What counts as time on a C182?

[Okavango]

Possibly a stupid question, but just wondered if any time on high winged Cessnas would do or any complex single (eg Piper Arrow)? Only asking as I don't have any C182 time but plenty of the latter, though some orgs I'm looking to get involved with want min 10hrs C182.

[Kulwin Park]

Well a C182 does handle much different from a Piper Arrow (flown both). Possibly the operator has an Insurance Requirement that stipulates a minimum of 10hrs on type, so best you better get some practice navs in on one cheaply then.

Stall characteristics and not floating during a landing are 2 differences. The rest is basically about high & low speed manuveoures in them.

[PAPI-74]

A complex single has a VP prop and retractable gear. If it the 182rg then yes it does count.
It is just about having more systems to operate and being able to deal with more complex failures.

[D-J]

Generally for most insurance companys anytime in larger cessna singles will count toward the smaller...

eg C210 will cover you for c206, c182, c172 etc etc

[Fly-by-Desire]

I would recomend a few hours of of flying in the 182 before you blast off in one, if you are comming from pipers then they will take a little getting used to, even from a 172. Main areas are getting to know the landing and a bit of engine managment.
They are an excellent plane, be careful and enjoy the flying!

[UnderneathTheRadar]

Forgive me if I'm on the wrong track but 10 hrs C182 sounds like a meat-bombing requirement.

APF rules require 10 hours on type, they'll only give you credit for C206 or C210 time - not for other complex single time.

UTR

[Peter Fanelli]

You're apparently in the UK so you ask the question in an Australian forum?

[Aerodynamisist]

The best way to get 10 hours 182 is to go and fly a 182 around for 10 hours. 210, 206 and 205 hours count for APF regs, new (apf) rules now require you to do a written test and check flight to fly jumpers. I'm unsure about what the casa position is there regarding what constitutes 10 hours on type for charter whether or not it's the same deal with a bit of 210 time.

The transition from low wing to high wing is not so bad, first two or three landings will feel weird without the low wing in your peripheral vision. 182 Has heavyish controls and a higher dash than other types.

[Curare]

Peter,

We all know pilots throughout the world value the advice of Australian pilots most.

[PAPI-74]

Yer, cos you are all so great at flying.
Everyone knows that we have the best tools and the greatest tallent.
No need to reply, just be humbled.
You can't play cricket either.....:ok:

[conflict alert]

okavango
you need to be more specific about your enquiry. As another has pointed out - your shown as a UK origin but post in an Ozzy AND NEW ZEALAND forum (Mr Fanelli) so the rules may be quite different. In NZ many years ago the Group Rating prevailed which meant if you had say constant speed fixed gear - you could fly any aircraft that had that configuration but before taking pax you needed to do 3 take off and landings. All since long changed and type rating required for every different aircraft type you fly. Don't know the rules across the ditch. You need to be more specific about what you are trying to accomplish.

[JRL89]

All i can think it would be is simply either a company requirement in their AOC or insurance requirements of that company. If you have a CPL, and your CSU and R/G stickers in your logbook, as a technicality, your free to fly any single engine piston a/c below 5700kg, but it makes perfect sense to do some time in the 182, before you blast off doing charters or meatbombing for a company

[The Green Goblin]

Provided it is of a similar class 10 hours on a Arrow is the same as a 182. I just log in my logbook SE<5700 as the type with the call sign. No need to write up what it is. They are all the same.

I understand that it also works in the Airlines, if you fly a 737 it can be counted towards A320 time and so you can negate the need for a simulator endorsement. Just a quick differences brief and you get to fly the line as a line pilot.

Watch those 182s though, very complex machine. Pretty hard to stay ahead of and the landing speed gives you a rush every time. Awesome power which is why they use them for meat bombing. I believe it has set many time to altitude records for its class.

[Peter Fanelli]

Ozzy AND NEW ZEALAND forum (Mr Fanelli)


Ok, and NZ, but that's like the bastard in the family that nobody mentions.

:E


Yer, cos you are all so great at flying.
Everyone knows that we have the best tools and the greatest tallent.
No need to reply, just be humbled.
You can't play cricket either.....


And you can't spell.


Watch those 182s though, very complex machine. Pretty hard to stay ahead of and the landing speed gives you a rush every time. Awesome power which is why they use them for meat bombing. I believe it has set many time to altitude records for its class.


Don't know about time to altitude records but maybe time from altitude.

:ok:

[Okavango]

Just to clarify, I was asking what counts as C182 time in Australia. Hope I got the right forum.

[frigatebird]

This is
AND THE PACIFIC Forum..

[Xcel]

skipped all of the thread...

just reread the title.. i swear i read it as "what counts time on a c182?"

answer is surely the clock...

[boofhead]

Always intrigues me when I read this type of post, from Aus, NZ or the UK. Why make it all so complicated? Is it to make the regulators more powerful? Give them more money? Keep the flight instructors employed?
In the US, any SEL rating covers all single engine land airplanes below 5700Kg except for pure jets. Simple. End of story. Any MEL rating covers all multi engine land below 5700 Kg. Any SES covers all single engine sea etc etc. All jets (except turbo propeller) and airplanes above 5700 Kg require a type rating.
Only one instrument rating, can be maintained by the pilot simply by using it. No night rating, all pilots Private or above have an automatic approval to fly at night. Forever.
Sign offs required by a flight instructor in the logbook, no record sent to the FAA, for complex, high performance, tailwheel, glider tow, high altitude pressurized, and flight review.
Works better than the system used in Aus, etc, as proven by the accident record.
If an owner or if the insurance company wants more time from a particular pilot, they will specify what is needed.
Why do you guys put up with this mindless crap?

[conflict alert]

Jeesh - its not that bad. Instrument, night, para drop, tow, aero's ratings or endorsements are forever (you just have to do some to keep it CURRENT). You don't have to re-do any of these every time you change an aircraft type. (exception of course SEIR to MEIR)

Aircraft type ratings can be from 3 circuits to hours depending on pilot ability and / or greedy institutions/instructors.

[boofhead]

Does an instructor also need all this "rating" stuff? Otherwise, how do you find an instructor who is qualified to qualify you?
Maybe you have been living with the system so long you cannot see the ridiculous efforts you have to put into it. I could not imagine the problems it would cause me. I am a free-lance CFI and love the ability to fly and teach new airplane types, floats, conventional, skis, you name it. If I had to be "rated" before I could do this I would have to give it up. I am in the CAP and they have a similar "rating' system, after 5 years I am only up to 80 percent of the types we have here in Alaska. I have to do separate check rides to be qualified on floats, amphibs, skis etc. I am qualified for example on the C206 amphib, and the C185 floats, but not the C206 floats or the C185 amphibs, and to get those "ratings" I have to find an instructor who is suitably "rated". An impossible task. I am always glad that GA does not have those rules and if I ever came back to fly in Aus (I started there many years ago) I am sure I would go mad with the seemingly unending and completely pointless rules you have become accustomed to. Not just the ratings, but the instrument (I see you have IR for single and multi? Do you also have them for glass and conventional instruments? What about separate ratings for King and Collins equipment? Or for HSI/DG? Turn Coordinator/T&B? Who decides this garbage?), night, various levels of instructor and the like.
Statistics show all this complication does not improve safety, and I might be able to make a case that it actually reduces safety because it prevents pilots from developing skills or gaining experience, two areas that desperately need attention.
When are you going to cry "Enough?"