Last but not least the Alabeo version has a real classic cockpit, only VOR/DME and ADF, so IFR only for those who can really navigate!
 
I don't currently own any Alabeo products but this 172 looks very impressive (as do all their aircraft). I believe there is some kind of tie-in to a certain extent with Carenado and my question is to what degree of procedural operation can I expect with this 'plane - same as Carenado's or to A2A 's level ?

Appreciate any feedback and thank-you in advance :encouragement:
 
Alabeo planes are basically identical with Carenado planes but Alabeo does the systems/avionics wise less complex planes, e.g. no GPS in the Cutlass.
 
I have most of Alabeo's Planes, I usually ask myself why they don't spend just a little more time going over things before they release them.
It seems like they are in too much of a hurry to get them out.

This is one I will pass on, I know we're comparing apples and oranges, but I think I would constantly be comparing this plane with A2A's C-172.
 
Wing Tip Missing Texture C-GGAL

Hi Guys,
Not sure if this is correct but has anyone noticed that on the texture C-GGAL one wingtip is missing the dark texture. I have re-done mine now to show the CESSNA logo on the ends.

Missing Wingtip texture
Z172d.jpg

New Wingtips
image.jpg image.jpg
 
Not hammering Alabeao, because I like their GeeBee and classic props, but I'll save a few more dollars and go for the A2A 172. Much more real simulation involvement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top