View Full Version : Cessna 210

1st Jun 2009, 19:26
I fly a 177 Cardinal and a mate has bought a C210. He wants me to check him out on it. Must be 30 years since I flew a C210. Anything I might need to know about this airplane? I remember it fondly although it did bite me if I did not have the right airspeed over the fence.

dont overfil
1st Jun 2009, 20:54
Comes down like an elevator if you get the speed below 80kts.
If you forget to set 10 degrees flap or don't set the elevator and rudder trims correctly for takeoff you will be standing on the right rudder pedal and lifting yourself off the seat hauling on the yolk.
Flown by the numbers it's a delight and very capable but nothing like a Cardinal to fly.

1st Jun 2009, 21:18
keep a little trickle of power on all the way down onto the runway :ok:

Big Pistons Forever
2nd Jun 2009, 04:21
Flying the aircraft is only part of the issue, understanding the systems is just as important and this is specific to the year and model. I bet there is not one interchangeable part between a 1960 C 210A and a 1986 P210R.

9th Jun 2009, 19:33
The only generic weakness in the wonderful 210 IMHO is the gear... Make sure there is sufficient fluid, know what to do if things go wrong... If you hear the motor run for more than a fraction of a second during cruise pull the breaker, otherwise you will likely lose the fluid. There is only 1 Hyd system with no backup way of lowering the gear.

9th Jun 2009, 20:00
Am I the only one that seems to be picking up on the fact that someone who has not flown a C210 for years is going to try and check another pilot out on it? What about the 2 year life on differences training for a start?

Sounds like the blind leading the blind to me......

9th Jun 2009, 21:27

Quote: "Am I the only one that seems to be picking up on the fact that someone who has not flown a C210 for years is going to try and check another pilot out on it?
No, you are not alone!! I totally agree with you. This whole plan is just :mad:

Just having to ask the questions the original poster did, documents the quality and value of having a checkride with said person. Unless, of course, intended as a joke, and he plans to get properly current on the C210 first. A fully loaded 210 compared to a 177 with only the pilot are as like as a bus and a VW beetle.

(Sometimes I see the positive thing in Helicopterland having all A/C TypeRated, and no Class Ratings exist. :cool: )

OK, I assume the Flak will hit soon from the "freedom"-crowd, I have no probs with that.

Cheers Bose-x,

9th Jun 2009, 22:42
What about the 2 year life on differences training for a start?

C'mon bose-x! The two year life is for MEP not SEP m8.



10th Jun 2009, 08:31
What about the 2 year life on differences training for a start?
C'mon bose-x! The two year life is for MEP not SEP m8.



I could have sworn I saw something in either a training note or a NOTEX recently that lifed all differences training to years?

Oh my god, I have become DFC and am making rules up.........

If I am wrong I humbly apologise and will not post any snippets of rules to try and convince others that I am right..... ;)

I could try and say I thought it was a 310 not a 210? :p

However the first part of my comment does stand!!!

10th Jun 2009, 21:56
What about the 2 year life on differences training for a start?

The person who asked the question is in the Pacific.

Might be a good idea to establish what licence is applicable before assuming that differences training would be required.



10th Jun 2009, 22:40
I'm presently current on 9 different aircraft, but with over 80 different aircraft over the past X number of years. I'm not familiar with a 2 year currency rule for a specific type of aircraft...particular a category and class that doesn't require a type rating, but I can't imagine having to enforce a 2-year currency in each of the aircraft I fly or have flown.

The Cessna 210 flies the same as a Cessna 206 or 207, with the same systems, airframe, handling, procedures, etc. The 206, of course, flies the same as a Cessna 182, which flies the same as a 172, which flies the same as a 152...which flies the same as a Cessna 150...which flies about the same as any other light airplane.

Certainly one should become familiar, and were one to offer instruction or training in the 210, one would do well to get a recurrent check in the type before holding out instruction to others. That said, I got back in a 210 a few months ago after having not flown one for about eight years or so. During the course of my checkout, I spent most of the time in the right seat providing instruction on the type to the instructor/check airman...because I was a lot more familiar with it than he was.

The 210 is a very forgiving airplane which is light on the controls, a little nose-heavy with a forward CG, and has ample power to do whatever you want to do with the airplane. It's got no bad habits, really, but does have a few specifics regarding the fuel system, electro-hydraulics, and flight controls which should be noted and known before one undertakes to operate the airplane. If it's turbocharged, one should handle it accordingly.

As others have mentioned various changes in the airframe over the years from the 205 through the latest 210 have made a few differences that are specific to that year, as well as make and model, and these should also be understood.

The airplane is easy to fly and land with or without flaps. The fuel management is dirt simple, as is the gear, the electrical, the flight controls, power setting, etc. However, as simple as they may be, like any airplane, the 210 can just barely kill you (very similiar to the Cub in that respect). It's a relatively slick airplane as light singles go, and it's an airplane one can easily overstress in weather and turbulence, though it's got a very strong wing, too. It's got the performance to lead one into places from which one can't return, and it must accordingly be flown with some common sense.

Landed lightly, it's not uncommon for new pilots in the airplane to flat-spot or blow a tire; brakes should be used sparingly, like all aircraft. Weight should be on the wheels when brakes are applied, and brakes during a "greaser" landing are a recipe for aircraft or wheel damage.

Long range tanks leave out one hour a side when filled to the bottom of the filler neck, in aircraft with the long filler necks. I've known two pilots who ran the airplane out of fuel and landed off field because of this, though they were forewarned that this could happen. Both though they had two hours of fuel remaining, when they ran out of petrol. Landing gear which doesn't work can often be fixed by shutting off the aircraft electrical power for about ten minutes, then trying again. The smart pilot preflights the electrohydraulic powerpack for every flight...not just every 25 hours or so. The airplane likes to run a couple of quarts down on fuel, depending on the specific airplane...like most light singles, it tends to blow out the breather whatever is above it's oil comfort level.

The fuel system employs kidney sumps which must be drained, at the base of where the strut would normally attach to the fuselage if the aircraft had wing struts...just below and forward of the cabin door leading edge. These same kidney sumps, which feed the fuel selector valve, accept fuel pump bypass return fuel,and are responsible for the fuel flow fluctuation that can cause an engine failure under certain normal operating conditions...and the precise reason why following the Cessna aircraft manual procedure for fuel flow fluctuation can guarantee an engine failure from which one cannot recover. Knowing the system can save you some grief (as can remembering to switch tanks before turning on the fuel boost pump, in such a situation...don't forget to retard the throttle, first).

Flown with one or two people on board, ballast aft makes it fly better, and makes it easier to land.

Like all light airplanes, take off on the fuel with which you taxi, and don't change tanks before or just after takeoff. Always change tanks when over a usable forced landing site.

Increased fuel flow above what should normally be expected often means you're really seeing decreased fuel flow...the indicated fuel flow is based on pressure drop, or fuel pressure, rather than actual fuel flow (unless one is using an actual dedicated flow sensor such as a Shadin device)...a plugged injector which is actually flowing less fuel...will show up on the cockpit instrumentation as an engine that's flowing more. Know the system, understand why, and you'll be able to better manage the airplane.

The 210 is not a big airplane. Unlike big airplanes, you can feel it, hear it, and still be a part of hand flying it. Know how the airplane should feel. Know the numbers, but know how to fly that airplane from it's slowest to it's fastest...be comfortable with or without flaps, with different kinds of approaches, different conditions. It lands just fine in a crosswind just like anything else. It's got rudder trim that can be set to taxi in a crosswind...use what's available.

It's not a 172 (though it flies like one), especially turbocharged models. Bad habits taught to students, such as power off on the downwind for a gliding landing...are improper in the 210. Fly a power on approach; keep the power in the green until you've got to retard it further for landing. Fly stable approaches; the 210 makes a nice instrument training platform, so far as a small single engine airplane goes. Get in the habit of flying it accordingly. It can certainly be flown like any other light single, but between the cost and the capability, the 210 calls for some respect in approaching one's decision making and flying...plan ahead, fly stable, fly smart, fly smoothly. Respect Va.

The 210 is NOT some magical, larger than life, towering giant of a machine that is too much horse to tame. It's a docile, easy to fly single engine airplane. It's sensitive on the controls; it's a two-finger airplane that can easily be flown with small inputs. Like any light airplane, it likes pilot input on the rudders. It's not a slip-to-landing airplane, and in fact one can cause damage to the vertical stab attach brackets and surrounding structure, by doing so. Make sensible, small, smooth power changes. Lock your seat in place. Don't skimp on fuel. Sump your fuel. Make sure seatbelts aren't locked outside the cabin before takeoff. Check your landing gear five times before you land, and make sure your control locks are out before taxi. The controls are available to use in crosswind taxi. Take advantage of that.

Know your speeds, but don't forget to listen to the airplane. Watch your engine instruments. Lean for taxi. Remember your cowl flaps. They're useful for warming the engine in the morning, and they should be remembered when doing touch-and-go pattern work. Open and closed. Lean properly. Don't use too much power on the ground, don't get the engine too hot, and use a reduced climb and higher airspeed when the cylinder temps start to creep up. Treat the engine as though it's the only one you've got, because it is.

Sometimes people develop poor habits or a cavalier attitude toward light airplanes. By the time one is flying a Cessna 210, one should be taking a professional attitude toward one's flying...whether one is an ATP or Private Pilot. Calculate performance. Fly precise altitudes and headings. Tune frequences always one ahead, identify nav stations, and time fuel tanks. Coordinate. Think before you talk. Organize.

Bose-x is right that one should always be prepared to know the airplane systems, especially if one is intent upon teaching them. I'm not a part of the regulatory system which requires two year currency, and the concept is somewhat foreign to me...and would impose an unnecessary burden in my case as I'm not sure I could do it for all the aircraft I fly or have flown, or occasionally use. That said, I'm also a big believer in seeking recurrent or refresher training when dusting off habits or skills in equipment that I haven't flown for a while, and I do believe that the few dollars or pounds or euros or whatever that one might turn over to a flight instructor are some of the least expensive one will spend in the scope of things. After all, it's hard to put a price on safety.

Whatever the regulations, ensure that you know yourself, your limitations, those of the airplane, and even those of the student well before you undertake this training, and you'll be fine. Be in ignorance of any of those things, and it could cost you dearly, whether your flight be in a J-3, CE-210, or B747. Never lose sight of the ancient wisdom that a cub can just barely kill you...but always remember that just barely is quite enough.

13th Jun 2009, 09:52
Beautifully put SNS3Guppy. I haven't flown one for years but that bought back good memories. From my memory that all seems very accurate. They are a very nice aircraft but like all of them they deserve respect.
They do bounce around a bit in turbulence compared to say a Cessna 310 and understandably. They are lighter despite the "solid" feel that makes them generally quite good for IFR flying. So if flying the C210 IFR it helps to anticipate if possible and perhaps slow down a bit, particularly on descent as it is slippery and will easily increase. In those situations I found hand flying in rough air and keep the control inputs gentle with power at say 18 inches (on descent) from memory was quite OK.
I used them a lot out of bush strips, some fairly short and with good loads.
They have good feel and were great for the job. Often at the end of a long VFR bush day I would finish up empty for the last leg home where the weather was a bit claggy (in the tropics). It was often good to finish off IFR with an ILS back through the weather to make life easier. I didn't feel that way about a lot of aircraft I flew then. I conducted the ILS exactly as I would in any twin, pre-planned.
The point is though they are a bit heavier and faster than a C177, C182 etc so require a bit more anticipation, pre planning and thought than you may be able to get away with in the C182, PA32 or whatever. The necessity to keep ahead of the aircraft yourself, convey that to the student as well as the operating of the aircraft and systems in pre planned rather than reactive way might be a bit hard if you aren't entirely famliar yourself.

15th Jun 2009, 21:10
What about the 2 year life on differences training for a start?
C'mon bose-x! The two year life is for MEP not SEP m8.



As promised rather than doing a DFC and making stuff up to suit I went and had a look at why I had it in my mind that differences training only lasts 2 years.....

Standards Document 17 V2 page 5 1.2.6 states that:

'The validity period for difference training is 24 months, notwithstanding the rating validity period of of 12 months in respect of Type rating and ME ratings, after which further differences training has to be completed'

Para 1.2.4 defines what requires difference training:

Variable Pitch prop
Retractable Gear

Additionally SLPC (single lever power control), EFIS and Tail wheel.


15th Jun 2009, 22:38
Standards Document 17 V2 page 5 1.2.6 states that:

SD17 is not a current Standards Doc. See:

List of Flight Crew Standards Documents | Publications | CAA (http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?catid=33&pagetype=65&appid=11&mode=list&type=sercat&id=22)

From LASORS 2008 Section F Page 7:

Differences Training in aeroplanes within the SEP class
rating is valid indefinitely. If a type, or variant of a type,
within the SEP class rating, has not been flown for some
time, pilots must use their judgement to decide if refresher
training is warranted. However, it is recommended that
such re-training be undertaken when the lay-off is more
than two years.

If a type or variant, within any other class or type rating,
has not been flown within the preceding two years, further
Differences Training, recorded again in the pilots logbook
or a proficiency check, on that type or variant, is required.

It still only applies to MEP m8....I appreciate that LASORS is not the actual reference.

16th Jun 2009, 18:32
Ah well, at least I knew I was not making it up!!!

dont overfil
16th Jun 2009, 18:47
In just one bit if a line sns3guppy briefly mentions checking the fuel sumps. It just reminded me that every time I checked the two I've flown I've found water even when there's been no rain!

16th Jun 2009, 20:03
Ah well, at least I knew I was not making it up!!!

No just plain wrong!


Making things up would be something like claiming to have qualifications that one doe not hold!!

:D :D :D