Checkride in a 182RG

M

Mafoo

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Jul 17, 2012
Messages
1,460
Location
New Hampshire
Display Name
Display name:
Mafoo
That's my plan.

Might be less conventional, and it would be setting myself up for a more difficult check-ride then needs to be, but a spot opened up in a share of the plane I just can't pass up, so with 22 hours behind be, I am going to own a part of one :)

My CFI said he will train me in it, even though he thought it wasn't the wisest move. I think some of the reason, is I am on track to finish in 40 hours, and he wants a 40 hour student under his belt (helps him sell the lower cost to future students). I suspect if I transition to the 182, it will take me a few more hours. We will see.

I am up for the challenge, and I would also like the fact that my first 20+ hours in it will be with a CFI. Better then finishing up in the 172, and then transitioning to the 182, in my opinion.

I will keep you posted on the developments :)
 
You know what they say...Train how you plan to fly after you complete your training. So what if it means it will take you a little past 40 hours?
 
Mafoo said:
That's my plan.
Click to expand...
Ambitious.

Might be less conventional, and it would be setting myself up for a more difficult check-ride then needs to be,
Click to expand...
Sort of true, but if it's what you're going to be flying later, not a bad idea.

My CFI said he will train me in it, even though he thought it wasn't the wisest move. I think some of the reason, is I am on track to finish in 40 hours, and he wants a 40 hour student under his belt (helps him sell the lower cost to future students). I suspect if I transition to the 182, it will take me a few more hours. We will see.
Click to expand...
Almost certainly will. You may find the insurers want anywhere from 10 to 25 hours of dual before you solo it, and with 22 dual already, that will pretty well kill any chance of finishing in 40. But finishing in 40 is, in the long run, a fairly meaningless goal. Took me 62 and I was training in a Cessna 150 forty years ago -- and I've done pretty well since then despite that "sub-average" start.:wink2:

And make sure your instructor puts both High Performance and complex endorsements in your logbook before solo along with all the regular solo endorsements -- I've heard of instructors forgetting that before, thinking the make/model solo endorsement fills the bill, and it doesn't.
 
I think it makes sense. I'm sure the insurance company will want you to have plenty of hours with an instructor given your low time. Check with them about coverage while doing solo, though, to make sure you're covered.
 
I got my 182RG right when I finished my private, and I'm doing my instrument in it now. It's a great airplane to fly, you'll enjoy it immensely. It will feel like a rocketship for the first 10 hours at least.

I had to have 20 hours of dual in mine before I could solo it (frustrating for a new PP) and had to have 50 total before I could carry passengers. They didn't care if I got mostly solo for that 30hrs or with a CFI, I did some of each. Insurance won't be cheap for you, that's for sure. I was about 75 hours IIRC when I started flying it. Have fun.
 
Z06_Mir said:
I got my 182RG right when I finished my private, and I'm doing my instrument in it now. It's a great airplane to fly, you'll enjoy it immensely. It will feel like a rocketship for the first 10 hours at least.

I had to have 20 hours of dual in mine before I could solo it (frustrating for a new PP) and had to have 50 total before I could carry passengers. They didn't care if I got mostly solo for that 30hrs or with a CFI, I did some of each. Insurance won't be cheap for you, that's for sure. I was about 75 hours IIRC when I started flying it. Have fun.
Click to expand...

50 in type???
 
Problem with owning a Skylane is that you may stop dreaming of a new airplane for awhile. I'd argue that it's too capable:lol:
 
Jaybird180 said:
Problem with owning a Skylane is that you may stop dreaming of a new airplane for awhile. I'd argue that it's too capable:lol:
Click to expand...

lol, that's comforting :)

However I think every time it's just my wife and I going some place, I am going to be dreaming of an RV-7
 
Jaybird180 said:
50 in type???
Click to expand...
Yep. 20 dual, 30 optional solo or dual. I flew my butt off and it took forever.


Jaybird180 said:
Problem with owning a Skylane is that you may stop dreaming of a new airplane for awhile. I'd argue that it's too capable:lol:
Click to expand...

:yes: Malibu's (Mirage and Meridian) still catch my eye. But such a hefty price tag, I'll keep Lane.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I knew of one fellow who got his private in a 210. So you're not alone.
Click to expand...
My dad bought a new 182P during his PPL training, got his license in it, I did all my PPL training in the same plane, including my IR. We sold it years ago, but bought a 182Q for my son to train in, he's 17 and that's all he's ever flown, except a few hours in the right seat of the 421.;) The biggest issues will be speed and abnormal gear procedures that most PPL candidates don't deal with on their check rides. :dunno: Nothing you can't figure out pretty quick. I say go for it! :D
 
I only needed 10 in type and I had about 80TT. Ah well each insurance company is different.
 
Mafoo said:
That's my plan.

Might be less conventional, and it would be setting myself up for a more difficult check-ride then needs to be, but a spot opened up in a share of the plane I just can't pass up, so with 22 hours behind be, I am going to own a part of one :)

My CFI said he will train me in it, even though he thought it wasn't the wisest move. I think some of the reason, is I am on track to finish in 40 hours, and he wants a 40 hour student under his belt (helps him sell the lower cost to future students). I suspect if I transition to the 182, it will take me a few more hours. We will see.

I am up for the challenge, and I would also like the fact that my first 20+ hours in it will be with a CFI. Better then finishing up in the 172, and then transitioning to the 182, in my opinion.

I will keep you posted on the developments :)
Click to expand...

Go for it. While you do have to think of retractable gear, cowl flaps, faster speed, and prop control, it really shouldn't add more than 5-10 hours to your time. You get used to whatever you're used to, and since you're planning to fly this particular bird after your cert, it makes sense.

Enjoy! The C182RG is a good airplane.
 
And requirements can change from year to year depending on market conditions. Cabin twins require about half as much training time as before 2008.
Jaybird180 said:
I only needed 10 in type and I had about 80TT. Ah well each insurance company is different.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
And requirements can change from year to year depending on market conditions. Cabin twins require about half as much training time as before 2008.
Click to expand...

They must be getting easier to fly!:rolleyes:
 
I am concerned. According to what I've been told, if you don't pas your check ride after 40 hours you'll just have to face up to the fact that you'll never be quite up to snuff.

:D Sorry - it's a throwback to an old thread, just couldn't resist. It's probably not going to be any harder to learn the 182 now than it would be later on. Sure, it will cost you a few more hours before you get your ticket... but you'd probably spend that time later on getting your HP and complex endorsements anyway. It sure will make your check ride interesting - but a lot less crowded.
 
Jaybird180 said:
I only needed 10 in type and I had about 80TT. Ah well each insurance company is different.
Click to expand...

So true. I also have as high of limits as they'll let me have ($1m, 100k per pas). The rate isn't cheap either, but it is what it is and I'm so happy and thankful to have the R182 over doing my IR in a Warrior like my PPL. And I know that no one will mess with my seat!
 
When I was about in your shoes I wanted to buy a lance. Checked on insurance first luckily and found it was going to cost over $6000. Well that ended that plan. Now I have a couple planes. Lowest insurance is $670 per year and highest is a cessna 205 at $2300. But I just was quoted 3200 on a cessna 210n. They also want me to fly 15 hours with instructor. I don't mind but don't understand why as the 205 is basically a 210 with welded down gear. I also have a high performance retract insured with them so would think it would be no big deal.
 
Centurions probably crash more for one thing or another, some of that likely comes from the retractable gear.
 
You may notice a common thread throughout any such discussion. The low-timers don't understand why the insurance companies want more time in type and the old CFI's know quite well that whatever is required probably isn't enough.

Theboys said:
When I was about in your shoes I wanted to buy a lance. Checked on insurance first luckily and found it was going to cost over $6000. Well that ended that plan. Now I have a couple planes. Lowest insurance is $670 per year and highest is a cessna 205 at $2300. But I just was quoted 3200 on a cessna 210n. They also want me to fly 15 hours with instructor. I don't mind but don't understand why as the 205 is basically a 210 with welded down gear. I also have a high performance retract insured with them so would think it would be no big deal.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
You may notice a common thread throughout any such discussion. The low-timers don't understand why the insurance companies want more time in type and the old CFI's know quite well that whatever is required probably isn't enough.
Click to expand...

Can it ever be enough in your eyes, Wayne?

Z06_Mir said:
And I know that no one will mess with my seat!
Click to expand...

The post of the day!
 
Sure, when the guy is promptly and proficiently handling things without fumbling, stumbling, mumbling and stammering. Normal checklists, expanded checklists, abnormals, speeds, power settings, procedures, emergencies, systems, avionics, IFR (if he's rated) other stuff he should have learned during prior training but somehow didn't get. And that's in addition to the three takeoffs and landings after which he thinks he's good to go.




Jaybird180 said:
Can it ever be enough in your eyes, Wayne?
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Sure, when the guy is promptly and proficiently handling things without fumbling, stumbling, mumbling and stammering. Normal checklists, expanded checklists, abnormals, speeds, power settings, procedures, emergencies, systems, avionics, IFR (if he's rated) other stuff he should have learned during prior training but somehow didn't get. And that's in addition to the three takeoffs and landings after which he thinks he's good to go.
Click to expand...

So you're saying high-timers never have days where they can't accomplish all of the above, even if they've had the training or even taught those items themselves? (I've seen it. Both in person, and in accident records, of course...)

More importantly, if you see a problem with pilots not availing themselves of additional training often enough, what should be done about it? Force it via regulation, or something radically different?

I suspect a group of concerned CFIs could hold a free "fly with a CFI Day" for the pilot community at any given airport, and only a small percentage of local pilots (who are already committed to their own learning and skills) would take them up on it, and a larger number would ignore it.

Got any fixes in mind?
 
Should not be a problem, should be easier than the guy I trained last year in a Bellanca Cruisemaster. That pretty much took care of most of the endorsements.
But he wasn't anywhere close to 40hrs.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
 
Anybody can screw up, but that wasn't the subject of this thread. GA's safety record speaks for itself regarding pilot capabilities, as does the ratio of accidents attributable to mechanical problems vs. pilot errors. The doofus factor is high.

Our system does not require the amateurs to demonstrate ongoing proficiency, and as a result we will never have it. I don't lose sleep over it, since there's nothing I can do about it. My position is that don't care whether a guy can fly a lick if he promises that he will never carry passengers. If he does, I think he should be required to know what he's doing. It won't happen, so I just shake my head and offer condolences.

I've never charged a dime for instruction given, so contributing a day to helping others would yield the same financial outcome. The pilots who fly with me know they will work their tail off to get better, but that the time spent is for their benefit rather than mine.

PS: Notice the current angst about re-taking check rides. Shouldn't a pilot be sufficiently proficient to fly to the standards of the ratings he currently holds on any day an examiner crawls in the right seat? Or do you think that the pilot has peaked to his all-time best on the day of the check ride and will never be that good again?





denverpilot said:
So you're saying high-timers never have days where they can't accomplish all of the above, even if they've had the training or even taught those items themselves? (I've seen it. Both in person, and in accident records, of course...)

More importantly, if you see a problem with pilots not availing themselves of additional training often enough, what should be done about it? Force it via regulation, or something radically different?

I suspect a group of concerned CFIs could hold a free "fly with a CFI Day" for the pilot community at any given airport, and only a small percentage of local pilots (who are already committed to their own learning and skills) would take them up on it, and a larger number would ignore it.

Got any fixes in mind?
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Good points and interesting background info Wayne. Helps to know where your comments were "coming from".
 
wabower said:
Sure, when the guy is promptly and proficiently handling things without fumbling, stumbling, mumbling and stammering. Normal checklists, expanded checklists, abnormals, speeds, power settings, procedures, emergencies, systems, avionics, IFR (if he's rated) other stuff he should have learned during prior training but somehow didn't get. And that's in addition to the three takeoffs and landings after which he thinks he's good to go.
Click to expand...

I agree. I fly for business and yes, for the fun of flying, so my minimums are one training flight per month, regardless of whatever other flying I did that month.

"Fun" for me means, precision, knowledge, and judgement :)
 
wabower said:
Shouldn't a pilot be sufficiently proficient to fly to the standards of the ratings he currently holds on any day an examiner crawls in the right seat? Or do you think that the pilot has peaked to his all-time best on the day of the check ride and will never be that good again?
Click to expand...

No argument there. Take a look at what the Canadians are doing if you want a possible solution. Too bad they don't check VFR only pilots.
 
wabower said:
PS: Notice the current angst about re-taking check rides. Shouldn't a pilot be sufficiently proficient to fly to the standards of the ratings he currently holds on any day an examiner crawls in the right seat? Or do you think that the pilot has peaked to his all-time best on the day of the check ride and will never be that good again?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't complain, IF it didn't cost a few hundred bucks per ride, and IF the check ride didn't have such a stigma attached. Right now the only way I have to do one is if I screw something up badly enough to get the FAA's attention.

If an examiner wants to come along, that's fine by me... as long as he doesn't screw up my W&B and I'm not paying for it. But there's the problem. The DPE has to get paid too. If I feel I can't fly to the standards any more, I'll spend that money on a CFI, not a DPE. If I'm confident that I can fly to the standards, that money's going to get spend on flying for currency, or something frivolous like food and stuff.
 
brcase said:
Should not be a problem, should be easier than the guy I trained last year in a Bellanca Cruisemaster. That pretty much took care of most of the endorsements.
But he wasn't anywhere close to 40hrs.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL
Click to expand...

Cool, thanks.

And the only reason I really cared at all about the 40 hours, was to help keep the costs down. If it was free, I wouldn't care if it tool me 200 hours.

Now that it should cost me $50 an hour less, plus I am flying MY OWN PLANE, I care less how long it takes :)
 
DaleB said:
I wouldn't complain, IF it didn't cost a few hundred bucks per ride, and IF the check ride didn't have such a stigma attached.
Click to expand...

That's a very good point.

I had to get 10hrs dual and 10hrs solo in the clipped cub before I could solo it.

Get this - the CFI for the dual hours did not even have to be current in a J-3 or have any time in type requirements. Not kidding
 
Last edited:
I think your answer is indicative of the reason that pilots don't maintain proficiency and squeal about time required for check-outs. While you're training for whatever rating you're trying to attain, the associated costs are an assumed part of the equation that you pay without evaluating the expense relative to the benefit.

As soon as you're free of the mandatory requirements and have the ability to determine how the flying money will be spent, ongoing training drops down the priority list and cost rises to the top. It's an unfortunate element of our hobby, but one that should be recognized. We can preach safety, proficiency, recurrent training, wings programs, IMSAFE and all that until the cows come home, but nothing will change.

The "just do it the way they say until you have your ticket and then fly like you want to" mentality that has been openly expressed by at least one member of this forum is pervasive within the pilot population, and the landscape is littered with their remains.





DaleB said:
I wouldn't complain, IF it didn't cost a few hundred bucks per ride, and IF the check ride didn't have such a stigma attached. Right now the only way I have to do one is if I screw something up badly enough to get the FAA's attention.

If an examiner wants to come along, that's fine by me... as long as he doesn't screw up my W&B and I'm not paying for it. But there's the problem. The DPE has to get paid too. If I feel I can't fly to the standards any more, I'll spend that money on a CFI, not a DPE. If I'm confident that I can fly to the standards, that money's going to get spend on flying for currency, or something frivolous like food and stuff.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
The "just do it the way they say until you have your ticket and then fly like you want to" mentality that has been openly expressed by at least one member of this forum is pervasive within the pilot population, and the landscape is littered with their remains.
Click to expand...

To this point, I have been looking to buy a plane (why I have landed on this one), and the few people who have taken me up in one as a demo, has done their version of a preflight.

None of them used a checklist, and all of them missed things I am taught to look for. (check the break pads, flaps, trim tabs, etc).

So each one of them I suspect, at some point after their checkride, threw out the "this is stupid" (in their eyes) parts of their walk around.
 
wabower said:
I think your answer is indicative of the reason that pilots don't maintain proficiency and squeal about time required for check-outs. While you're training for whatever rating you're trying to attain, the associated costs are an assumed part of the equation that you pay without evaluating the expense relative to the benefit.

As soon as you're free of the mandatory requirements and have the ability to determine how the flying money will be spent, ongoing training drops down the priority list and cost rises to the top. It's an unfortunate element of our hobby, but one that should be recognized. We can preach safety, proficiency, recurrent training, wings programs, IMSAFE and all that until the cows come home, but nothing will change.

The "just do it the way they say until you have your ticket and then fly like you want to" mentality that has been openly expressed by at least one member of this forum is pervasive within the pilot population, and the landscape is littered with their remains.
Click to expand...
So how often, then, have you hired a DPE to do a voluntary 709 check ride? Is there even a mechanism for volunteering for a 709 ride? I haven't looked.

Cost isn't at the top of my list. Safety, followed by proficiency, followed by learning new things -- HP, complex, instruments, glass panel. Those top my list. I'll do what I feel I need to maintain proficiency and skill, and as a grownup I think I can make my own judgment about that. If I ever feel the need for a second opinion, the landscape is also littered with CFIs looking for work. And of course there's the BFR, which is a mandatory check every two years without the impact of a 709.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top