By J. DOUGLAS HINTON
It’s an old adage: Everything old is new again. But in the case of Yingling Aviation’s Ascend 172, it takes a lot of work to make an old plane like new again.
First introduced at AirVenture 2015, the Ascend 172 is one of the original “remanufactured” aircraft, designed to get people into a like-new airplane at a used airplane price. When it was introduced, base price was $159,000.
“Our philosophy is that we’re offering an aircraft that’s practically brand new — except for airframe hours — at a price that’s almost $200,000 less expensive than a new 172, comparably equipped,” says Jerry Pickett, vice president of sales and MRO at the Wichita-based business.
The Ascend 172 addresses many of the challenges to the general aviation industry that contribute to the dwindling pilot population, such as the growing number of outdated, aging aircraft and the rising costs of new aircraft, officials said when they unveiled the like-new airplane just two years ago.
It makes sense they chose the 172 for this process. It is the most prolifically produced airplane in history, with more than 43,000 coming off the production line since the model was introduced in 1956.
A Cessna dealer since 1946 and the world’s largest Cessna parts dealer, Yingling begins the process of remanufacturing the 172 by scouring the used aircraft market, looking particularly for the Cessna 172N model, which seems to be the most ubiquitous version of this classic.
They specifically look for airframes with a maximum of 700 hours with little or no damage history.
After buying the used plane, they bring it back to Wichita and sequester it in the company’s overhaul facility for 60 to 90 days, depending on options desired.
Let the magic begin…
First, firewall forward. Overhaul the engine. Same for the prop and new engine accessories, including carburetor, alternator, magnetos, engine mounts, starter, control cables, muffler and tailpipe, vacuum pump, engine baffling, and engine cowling.
Remove all exterior paint down to the bare metal to look for corrosion. Repair as necessary and repaint.
New wheels, tires, brakes and hoses. Replace all wiring, antennas and fuel tank gaskets. Replace the windshield and side windows. Add new door seals, control cables and pulleys.
As for the interior, the Ascend 172s have all new seats, coverings, sidewalls and carpeting.
There’s also a new glare shield and new engine instruments, including fuel gauges and circuit breakers. New avionics are installed in the new instrument panel.
While the standard engine on the 172 is 160 hp, an option is available for a 180 hp O-360-A4M version for an approximate $20,000 add-on.
Performance is increased to 150 mph cruise, climb to 800-1,000 fpm, and takeoff distance to 960 feet at sea level, according to Yingling officials.
Then there’s the other options: A second GNC 255 Nav/Comm; a GMA 350 audio panel with MKR GTX 345 ADS-B Out and In, Davtron M800 digital clock, flight instrument backlighting, USB port, LED NAV and beacon lights, wheel fairings, and more.
The plane is backed by a warranty that covers 200 hours or one year.
Interest has been high, according to Randy Schuette, director of sales at Air Orlando, one of companies in the dealer network for the remanufactured plane.
“We were pretty satisfied,” he said after this year’s SUN ’n FUN. “There was a lot of interest, particularly among flight schools. Right now, we’re in negotiations with two entities for about 12 aircraft. And we’re getting inquiries from Europe, Australia, South America, and Canada. Not bad for starters!”
Perhaps fueling some of that interest is the fact that the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association gave away an Ascend 172 as its sweepstakes airplane this year. That meant the bright yellow aircraft traveled the country with AOPA officials at the big shows, including AirVenture, as well as the regional AOPA Fly-Ins and other shows.
The original remanufactured Ascend 172’s yellow paint was suggested by AOPA’s President Mark Baker as a way to grab attention and “start a ramp conversation.”
Later models sport a more conventional Signature tri-color paint scheme.
As the plane toured the country with AOPA, Yingling officials said they learned a lot — and what they learned has been incorporated into the latest edition of the Ascend 172.
“We’ve had the opportunity to collect valuable input from customers and potential buyers on one hand and, from a hands-on perspective, we’ve also refined some of our refurbishment techniques and procedures,” noted Lynn Nichols, CEO at Yingling. “Demonstrating the Ascend 172 has also allowed us to gain some insights into what flight schools and flying clubs consider to be the most important systems and components they’re looking for in the aircraft they plan to acquire.”
And while a new paint scheme and other “detail improvements” don’t show up to the “casual observer” as important, he noted that “probably the most notable and most often mentioned improvement we’ve incorporated is the addition of the Garmin panel,” which features the G500 EFIS, Sandia Quattro standby instrument, GTN-650 Global Positioning System (GPS), GMA-350 audio panel, GNC-255A Nav/Com, GTX-345 ADS-B In/Out transponder, LED lighting, and Rosen Sun Visors.
As the Ascend gains recognition and popularity, it would not be surprising to see Yingling expand its scope to other Cessna models, such as the 182 or other Cessna models.
You know I just don’t get it, all the negativity on these refabs. Look it’s very simple, if you don’t want to buy it or can’t afford it, just move on. Flying is an expensive sport no matter how you address it. The aircraft are not the problem, it’s all the avionics that drives the cost up. You buy an airplane for 35K and wind up putting 40K worth of electronics in it. Really?
And the FAA, our do nothing government organization that does nothing but cost us more money each and every year. They haven’t came out with a worthwhile program in over 20years, and they never will.
All I’m trying to say, each to his own, if I want to purchase a light Jet because I can afford it, so what. If you can’t afford a Refab 172, so what…. stop the complaining and buy a Aircoupe for 15K, it will still make you smile every time you lift off. That is, if you really enjoy flying.
Did you ever notice all these planes. ,no matter who gives it away always seems to be a struggling doctor ,lawyer or slum lord. That wins ,
You figured it out
I’ve owned a ’75 C172M for 32 years. I’ve put a factory new 160hp engine in it and am now in the beginning stages of doing an avionics overhaul … starting with installing a new ADS-B ‘out’ transponder. I WILL upgrade the airplane MY way for a LOT less money.
I paid $13.5K for this airplane when I bought it in 1985 and another $13.5K for the new engine which I scored for the same price when Piper couldn’t afford to pay for ’em for their Cadets. I have less than $35K in the airplane. But, I’m fortunate … I’m an A&P with avionics experience and do all my own work.
I tried talking to these folks at Airventure and SnF but they’re not interested in doing the earlier “M” model airplanes so … that’s that. It’s a good idea — for some — but likely NOT for private individual owners. I’m finding that a lot of overhaul and reman shops TALK a good story but don’t follow through. Pete S’s question is valid. When they start claiming they’ve done — say — 50 airplanes … THEN it’s a good idea.
Thanks Larry, I’ll bet they have sold very few, and in a way I hope I am wrong. You have by far the best model, the M model. As a FBO owner I’ve probably owned 25 – 30 172s over 4 decades and the M was the best IMHO. Thanks for your comments. Pete
I agree, Pete. Anyone reading this and lusting for a 172 … buy an “M” model. And — even tho I’m an A&P, I did NOT know until recently that among the four years that they built the “M” model, 1972-76, the ’76 model has a different instrument panel. It’s more like the “N” models with the fuel gages and etc on the L/H side. Also, the horizon and DG are vertically in line with the yoke shaft because Cessna lowered the control “T” behind the panel. In the ’73-75 models, that yoke comes out of the panel at a higher location so the primary flight instruments have to be offset left. Of the four years, the 1976 “M” model is the one to have … but they’re ALL good. The ’76 and newer have room to put a small glass panel in ’em, the pre-’76 models would be mighty tight. Also, the “M” models were the first to have the ‘camber lift’ wing cuff.
I would love to own a nice C182 but … why? Putting in the 160hp high compression O-320 in my 172 made a big difference in performance in every regime. In fact, the day I put first tested it, I took it up to … are ya ready … 17,500′ with no problem. They didn’t sell ~44,000 172’s because they didn’t get it right.
You are100% right Larry. The cuffed wing made a big difference, and the M still had 40 degrees of flap. A skilled pilot could land them incredibly short.
I discovered something else “different” about the ’76 “M” model, Pete. The ’76 has a POH while my ’75 just has one of those Owners Manuals. I never knew that before. I guess they were getting ready for the “N” models with the ’76 airplane ?? A friend has a ’76 airplane and I noticed the POH so I checked into it.
While perhaps a laudable effort for some,… These remanufactured C172s are no bargain. You can literally get twice the airplane for half the price if you do it yourself (e.g., managing the contracting out of the work to a good mechanic or shop), while investing in what really needs to be addressed. Plus, you can better configure the airplane to best suit your own mission need. I’ve seen many examples in doing this where combinations of useful features are not even available in brand new airframes coming off the Wichita or similar line. It also doesn’t need to be a C172. The same investment in some other type airframe can get you better end performance or capability match for your experience level and typical uses, for virtually the same investment, and likely with higher residual value. Nonetheless, it is a worthy goal, albeit sad it has to come to this. GA’s traditional OEMs for the most part (and to some extent this is also true for faulty policies of FAA, AOPA, and EAA) are now completely insensitive to the future of GA, except perhaps for self interest, or for maximizing high end turbine type ROI profit levels. Except for parts of the amateur built segment, the vision, innovation, and real interest in sustaining low end GA that we once had appears to simply be gone.
There were some number ? of Air Force T-41 ‘Mescalaro’ 172 trainers, parked at Davis Monthan ‘bone yard’. I have tried to contact someone in sales or distribution about the sale and availability of these moth balled planes. I cannot find any information or contact site for these stored airplanes. I have seen pictures of at least 10 to 20 of these airplanes. Possibly some of these planes could be refitted and reworked into flyable aircraft and trainers.
Great so these guys are going to buy up all the affordable 172s and then the 150/2s and resell them at a still unaffordable for most price? When did 200K become affordable? GA really needs a major shift in regulations to keep from spiraling into oblivion. Why can’t I buy a new IFR capable aircraft for 50-60K?
So the latest Ascend 172 sold for $244,000 not $159,000. It was a 1979 model 172 which sold for around $35,000 when it was new in 1979. based upon inflation that would be $118,000 in 2017 dollars. so they are wanting to sell you a remanufactured plane for 2.07 times the inflation adjusted cost of the plane when it was brand new 38 years ago! Is it just me or does something seem a bit off here.
A 172 with 700 hours needs to be remanufactured? That isn’t halfway to an engine overhaul! Is that a typo?
Rare to find a 40 year old airplane with only 700 hours. I suspect a type error. Regardless, Lycoming recommends no more than 12 Y E A R S between overhaul in addition to the 2000 hours of service recommendation.
If Lycoming had it their way they would require an overhaul between flights. Their engines are not as weak as they think they are and will last well beyond 12 years. They just want to sell overpriced parts.
Yeah … well I have 2200 hours and 50 years on an O-320-E2A in my Piper and it’s running just fine !! Isn’t Lycoming the same company that screwed up the rods on some new engines and then had a draconian AD issues? I have a “saying” … when engine parts get ‘married’ … leave ’em alone if it’s running OK.
Nonsense. Why pay more for a refirb antique with less performance than a new Light Sport equipped with state of the art avionics and made with state of the art materials for less money? And even better? An LSA can be flown forever on a Drivers License not even Basicmed is needed.
Flight Design http://flightdesignusa.com/ (these guys are also making a 4 seater, certified for half the money of a new 172)
Unless you are Instrument rated and want to exercise that authority, or plan to fly at night, or both. If the LSA is equiped with the correct instrumentation and lighting, it can be flown at night and it can be flown IFR. Have to at least have a Basic Med for that.
Oh, and if you really need to take more than one Pax, LSA isn’t big enough.
I wonder how many have been sold, not mentioned in article?
Man, this is brilliant. I want one and will begin arranging the financing. Fantastic.