Taking the Rear Seats Out of a C182

But...

The larger question would be...

Who the hell does a W&B on a 182?
 
azure said:
Stepping outside the CG limits isn't the same thing as *changing* them, though. The way I read that regulation, it's only a major alteration if it purports to increase max gross weight or changes the CG envelope as documented in the POH...
Click to expand...

Yes, it doesn't pertain to the discussion we are having here, but outside of this particular scenario there are going to be cases where removing the rear seat is going to involve further implications. You could for instance, remove the rear seat from a J3, mount a magnetic anomaly detector to the floor and fly it solo from the front seat while looking for submarines lurking in the bay. In that case you'd probably have to fill out a 337. :rolleyes:
 
azure said:
If it puts you outside CG limits to remove the seat, then obviously you can't legally, and shouldn't, without doing something else to put the plane back within limits.
Click to expand...

or altering the limits.
 
Taking the seats out of a restart airplane ('96 and on) is truly a pain. Many bolts. Many brackets. Very much weight. Putting it back in is even worse. Lots of fiddling around with bolts and brackets to get them all lined up so they'll go together. Why couldn't they have used some quick-release idea like we see in minivans?
 
timwinters said:
But...

The larger question would be...

Who the hell does a W&B on a 182?
Click to expand...




I was going to say ....

Most 182 drivers only do a weight and balance when they're loaded to the gills, not when they're taking things out of an empty plane.

I had the back seat out of mine for a while. It just adds 40 lbs. to your payload is about all. C.G. doesn't change enough to bother. :redface:
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
Yup.....9G's
Click to expand...

Nope. 26gs for the front and 21 for those behind.

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...c35c03a1&mc=true&node=se14.1.23_1562&rgn=div8

Excerpt:

(2) For the second test, the change in velocity may not be less than 42 feet per second. The seat/restraint system must be oriented in its nominal position with respect to the airplane and with the vertical plane of the airplane yawed 10 degrees, with no pitch, relative to the impact vector in a direction that results in the greatest load on the shoulder harness. For seat/restraint systems to be installed in the first row of the airplane, peak deceleration must occur in not more than 0.05 seconds after impact and must reach a minimum of 26g. For all other seat/restraint systems, peak deceleration must occur in not more than 0.06 seconds after impact and must reach a minimum of 21g.
 
Dan Thomas said:
Why couldn't they have used some quick-release idea like we see in minivans?
Click to expand...

I ask myself that same question every time I pull out the seat in my P model 182 as well. I suspect the answer is that 1) redesigning it is expensive, and 2) adding the hardware necessary to meet crash-worthiness standards and be quick removable would add a significant amount of weight--not really an issue for minivans.
 
Hmmm...so, just the belts are 9Gs then. :yikes: :confused:....or I may be confused with CAR 3 regs.
Dan Thomas said:
Nope. 26gs for the front and 21 for those behind.

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...c35c03a1&mc=true&node=se14.1.23_1562&rgn=div8

Excerpt:

(2) For the second test, the change in velocity may not be less than 42 feet per second. The seat/restraint system must be oriented in its nominal position with respect to the airplane and with the vertical plane of the airplane yawed 10 degrees, with no pitch, relative to the impact vector in a direction that results in the greatest load on the shoulder harness. For seat/restraint systems to be installed in the first row of the airplane, peak deceleration must occur in not more than 0.05 seconds after impact and must reach a minimum of 26g. For all other seat/restraint systems, peak deceleration must occur in not more than 0.06 seconds after impact and must reach a minimum of 21g.
Click to expand...
 
I got my A&P to do up a temporary W&B and he also yanked the seats for me and put them on a pallet in my hangar... covered in plastic. Nice guy, that A&P.

I haven't actually seen the new W&B yet but the vast chasm behind the front seats looks like the bed of a pickup truck relative to what it looked like with seats in.

I was able to lay my super long shotgun case down and it stretched from the wheel well (it's an RG) to just shy of the front seat tracks - perfect fit! Without that wheel well it would be a **** ton of room!

Anyway thanks for the info, all.
 
peerlesscowboy said:
Cap'n Ron ? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Speaking of, seems like he heavily weighed in on this specific topic when it was brought up several years ago.

Kind of like 'if the pilot removes the back seat without an A&P, he's going straight to the inner circle of regulatory hell'.
 
135 operators operators flying Part 25 jets have multiple interior configurations depending on what seats they want in them. This is especially true of air taxis that double as an air ambulance.

They typically have two or three difference "current" empty weights on the airplane. IME anything from 10,000 pounds to 90,000 pounds are flown that way.


The old junk skydive 182 only has a pilot chair. (FSDO is 25 miles north of its base airport)

I have yet to understand the arguments that seats can't be removed. :dunno:
 
Tom-D said:
When you do not have the authorization in the OM, you will be required to prove to the FAA that you will not exceed the limits in all loading configurations not given in by the W&B contained in the OM.

To state that in a different method, the FAA will call it a major alteration, you will be required to prove it ain't.
Click to expand...

Just sounds like BS. There are lots of airplanes out there that are out of CG when loaded to zero fuel weight, the crew is required to calculate the minimum fuel needed for BALLAST.

Where's a helicopter pilot to explain ballast?
 
Last edited:
bnt83 said:
Just sounds like BS. There are lots of airplanes out there that are out of CG when loaded to zero fuel weight, the crew is required to calculate the minimum fuel needed for BALLAST.

Where's a helicopter pilot to explain ballast?
Click to expand...

I believe you missed the point/ question, they already have authorization to calculate W&B at any configuration.
some 182s have authorization in the form of a owners manual that gives the option of removing the rear seat.

Some don't, So if your POH/Om does not give the option where do you get the authorization to pull the seat, and recalculate the W&B?
 
bnt83 said:
135 operators operators flying Part 25 jets have multiple interior configurations depending on what seats they want in them. This is especially true of air taxis that double as an air ambulance.

They typically have two or three difference "current" empty weights on the airplane. IME anything from 10,000 pounds to 90,000 pounds are flown that way.


The old junk skydive 182 only has a pilot chair. (FSDO is 25 miles north of its base airport)

I have yet to understand the arguments that seats can't be removed. :dunno:
Click to expand...
IIRC, those arguing against it said it required tools and was not on the list of authorized maintenance items that a private pilot could perform, therefore it must be highly illegal.

This was something like 4 or 5 years ago, but the gist was that seats like I have in the Baron where you pull a cotter pin and remove the seat were okay to remove, but the bench seat in a 17X/18x required tools.
 
Last edited:
Whatever, don't reweigh the whole airplane after the rear seats are removed. You may just happen to find that it "gained" weight from the factory "calculations".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top