And even worse, quite some T are TN, so look careful ;-).
boscomantico wrote:
It’s the current (well, the one in production for 15 years) variant of the 182 which has the “T” designator. This has nothing to do with being Turbo though. A stupid idea by Cessna IMHO not to skip the T model, since so many people (like you) get confused over this. So:Cessna 182T = normally aspirated
Cessna T182T = turbocharged
The one that I am looking to purchase is indeed “CESSNA T182T” so it’s a proper turbo :)
Cessna couldn’t have made more mess with this designation, the whole industry uses T for turbo, and they’ve managed to mess it up.. Even the ICAO type designator makes no sense with “C82S” of the turbo version.
It’s the current (well, the one in production for 15 years) variant of the 182 which has the “T” designator. This has nothing to do with being Turbo though. A stupid idea by Cessna IMHO not to skip the T model, since so many people (like you) get confused over this. So:
Cessna 182T = normally aspirated
Cessna T182T = turbocharged
PetitCessnaVoyageur wrote:
To add a few information to the subject, I have been proud owner of a C182T (which means the NA set-up of the Tango version) g1000 equipped, for 4 years now.
…
Four years later, including 2 full years reading EuroGA, I wonder how a Turbo “would have change the game” for the flights I intend.
Sorry for digging up a 3 years old message, but can you explain to me what you mean by this? Specificaly – 182T – NA setup of the turbo version? I was not aware that T meant anything but turbo, and either you have it or not?
You could buy the kit now. Probably would not lose value if it just sits in a box. Make sure you get the STC etc. Email me if you need contact details.
I am deffo older but the increased wisdom is mostly in the form of avoiding trouble 
To add a few information to the subject, I have been proud owner of a C182T (which means the NA set-up of the Tango version) g1000 equipped, for 4 years now.
At the time of the purchase, I was naive, hadn’t fly much on complex / performant aircraft (15 hours on an Arrow IV turbo), and when I inquired the seller man about the turbo version, he answered:
- that there were very few T182T on the used market (which is rather true in France and near countries)
- that I would burn 4gph more on average, which is what I also found in a document published by Cessna, with “real life numbers”. This is probably true if you spend much time in the low levels, what I was doing at the time (not IFR yet), and could expect anyway, since my goal was to rent the plane to take the ownership costs down… 4gph hugely impressed me, and it helped a lot to make me love the NA idea
- that a turbo is more fragile, prone to failure, doesn’t like dust and sand, etc…
Back then, I didn’t insist in this way, and gave up with the idea. The flights I performed on a NA version before the purchase [confidence: they made me tried another aircraft, because the one I was considering was not insured, and you know what: I didn’t protest ! Luckily, I only found minor faults on mine thereafter] convinced me, as the aircraft seemed to have huge amount of power, much more than the Arrow which was at the top of my known world.
I got my IFR rating on the aircraft in the following months (I already had the theory), and was still impressed by the performance, stability, and avionics installation.
Four years later, including 2 full years reading EuroGA, I wonder how a Turbo “would have change the game” for the flights I intend. Sometimes have regrets, not to be able to maintain climb performance higher up, but all in all, still thinks it allows me to do a lot. Ceiling is published at 18100ft, I climbed it to FL170 once, but it was miiiles in advance, to get above a layer I could see. I wouldn’t do the same if I was inside the layer.
One day, when I am older and wiser, as Peter, I may order a TKS kit to make this adorable plane even more capable. Actually, I spent a lot of time taking care of it, learning on the type, and would reluctantly change a perfectly known plane, for a potentially fully bogged one.
But I need to work hard for that, and then, CAV may have disappeared :-D This makes me think I could write to them, and ask to book one :-) (I will try to book for the 2016 price too ;-)
@Peter wrote:
So I am using a freelance installer
Have you made your decision ?
Is the installation forecast ?
That’s what I thought (Airplus Maintenance at EDNY) – see this thread
However from multiple reports it doesn’t look like Airplus are interested in doing TKS work anymore. They are busy elsewhere. So I am using a freelance installer.
The guy says that they have only one certified installation center in Friedrichshafen, Germany. He also mentioned a lead time of six months and a downtime of three weeks. I will definitely let this pass..
