5 people in a 182, is it legal?

dennyleeb said:
I would not buy a plane older than 2005, and g1000 or better is a must for me
Click to expand...
Your kids would be a lot safer with their own seats in a 20 year old airplane.
 
jesse said:
Your kids would be a lot safer with their own seats in a 20 year old airplane.
Click to expand...

I only have 2 right now, and kinda why I said a vasectomy may be in my near future instead
 
I had to gear up before, the decelleration is no where near 9g's, it's not even 2. If there's an instrument telltale reading 9g, it was from the runway contact jolt. I went into the crop once and went from 115kts to 0 in 1.3 seconds and that only works out just over 4.5 g's, half of the 9 g's you're talking about. If you take a plane at 70 and decellerate it to 0 in 3 seconds, about typical for a GA gear up, that only works out around 1.2g
 
If you read that interpretation carefully, you'll see that they are very careful to say only that it's legal, not that it's safe, and that there may be serious safety hazards if you do it. Research suggests that two people under one seat belt in a seat not designed for two is highly risky, especially in side-loaded impacts. Further, any pilot who puts two kids that small under one belt should have his/her medical revoked for insanity...

"He's touching me."
"No I'm not."
"Yes he is."
"Well, she's poking me."
"No I'm not."
"Yes she is."
"Well, he's breathing on me..."

Even Pilot-ISO won't fix that problem.
 
Henning said:
I had to gear up before, the decelleration is no where near 9g's, it's not even 2. If there's an instrument telltale reading 9g, it was from the runway contact jolt. I went into the crop once and went from 115kts to 0 in 1.3 seconds and that only works out just over 4.5 g's, half of the 9 g's you're talking about. If you take a plane at 70 and decellerate it to 0 in 3 seconds, about typical for a GA gear up, that only works out around 1.2g
Click to expand...

Interesting. I'd like to read the accident reports on both of those events. Have the info handy?
 
NoHeat said:
Yes. A lap child died in a crash of a Socata a few blocks from my house.

You should be aware that 9g's of forward acceleration is typical in a gear-up landing. Other crashes would have more forward acceleration. A 20-pound child would exert 9 X 20 = 180 pounds of forward force at 9 g's. Some crashes would exert much more than that. A child seat or a safety belt are strong enough to withstand many thousands of pounds of force, but I'd bet your wife can't pull back more than a hundred pounds with her arms. If she goes to a gym she can find out exactly how much, but it won't be thousands of pounds, that's for sure.

When my children were small, I always paid for their airplane tickets when we flew commercially, because I love them and I don't want them to die. Other parents seem to view their small children instead as sources of inconvenient expenses to be avoided whenever the law allows, so they do the lap-child thing instead.
Click to expand...
:yeahthat:
Put the infant in an approved seat, with an approved restraint system. Somewhere on the internet there's a simulation of deceleration with people holding crash-test infant dolls. They ALL went flying and most sustained fatal injuries, even though the G-force was probably only around 2 Gs or so. Now, if you hit something immovable, it gets much worse.
 
TMetzinger said:
:yeahthat:
Put the infant in an approved seat, with an approved restraint system. Somewhere on the internet there's a simulation of deceleration with people holding crash-test infant dolls. They ALL went flying and most sustained fatal injuries, even though the G-force was probably only around 2 Gs or so. Now, if you hit something immovable, it gets much worse.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone has even suggested a child sitting in a lap at any point of this discussion,
 
We always used child seats just like in a car...I'd just wait till she's prego to worry about it...then start shopping!...Don't discount the older birds...there are fine aftermarket avionics and alot of the older birds can lift more than the newer ones. Still a simple snip is your cheapest option.:idea:
 
Red Air Rambo said:
We always used child seats just like in a car...I'd just wait till she's prego to worry about it...then start shopping!...Don't discount the older birds...there are fine aftermarket avionics and alot of the older birds can lift more than the newer ones. Still a simple snip is your cheapest option.:idea:
Click to expand...

I don't really have a problem with older birds. I like all glass, new paint, new int. and a new engine, if you do all that to a older plane you are in it for the same money so that is why i just go a couple yrs old

here is one you would like (and me)

http://pristineairplanes.com/listing-2011+P337+Rocket+II-63.html


:)
 
Last edited:
Any reason to not go with a Bonanza or PA-32? Get a used one, put in Aspen Glass, and I think you might like it a lot.
 
Rotor&Wing said:
Interesting. I'd like to read the accident reports on both of those events. Have the info handy?
Click to expand...


The gear up wasn't an accident, it was a mechanical failure on a 210 I was bringing in to have the gear door removal STC done. The gear wouldn't come down after the doors openned and I landed it on the gear doors. No report required, I did the wrong thing and shut the engine down over the runway and settled it in. Only thing that needed to be repaired was the nose gear doors and some cowling scrape. The Ag Cat one is in the NTSB files in Illinois 8 or so years ago, a GA 164; it died.
 
Henning said:
I had to gear up before, the deceleration is no where near 9g's, it's not even 2. I
Click to expand...

Okay, I said the wrong thing regarding the 9 g's. Here's what I should have said:

Starting around 1952, passenger seats on many aircraft were required to withstand 9 g's of forward acceleration in a crash. So if you want to pick a reasonable value for the acceleration in a crash that is survivable with good seats and restraints, 9g is a good choice. That's the justification I should have given for the number 9.

For engineering-types who are curious, the history behind the 9g value is a bit fuzzy. Here's a report on the crash tests dating back to the dark ages of aviation:
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA055343
 
dennyleeb said:
again I did not say lap child
Click to expand...

um, I thought I saw the phrase "lap child" when you wrote the question that I attempted to answer.

Maybe my report of a lap child who died in a small-plane crash was somehow an answer to a question you didn't ask? Oh well, I won't bother to post any more responses since they get dismissed anyway.

"
Originally Posted by dennyleeb
most airlines allow a lap child, so i am thinking it is legal but some feel it is not a good idea, has anyone ever read where this exact thing lead to a accident or injury that otherwise would not have happened?"

 
Last edited:
NoHeat said:
Okay, I said the wrong thing regarding the 9 g's. Here's what I should have said:

Starting around 1952, passenger seats on many aircraft were required to withstand 9 g's of forward acceleration in a crash. So if you want to pick a reasonable value for the acceleration in a crash that is survivable with good seats and restraints, 9g is a good choice. That's the justification I should have given for the number 9.

For engineering-types who are curious, the history behind the 9g value is a bit fuzzy. Here's a report on the crash tests dating back to the dark ages of aviation:
http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA055343
Click to expand...

IIRC 50g is where you start dieing from the Gs alone, I believe it's the aorta that tears loose first. The 9g has more to do with the amount of survivable damage the plane can take. Ag plane seats I believe are rated for 18g crushing.
 
COFlyBoy said:
All that said, Cessna, Piper and Beechcraft have built some great 6 place haulers. We fly a Cherokee Six, which provides plenty of sibling separation and enough space to carry all of the child maintenance materiel. I think you must have a great 182, to not be willing to buy a slightly older 210 or 206. I'll bet you can find one that is nearly as tricked out as your 182, but a bit older.
Click to expand...

Ron Levy said:
If you read that interpretation carefully, you'll see that they are very careful to say only that it's legal, not that it's safe, and that there may be serious safety hazards if you do it. Research suggests that two people under one seat belt in a seat not designed for two is highly risky, especially in side-loaded impacts. Further, any pilot who puts two kids that small under one belt should have his/her medical revoked for insanity...

"He's touching me."
"No I'm not."
"Yes he is."
"Well, she's poking me."
"No I'm not."
"Yes she is."
"Well, he's breathing on me..."

Even Pilot-ISO won't fix that problem.
Click to expand...

When our kids (now in their 30s) were young we had an 8 passenger 3/4 ton Dodge van. Long trips were easy. They each had their own bench seat for their stuff and themselves. Completely eliminated the problem of a seat that wasn't wide enough for two kids. There still was some reaching over a seat back now and then, but by and large the problem was solved. The thought of two kids in the back seat of a plane on a long trip (read - anything over 30 minutes) is scary. :D And, Ron is right. Pilot-ISO isn't going to cure that.
 
Get a two seater and leave the kids at home.
 
I have three kids 12, 10 and 7 and a 206, and that works pretty well. One kid in the back row and enough place for luggage. I also considered getting a 182 a while back and am really glad I didn't. It is bad enough flying with kids when they are not squished in place and to add that to the mix sounds like a bad idea to me. As it is flying can be challenging with the whole family. Especially IFR if you want to talk about distractions in the cockpit. In my case I went with the G1000 with GFC700 autopilot which certainly helps take some of the load off when two kids are fighting and one is vomiting on me... The advice to leave the kids at home and get a two seater is probably not a bad one and one I sometimes consider. But for goodness sake don't make things worse by getting something too small. Just my two cents.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top