Upgrading from C172SP to 182S

Hi,

My fractional 172SP had an unfortunate "incident" with another pilot and is
grounded for the foreseeable future. I am planning to upgrade to a 182S in
the fractional fleet.

Any comments and/or suggestions to make the transition as smooth as
possible?

Thanks,

Marc CYBW

--

"Marc CYBW" wrote in message
news:uF7dg.35084$Qq.24307@clgrps12...
My fractional 172SP had an unfortunate "incident" with another pilot and
is grounded for the foreseeable future. I am planning to upgrade to a 182S
in the fractional fleet.

Any comments and/or suggestions to make the transition as smooth as
possible?

A few hours of training with an instructor who is a frequent flyer of the
182 should be sufficient. There are few more switches and levers to deal
with, and the plane flies a little more "heavy" (more stable, less
responsive, higher control forces), but otherwise the 182 is just as easy to
fly as the 172, and quite similar in handling.

The biggest issue will be getting used to the higher speeds. Fortunately,
you can fly the 182 almost as slow as the 172, so if you're having trouble
keeping up with the airplane (that is, keeping yourself mentally far enough
ahead with respect to where the airplane is heading), just fly slower.

Depending on your previous experience, you may want to read up on constant
speed propellers. I can't recall...are the 172SP and 182S both
fuel-injected? You might need to brush up on the fuel system too. But
still, otherwise the transition is unlikely to be difficult at all.

Pete

A few hours of training with an instructor who is a frequent flyer of the
182 should be sufficient. There are few more switches and levers to deal
with, and the plane flies a little more "heavy" (more stable, less
responsive, higher control forces), but otherwise the 182 is just as easy
to fly as the 172, and quite similar in handling.

I found the two birds to handle quite differently. The 172 feels positively
sprightly compared to a 182, which is more truck-like and nose-heavy. The
182 is really a "trim" plane, meaning that you need to keep that electric
trim working throughout all phases of flight -- especially on landing.

Don't try to arm wrestle it into the flare -- just be ready to roll the
trim. It takes quite a heave to flare an improperly trimmed 182, while it's
quite easy to pull this same maneuver in a 172 without trim.

Which is not to say the 182 is at all difficult to fly -- it's not. Be
ready for that nose-heaviness, trim accordingly, and it's a simple plane to
fly. (One note of caution: Given the number of firewalls that have been
replaced in the 182 fleet, it's safe to say that a lot of pilots have been
surprised by the nose-heaviness. Remember: TRIM!)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Jay Honeck wrote:
Which is not to say the 182 is at all difficult to fly -- it's not. Be
ready for that nose-heaviness, trim accordingly, and it's a simple plane to
fly. (One note of caution: Given the number of firewalls that have been
replaced in the 182 fleet, it's safe to say that a lot of pilots have been
surprised by the nose-heaviness. Remember: TRIM!)


I never really liked the C-182 even though on paper it's pretty much an ideal
airplane. As people say, if you can get the doors closed, it should fly. But I
always found it heavy... even more so than the C-210. At least the C-210 didn't
feel so nose heavy because there's more bird behind you than the C-182 has.

I don't think it flies anything like the C-172 although a Skyhawk pilot should
feel pretty much at home in it. Cessna is Cessna, after all.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:Sz9dg.989012$xm3.907250@attbi_s21...
I found the two birds to handle quite differently. The 172 feels
positively sprightly compared to a 182, which is more truck-like and
nose-heavy.

I guess you need to work out.

I did mention the heavier control forces, but really...aside from that, the
two planes really are quite similar. There's a lot more to handling
qualities than just how much force you have to use.

The 182 is really a "trim" plane, meaning that you need to keep that
electric trim working throughout all phases of flight -- especially on
landing.

Nice you had a 182 with electric trim. None of the ones I've flown had it.

But anyway, it's not like you can ignore the trim on the 172 either. Any
airplane flies SO much better if you include the trim as part of your
control of the aircraft. If you've flown your approach correctly and have
the trim already set properly, even in the 182 the final flare does not
require that much back-pressure.

Yes, you can flare it with the trim, but there's really no reason the trim
should be that far off in the first place. And in a 182 without electric
trim (there are lots of them out there), you really ought to be looking out
the front window, rather than leaning down for the flare.

Pete

On Wed, 24 May 2006 23:13:17 -0700, Peter Duniho wrote:

[...]
But anyway, it's not like you can ignore the trim on the 172 either. Any
airplane flies SO much better if you include the trim as part of your
control of the aircraft.

After transitioning to the 182, I found I'd a finer touch on the trim. A
little out of trim in a 172 is a non-issue. But it gets downright
uncomfortable with the few extra knots of the 182.

If you've flown your approach correctly and have
the trim already set properly, even in the 182 the final flare does not
require that much back-pressure.

I agree. I just did 9 T&Gs yesterday in a 182 getting back my "I'm going
to touch down on that spot there" landings, and I never used the trim
again once I'd trimmed for final approach speed.

[...]
you really ought to be
looking out the front window, rather than leaning down for the flare.

Laugh One bad habit I had to lose was the "looking down". I didn't do
that for trim, but I did for the cowl flaps. I've no idea why.

- Andrew

"Andrew Gideon" wrote

Laugh One bad habit I had to lose was the "looking down". I didn't do
that for trim, but I did for the cowl flaps. I've no idea why.

That's easy!

The cowl flap is down on the bottom of the plane, so you were looking down
to see if it were really opening! g
--
Jim in NC

Besides the nose-heavy feel others have mentioned, the only important
differences are in landing, and there are two things to remember: 1)
Trim really determines airspeed. 2) Airspeed is everything.

Pay close attention to your speed on final. Don't come in too slow or
you may lose elevator control. Coming in too fast isn't too big a
deal. The 182 is a very forgiving airplane, but it's NOT as forgiving
as the 172. If you have the trim set wrong, you're more likely to have
a bad landing.

I made exactly the same transition some years ago - from a 172S to a
182S, and my impression is in some ways opposite to the others listed
here. The 182S was the first constant-speed prop I had flown, and I found
the plane took off like a rocket! The torque and acceleration on takeoff
took some getting used to for me. After this, you will find pretty much
the same panel, and it will not be much more difficult to fly. You'll
have the advantage of getting where you're going faster, and though
per-hour operating costs will be higher, per-mile costs are only slightly
greater. If you are not yet used to the constant-speed prop, this will be
by far the most significant issue for you, including the use of the
appropriate instrumentation (manifold pressure and RPM, instead of just
RPM). Landing? Yes, it's heavier, and you will quickly learn to take
advantage of the electric trim right under your left thumb, unless you
want your landings to take the place of your weekly workout at the gym.
If you don't have the luck I had - to land the plane for the first time
with a 25kt crosswind- it should be no big trick.

I knew the plane was heavier, so I was ready for that. You know it, and
you're ready for it. I knew about the CS prop, and had studied that too.
What surprised me was the torque on takeoff.

GF

I have to strongly disagree with some of the nose-heavy comments
reported here.
Yes, the 182 is nose heavy compared to the 172, but it is not THAT heavy.
Yes, it is a very stable airplane and can be flown from the time the
wheels are off the ground to the the roundout with trim.
When trimmed properly, the control forces at roundout are not excessive.
I use my left thumb and forefinger to pull on the left side of the yoke
and hold pitch attitude for landing. My right hand is on the throttle,
with power off.
You have to fly the propper airspeed. Most pilots fly too fast.
The 182, fully loaded with aft most cg is fine at 70 kts.
With two people and no baggage, I fly final trimmed at 60 kts with 30
deg flaps. Over the threshhold, I am at 55 kts. The airplane stalls at
45 kts, gross weight, with the cg at the aft limit.
I fly taildraggers, so perhaps I have the advantage of training in
keeping the nose high on landing. It does not require super human
strength to move the yoke to keep the nosewheel off the ground when
landing a 182.
I currently fly both an R and S model 182 and have around 250 hours in
the Q, R and S models.