R182 gear leak

Landing Fees

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Feb 9, 2018
Messages
387
Display Name

Display name:
Landing Fees
So our IA fixed a slow leak in the right actuator which was producing a very slow leak. My partner and considered it preventative but necessary. So I went up for her first test flight after the repair. Gear up, gear down, gear up. Smilez.

Then the ammeter was showing a significant discharge every 11-12 seconds, clearly the power pack was having a struggle maintaining pressure. I put the gear down and landed at a nearby airport. Whole bottom of the plane from the firewall back was red! Now I wish we didn't clean the belly after every flight. Red hydraulic fluid looks bad seeping between, her...well you know...mains. Sadz.

Called. Told to pull the CB and head back.

Initial diagnosis is something leaking on the power pack and the two drain holes. Planning on being poor. Hoping it is a simple o-ring fix vs a power-pack rebuild. Fingers crossed.
 
Are you sure you do not have a nose actuator hose leak?

Don't know yet. Initially he ruled out the nose gear because the leak was behind the firewall. I pulled out the seats and was waiting for a call. Occasionally we have stumbled upon things that weren't logged like when we found the right side rudder pedals reversed.
 
Don't know yet. Initially he ruled out the nose gear because the leak was behind the firewall. I pulled out the seats and was waiting for a call. Occasionally we have stumbled upon things that weren't logged like when we found the right side rudder pedals reversed.

A pump is not as big an expense as you might think.
 
Hey, look on the bright side. It's not a cracked pivot, and those are way more expensive than the power pack!
 
Do you remember all that fuel costs you saved by having the retract? now you are going to have a chance to spend that money.
 
Do you remember all that fuel costs you saved by having the retract? now you are going to have a chance to spend that money.

I only pay 50% so only half-way in the poorhouse.
 
Nah, powerpack overhauls are cheap, especially in the context of a retract cessna high wing. It's those gear pivots that would really put you on the poor house and end your flying season for the year, early. Something ridiculous for new casting, per side. Ditto for actuators, way out in the bozosphere. a 2AMU installed powerpack job is peanuts, ditto for hose/gaskets replacement.

Nooooo thanks. That's what I call jumping the shark. I'll take a fixed gear with that retarded AirPlains conversion and run around at twin engine trainer fuel flows to go a buck sixty, seeing how one casting covers an engine overhaul. I suppose we have found the one instance where the measly cube root power is actually a worthwhile manner of increasing cruise speed :D

With the gear up I have done 150 at 14gph at 6500, but I might have been in ground effect. ;)
 
I have an R182 and I worried when I saw the pivot prices. Luckily, I have the older model R182 with the steel pivots. I haven't heard much about steel pivots failing. I have no idea why Cessna decided to go with the aluminum pivots a couple years into production.
 
I have an R182 and I worried when I saw the pivot prices. Luckily, I have the older model R182 with the steel pivots. I haven't heard much about steel pivots failing. I have no idea why Cessna decided to go with the aluminum pivots a couple years into production.

When we were shopping for an R182, all I heard was "the 1978's have steel pivots that don't crack, but they have bladder tanks. The 1979's and later have wet wings, but aluminum pivots that crack. Pick your poison."

We ended up with a 1978, but only after the brakes went soft a year in and we discovered the fluid was leaking through a cracked pivot, did I find that we're one of the lucky 100 or so that fall into a serial number range after the pivots were changed to aluminum, but before the fuel tanks were changed to wet wings. :mad2:
 
When we were shopping for an R182, all I heard was "the 1978's have steel pivots that don't crack, but they have bladder tanks. The 1979's and later have wet wings, but aluminum pivots that crack. Pick your poison."

We ended up with a 1978, but only after the brakes went soft a year in and we discovered the fluid was leaking through a cracked pivot, did I find that we're one of the lucky 100 or so that fall into a serial number range after the pivots were changed to aluminum, but before the fuel tanks were changed to wet wings. :mad2:

What did you end up doing with the aircraft? Was it a short ownership stint on account of this issue or what? How did you go about the repair? People seldom go the new route on these parts for the obvious reason$$$, so it's salvage city or overhaul/exchange the casting at still unbelievable bozospheric prices in order to get these folding legs repaired.
 
When we were shopping for an R182, all I heard was "the 1978's have steel pivots that don't crack, but they have bladder tanks. The 1979's and later have wet wings, but aluminum pivots that crack. Pick your poison."

We ended up with a 1978, but only after the brakes went soft a year in and we discovered the fluid was leaking through a cracked pivot, did I find that we're one of the lucky 100 or so that fall into a serial number range after the pivots were changed to aluminum, but before the fuel tanks were changed to wet wings. :mad2:

78 182RGs are an undesirable model in the market because the later models have long range tanks. Also 210s and 182RGs are not as prone to the same issues as the 172RG and cracks are very uncommon.

I flew a79 182rg regularly for 20 years. It now has 10000 hours on the airframe and had one cracked pivot, which occurred 15 years ago.
 
Last edited:
What did you end up doing with the aircraft? Was it a short ownership stint on account of this issue or what? How did you go about the repair? People seldom go the new route on these parts for the obvious reason$$$, so it's salvage city or overhaul/exchange the casting at still unbelievable bozospheric prices in order to get these folding legs repaired.

We still have it in the club. Once you drop that kind of coin fixing something, you want to enjoy it for a while, right?

Ce$$na wanted $19,000 for a replacement. Oh, and a 4 month lead time, right through prime flying season. So instead, we sent it off to these guys who have an STCed repair process for the pivots. $4K and 5 weeks, but much more reasonable. No issues since then.

The cause was likely that the gear legs weren't quite up against the receptacle, which puts all landing stresses onto the thin piece of the pivot that goes into it. And yes, we did have a pre-buy done, the guy just didn't catch that.

78 182RGs are an undesirable model in the market because the later models have long range tanks. Also 210s and 182RGs are not as prone to the same issues as the 172RG and cracks are very uncommon.

Still has 5 hours, assuming 15gph... Long enough range tanks!
 
No leak found. Going to reswing the gear now that I have removed every interior piece.
 
We still have it in the club. Once you drop that kind of coin fixing something, you want to enjoy it for a while, right?

Ce$$na wanted $19,000 for a replacement. Oh, and a 4 month lead time, right through prime flying season. So instead, we sent it off to these guys who have an STCed repair process for the pivots. $4K and 5 weeks, but much more reasonable. No issues since then.

The cause was likely that the gear legs weren't quite up against the receptacle, which puts all landing stresses onto the thin piece of the pivot that goes into it. And yes, we did have a pre-buy done, the guy just didn't catch that.



Still has 5 hours, assuming 15gph... Long enough range tanks!

We have 80 gallon tanks. Routinely burn about 10 gallons at 10K. Longer range than my bladder.
 
I haven't heard much about steel pivots failing. I have no idea why Cessna decided to go with the aluminum pivots a couple years into production.
I'll take "what are profits for $1000?" Alex"
 
When we were shopping for an R182, all I heard was "the 1978's have steel pivots that don't crack, but they have bladder tanks. The 1979's and later have wet wings, but aluminum pivots that crack. Pick your poison."

I know the bladder tanks (even long range ones) don't have the capacity of the integral tanks (wet wings) on later models. However, I'll take a bladder tank any day over the integral tanks. When the integral tanks leak it can get expensive. Some experienced mechanics wont even touch it.

Back when I was an A&P I worked on integral fuel tanks. It's really an awful job. Now I'm an engineer (nothing motivates you to get an engineering degree like a crappy fuel cell job). I design aircraft hydraulic components and a significant percentage of our designs are for Cessna. When the time comes to replace one of these crazy expensive parts I'll certainly explore the owner produced option.
 
Back when I was an A&P I worked on integral fuel tanks. It's really an awful job. Now I'm an engineer (nothing motivates you to get an engineering degree like a crappy fuel cell job). I design aircraft hydraulic components and a significant percentage of our designs are for Cessna. When the time comes to replace one of these crazy expensive parts I'll certainly explore the owner produced option.

IMHO small aircraft would really benefit if owner engineers helped everyone down that road. Just take the look at the aft tailcone bulkhead on the 182 series, that bugger is an eye watering $4k or so, for about $2 in aluminum, maybe 3 hours of labor and a $100 heat treatment after forming.
 
Leak fixed, an o-ring. Got confusing with the sheer amount of fluid and wasn’t leaking until the swung the gear. I think she flies faster with the gear up than anything on the planet. Cruised around 18/21 @ 7.5 gph for two hours.
 
Great to hear it's up and flying, good on ya
 
I'm a fixed pitch flyer, is that 1800 RPM & 21" MP? That burn rate is right down there with my O-300 172. Congrats on finding the cheap fix!
 
Leak fixed, an o-ring. Got confusing with the sheer amount of fluid and wasn’t leaking until the swung the gear. I think she flies faster with the gear up than anything on the planet. Cruised around 18/21 @ 7.5 gph for two hours.

Do you know what o-ring was the culprit?
 
I'm a fixed pitch flyer, is that 1800 RPM & 21" MP? That burn rate is right down there with my O-300 172. Congrats on finding the cheap fix!

18”/2100RPM. We start at 5600’ here so I was cruising around 7500.
 
IMHO small aircraft would really benefit if owner engineers helped everyone down that road. Just take the look at the aft tailcone bulkhead on the 182 series, that bugger is an eye watering $4k or so, for about $2 in aluminum, maybe 3 hours of labor and a $100 heat treatment after forming.

I agree with that sentiment. However, onerous requirements to get an STC or PMA make it too difficult to do anything beyond owner produced parts. I think the most someone could do is share the detail drawings he used for his own owner produced part. Then some other owner could oversee the manufacture of that part, thereby being compliant with the requirements.

A drawback to that would be public nit picking of your part (as in these online forums). Under the scrutiny of the wrong person with authority, it could have expensive consequences. Each designer has different notions of best practices. Now give that guy authority and you're stuck on his roller coaster.
 
I agree with that sentiment. However, onerous requirements to get an STC or PMA make it too difficult to do anything beyond owner produced parts. I think the most someone could do is share the detail drawings he used for his own owner produced part. Then some other owner could oversee the manufacture of that part, thereby being compliant with the requirements.

A drawback to that would be public nit picking of your part (as in these online forums). Under the scrutiny of the wrong person with authority, it could have expensive consequences. Each designer has different notions of best practices. Now give that guy authority and you're stuck on his roller coaster.

You don't need FAA/PMA for owner produced parts. What you need is adequate data to show that the part you made is equal to the part you are replacing. There are all kinds of metal analysis labs that can tell you what the part is made of, temper/hardness etc. You can literally cut strips out of unknown sheet and send it to them and they will tell you what it is.

That would be for simple sheet metal parts and not something like a 182RG landing gear pivot but that's why you want a metallurgist type engineer to help with such projects. Nose strut tubes come to mind.

I'm not an engineer. Google "FAA reverse engineering parts" you'll be surprised what guidance you find.

A side note, a whole lot of aftermarket PMA certificates show "test and computations" as the basis for approval, those had to have been reverse engineered.
 
You don't need FAA/PMA for owner produced parts. What you need is adequate data to show that the part you made is equal to the part you are replacing. There are all kinds of metal analysis labs that can tell you what the part is made of, temper/hardness etc. You can literally cut strips out of unknown sheet and send it to them and they will tell you what it is.
.

I agree you don't need PMA for owner produced parts. What I was getting at, the only way an engineer owner could help other owners would be to share drawings or devote the time and money to get a PMA or STC to sell finished product. If there was financial benefit to be had to produce an STC or PMA on these overpriced parts I think someone would have done it by now (McFarlane for example).

As far as the analysis, we do that all day long at work. We can check chemistry, hardness, measure on CMM in house. I think when the moment comes to replace one of these complex and expensive parts I would be in good shape. However, the current laws prevent me from helping fellow owners beyond sharing drawings, and that comes with risk of the public picking apart your owner produced part.
 
Back
Top