Why the Cessna 182 Turbocharged is THE best plane

  Рет қаралды 27,152

Van Bortel Aircraft Inc

Van Bortel Aircraft Inc

3 ай бұрын

• Visit us at www.vanbortel.com for a complete list of available aircraft along with specifications and photos.
The Cessna 182 Turbocharged is a high-performance single-engine aircraft known for its versatility and reliability. Equipped with a turbocharged engine, it boasts improved performance at higher altitudes, allowing for faster climbs and increased cruising speeds. With a spacious cabin for up to 4 passengers, it's popular among pilots and charter ops alike. #cessna #planes #aviation

Пікірлер: 37
@JOBAYERHOSSENBD
@JOBAYERHOSSENBD 3 ай бұрын
I watched the video completely. The whole video was awesome. Good luck for that
@pabloalvarezbiering60
@pabloalvarezbiering60 2 ай бұрын
Definitely a great airplane , great presentation too !!
@MichaelVanHeemst
@MichaelVanHeemst 3 ай бұрын
The easiest way to distinguish a turbo from non turbo is the single exhaust stack on the turbos and dual exhaust stacks on the non turbo. Different set of cowl flaps.
@markymarknj
@markymarknj 3 ай бұрын
I imagine the fact that the 182 has fixed gear is another reason why insurance is reasonable on these airplanes-no gear up accidents.
@noblegoldheart8508
@noblegoldheart8508 2 күн бұрын
I have a friend who owns a 182Q model, and he says the same thing about insurance. All the companies are a lot more reasonable towards fixed gear airplanes, because they can’t have gear up accidents. Whereas complex airplanes like a 182RG model, they’ll charge a pretty penny because of the gear up landings.
@markymarknj
@markymarknj 2 күн бұрын
@@noblegoldheart8508 EXACTLY! Plus, you don't have the weight, complexity, or expense of having retractable gear. I bet annuals on retractables are expensive.
@noblegoldheart8508
@noblegoldheart8508 2 күн бұрын
@@markymarknj and that’s precisely one of many reasons why I’d like to own a 182. Much later down the road of course, but they’re absolutely solid airplanes that can do just about anything. Speaking from experience too, they’re also decently easy on maintenance.
@noblegoldheart8508
@noblegoldheart8508 2 күн бұрын
@@markymarknj and yes, annuals for complex airplanes are hideously expensive. Because every annual or 100 hour inspection, you have to do a gear swing. Which includes the labor of jacking the airplane, and using a tail boom to support the tail. A good example of this is the Cessna 310. Every single annual, you have to re-rig the landing gear because it’s a fully mechanical system. And overtime the cables, chains, and rods will wear out and have to be readjusted.
@markymarknj
@markymarknj Күн бұрын
@@noblegoldheart8508 I'd LOVE to have a 182! It's a great airplane.
@MalcolmRuthven
@MalcolmRuthven Ай бұрын
Turbocharging is great at high altitudes. If you want to go faster than the T182, get a T210. I had a 1967 T210 for several years and its true airspeed was always 200 mph or more from 8,000 feet up, burning 16 gph. The 1967 model has four "real" seats, not six like later (and more expensive) models.
@alecb846
@alecb846 10 күн бұрын
Beautiful old technology that has not really changed in 60 years. It is in the price range of more modern aircraft like a Cirrus. Although not a popular statement, the company should have added a ballistic parasure system to the plane to better compete with their primary competition like the cirrus.
@andrewcavese1387
@andrewcavese1387 4 күн бұрын
I believe you can add one to the 182
@billgalante1181
@billgalante1181 Ай бұрын
Fantastic video, thanks for sharing.
@wayneschenk5512
@wayneschenk5512 3 ай бұрын
What a great aeroplane
@TimM-dx3kx
@TimM-dx3kx Ай бұрын
For landings what are the airspeeds and flap settings for a Skylane T182T
@nxfedlt1
@nxfedlt1 Ай бұрын
54kt vs0. 45kt full flaps
@captainbuck5969
@captainbuck5969 Ай бұрын
Best value??? Who would pay about 1 million dollars for a plane that has about 100,000 dollars of materials in it? Cessna high wing technology has really changed much in 60+ years.
@GaryMCurran
@GaryMCurran 2 ай бұрын
Cessna has been pushing how good Cessna single engine airplanes are. While I am not current (I probably can't get another medical), I still follow the aviation community. Your comment about the airplane being 60 years old really brings home that it's an OLD airplane, with OLD technology. The TIO-540 engine still has magnetos! There are certified electronic spark systems available which will bring better fuel economy. Why isn't Cessna using them? How about aerodynamic clean up? Both the 210 and the 177 have used internally braced wing structures. Okay, maybe not for the Skyhawk, but the Skylane should be able to reduce drag by going to an internally braced wing. Honestly, if I was upgrading the Skylane, we'd start at the front of the airplane. The TIO-540 would be gone. It would be replaced with a Continental CD-300. More horsepower, more performance, better fuel availability, better fuel economy. Diamond is doing very well with that engine in the DA-50 right now. Even with the higher weight of the engine and the fuel, you could probably gain useful load in the cabin. Change out the 552 pounds of fuel to 337 pounds of Jet-A with 50 gallons total fuel on board. With a fuel burn of only about 9 gph versus 14 gph or higher for a TIO-540 and you could go at least as far on less fuel. Next, I would get rid of the wing struts, as mentioned earlier. I think we ought to retract the landing gear, as well. Should give us a few more knots of speed. We might even be able to go to a four blade prop, say from MT or someone. All of our General Aviation airplanes from Cessna, Beech and Piper are decades old designs, or based on decades old designs, using decades old technology. While I understand the very small market for GA Airplanes today, and the cost of certifying a new airplane, at some point, manufacturers are going to have to start switching over to new tech and Jet-A for new airplanes. My two cents.
@quinnjim
@quinnjim Ай бұрын
That would be a great 1.5 million dollar airplane you've come up with! As far as having retractable gear....did you just invent the 182RG, or has it been around for awhile?😀
@GaryMCurran
@GaryMCurran Ай бұрын
@@quinnjim I think you're overstating the price a bit, but $1-$1.1M, probably. A new Turbo 182T is north of $800,000 as is. And, as you are well aware, Cessna did do a 182RG, and I see no reason why it shouldn't be brought back. Currently, Cessna has no single engine retractables in production. So, not only the 182, but the 172RG should be returned to production, which allows for 'complex' training.
@wilfredpacquin2213
@wilfredpacquin2213 Ай бұрын
You’ve mouthed more than 2 cent. Let Cessna always be a Cessna and more flavor you can buy of these great aircraft!
@carlmanning6707
@carlmanning6707 Ай бұрын
Great video I would love to fly I’m a big guy at 350 lbs and I don’t think I would fit in them training planes.
@jerodkenoyer270
@jerodkenoyer270 Ай бұрын
Me too. 360 6'5" Just beginning as a student pilot in ground school. Got my medical done and asked my AME who is also a pilot and familiar with the Cessna 172 if he thinks I'll fit. He says it'll be a little tight but I will fit.
@carlmanning6707
@carlmanning6707 Ай бұрын
@@jerodkenoyer270 ok let me know how you fit good luck with your training
@jerodkenoyer270
@jerodkenoyer270 Ай бұрын
@@carlmanning6707 I certainly will. Thank you. I hope you get to experience it too.
@tonyrowland9216
@tonyrowland9216 21 күн бұрын
do you offer steam gage to glass training?
@johnsanchez6263
@johnsanchez6263 Ай бұрын
Looks sleek
@AY-nr5uy
@AY-nr5uy 2 ай бұрын
Mean machine
@mikebrown3769
@mikebrown3769 3 ай бұрын
Randall, Excellent video! Without question the T182T Skylane is a hoss of an aircraft. Best, Mike Brown
@MrMonoTracer
@MrMonoTracer Ай бұрын
However… the normally aspirated 182 is 100lbs lighter, burns unleaded fuel (UL91, UL94), costs less and still climbs pretty high. But… you‘re right when it comes to flying above high terrain.
@shakey2634
@shakey2634 16 күн бұрын
Primary flight training in a 182? Only for a lottery winner. What’s the recommended reserve cost per hour in a TIO540 vs an IO 360? I realize this is a sales video but c’mon…..
@andrewcavese1387
@andrewcavese1387 4 күн бұрын
Tbh the 182 is not tht crazy to use for training.The prices arent terrible to rent in my area.
@shakey2634
@shakey2634 3 күн бұрын
@@andrewcavese1387 in my area a 182 is at least $50 more per hour than a 172.
@andrewcavese1387
@andrewcavese1387 3 күн бұрын
@@shakey2634 yeah im not saying there comparible in price but 50 more an hour is not only for lottery winner lol
@shakey2634
@shakey2634 3 күн бұрын
@@andrewcavese1387 It would add at least $2000 to private pilot training if you got it done in 40 hours or so. So, no, not lottery winner money, but a lot for many of us. That money would buy you another 13 hours in a 172 though.
The Cessna 206 - the plane for many missions
13:48
Van Bortel Aircraft Inc
Рет қаралды 12 М.
Roy Halladay Crash Dissected: Drugs Were the Least Of It
9:50
你们会选择哪一辆呢#short #angel #clown
00:20
Super Beauty team
Рет қаралды 30 МЛН
버블티로 체감되는 요즘 물가
00:16
진영민yeongmin
Рет қаралды 112 МЛН
Inside The $700,000 Cessna 182 Turbo Skylane
8:39
Aviation Base
Рет қаралды 49 М.
Why New Aircraft Engine Ideas Rarely Succeed
22:48
AVweb
Рет қаралды 755 М.
2004 Cessna Turbo 182T
19:30
Skywagon University
Рет қаралды 15 М.
Flying the most affordable airplane across America
16:03
Ethan McIntosh
Рет қаралды 1,4 МЛН
Flying the BRAND NEW Cessna 182 is like CHEATING!
18:51
Airplane Academy
Рет қаралды 1,3 МЛН
Buying a Modded Cessna 182 Spy Plane (300HP Fuel Injected Monster)
15:42
Why the Cessna 182 Skylane is excellent
19:18
Dwaynes Aviation
Рет қаралды 282 М.
Flying the New Cessna Turbo 206 is... WOW
17:54
Airplane Academy
Рет қаралды 336 М.
Why Aircraft Engines Quit
24:24
AVweb
Рет қаралды 900 М.