What is it about the C180/185
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Zealand
Age: 37
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How does a 185 compare to flying a cub? I'm guessing that extra horsepower would make her bite a lot harder on T/O, but if you can handle a cub would the step up be great?
I'm guessing yes, but hoping no.
I'm guessing yes, but hoping no.
mynameisis
the lead photo of this thread is from the Ed Coates collection.
This info is attached to the photo.
VH-FIE1
RFD as discussed.
RFF as discussed.
This info is attached to the photo.
When DCA grounded the Ansons in 1962, Alan Rae, founder of Flinders Island Airlines,
replaced them with Skywagons. Seen above is the first VH-FIE at Moorabbin in May 1963.
FIA had acquired this machine exactly one year prior to Geoff Goodall taking this image.
Sold off by the airline in 1966, it became VH-EIE, thus leaving its rego open for the Beech.
VH-FIE later went to New Guinea and was damaged in a crash at Balimo in 1972. When
restored, it went onto the PNG register as P2-EIE. It began life on the US register as
N4193Y.
replaced them with Skywagons. Seen above is the first VH-FIE at Moorabbin in May 1963.
FIA had acquired this machine exactly one year prior to Geoff Goodall taking this image.
Sold off by the airline in 1966, it became VH-EIE, thus leaving its rego open for the Beech.
VH-FIE later went to New Guinea and was damaged in a crash at Balimo in 1972. When
restored, it went onto the PNG register as P2-EIE. It began life on the US register as
N4193Y.
RFD as discussed.
RFF as discussed.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How does a 185 compare to flying a cub? I'm guessing that extra horsepower would make her bite a lot harder on T/O, but if you can handle a cub would the step up be great?
I'm guessing yes, but hoping no.
I'm guessing yes, but hoping no.
Dramatically different aircraft in almost every way.
For a start, you sit about a metre higher in the Cessna and that makes a difference.
The Cube is truly fun to fly but it can be waffled around without really thinking too much.
It can be plonked onto the ground and it sort of rights itself without too much concern because it is a pretty light little machine.
The 180 and even more so the 185 DEMANDS your attention anytime you're within striking distance of the ground and REQUIRES consistent planning and technique to both take-off and land.
Furthermore it needs that attention ALL the way to hangar door.
Much heavier on the controls but so very responsive as compared to the blanc-mange response to the Cub's controls.
However, there are few things more satisfying than pulling off a greaser and coming to a nice controlled stop straight ahead ( I did that once !...I'll never forget it!)
Love the Cub...Respect the 180/185.
I could go on, but there are far more experienced people on this forum who can put it better than I.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: .
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 185 I fly sure is a nice plane...and it's still teaching me a lot (mostly about proper landings 
). It's unfortunate I actually have to fly places and can't just burn some fuel in the circuit whenever I want. It looks great, along with the 170 and 195 one of the nicest looking Cessnas. I don't think it's the best looking series ever (*drifts off to dream about flying a Spitfire*).
Lots of nice looking 180/185s in N Zed (not to mention the scenery)...I don't suppose anyone will need some ballast for their plane in a couple months?
). It's unfortunate I actually have to fly places and can't just burn some fuel in the circuit whenever I want. It looks great, along with the 170 and 195 one of the nicest looking Cessnas. I don't think it's the best looking series ever (*drifts off to dream about flying a Spitfire*).Lots of nice looking 180/185s in N Zed (not to mention the scenery)...I don't suppose anyone will need some ballast for their plane in a couple months?
Silly Old Git
Not every pilot in Talair was pleased to get stuck in the 185 and a lot avoided them
Us dumb old kiwis of course grew up on them, there being dozens of survivors and ex topdressers around
http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-a...ml#post2198904
Us dumb old kiwis of course grew up on them, there being dozens of survivors and ex topdressers around
http://www.pprune.org/dg-p-general-a...ml#post2198904
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: France
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cessna 180 with crosswind landing gear.
I had the pleasure of some little time in the crosswind version. This was in the early 1960's. As desert duck #43 states, once you get used to it, quite some fun.
Tmb
Tmb
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had the pleasure of some little time in the crosswind version. This was in the early 1960's. As desert duck #43 states, once you get used to it, quite some fun.
Once the technique of lowering the into wind wing down is mastered, I contend that the xwind landings are actually easier than direct headwinds.
The aircraft is less likely to bounce with one leg planted first.
Keeping it straight is then just a matter of judicious use into wind aileron as the ship slows down.
The machine going sideways would scare the hell out of me.
99% of my T/W experience has been in the 185.
One of the reasons they can get a bit stroppy , is that they have considerable length behind the main gear, compared with other types(Maule etc). I haven't flown a Maule.
If you are even slighty out of shape on tar, the resultant moment will quickly overcome any control margin you have.
This gets more and more pronounced as you increase the payload.
It is not as bad on grass/dirt, because of the surface slip available.
3 Blade props lessen the assymetric thrust (down -going blade etc) compared to 2 blade props but increase the gyroscopic force due extra rotating mass.
One of the reasons they can get a bit stroppy , is that they have considerable length behind the main gear, compared with other types(Maule etc). I haven't flown a Maule.
If you are even slighty out of shape on tar, the resultant moment will quickly overcome any control margin you have.
This gets more and more pronounced as you increase the payload.
It is not as bad on grass/dirt, because of the surface slip available.
3 Blade props lessen the assymetric thrust (down -going blade etc) compared to 2 blade props but increase the gyroscopic force due extra rotating mass.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Aus, or USA, or UK or EU, or possibly somehwere in Asia.
Posts: 320
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have flown 180's and 185's on PVT, CHTR AWK and AG with a variety of dispersal systems.
Nothing much more satisfying than landing off a turn in a quartering tailwind up a short ag strip, with a prefectly timed pivot turn, under inertia, at the loader before blasting off again (and again and again...)
180 (especially the early ones) are the nicest, but unforgiving to the innattentive.
185 is a bit of a disapointment,more stable, much more forgiving, more power and more space, should be better, but I still prefer the old 180's with their nicer lighter handling and somehow always found them more fun to fly.
I have also flown 170's and straight tail 172 with t/w mod utilizing lightweight 180 legs, very sweet to fly and low low landing speed, way fun and from a short distance very difficult to pick from a 180. Also flown straight tail 150 with t/w mod, looked just like a little 180 from a distance and was fun but not so much as the real one or the modded 172.
Texas taildragger mod never rang my bell and i have not tried one, they just don't look right.
195 was a real conveyance, shakey jake and all, and the 188 very nice to fly but a bit of a ground hog.
HD
Nothing much more satisfying than landing off a turn in a quartering tailwind up a short ag strip, with a prefectly timed pivot turn, under inertia, at the loader before blasting off again (and again and again...)
180 (especially the early ones) are the nicest, but unforgiving to the innattentive.
185 is a bit of a disapointment,more stable, much more forgiving, more power and more space, should be better, but I still prefer the old 180's with their nicer lighter handling and somehow always found them more fun to fly.
I have also flown 170's and straight tail 172 with t/w mod utilizing lightweight 180 legs, very sweet to fly and low low landing speed, way fun and from a short distance very difficult to pick from a 180. Also flown straight tail 150 with t/w mod, looked just like a little 180 from a distance and was fun but not so much as the real one or the modded 172.
Texas taildragger mod never rang my bell and i have not tried one, they just don't look right.
195 was a real conveyance, shakey jake and all, and the 188 very nice to fly but a bit of a ground hog.
HD
Silly Old Git
Kiwi Ag pilots loved em cause they has a cigarette lighter and a heater, also a landing light for sneaking home late
I know of one fella would come home, clean up, and roar off again into the night to visit his popsie about a 100 miles away. One night the unthinkable happened. It stopped.
He switched on his light just in time to see a big Jersey cow filling the windscreen.
The farm lights come on , farmer gets shotgun and rounds up young fella climbing over fence.
"Aha, hands up yer bastard, yer the one been rustling me cows!"
"No mate I just landed me plane in yer paddock"
Much more comedy with cops being called etc..
Another fella borrowed a C180 to visit his popsie at night . Perfect landing on unlit airfield followed by a smooth roll through into a storm drain.
Exit NZ very quick smart.
There wasnt a month go by it seemed something was happening with a 185.
A lot perished in them and they got an unfair reputation in Ag circles as "The Widowmaker"
I know of one fella would come home, clean up, and roar off again into the night to visit his popsie about a 100 miles away. One night the unthinkable happened. It stopped.
He switched on his light just in time to see a big Jersey cow filling the windscreen.
The farm lights come on , farmer gets shotgun and rounds up young fella climbing over fence.
"Aha, hands up yer bastard, yer the one been rustling me cows!"
"No mate I just landed me plane in yer paddock"
Much more comedy with cops being called etc..
Another fella borrowed a C180 to visit his popsie at night . Perfect landing on unlit airfield followed by a smooth roll through into a storm drain.
Exit NZ very quick smart.
There wasnt a month go by it seemed something was happening with a 185.
A lot perished in them and they got an unfair reputation in Ag circles as "The Widowmaker"
Anyone know anyone who was involved with this??
The C180 was a handy working aircraft, and many were used for crop dusting operations, In March 1958, an ag pilot working in New Zealand by the name of Don Erceg dropped his usual C180 into maintenance and picked up another. Something didn’t feel right, so Erceg returned and invited an engineer to join him so they could figure out the problem. The pilot put the aircraft through a series of manoeuvres hoping to demonstrate the ‘strange’ feeling to the engineer. Despite some increasingly aggressive moves the engineer couldn’t feel what this highly tuned ag pilots backside was telling him, not even as he took it through inverted! Erceg dropped off the engineer and returned to work. A couple of days later, while positioning the aircraft after a day’s top dressing the pilot felt a severe vibration followed almost immediately by silence. The aircraft stabilised in inverted flight and it is said that Erceg grabbed the only control he hadn’t so far tried, the flap handle. This somehow righted the aircraft and it fluttered to the ground where Erceg climbed out discovering that the engine had departed the airframe damaging the starboard strut and landing gear on the way. Erceg walked to a cattle station and called the engineer, telling him that the engine was missing. The engineer offered to send a mechanic with some fresh spark plugs but he soon realised that the engine was missing from the airframe! Three days later after some remedial work, ZK-BQJ took off from the field and was ferried to maintenance for some rather more substantial work.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Erceg walked to a cattle station and called the engineer, telling him that the engine was missing. The engineer offered to send a mechanic with some fresh spark plugs but he soon realised that the engine was missing from the airframe!
I wouldn't have thought it possible.
CAA would have had him up for flying with the CG out of limits
Last edited by ZEEBEE; 20th Aug 2009 at 01:46. Reason: crook grammar
Silly Old Git
I knew Don "Goose" Erceg, and he loved telling that story.
He said there was a loud bang, and an almighty vibration. He dived for the throttle to close it but it, and pitch controls disappeared out through the panel!
He didnt have a bloody clue the engine and prop were gone because the top cowl was still in place. (see photo)
Pole hard forward with full flap seemed the right thing to do and he said it was on the ground before he had time to get REALLY frightened.
He was damn lucky, a Dutch fella had the same thing happen on a ferry flight and he never made it
It was a dud series of props, a retainer let go and a blade would fly off.
Don went on to do most of the flying in the Air Truck which he described as "So bloody awful only my 14000 hours topdressing experience kept me alive in it"
Wheres Fearless Feeney ? He be good for a 185 yarn or two.
Don Erceg somewhere in deepest darkest Te Kuiti
He said there was a loud bang, and an almighty vibration. He dived for the throttle to close it but it, and pitch controls disappeared out through the panel!
He didnt have a bloody clue the engine and prop were gone because the top cowl was still in place. (see photo)
Pole hard forward with full flap seemed the right thing to do and he said it was on the ground before he had time to get REALLY frightened.
He was damn lucky, a Dutch fella had the same thing happen on a ferry flight and he never made it
It was a dud series of props, a retainer let go and a blade would fly off.
Don went on to do most of the flying in the Air Truck which he described as "So bloody awful only my 14000 hours topdressing experience kept me alive in it"
Wheres Fearless Feeney ? He be good for a 185 yarn or two.
Don Erceg somewhere in deepest darkest Te Kuiti
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: France
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cessna 180 with crosswind landing gear.
Zeebee:
Reference the C180 with the above gear, they did not seem to sell well and after a year or so disappeared from the market.
I recall at Canberra the first time I took one there and on the taxi, the comments from the ATC were "had my undercarriage collapsed" and did I need assistance.
Tmb
Reference the C180 with the above gear, they did not seem to sell well and after a year or so disappeared from the market.
I recall at Canberra the first time I took one there and on the taxi, the comments from the ATC were "had my undercarriage collapsed" and did I need assistance.
Tmb
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Perth
Posts: 430
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Among the Cessnas fitted with the crosswind gear were the 140, 195 and 170. Manufactured by Goodyear and permitted landing with some 15° of drift.
I wonder if the max XWind component was changed by the option?
I think I saw the on in Canberra...it all looked wrong somehow. Not surprised about the tower's comments
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Developed by Goodyear in 1947. Some Cubs, Ercoupe, Helio Super Courier and Stinsons likewise fitted that I know of.
cross-wind landing | landing gear | goodyear cross-wind | 1949 | 1230 | Flight Archive
cross-wind landing | landing gear | goodyear cross-wind | 1949 | 1230 | Flight Archive
Last edited by Brian Abraham; 21st Aug 2009 at 04:20.
Now I know this is a Cessna 180/185 thread, but the195 has been mentioned a couple of times, so here it is.
It must've been the Cadilac of the single engine GA types at the time. Isn't that just superb.
It must've been the Cadilac of the single engine GA types at the time. Isn't that just superb.