Upgrading from C172SP to 182S

Jay Honeck wrote:


I sure wouldn't dream of coming in behind the power curve, hitting an
unpaved strip and locking up the brakes, though. I've just got too much
money tied up in our plane to treat it like that...

Treat it like what? Nothing happens to the plane.

john smith wrote:

That's just because you fly a nose heavy Piper. :-))


Atlas IS nose-heavy, compared to our old Warrior. No different than
comparing a 172 and a 182, really...and the performance difference is about
the same, too. It's just got that wing thingy on the proper side of the
fuselage!
I sure wouldn't dream of coming in behind the power curve, hitting an
unpaved strip and locking up the brakes, though. I've just got too much
money tied up in our plane to treat it like that...


You are missing his point. At 55 kts

Kts? Kts is for airline pilots. That's 55 mph IAS.


he is still at minimum 10 kts above

Stall is around mid 40's mph.


aft cg gross weight stall.

It's a 182, we're nowhere near aft cg.


A
high sink rate with your Piper may punch the main gear up through the
top of the wing. On the Cessna it will splay outward and propel the
aircraft back into the air.

If you do it right it doesn't bounce at all. If you bounce you're
airspeed was too high. The lower you're airspeed the higher the sink
rate can be.

The 172SP is 180 hp, the 182 is 230 hp.



..Blueskies. wrote:


--



The XP is a 180 hp, right? And the 182s is 225 I think, so you will need a high performance signoff (power down, prop
down, mix down; mix up, prop up, power up). Be sure you know the avionics well, also. Do some sitting inside and
pretending if you can to familiarize yourself with the layout, remember to do the cowl flaps, use the checklists...

IMHO, the 182 feels more solid, comes down 'easier', get up and out with more authority (the CS prop!)...

"Newps" wrote in message
...


Kts? Kts is for airline pilots. That's 55 mph IAS.

MPH? How old do you think this plane is?

Michael Ware wrote:
"Newps" wrote in message
...


Kts? Kts is for airline pilots. That's 55 mph IAS.


MPH? How old do you think this plane is?

I was giving you real world speeds. In your case look at the inside ring.

In article ,
Newps wrote:

Stall is around mid 40's mph.

aft cg gross weight stall.

It's a 182, we're nowhere near aft cg.

Newps... it's a disclaimer. Many pilots do not know the referenced
speeds are for the aft cg, gross weight condition. The do not know how
to calculate speeds at lower weights and other cg's.

On Fri, 26 May 2006 10:21:03 -0600, Newps wrote:

Kts? Kts is for airline pilots. That's 55 mph IAS.

Cool. Both my club's 182s (and the two 172s) are airliners.

I just hope I'm not expected to provide in-flight meals and movies.

- Andrew

On Fri, 26 May 2006 10:23:32 -0600, Newps wrote:

The 172SP is 180 hp, the 182 is 230 hp.

172XPs, as far as I know, are 210 HP. But the OP wrote of the 172SP,
which is 180 HP (like older Skyhawks with the Superhawk upgrade).

I suspect that Blueskies wrote "XP" where "SP" was intended.

- Andrew

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message news
On Fri, 26 May 2006 10:23:32 -0600, Newps wrote:

The 172SP is 180 hp, the 182 is 230 hp.

172XPs, as far as I know, are 210 HP. But the OP wrote of the 172SP,
which is 180 HP (like older Skyhawks with the Superhawk upgrade).

I suspect that Blueskies wrote "XP" where "SP" was intended.

- Andrew


Yea, what you said. I know the XP was CS prop, etc.

I sure wouldn't dream of coming in behind the power curve, hitting an
unpaved strip and locking up the brakes, though. I've just got too much
money tied up in our plane to treat it like that...

Treat it like what? Nothing happens to the plane.

Nothing bad happens to your aircraft when you lock up the brakes on a gravel
runway, with the prop spinning? In a 182?

No stone chips in the prop? No flat-spotted or gouged tires? No stones
tossed into the paint?

Consider the added stress on the airframe. Motor mounts in particular are
going to be under great duress in a landing like you described. The
nosewheel structure will also be heavily stressed. Do that particular
landing "procedure" incorrectly in a 182, and you'll be buying a new
firewall. Many Skylane owners before you have discovered just how fragile
that nosegear-to-firewall connection really is.

I'm glad you have off-road fun with your plane, but you probably shouldn't
suggest a guy that is new to 182s do the same. What you described doing
with your plane is a high-skill, relatively high-risk game, and is probably
more suited for a tail dragger. It surely isn't suited for a newbie 182
driver, like the O.P.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"