C172 to C182 Transition

[DesertNomad]

I trained and earned my PPL in a 172. I have 90 hours now.

Three hours into my PPL training, I went to Africa and got 35 hours in a 182 (12 of which I was flying it), but none of this time is logged (thus not counted in my 90 hours). In Africa, I didn't do any t/o or landings but I flew the pattern a bit - didn't really mess with the throttle or prop control much at all, but I got comfortable at cruise with it.

Now I have started 182 (HP) training. I only have 3 hours and 4 landings - just two hops KRNO (4415') - KFLX (3966') in the past couple of weeks. My landings today were both at about 100°F. In Reno it was Rwy 25 with wind 220@15G21.

I am finding the landings a bit difficult. I want to flare too high, and I don't feel like I have great directional control over the runway once I get to 5-15 feet or so... maybe because I am flaring high and then relaxing it a bit to let it get down whereupon I also tend to get sloppy on directional control with the crosswind.

I think it is more that the extra weight just has more momentum and is less responsive than the 172. The sink rate seems higher overall.

Any tips for this transition? I am flying final at 80mph and am leaving some throttle a tad longer than I do in the 172.

 

[Skylane81E]

Fly it like the 172, just be sure to keep the nose up on landing

 

[wabower]

Speed on final sounds high. If you're light try it at 70 mph and see what happens. I own a C-180 and use 70 on final, slowing to 65 when field assured.

Fly the length of a long runway in landing configuration but with wheels a foot above the runway and just enough power to stay airborne. Maintain altitude, centerline and longitudinal alignment with the runway. At the end, do a missed approach and come around and do it again. Two-three is usually enough to see exactly what it should look like, and any time you reduce power by 50 RPM the plane will land perfectly.

And you're right, a 182 is just a 172 on steroids, so assume everything will be just a little bigger and heavier but you can make ti do the same things you could do in the 172 with a little more effort.

I trained and earned my PPL in a 172. I have 90 hours now.

Three hours into my PPL training, I went to Africa and got 35 hours in a 182 (12 of which I was flying it), but none of this time is logged (thus not counted in my 90 hours). In Africa, I didn't do any t/o or landings but I flew the pattern a bit - didn't really mess with the throttle or prop control much at all, but I got comfortable at cruise with it.

Now I have started 182 (HP) training. I only have 3 hours and 4 landings - just two hops KRNO (4415') - KFLX (3966') in the past couple of weeks. My landings today were both at about 100°F. In Reno it was Rwy 25 with wind 220@15G21.

I am finding the landings a bit difficult. I want to flare too high, and I don't feel like I have great directional control over the runway once I get to 5-15 feet or so... maybe because I am flaring high and then relaxing it a bit to let it get down whereupon I also tend to get sloppy on directional control with the crosswind.

I think it is more that the extra weight just has more momentum and is less responsive than the 172. The sink rate seems higher overall.

Any tips for this transition? I am flying final at 80mph and am leaving some throttle a tad longer than I do in the 172.

 

[GAZOO]

I final at 80 with slight power. I let it decend till bout 10 foot above runway then I pull throttle and flare. It will settle nicely and touch down. I find the 182 to be a perfect all around airplane but they are like flying a truck. I fly taildragger 95% of my time, use the 182 on longer trips (much faster and more comfortable). I am always amazed how heavy the controls feel on the 182.

 

[denverpilot]

Agree with Wayne, 80 MPH is too fast over the fence.

Take a long look at these... (Or better the ones for your model...)

Note the short field flap 40 speed...

Lots and lots of new 182 drivers forget about this POH page...

And to a lesser extent, this one...

For fun, calculate 1.3 X all of these and you have a nice "safety margin" table for yourself.

Note the liftoff speed here. It's flying at that speed...

And better since it's one of the only places to find it in the POH already calculated, note the changes in speed on the next page for a lighter aircraft...

You flying at max gross very often? (Yes, that says 44 KIAS... at 2400 lbs...)

And last but not least... The landing distance chart. What's that little box say for speed at 50' AGL?

Of course it also says Flap 40. If you're in a Flap 30 limited airplane, or anything other than a P model, just use the above as hints for what to hunt down in your POH. (They won't be drastically different.)

Lots and lots of folks assume the 172 to 182 transition to bigger airplane, goes faster, means the same for V-speeds... If ya look closely... Maybe not...

The attached are not the numbers from my Robertson STOL addendum. Those are slower yet.

 

[DesertNomad]

I was doing the landing with flaps 20°... wind 30° off the centerline 15kts, gusting to 21kts. 80mph (not kts) was on short final. Over the fence was probably 75mph.

 

[tlglenn]

In a 172 I can bring the power to idle on short final. In a 182 I have to wait until I start the flare unless I'm intentionally practicing power-off landings.

 

[denverpilot]

I was doing the landing with flaps 20°... wind 30° off the centerline 15kts, gusting to 21kts. 80mph (not kts) was on short final. Over the fence was probably 75mph.

No need to fly faster for a 7.5 knot gusting to 10.5 knot max crosswind. Or not use all the flaps.

I caught that you said 80 MPH and stated it that way.

That's 70 plus a smidge knots, and 10 knots faster than necessary if you get the flaps all the way down.



At flaps 20, you're 18 knots above the most forward CG stall speed at max gross for 30 degrees of bank, and 22 knots above stall speed for zero degrees of bank.

Further aft and lighter, is just gravy. Two fat guys doing training is almost always way forward, but significantly lighter than 2950. Even with full fuel on a bird with long range tanks. Normal tanks, definitely lighter.

If you're planning to touch down with the stall horn on, assuming it's coming on at 1.3 Vso, it'll start to beep at 62.4 wings level, full forward CG, at max gross.

(They're never that accurate...)

With that *lovely* 18.2 knot headwind component, if you go to full flap, you'd be able to touch down with a wickedly low *ground* speed, if you got the stall horn to come on, and crank that upwind aileron over...

You'd be planted. And nice and slow.

I'd take that little crosswind and the big headwind any time. Saves brakes.

Harder to taxi to the hangar than keep it on the runway during the landing, with that 7-10.5 knot gusty cross.

Max demonstrated is 15 ... and it'll do better than that if you have to... But you'll run out of rudder in a swept tail model earlier than a straight tail.

Folks are afraid of full flap landings in 182s when the crosswinds start, and the numbers show she'll do it and make it look like you were some kinda genius, if you just toss them out and slow her up. Just takes practice.

If you like carrying a touch of speed, realize that there is no warning about being cross controlled with flaps hanging out in the 182, like the totally overblown thing beat into many heads in the 172...

Add a little more slip and she's stuck on, one wheel down and slowing.

If a gust catches you unaware, power up and level off, get the airspeed up, flaps to 20, and climb... and come around again for another shot at it. Every landing is a go-around until it's not, right?

She'll land reeeealy reeeealy slow groundspeed-wise, in a headwind like that one. I'd love to catch a day like that once the bird is out of the shop. Great practice day! I'm probably rusty.

Do what you're comfortable with, but just know you have a lot of margin at your likely weights and CG at 70 knots. You get the flaps all the way out, you have a good margin at 60 knots but watch the drag.

If you're doing those with an airliner style flat approach angle, you'll need a pretty good amount of power to make the runway at 60.

Generally I fly 85-75-65 in the pattern. 85 downwind, first notch of flaps, 75 base, full flaps, 65 final, and the pattern is tight. None of this dragging it in from three miles out.

Doing a power off approach at Flap 40, looks a whole lot different than at Flap 20 in the 182... Crosswind or no crosswind. Big numbers/TDZE markers (if you like) kinda filling the windshield, until time to flare.

Go out with your normal load and find out how much power it takes to hold her straight and level at altitude with the flaps hanging out at 40 and work down to the stall horn and keep it there. Now note that airspeed and power setting. The airspeed will probably be lower than you think about for landings, and the power will probably be higher.

Then apply whatever numbers you just learned it'll fly just fine at, with a margin above stall, to the landings.

That same power setting and speed will hold her 1' off the runway, forever, in constant wind conditions.

Fun stuff. I do love me some crosswind practice... Really do.

 

[txshooter]

Unless you are shooting an approach in a busy airport with a long runway, you don't want your final approach speed more than 80 kts, at which you will take a bit of runway to slow down enough holding the nose off until it settles and you hear the stall warning horn.

I practice landings with all different flap settings from 0 to 45, power off as well as holding a little power in until after the flare and the plane is settling down to the runway.

I have found that trimming for 70 kts with flaps and holding just a little power in until after the flare will produce a real nice touchdown and not eat up a lot of runway. I use this especially at night when it is easy to mess up a landing by flaring too high or too late, which is never good in a 182! I trim for a nose high attitude and pretty much fly the plane to the runway.

 

[denverpilot]

This is one of the (minor) difficulties that I have now that the DPE pointed out that my particular 182 "hunts" in airspeed at the common 90 knot approach speed in light singles and behaves better at 110 with 10 Flap.

Slowing from 110 and 10 Flap after breaking out (simulated or real) at the bottom of an ILS, is a seat-belt test and a great way to balloon back up if you're not ready to trim and push as the flaps come down, if you elect to chop and drop.

She'll do it, but it isn't a comfortable ride for pax.

Otherwise for smooth, you chop and wait with 10 Flap ... and eat up a lot more runway slowing. And you won't hit the touchdown zone markers doing that unless you force it on, and that's a great way to land on the nosegear. .

 

[douglas393]

Like everyone else I have found in my 182 that if I use 80 knots on final my plane is quite happy flying to the next airport in the next county(well maybe a bit of an exaggeration). If I enter final with 70 to 75 kts things work real well. I pull throttle when I have the runway made and use 2 notches of flaps for strong winds, one notch when the winds are weaker. I occasionally(about every few months) practice no flap landings, and typically do not even have to slip much at all. I trim for nose up on final, and push the yoke forward for descent, and slowly let off the yoke as I transition to flare(by which time I have transitioned to pulling the nose up), and she almost will land herself as the speed bleeds off.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

I land 182s as if the nose is heavier than it should be as a routine precaution with consistently good results. The handling analogy to pick-up trucks of different weights to the 170, 180, and 206s can be of some practical use in mental preparation when switching models.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Folks, he said 80 mph, not 80 knots. I also fly final at 80 mph (which equals 69 knots) in the 182 and it works great, provided you're in a flaps-40 bird with the flaps all the way down. Pull power just prior to starting the roundout, and with practice you'll be able to touch down smoothly within the first 500 feet of runway.

Faster than 80 mph is inadvisable. Slower is do-able, and is advisable if you're not using full flaps or you have a newer bird that only has 30-degree flaps.

 

[MAKG1]

69 KIAS is still fast for a 182 unless it's loaded to max.

You should be able to nail within 200 feet of the threshold per PTS.

 

[denverpilot]

Folks, he said 80 mph, not 80 knots.

Did you miss this? I converted all my numbers to knots because we're pilots, but I recognized that he said 80 MPH.

I caught that you said 80 MPH and stated it that way.

That's 70 plus a smidge knots, and 10 knots faster than necessary if you get the flaps all the way down.

At flaps 20, you're 18 knots above the most forward CG stall speed at max gross for 30 degrees of bank, and 22 knots above stall speed for zero degrees of bank.

80 MPH final is at least 5 knots too fast. And he said he was purposefully using Flap 20 which is probably the real problem...

You and I think similarly that most landings are Flap 40...

I see a LOT ... like, virtually everyone here locally around the coffee pot, and a significant number online... who seem to always land the 182 with Flap 20 because they think it's some magic potion to good landings in it.

That same group if asked, "Do you always land a Skyhawk at Flap 20?" will say "No, that's different!"...

Cracks me up.

 

[dell30rb]

I went to Africa and got 35 hours in a 182 (12 of which I was flying it), but none of this time is logged (thus not counted in my 90 hours)

You may log all of the time you were sole manipulator of the controls. Does not matter if you lacked the HP endorsement at that point.

 

[douglas393]

Did you miss this? I converted all my numbers to knots because we're pilots, but I recognized that he said 80 MPH.



80 MPH final is at least 5 knots too fast. And he said he was purposefully using Flap 20 which is probably the real problem...

You and I think similarly that most landings are Flap 40...

I see a LOT ... like, virtually everyone here locally around the coffee pot, and a significant number online... who seem to always land the 182 with Flap 20 because they think it's some magic potion to good landings in it.

That same group if asked, "Do you always land a Skyhawk at Flap 20?" will say "No, that's different!"...

Cracks me up.

I am one of those dorks that lands my 182 with 20 degrees flaps. Why? Because when I first bought the plane and did my training with my CFI this is how she taught me to do it. I did question her on why 20 degrees as opposed to full flaps as suggested in the POH, and never got a real good answer. I also flew a few times with another CFII who has lots hrs on 182's and is quite the stickler for things, and the one thing he never berated me on was the 20 degrees of flaps. I have tried full flaps a few times, and it works quite well, but old habits are hard to break, and I have just gotten used to using the 20 degrees of flaps.

Is this a good reason for using 20 degrees of flaps? No not really, but it is as good a reason as I can come up with for why I have not changed.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Did you miss this? I converted all my numbers to knots because we're pilots, but I recognized that he said 80 MPH.

I didn't miss yours, but you were off a bit on the conversion too.

80 MPH final is at least 5 knots too fast. And he said he was purposefully using Flap 20 which is probably the real problem...

Meh - I've had excellent luck with it, but I've never flown one with the STOL kit, which probably makes a difference as well.

You and I think similarly that most landings are Flap 40...

I see a LOT ... like, virtually everyone here locally around the coffee pot, and a significant number online... who seem to always land the 182 with Flap 20 because they think it's some magic potion to good landings in it.

Landings are much easier to learn in the 182 at 20 degrees. That's why there are so many CFI's who teach landings with 20 degrees, their students pick up on it faster, everyone feels better, and it becomes standard practice. I'm glad I don't use a lazy CFI for aircraft checkouts - It took me a bit to get used to it, but I can get consistently good landings at 40 degrees.

 

[Dave Krall CFII]

Never heard of this Flaps 20 degrees "easier to land" stuff with 182s. Was taught to use whatever was indicated with no issues whatsoever.

 

[timwinters]

In my old straight-tail, which is more like a 180 than a 182, I pull the throttle to idle abeam the numbers, 1st notch, trim for 80 mph.

Turn base, 2nd notch, it'll slow to about 75.

Turn final, 3rd notch, it'll slow to 70.

Runway made, 4th notch and it slows to 65.

 

[douglas393]

Landings are much easier to learn in the 182 at 20 degrees. That's why there are so many CFI's who teach landings with 20 degrees, their students pick up on it faster, everyone feels better, and it becomes standard practice. I'm glad I don't use a lazy CFI for aircraft checkouts - It took me a bit to get used to it, but I can get consistently good landings at 40 degrees.

Have not really experienced that to tell you the truth, and would think with 40 degrees flaps the landings may be easier. I have just gotten used to landing with 20 degrees of flaps. I would not classify my CFI as lazy because we used 20 degrees flaps instead of 40 degrees, not sure if the conclusion is supported by the fact. I get consistently good landings with my technique. Certainly I agree the POH supports full flaps, and really cannot give you a good reason except habit at this point why I use 20 degrees. I can give some stretches of reasoning to explain wy 20 degrees are better but in reality in the end I do what I do because it consistently works and is comfortable for me, my passengers, and my plane.

 

[timwinters]

Have not really experienced that to tell you the truth, and would think with 40 degrees flaps the landings may be easier.

Actually, the opposite is true in my plane. 40 degrees substantially steepens the approach from a 20 deg and really increases vertical speed. This difference is greater yet when comparing a 40 deg power off approach vs. a 20 deg partial power approach. The exact timing of the round out and flare is more critical for a 40 deg power off.

The only time I do partial flap/partial power landings is when I have a non-aviator on board who is acting wary. The closure rate with terra firma is far more subtle with 20 deg and tends to freak them out a lot less.

 

[Jaybird180]

Trim, trim, trim is your friend.

 

[denverpilot]

Have not really experienced that to tell you the truth, and would think with 40 degrees flaps the landings may be easier. I have just gotten used to landing with 20 degrees of flaps. I would not classify my CFI as lazy because we used 20 degrees flaps instead of 40 degrees, not sure if the conclusion is supported by the fact. I get consistently good landings with my technique. Certainly I agree the POH supports full flaps, and really cannot give you a good reason except habit at this point why I use 20 degrees. I can give some stretches of reasoning to explain wy 20 degrees are better but in reality in the end I do what I do because it consistently works and is comfortable for me, my passengers, and my plane.

I had a CFI that let me land the way I wanted for a while... then he said, "Those look good. Let's do the ones you DON'T like, now."



I guess it stuck. Now two decades later when I don't like how one way is looking I go beat on that.

Here's hoping the airplane is done this week at the shop. They'll probably ALL look bad by now...

I'm sick of unpacking boxes, moving, dealing with contractors, and lounging around PoA for my pseudo-aviation fix. Heh.

That it I need to start a thread about finding tires for an ancient Ford tractor.