1970-71 Cessna 182N Skylane

FloridaPilot

FloridaPilot

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
2,456
Location
Florida
Display Name
Display name:
FloridaStudentPilot
Did I read that correctly? The 1970 version of the Cessna 182N has 1320 Useful load? Is that the most other than the 1977 version of the Skylane which has 1325? My wife likes the Cessna series because it has two doors I was thinking Piper 235 but the 182 just might fit the mission perfectly.
 
There ya go. She be happy, ya get some shade and you don't have to crawl around on the ground to preflight it
 
Would a 5lb difference be a deal breaker?
 
The '70 182N had a MGW of 2950 lb, and Cessna quoted an "average empty weight" of 1,640, giving your 1,310 lb useful load. The '77 182Q is also 2,950 lb MGW, and "average empty" of 1,717, for useful load of 1,233 lb.

Gross weight went up to 3,100 lb with the 1981 Model 182R (not "R182", which is the retractable ... :confused: ), though some earlier models have had the MGW increased by STC paperwork.

The joker in the deck is that after forty-some years, airplanes have been equipped so differently that these factory "empty weight" and "useful load" numbers are useless. Plus, older airplanes tend to gain weight for no reason at all (I know the feeling). So you just have to look at them on a case-by-case basis.
 
Important;
  • 182N w/spring main gear had gross landing weight increased to 2950lbs, but landing weight remained 2800lbs.
  • 182P w/tubular main gear has both landing & take-off weight increased to 2950lbs. Baggage area increased to 200lbs.
  • 182R increased gross weight for take-off to 3100lbs & landing weight remaining 2950lbs (for both turbo retract & standard gear)
Both 182P&Q models can increase Gross weight to match R model by acquiring the "Fresh Pick" STC.

Most planes have gained 150-200lbs in empty weight over time; e.g. leather seats, thicker carpet, sound deadening, more avionics, second coat of paint, etc.
 
Last edited:
We just weighed our 182H after a panel makeover and our useful is only 955lbs. Can't believe she is that porky
 
SkyDog58 said:
Well, men in the southeast have standards when it comes to beer and 8 ounces doesn't meet that standard. :rofl:


But then neither does any size of PBR. :ihih:
Click to expand...

Welllll been my experience that 8 oz goes down just like 16 oz or whatever, just more of 'em with the end result the same, drunkenness. PBR now, that's a real man's beer.
 
I have a 182 N with the STC for higher takeoff weight. Also have the extended range tanks to 39 per side. I keep them at 30 per side unless needed or real cheap fuel somewhere. I never have issues with weight. Even keeping 30 a side that gives me a solid 4 1/2 hours before needing fuel. I really don't want to fly more than 4 hours non stop anyway.
 
My dad had one of those. IIRC, it held 80 gallons. At 65% or less it was a bladder buster, I think I remember at 45% that was like 8 hours.
 
TommyG said:
I have a 182 N with the STC for higher takeoff weight. Also have the extended range tanks to 39 per side. I keep them at 30 per side unless needed or real cheap fuel somewhere. I never have issues with weight. Even keeping 30 a side that gives me a solid 4 1/2 hours before needing fuel. I really don't want to fly more than 4 hours non stop anyway.
Click to expand...

I have a 182P with bladders and have been advised by many to keep them full for bladder longevity. Hangar neighbor with a 1950s V tail bonanza just pulled out one of his bladders that was leaking...the date stamp was 1956. He flys it a few hours a month and keeps the tanks topped off.
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
I have a 182P with bladders and have been advised by many to keep them full for bladder longevity. Hangar neighbor with a 1950s V tail bonanza just pulled out one of his bladders that was leaking...the date stamp was 1956. He flys it a few hours a month and keeps the tanks topped off.
Click to expand...

You don't have to keep them completely full.
What kills bladders faster is parking outside with the sun beating on the wings.
 
NordicDave said:
Both 182P&Q models can increase Gross weight to match R model by acquiring the "Fresh Pick" STC.
Click to expand...

Important note, the STC only raises MGTOW. Landing is still 2950 in the models that qualify.

We haven’t bothered because if you load to 3100 you need to be going somewhere quite a ways off to burn down to 2950. The major usefulness of the MGTOW increase in our airplane would be to tanker more fuel on a long IFR flight that requires an alternate.

The other time is when it’s packed to the gills, and we just leave fuel off to pack it to the gills, and stop more often which also is not all that common of a trip for us.

Since no one in our airplane is enthused by more than three hour legs in XC planning, four max, we haven’t bothered.

The price of that STC was raised in the not too distant past due to popularity, I guess. If we’d have bothered to do it at the old price, maybe worth it. Now, not really.

If we were using it regularly as a cargo hauler or long haul flight planned aircraft and peeing in a bottle, the STC plus our LR tanks would make a nice match.
 
455 Bravo Uniform said:
I have a 182P with bladders and have been advised by many to keep them full for bladder longevity. Hangar neighbor with a 1950s V tail bonanza just pulled out one of his bladders that was leaking...the date stamp was 1956. He flys it a few hours a month and keeps the tanks topped off.
Click to expand...

There's far more to bladder longevity than simply leaving your tanks full all the time. The material the bladder was made from is one of those things, and it is likely the reason your neighbor's 1956 bladder was still ok. In fact, that bladder is probably still repairable while much newer bladders aren't, due to material choice.

I've never left my tanks full in any bladder equipped airplane I've owned. Never replaced a bladder either.
 
FormerHangie said:
If it's just the two of you, any Skylane will have plenty of useful load, unless you travel with a piano.
Click to expand...

We actually joked that our LLC was just in case one of the co-owners decided to drop baby grand pianos on school busses full of nuns and children with the Skylane. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top