- Joined
- Oct 28, 2014
- Messages
- 5,142
- Display Name
- Jack Fleetwood
Clouds formed on the horizon about 15 minutes before sunset, which cut my time short, but we got it done.
Not only do I own and have about 2500 hours in Cessna 182RGs, I was a club aThe retractable Cessnas look good in the air, but that retract mechanism is an absolute nightmare to maintain!
I would agree. I put over 1,200 hours on my '81 182-RG and the only issue I ever had with the main gear was replacing the swivel fittings for the brake lines.Not only do I own and have about 2500 hours in Cessna 182RGs, I was a club a
Maintenance officer on a 182RG that had over 10,000 TT before leaving the club. I completely disagree with your comment - useless you think periodic lubrication is a nightmare.
The club aircraft required 2 gear motor replacement , zero actuator or trunion issues. Most gear issues in 182RGs are caused by improperly trained pilots and lack of landing currency. Hard landings = cracked trunions.
Now if you are referring to early model 210s, they are a plumber’s nightmare.
Both models are XC aircraft. Post 1978 the Cessna gear systems were improved. Why would the support brackets be wearing out if they are properly lubricated annually? I believe most the bad reputation on Cessna retract gear is from early model 210s and 172RGs used in flight schools with very hard landings. Today even cracks in trunions can be repaired.What's the latest on 182 and 210 retractable parts (saddles?). Are they still unobtanium or has a reasonable solution surfaced?
I did forget brake swivels, which are replaced about every decade.I would agree. I put over 1,200 hours on my '81 182-RG and the only issue I ever had with the main gear was replacing the swivel fittings for the brake lines.