182 Checkout

Parabellum

New Member
Whats up fellas. Now that I have my IR, my next task in the short run is probably going to be a checkout in a C182 when I save up enough money. For those of you who have 182 experience already, I'm wondering how its handling compares to that of a 172? Obviously the performance is greater, but how long does it typically take people to learn the constant speed prop? The only other airplane I've flown other than the 172 is the 152, which I had no problem getting checked out in at all. I still fly those alot because they're cheap to rent and are good time builders. But I think the 182 could come in real handy when flying long cross country trips.

Thanks guys...
 

sbav8r

New Member
You shouldn't have any problems at all, the 182 is a very docile aircraft. I would imagine the school has a minimum on training in the 182, which should be around 4-8 hours before solo with no prior high performance/ complex experience. This is mainly for insurance and that should be more than enough time too get comfortable with the plane.

Warning: After you fly the 182 your going to be spoiled, it's going to be real hard to get back in the 152.
 

I_Money

Moderator
It is tough to say, when I got checked out in a 172 it took 5 hours (as per insurance requirements). It takes you a little time not only becoming comfortable with the prop, but also the heavier, faster, better performing airplane. The prop becomes quite easy, however it does take practice and can become very busy when you are being told to climb then level off then climb again, etc!! I would say 3-5 hours and then you will be fine with it.
The good thing when you start flying other airplanes; multi, 206's, 172RG's it will all be really easy.
 

JediNein

New Member
Congrats on the Instrument Rating!

Stepping into a C182, there's about six things to remember:
1. Lots of right rudder for takeoff. Add the power slowly and smoothly.
2. The airplane is *very* nose heavy on landing. Trim and backpressure. First bounce, go around. The 182 *will* do a prop strike on a porpoise.
3. A C182 lightly loaded and fully loaded are two different airplanes. Try to get into both situations during your checkout training.
4. Descent planning and engine management is more important than in the 152, especially IFR.
5. Just because it's a high performance airplane doesn't mean that you can depart safely off a mountain airport in the summer with full fuel, luggage, and four fat guys in the plane.
6. When it's 70 degrees out and humidity above 20%, watch out for carb ice. The 182 has a habit of complete power failure due to carb ice right about 50' AGL after takeoff. Those Continental Engines *WILL* ice up.

The 182 is one of those all-around excellent airplanes. It goes fast. It carries cargo. It leaps off the runway and climbs like a homesick angel. It responds to control inputs briskly. Treated well they fly to TBO and beyond consistently.

Fly SAFE!
Jedi Nein
 

racemey

Well-Known Member
I have flown a 182 about 90% of the time after getting my private. Compared to a 172, the controls feel a bit heavier and the nose is heavier, allowing you to drop like a rock with full flaps if you need to (careful not to land on the nosewheel first!). It is a pretty easy transition to make. The constant speed prop is no biggie, just keep it part of the checklist and there will be no problem. The 182 I fly is fuel injected, so I basically swapped carb heat knob for the c/s prop knob. As sbav8r said, once you fly a 182, you won't want to go back to a 172 or especially the 152. After I got checked out in the 182, I went and rented my club's 152 and I have not flown it since. Have fun with the transition!
 

Alchemy

Partner, Ally, Friend
Just out of curiosity, what year model do you plan on checking out in? I've got about 30 hours in a 1978 182RG, I don't think there's a really huge performance difference between the RG and fixed gear versions so I'll give you my opinions. A lot of this may or may not apply depending on the differences between the plane I've been flying and your 182.

The Constant Speed prop doesn't take as long to learn as you might think. In the 182, you really don't even use the prop control that much. The prop control at full forward gives you about 2400 RPM, and that's the RPM setting you'll takeoff and climb out with. You can even cruise at that 2400 RPM if you want, so in theory you could go the whole flight without messing with the prop control at all. On most flights, the only thing you'll do with the prop control is take a hundred or two RPM out for cruise and make sure you put it up to back up to max RPM before you land.

As you might be aware, the throttle will control the Manifold Pressure in the 182 instead of the RPM like it was in the 172's. The main difference here is that you will need to reduce power slightly when you reach 400-500 ft AGL. The reason for this is that you do not want to keep the manifold pressure at a setting higher than the RPM's for very long, or you risk damaging the engine. However, when taking off from high altitude airports you may find that you cannot obtain a manifold pressure setting higher than 23" or so, in which case you would execute the entire climb at full throttle.

The other thing you'll need to learn to deal with is cowl flaps. These will always need to be open during taxi, takeoff, and climb. You'll close them for descents, landing and anytime you're going to operating at low power settings. You should use the oil temperature gauge and cylinder head temperature gauges (if you have them) as a guide to cowl flap use during cruise. I usually leave them halfway open for cruise.

Handling wise, you'll find it to be more nose heavy than the 172/150. You'll need more back pressure in the flare and might also need more pressure to rotate/climb out before you add in trim. In cruise, it handles very favorably compared to its smaller cousins. The best analogy I can draw is that the 172 feels like you're driving on a dirt road and the 182 feels like you're driving down a paved road. It just has a more stable, less kite-ish feel to it.

I strongly prefer the 182 to the 172 for cross country trips, because the avionics are usually better (a big plus for IFR), it's faster (the RG does 145+ knots), has a longer range (750 NM with the 75 gallon tanks), and has a greater useful load (1200 lbs vs 800 lbs). All in all I'd say it took me about 5-6 hours to become competent enough to fly the 182RG on my own. Without the gear you might be able to do it 4-5 hours or less. I'm sure whoever your renting from has insurance requirements though. Good Luck.

Sorry for the length of this discertation, but I hope it helped.
 

Parabellum

New Member
Thanks for the info guys. The FBO I fly with has a 1976 C182 with a fixed gear. I believe it has an IFR approved GPS as well, so its definately well equipped. Now, another question. How does shooting instrument approaches, specifically ILS approaches differ from a 172? Is shooting approaches during checkout training even advisable or is it better to wait until you get more comfortable with the airplane first?
 

Derg

Cap, Roci
Staff member
Might want to get MikeD's attention.

Mike's father owns the "ultimate" and I do mean "ultimate" Cessna 182.
 

Alchemy

Partner, Ally, Friend
[ QUOTE ]
How does shooting instrument approaches, specifically ILS approaches differ from a 172? Is shooting approaches during checkout training even advisable or is it better to wait until you get more comfortable with the airplane first?

[/ QUOTE ]

There really aren't a lot of big differnces. Here are a few minor things worth mentioning regarding IMC ops:

The 182 may have an HSI and/or a different brand of nav/com radios than the 172. Most of the time the radios will be nicer and more user friendly than what you'll find in 172's, so once you get the hang of them they're easier to use. An HSI is extremely helpful, as it effectively takes one instrument (VOR/ILS indicator) out of your scan.

The Vspeeds and approach speeds are all different. I usually go for 120 knots groundspeed on the ILS in the 182, whereas 90-100 was more common in the 172. I still leave the flaps retracted in the 182 until landing is assured.

You might want to be more conservative about your use of carbeurator heat than you were in the 172/150. The carb heat tends to REALLY make the engine run rough, at least in the skylane I've been flying. I usually don't turn it on unless I have the Manifold pressure set below 15" and I can be pretty much assured of making the runway. The carb heat always makes me nervous about the engine quitting.

I haven't had the pleasure of shooting any GPS approaches yet, but from what I understand it's basically the same as a VOR approach. You just use a nav selector which makes the HSI/ILS/VOR indicator work off the GPS rather than the NAV radio. An IFR cert. GPS is definitely a great thing to have, but I reccomend you do at least 4 or 5 of them with a CFII before attempting them on your own.

I don't see anything wrong with shooting approaches in the 182 during your checkout after you get take offs, landings, V speeds and emergency ops down well. It's actually pretty smart if you plan on using the plane in IMC right away.
 

eodfe

New Member
Paul, congrats on the IR rating, feels great doesn't it? Just curious, what/where did you do most of your approaches? I did the ILS and VOR DME at Jeffco and then the NDB at Cennential.

As for the 182, I did my long IFR trip to Las Vegas in the 182, it was the first time I flew an airplane with a functional GPS, I'm spoiled. It was a newer S model and it had a lot of bells and whistles. The 182 I like the most is our clubs Turbo 182, it has a lot of power compared to the 172. It only took me a couple of hours to get used to the 182. The controls feel heavier and I had to get used to not pulling power as quick as you can with the 172 during landing. The prop really is a no brainer, just remember to do the checklists and don't forget about the cowl flaps. When the summer comes and the 180hp planes are grounded after it gets to hot, I plan on using the 182 alot.
 

davetheflyer

New Member
I love 182s!

My transition was easy, but then I already a lot of complex experience by then. The 182 handles very much like the other Cessna singles, but with a lot more power and stability (not to mention elbow room!
). The 182 was the patrol plane that I used for looking for forest fires. It has a good cruise speed, but can get really slow if you want to loiter for a while.

Think off the constant speed prop like a manual transmission. One setting for max performance on takeoff, bring it back for efficiency and speed in cruise, then push it forward before landing in case you have to go around. It shouldn't take more than a few hours to master.

Have fun!
 

Jason

Well-Known Member
I also love the 182's! You'll have a blast. My only 182 experience is in the new ones. I love the avionics. It had a better avionics package than the Challenger 600 we had. The autopilot was awesome. Ton of power. Very stable - great IFR airplane. In my opinion one of the best (if not the best) GA airplane out there. As others have said it is a fairly nose heavy airplane on landing. I've never used full flaps in it except during training - they simply aren't needed.

Jason
 

sbav8r

New Member
[ QUOTE ]
Mike's father owns the "ultimate" and I do mean "ultimate" Cessna 182.



[/ QUOTE ]

Mike please do tell. What did you put a turbine in it or something?
 

aloft

New Member
Sorry to dredge up an old thread, but I just have to rave for a moment about my first experience flying a C-182 yesterday. All I can say is WOW!!! That thing is AWESOME!!! Handles like a dream, and really wasn't at all difficult to land properly. The only real gotchas are prop speed and cowl flaps management, which will both take a bit of getting used to, but are not a huge deal. So after some basic air work and several trips around the pattern (as well as that day-long hi-perf ground school I mentioned earlier), I now have a fresh high performance endorsement in my logbook!

The only downside is that it's gonna be REAL hard to get back into a 172 now, dangit!
 
Top