Fantasy Cessna 180, 185 or 195?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fantasy Cessna 180, 185 or 195?
On my recent chug back from Switzerland at 80mph I had plenty of time to reflect on what fantasy aircraft I would add to the Super Cub if I ever had the chance. It would have to carry me and the family out of short, rough strips a long way, quite fast and still be reasonably interesting and look good. I decided it would therefore have to be one of the big-engined tailwheel cessna singles, but which one? Which would people choose -- the 180, 185 or 195?
I need some flesh to put on my latest fantasy!
Thanks,
David
I need some flesh to put on my latest fantasy!
Thanks,
David
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: S Warwickshire
Posts: 1,214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why restrict yourself to a Cessna - not bad aeroplanes, but visibility a bit limited. Must admit the Jacob engined 195 sounds nice though.
How about:
Jodel D140
Bolkow 207
Beagle Husky
Pilatus Porter
Wilga
Dornier Do27
That Yak thing that looks like an overgrown Cub
How about:
Jodel D140
Bolkow 207
Beagle Husky
Pilatus Porter
Wilga
Dornier Do27
That Yak thing that looks like an overgrown Cub
That'll be the Yak 12 then mark 1 
I'd love one but for practical purposes I'd pass on it and the delicious 195 with their lovely radials and settle for the 180 as a reasonably sensible (read affordable) alternative.
I'd love one but for practical purposes I'd pass on it and the delicious 195 with their lovely radials and settle for the 180 as a reasonably sensible (read affordable) alternative.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speed, utility and character are the order of the day. Yak 12 is out, therefore, as is the Wilga, on speed grounds.
I suspect the 180 is what I'd choose as the next member of my fantasy plane portfolio. There was actually one, G-ARAT, for sale at Shoreham the other day.
David
I suspect the 180 is what I'd choose as the next member of my fantasy plane portfolio. There was actually one, G-ARAT, for sale at Shoreham the other day.
David
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,666
Received 325 Likes
on
179 Posts
There is definitely somehting about the Cessna 180/185 - I've always seen them as a classic from about the age of six (my very limited experince is all 152/172) but... the 190? A real classic, but not quite such a bush plane perhaps?
Did you see a programme on the telly a couple of years ago which featured Docu-hero hitching a lift with Alan Root (Mr African Wildlife cinematographer and balloonist) in a 180... blew the rear tyre and bungied a spade to the tail wheel leg to act as rudamentry skid... great stuff!
Then again the Cub is a super aeroplane as well, as are those in Mark's list...
Did you see a programme on the telly a couple of years ago which featured Docu-hero hitching a lift with Alan Root (Mr African Wildlife cinematographer and balloonist) in a 180... blew the rear tyre and bungied a spade to the tail wheel leg to act as rudamentry skid... great stuff!
Then again the Cub is a super aeroplane as well, as are those in Mark's list...
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deepest Warwickshire
Age: 47
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All 3 types of Cessna equally good looking IMO esp. so the 195 - beats the nose wheel *yawn* fleet anyday. 195 I have heard is a tricky tail dragger. Also rare, but just having looked at this months GA Buyer, there's one for sale on a G-reg! 85000 euro, contact [email protected].
If we're talking pure fantasy where the 195 never had an accident, then the 195 it is, purely because it is radial powered. Radials of course make a far nice noise than a Lyc.
If we're talking pure fantasy where the 195 never had an accident, then the 195 it is, purely because it is radial powered. Radials of course make a far nice noise than a Lyc.
Last edited by BlueRobin; 23rd Jul 2003 at 19:11.
C180/185
Once went to to look at a C185 having dreamed of one since my early days of flying.
Arrived at the strip in a Maule, looked the aircraft over, and having explained to the seller my long time longing for such a machine asked what the C185 would do better than the Maule for the extra Ł50K.
'Save your money- go home, have a cold cup of tea and stick with the Maule' was the essence of his reply.
Never looked back ! New dream is the turbine!
Arrived at the strip in a Maule, looked the aircraft over, and having explained to the seller my long time longing for such a machine asked what the C185 would do better than the Maule for the extra Ł50K.
'Save your money- go home, have a cold cup of tea and stick with the Maule' was the essence of his reply.
Never looked back ! New dream is the turbine!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Heart
Posts: 811
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QDMQDMQDM,
Your description matches the Jodel D140, as deiscussed on the DR400 thread. However, it being a 'fantasy' then money is no problem. The piston Beaver.
I have only flown the Turbo Beaver but it's a superb aeroplane. It's got so much more presence than the C195. With regards to the 180/185, well, they may have tailwheels but they are still Cessna's.
The Turbo-Porter is a dog.
For BlueRobin,
In my experience people who talk about 'tricky taildraggers' tend to be people who have been frightened by them.
Your description matches the Jodel D140, as deiscussed on the DR400 thread. However, it being a 'fantasy' then money is no problem. The piston Beaver.
I have only flown the Turbo Beaver but it's a superb aeroplane. It's got so much more presence than the C195. With regards to the 180/185, well, they may have tailwheels but they are still Cessna's.
The Turbo-Porter is a dog.
For BlueRobin,
In my experience people who talk about 'tricky taildraggers' tend to be people who have been frightened by them.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Connecticut USA
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had to add my (biased) opinion on the subject of C-180, C185 vs. C-195 as part of a fantasy air fleet. IMHO, with your stated goals of beauty, speed and capability, the C-195 is clear the winner. For about the same price as well used C-180 you get one of the last round engine classics, a real beauty especially when compared to the angular, strut braced, utilitarian C-180/185.
A 195 will cruse at about 150 MPH down low or closer to 160 at altitude (similar to speed of the C-180’s I’ve been around, a C-185 is probably a bit faster). But, you get a much larger/nicer cabin with that wonderful radial rumble. The 195 is certified as a 5 place aircraft; there is even an “aisle” between the two front seats, no rubbing shoulders up front and you can easily change seats to the back if you want to stretch out.
The aircraft is modern enough to be “practical” (is a personal aircraft ever really practical?) and reliably operate in today’s airspace but old enough to be unique while bringing back the atmosphere and feelings of flying in the classic era. The all metal airframe is virtually the same construction as the newer Cessnas so it can tolerate being outside and does not need to be a pampered hangar queen. The Jacobs R755-B2 is one of the last small radials so it is well developed and reliable; usually going 1,500 hours to overhaul. Both airframe and engine parts are available from specialty suppliers at “reasonable” prices (a top rate engine overhaul costs a bit less than a comparable HP flat engine). All and all a C-195 is a great choice for a family traveling airplane, it does well on 1,200 – 1,500 ft grass strips, will carry 5 FAA adults, full fuel (78 of the tiny US gallons) with some GW left over for baggage, burning <14 gals/hour 5 hour legs are possible and you probably won’t see your self on the ramp when you get there (unlike most Cessnas).
The only case I could see for the C-180 or C-185 would be if you flew into really short rough fields & unimproved fields or were trying to make a living with the aircraft. But if you did that, then Miserlou is right – you need a Beaver.
Now, I did detect a note of reality in your fantasy aircraft? If you were willing to remove the purchase and operating costs…..then I would have to agree with foxmoth and look toward a G model Stagger Beech or perhaps a Waco SRE or Howard DGA-15. It is always nice to dream. But you know, I bet if I was in that immaculate Howard on short final to a very short, rough, one way canyon strip; my fantasy aircraft would be a Super Cub.
For a great C-195 travel log take a look at http://www.gruner.com/flight/
The Cessna 195 Club site has more C-195 information, history, sales brochures, photos and audio files of a starting Jacobs at http://www.cessna195.org
A 195 will cruse at about 150 MPH down low or closer to 160 at altitude (similar to speed of the C-180’s I’ve been around, a C-185 is probably a bit faster). But, you get a much larger/nicer cabin with that wonderful radial rumble. The 195 is certified as a 5 place aircraft; there is even an “aisle” between the two front seats, no rubbing shoulders up front and you can easily change seats to the back if you want to stretch out.
The aircraft is modern enough to be “practical” (is a personal aircraft ever really practical?) and reliably operate in today’s airspace but old enough to be unique while bringing back the atmosphere and feelings of flying in the classic era. The all metal airframe is virtually the same construction as the newer Cessnas so it can tolerate being outside and does not need to be a pampered hangar queen. The Jacobs R755-B2 is one of the last small radials so it is well developed and reliable; usually going 1,500 hours to overhaul. Both airframe and engine parts are available from specialty suppliers at “reasonable” prices (a top rate engine overhaul costs a bit less than a comparable HP flat engine). All and all a C-195 is a great choice for a family traveling airplane, it does well on 1,200 – 1,500 ft grass strips, will carry 5 FAA adults, full fuel (78 of the tiny US gallons) with some GW left over for baggage, burning <14 gals/hour 5 hour legs are possible and you probably won’t see your self on the ramp when you get there (unlike most Cessnas).
The only case I could see for the C-180 or C-185 would be if you flew into really short rough fields & unimproved fields or were trying to make a living with the aircraft. But if you did that, then Miserlou is right – you need a Beaver.
Now, I did detect a note of reality in your fantasy aircraft? If you were willing to remove the purchase and operating costs…..then I would have to agree with foxmoth and look toward a G model Stagger Beech or perhaps a Waco SRE or Howard DGA-15. It is always nice to dream. But you know, I bet if I was in that immaculate Howard on short final to a very short, rough, one way canyon strip; my fantasy aircraft would be a Super Cub.
For a great C-195 travel log take a look at http://www.gruner.com/flight/
The Cessna 195 Club site has more C-195 information, history, sales brochures, photos and audio files of a starting Jacobs at http://www.cessna195.org
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's a pretty good sales job on the 195! It's a beautiful aircraft. The thing that scares me a bit is the visibility on the ground and on final.
All I need now is a few more pennies. Maybe one day.
David
All I need now is a few more pennies. Maybe one day.
David
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,666
Received 325 Likes
on
179 Posts
I can't believe I wrote 190 when I meant 195 somewhere above. But. Wot about tbe 145? Airmaster? A ragwing... More classsic I vouchsafe than the Shakey Jake 195?
Ducks, etc....
Ducks, etc....
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Connecticut USA
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The visibility on final is not really as bad as it looks, much better than the average biplane, using the flaps helps by keeping the nose lower (they don't seem do much else other than add a bit of drag). The old timer that checked me out said "on short final, if you can see some of the runway - thats good, if you can see the whole runway or no runway - thats bad and you might want to rethink the landing attempt." Once on the ground you do have to throw in a few s turns and pay more attention, a passenger in the right can be a big help to see that side.
I like QDMQDMQDM's choice in the above post (N190EC) but to look it’s best a 195 should have a spinner and wheel pants (spats?). For a real head turner, with a paint scheme that is a bit over the top for my tastes,
http://www.barronaviation.com/n9854a(195).htm
I like QDMQDMQDM's choice in the above post (N190EC) but to look it’s best a 195 should have a spinner and wheel pants (spats?). For a real head turner, with a paint scheme that is a bit over the top for my tastes,
http://www.barronaviation.com/n9854a(195).htm
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my experience people who talk about 'tricky taildraggers' tend to be people who have been frightened by them.
Nice to see an old thread pop up again
Here's an affordable alternative with the presence of a Beaver and cheaper to buy than any of the other alternatives:
Ladies and Gentlemen I give you the Max Holste Broussard one of which lives in Eggesford now doesn't it QDM x 3 ?
Here's an affordable alternative with the presence of a Beaver and cheaper to buy than any of the other alternatives:
Ladies and Gentlemen I give you the Max Holste Broussard one of which lives in Eggesford now doesn't it QDM x 3 ?
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Enniskillen
Age: 67
Posts: 479
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the C185 Skywagon is one of the most practical aeroplanes ever built. I goes just fast enough and takes off and lands in about 700 FEET at max weight.
The IO-520 (300 hp fuel injected) is a lovely smooth power plant that will haul you out of almost any field, and climb away at well over 1000 fpm with 6 people What other STOL aircraft gives you about 1700lbs useful load.
I would love to fly one again so if there are any out there needing the dust blown off them give me a shout, I have just over 400 hours on type.
Here is a good pilot report about a 185.
This one was for sale at $12,000 a while back. It had been there for 16 years, would make an interesting project.
Tony
The IO-520 (300 hp fuel injected) is a lovely smooth power plant that will haul you out of almost any field, and climb away at well over 1000 fpm with 6 people What other STOL aircraft gives you about 1700lbs useful load.
I would love to fly one again so if there are any out there needing the dust blown off them give me a shout, I have just over 400 hours on type.
Here is a good pilot report about a 185.
This one was for sale at $12,000 a while back. It had been there for 16 years, would make an interesting project.
Tony
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,410
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Q,
The 195 is an absolute stunner. Never flown one but they do look the business and the interior is so classy (as is the Staggerwing) They are among the most beautiful aircraft in my opinion.
The 185/180 are probably more practical than beautiful but can certainly do the job, so I understand.
I have no experience in flying any of them but am sure that a man of your standing would be fine.
I do since a few weeks have got some experience in our 'new' Maule an M5 235 which we bought.
It will do all the things you are looking for and to swap over from the Cub is not going to cost you the earth either.
The shortfield performance is great and it will carry 1200lbs @ 120KTS.
Come and have a play if you are around this way.
FD
The 195 is an absolute stunner. Never flown one but they do look the business and the interior is so classy (as is the Staggerwing) They are among the most beautiful aircraft in my opinion.
The 185/180 are probably more practical than beautiful but can certainly do the job, so I understand.
I have no experience in flying any of them but am sure that a man of your standing would be fine.
I do since a few weeks have got some experience in our 'new' Maule an M5 235 which we bought.
It will do all the things you are looking for and to swap over from the Cub is not going to cost you the earth either.
The shortfield performance is great and it will carry 1200lbs @ 120KTS.
Come and have a play if you are around this way.
FD