Those Alaskan aeroplanes, might not look pretty cosmetically but I have spoken to some big operators up there who have 20-20 Cessna’s. They are all about the Cessna Service Kits. Just like the SK for the lower wing strut attach points. Generally, they seem to know all the areas of concern in the aircraft they operate. If you ever want to talk to or buy parts from a Cessna genius – http://www.robairrepair.com/
Worth noting also that guy with the 182P has the P-Ponk engine which potentially another 45hp for 4lbs of extra weight.
A stock 182 P/Q is a wonderful performer, and yes, a Horton or Sportsman STOL kit help noticeably. VG’s are also helpful, though not if you’ll have to clear snow off the wings. The AoA is another topic, there are two sides to that story.
182 owners should make themselves aware of Cessna service bulletin SEB95-19, likely soon to be an AD for the wing strut bulkhead cracking. I found such a crack in a 182Q with 3380 TTSN. There’s a kit to install to carry wing strut loads across this vulnerable area. The service letter also applies to other strut braced Cessnas, though not all.
Note that in this photo, I have drilled off the wing strut attach lug for clarity, and removed the boot cowl skin, (which was damaged anyway) to get a better photo.
For gravel operations, the leading edge of the horizontal stabilizer can take a beating. I saw this gravel mod when I stopped for fuel in Alaska once:
Sportsman STOL, MT Prop, VG’s maybe also adding to the party. He’s also rocking the split induction rubber and jubilee clip mod, that I’ve been known to sport from time to time.
Another video starring a 182P by Backcountry182 – Other than the AoA indicator, beefed up nose fork and larger tyres this aircraft is stock.
Another good video on the off airport ability of this type
Dimensions are the same, although the Lycoming and spinner may have lengthened the type by a few inches. The empty weight coming in at 200 lbs more is a bit of a mystery – perhaps there has been structural beefing up, but not aware of it.
Max RPM is lower? With better cabin finish giving a smoother feel?
The 182S feels like a bigger aeroplane than a 182P/Q etc… Don’t know why that is. I think you would land in much tighter spots with the older aircraft somehow. The one thing I’ve noticed is that the price of annual maintenance on a new build one is similar to the cost of the older one. The 182S is lovely to fly, smooth, no big drop in rpm pulling out the carb heat over the sea…. lots of reasons it’s better once you are not trying to emulate backcountry182 dude off youtube.
PetitCessnaVoyageur wrote:
It has a Hartzell propeller which is different from standard McCauley
I wonder what it brings.
It has a Hartzell propeller which is different from standard McCauley
I wonder what it brings.
Robert I saw this one and it’s definitely much better than the original one I wrote in first post… 25k extra for 25 years younger plane seems like a good deal
