I think your right, … I think your right, I may have been thinking of either the 210 or maybe the 337. Been a while. This view sparked a recall, but details of ship are foggy now. I did like the 337 a lot. Must of been it’s radical design.
veritasvg on
May 2nd, 2009 10:58 am
You and everyone … You and everyone else.
Philscbx on
May 2nd, 2009 10:58 am
Now get the … Now get the hydraulic timing to not close the doors on the gear while retracting. I had to solve that issue.
ferdmack on
May 2nd, 2009 10:58 am
do you mean the … do you mean the nosegear doors? they are not hydraulic on the 182. while at rest, springs hold them open; when the wheel fits into the well during retraction, it pushes against a bar that pulls the doors closed.
if you mean the main gear doors, there aren’t any on a 182. i know that some 210s had them however. that would be nice, i would imagine it would buy you a few knots- as long as they don’t malfunction at the wrong time… i’ve also heard of 210 owners removing them for that very reason.
ferdmack on
May 2nd, 2009 10:58 am
as for reliability, … as for reliability, the 182 has a hand lever that you can use to pump pressure into the system in the event of a gear pump failure. the only true failure mode is when the hydraulic system is breached, and without fall-down gear like a piper which is just held up by hydraulic pressure, and naturally returns to down-and-locked, the cessna setup is admittedly less robust. it does buy me 15-18 knots difference between gear down and gear up in cruise though… this plane trues out at 155-160 kts.
veritasvg on
May 2nd, 2009 10:58 am
Yessir…and a fair … Yessir…and a fair number of Bonanzas, too.
That’s what makes the Columbia and Cirrus so attractive. Fast and fixed gear.
There’s also the Piper 6X, which is basically a modern day Cherokee Six…but she’s gonna drink ya out of house and home. She’ll also handle like a grand piano with wings.
Outlaw1257 on
May 2nd, 2009 10:58 am
Actually, … Actually, Futureflyer, what matters most is that the landing gear come DOWN when it’s supposed to!!
The Cessna 210 and other Cessna RG planes have had a long history of trouble in that respect.
MayoDK on
May 2nd, 2009 10:58 am
Build them with … Build them with very long legs and fold them into the wings?
RobertGary1 on
May 2nd, 2009 10:58 am
Makes me happy to … Makes me happy to have the simple Mooney gear system. No fluid leaking all over the place and everything comes up within 3 seconds.
futureflyer16 on
May 2nd, 2009 10:58 am
doesnt matter how … doesnt matter how it looks comin up only thing that matters is its up haha
Xxflyboy10xX on
May 2nd, 2009 10:58 am
haha thats funny … haha thats funny how they really do look like a retarded storks legs. but high wings do look good with their gear retracted
marick626 on
May 2nd, 2009 10:58 am
Certainly the way … Certainly the way pipers retract their gears is basicaly better. But how else would you retract the gear in a high wing airplane?.
rippin187 on
May 2nd, 2009 10:58 am
LOL looks like a … LOL looks like a retarded stork legs retracting. I like Pipers design much better!
I think your right, …
I think your right, I may have been thinking of either the 210 or maybe the 337. Been a while. This view sparked a recall, but details of ship are foggy now. I did like the 337 a lot. Must of been it’s radical design.
You and everyone …
You and everyone else.
Now get the …
Now get the hydraulic timing to not close the doors on the gear while retracting. I had to solve that issue.
do you mean the …
do you mean the nosegear doors? they are not hydraulic on the 182. while at rest, springs hold them open; when the wheel fits into the well during retraction, it pushes against a bar that pulls the doors closed.
if you mean the main gear doors, there aren’t any on a 182. i know that some 210s had them however. that would be nice, i would imagine it would buy you a few knots- as long as they don’t malfunction at the wrong time… i’ve also heard of 210 owners removing them for that very reason.
as for reliability, …
as for reliability, the 182 has a hand lever that you can use to pump pressure into the system in the event of a gear pump failure. the only true failure mode is when the hydraulic system is breached, and without fall-down gear like a piper which is just held up by hydraulic pressure, and naturally returns to down-and-locked, the cessna setup is admittedly less robust. it does buy me 15-18 knots difference between gear down and gear up in cruise though… this plane trues out at 155-160 kts.
Yessir…and a fair …
Yessir…and a fair number of Bonanzas, too.
That’s what makes the Columbia and Cirrus so attractive. Fast and fixed gear.
There’s also the Piper 6X, which is basically a modern day Cherokee Six…but she’s gonna drink ya out of house and home. She’ll also handle like a grand piano with wings.
Actually, …
Actually, Futureflyer, what matters most is that the landing gear come DOWN when it’s supposed to!!
The Cessna 210 and other Cessna RG planes have had a long history of trouble in that respect.
Build them with …
Build them with very long legs and fold them into the wings?
Makes me happy to …
Makes me happy to have the simple Mooney gear system. No fluid leaking all over the place and everything comes up within 3 seconds.
doesnt matter how …
doesnt matter how it looks comin up only thing that matters is its up haha
haha thats funny …
haha thats funny how they really do look like a retarded storks legs. but high wings do look good with their gear retracted
Certainly the way …
Certainly the way pipers retract their gears is basicaly better. But how else would you retract the gear in a high wing airplane?.
LOL looks like a …
LOL looks like a retarded stork legs retracting. I like Pipers design much better!