Hey guys! I wanted to let you know I just launched an "Insiders" Newsletter where once a week I'm sharing an important lesson I've learned in aviation, links to my latest content so you don't miss out, and links to any other interesting or helpful content I've found. I'm also working on a HUGE project I can't announce yet but I'm going to be sharing more behind the scenes info with Insiders first - Subscribe (it's free) at: airplaneacademy.com/insiders
I work at the Cessna plant in Independence ks where this very plane was assembled. I have personally worked on this very aircraft. It is kind of cool to see a plane you have helped get ready for flight on a youtube video.
I really like the retro font on the Cessna logo. Has the equipment used for riveting of the panels changed in the last decade or so or done in the same fashion?
@@My_Fair_Lady You sound more like the attention seeker. I think the odds of a person who builds Cessna 182's finding a video of a... wait for it... Cessna 182 would be super high.
I learned to fly in a 172 and a week after I got my license my flight school got two 182s . My instructor invited me back to go out in one of the new 182s . We got to level flight and he let me take over. This thing was brand new . It still had plastic covers on the seats. It still had that new aircraft smell.
That must have been an awesome school then, or at least a great instructor! Sounds like he was a stand up guy. He probably felt bad that they got the new planes right after your graduation?
Back in the early 1970s I was a young paratrooper stationed at Fort Campbell Kentucky. We had a sport parachute club for off duty jumping. On the weekends we would drive to Elkton Kentucky and meet up with a pilot that had a Cessna 182. He would take off the right door and remove the front seat and rear seats. We could fit three parachutists in the plane and away we would go off the grass airstrip. As soon as we started our free fall jumping the local residents would show up and watch use jump the whole afternoon. I have fond memories of jumping out of that Cessna 182. I'm glad they are still making them. It was a fun time for all.
If you ever get to buy a new Cessna the delivery process is unimaginable. 4 days of fun in the air with your brand new bird and the best of everything. I bought a new T206H and took delivery in June. You will know your way around Wichita when you finally depart on day 5. Eat lunch at Steerman airport……at least one of the flying days.
Having all those wonderful avionics and self recovering auto pilot is not cheating it's reducing pilot work load. I got my licence on a 152 and did the next 500 odd hours on 172's and then the 172 Cutlass retractable gear for my commercial licence. Flying passengers around the east coast of the states could be hard work and at times very tiring. I absolutely love that aircraft. 1100lbs is just about 500kg; that's a serious load. 145 knots cruise, perfect. The ability to make flap selections and have the AP take care of the trim; luxury. Reduced work load means safer flying and allows the pilot to maintain better situational awareness. What's not to like?
It seems almost bizarre to me that you can have an aircraft with instrument-reliant features like the self recovering autopilot and yet it's NOT certified for actual IFR...?
@@ska042 the comment was only for the visual approach settings- the IFR approaches are different and the plane is certified for IFR using the IFR approaches. The visual's are not IFR procedures / not for IMC. The visual approaches would help with VFR situational awareness much like foreflight is an assist and not IFR certified. That's my take.
FSF - Full Self Flying. Literally AutoPilot. This is fantastic. A seasoned, knowledgeable and unable to be distracted, electronic co-pilot ready to take over when needed. And Flight Plans by touch screen - also fantastic. Cessna has made hobby flying fun, safe and relaxing. Thank you both for sharing...
Something you can almost get away with in a trainer, but when you get into high performance airplanes, your rudder skills (or lack thereof) will become apparent. 🙂
As long as you can turn it off its ok I guess. I'm left wondering -- if the plane has such an advanced autopilot as this one, and you're not proficient on instruments and go inadvertent IMC -- why would you continue to hand-fly the airplane? Just activate the autopilot -- which kind of turns this feature into a useless gimmick doesn't it? Either let the autopilot fly the airplane, or don't. This half/half thing seems kind of pointless.
I have an ATP and am currently an airline pilot and would love to have an airplane but the thought that these 4 seaters with a naturally aspirated engine goes for $500k brand new, is absurd. These planes haven’t changed other than avionics since the “restarting of the type” in 1996 and was first certified in the mid 50’s. It is super light aluminum and a tight tolerance engine that runs at a constant speed. The airplane in 1958 sold for just under 18k and adjusted for today’s inflation goes for 190k. I understand we have GPS, G1000, etc. and better manufacturing, but that should make it cheaper. Not more expensive. $250k with all the current items in it new and I would have one but the manufacturers are way too proud of their product. In the end, great video and really nice to see what is going on in GA today but it is a big miss for me.
The pilot community on youtube is something I love watching, though I definitely don't earn near enough money to be able to start on this journey myself, so it's just nice to watch.
I had an friend, totally I.T based, I was amazed when he said he was training for a license etc, it honestly doesn't seem so difficult. You can definitely plan for this if you really wanna fly. You don't need to own these planes for flying them :v
you can get a loan between multiple people and do a sharing ownership, that would put you in a brand new 182, and you could split the annual maintenance costs. I would like someone to let us know what the annual maintenance inspection costs on a 2022 Cessna 182 (Textron) in 2023? Thanks for helping
I had a 2006 turbo 182 before I lost my medical. Best airplane I ever owned. It would do 155 KTAS at 12,500’, running lean of peak at about 12 GPH with Gamijectors (if I remember correctly; that was 10 years ago). It would fly circles at 70 kts over sites my passengers wanted to photograph, steady as a rock. It was indeed a great short field airplane. I could easily land and make the first exit taxiway at my airport every time, just to show off. It would true 170 KTS at 17,500’, though I almost never took it that high unless there was a screaming tailwind. I loved that airplane. The new one in this video almost brings tears to my eyes. I envy anyone who can get himself one.
We don't use VFR altitudes above FL180...I really hope you meant 17,500. If you were flying at 18,500, sure hope you had an ATC assigned altitude of FL180 block FL190.
@@danl.909 You stated that your airplane would true out at 170kts at 18,500. And that you ALMOST NEVER took it that high unless there was a screaming tailwind. Those are your words... so now you're are saying you NEVER took it that high. I was only questioning whether you knew that FL180 and above is class A airspace, formerly known as PCA...Positive Controlled Airspace, requiring an IFR assigned altitude by ATC.
Darren is a great ambassador for Cessna. Excellent commentator in explaining the aircraft’s abilities and new features. Hell I’m not even a pilot just a guy that enjoys flying along in small aircraft videos. Thanks
We had a company owned 182 with cuffed leading edges. I loved practicing 50 knot approaches with a high sink rate at a higher than normal approach. Great for night time operation as inexperienced pilots can make lower than normal approaches at night. Also a good economical workhorse.
I remember back in the day when a 150 cost 16 or 18 an hr, 172 was 21 and the 182 was 23 including gas. Those were the days when ww2 pilots were instructors costing 10$ hr. One was a Mosquito pilot, another flew Vulcans and a third water bombers. I had some pretty good instructors.
I’m a member of the Civil Air Patrol and we have the world’s largest fleet of single engine Cessnas and our 172’s/182’s are being equipped or come with the G1000, which is great and a huge help for our missions, but this new 182 just blows my mind. Can’t wait to see if we’re going to get any of the new 182’s in our Wings in the near future.
My daughter joined CAP a year ago to get a feel for military service, without any thoughts of flying. THEN, she did a weekend deployment where she got stick time on a glider. Done, and done. She is going to be a pilot, whether as a vocation or as a PPL. CAP is great for type-A all-star performers, and creating leaders. Thanks and keep up the good work.
What an amazingly well done video! Great job to you both. This airplane is very VERY nicely done, and I absolutely love the retro '60s paint job on this version. I so much enjoy your videos!
@@AirplaneAcademy Yes--There has to be a sizable demographic that prefers this retro font and paint. i love it. Also, sounds like Cessna has really worked on less NVH. Noise/Vibration/Harshness.
Got my PPL 7/24/22, I own a 172 and fly out of KRYW in Lago Vista. I watched your videos throughout all of my flight training. Thanks for all of the great videos and tips!
Wonderful aircraft. I learned to fly on the Cessna 150 and 172. I found that the Cessna wing was so efficient that sometimes I had trouble getting it to settle on the runway on landing.
Getting the plane to settle has nothing to do with the wing design -- it's all about speed management. If you're floating during the flare, you've got too much speed.
Great aircraft. I have fond memories of skydiving from a 182 over 40 years ago. Strut & step exit, so you would spend a bit of time hanging onto the strut, before dropping away into free fall.
I'm liking the Cessna representative here. I did work as a Salesman for a little while( I decided it wasn't for me). Between my experience in and as a consumer I've realized there are two kinds of salesmen. The typical " greasy used car salesman" type, and the one that actually believes in the product. He seems like he really believes in the product and genuinely wants people to enjoy it as much as he does. It's going to be quite a while before I can afford my own plane, but I'm gonna have to ask to talk to him when I start looking at what Cessna has to offer.
If you listen attentively you’ll hear say The tio540 is 235 hp which is wrong. It’s 310hp not 235 so yes I agree with you …yup he’s GREAT and also gay as hell good rep for “the times”
And how about that price (and waiting list)! Great vid and plane and I'd love to get one but they are all now so priced out of the range for any normal human to buy.
I realize this is different take but other than the GPU plug, the Kelly AC and avionics this plane is basically the same as the 1969 182 Skylane, right down to steps on the wing struts and copious aerodynamic impediments. If this aircraft was $150,000 that would be reasonable, but this is like GM selling a 1969 Caprice with a fuel injected motor, airbags and GPS. This is disgraceful.
@@GasIPass So, aside from accounting for inflation since 1969 and the exorbitant cost of a G1000 NXI, the 182 has similar useful load, slightly less fuel burn and is 10-20 kts slower than an SR22 , but is half the price.
@@sircrapalot9954 in 1980 a brand new 182 cost $17,000. Taking into account inflation that same plane would only cost $60,000 today. If you are happy with the lazy/non-improvement of air frame design since this aircraft was first released in 1956, that’s on you.
@@GasIPass To really be fair in comparing these things to cars, we have to remember that these planes use an ancient ghetto mechanical fuel injection from the 60s and 70s. No car manufacturer would dare sell an engine with zero-feedback Bosch K-Jetronic dribble system where just going over a mountain pass requires manual tuning by the driver. But getting something new certified and STCs available is so expensive it's basically illegal, so we're all frozen in time.
@@GasIPass you are quoting the original MSRP from 1957, not 1980. Adjusted for inflation, the 1980 price is roughly $200k. Still a far cry from the price today, but the airplane is also far more capable in terms of mission, avionics and autopilot. It’s a numbers game, numbers are too low to bring down prices, but we can’t bring down the price in order to get the volume up. Tough world.
My Dad started with a 172, then upgraded to a 182. He just got his multi engine rating when he developed Afib and was grounded. Broke his heart, but he sure had fun flying all his friends to cool destinations, including me !
I feel your Dad's pain as I had also had a medical grounding way too young. I started flying a 172R then moved up to the 172S after I soloed just for the extra 20HP which was helpful in Phoenix's heat. Day after my checkride I got into a '99 182S and never looked back until I started having episodes of lightheadedness. Grounded before I started my multi but was 75% through my IFR. Interesting fact; that 182 had a new sticker price of right around $230,000 and rented for $115/hr. The biggest bargain anywhere. My kids never got to know me when I flew so it's just an oddity when someone is digging through a closet and finds my flight bag.
@@9HighFlyer9 that’s weird, I contacted a Cessna representative and they said a new Cessna Skyhawks costed $499,999. With what you do, how much money do you assume you need to own a plane, something even basic as a Cessna 150.
@@poochie5543 Now they cost half a million $. But in 1999 they were $135,000. There's an article, from 1997, on Avweb if you search for it. Discusses the price and if they're too high.
@@9HighFlyer9 in reality which is surprising, it’s actually cheaper to buy a plane today than before during 80’s. I know I’m still new and working for my ppl at 18, i hope I can get a tour at one of Cessnas dealership on what they have in person, very fascinating non the less.
All throughout my childhood I had real at home simulators with all the controls, rudder pedals. The 172 was my absolute favorite to fly. Super forgiving airplane. I just recently started playing the simulators again and it's like I never stopped flying even though it's been 15 years since I last been on a simulator.
I flew my 1959 Cessna 182B for 15 years with upgraded radios and nav. Never had a problem. The old 'STABILIZER' trim was the best as the stabilizer and elevator were always in line (less drag) when in cruise. I also raised the ailerons 1/2 inch. This improved cruise speed plus improved low speed handling due to slightly more wing 'wash out'. I really mis her.
@@bubbacole1657 Look into your local EAA chapter scene. There may be some budget builders in your area. Another option is taking a ground school course. It’s cheap. If you really want to fly on weekends, you can figure it out. Owning is expensive. You can get paid to fly.
Totally dig the vintage paint scheme! I have a 1979 Piper Dakota I did major flight deck upgrade - all Aspen Avionics PFD/MFD and Garmin flight deck, but I kept my retro paint scheme. I have 235 hp and 1,150 lbs of useful load. Love it!!
Don't wait any longer than you have to kid. I put off getting a pilot's license and then I had to work, I got married and had kids and never did get it. Now I'm in my 50's watching other people fly on TH-cam videos.
@@Reacta-dev yea what Lance said …I waited til age 26 which wasn’t bad but I knew I wanted to fly since your age. I say that to say the journey is been rough and because I waited long I almost didn’t finish. So get on it soon as your 15/16 make it your goal to have your ppl at or before 20
Every time they talked about the range I remembered flying from Prince Rupert, BC to Victoria, BC in a 182. What a day! As for cabin space, I'll take my Cardinal.
None of it cheating... it helps reduce workload. Althrough I do like to practice flying approaches by hand as well to stay fresh, trim, pitch, and power settings... The C182 is such a great plane. Great job on the video.
@@markadams7328 Yeah, don’t disagree with you at all. It’s why I make it a common practice to fly several approaches by hand within the same six-month requirement period and not just rely on automation.
Ok...so I have to say when I was in flight school back in the 80's I flew all Pipers. Warriors, Archer II's, Turbo Arrows, etc...and I LOVE low wing aircraft. I grew up in both low and high wing, but my love of low wing is forever. That said...this is one beautiful plane and if I could afford a plane...I would seriously have to consider this plane. WOW!!!!!!!!!! And NO ONE that knows me would believe that I just wrote that!!! LOL Greg
A shout out to Derek, I met Mark Trimble years ago at the hanger at College of the Ozarks where my old Navy buddy taught A&P students till they shut the aviation program down. He was the nicest man, his son though is another story. Great video on the 182.
This review was great right up until the point he told you to adjust the mixture. Just WTF. 2022 and FADEC still isn’t the standard. A $600,000 plane with 1950 engine technology. I realize a number of people will say managing mixture is no big deal but technology should be reducing Pilot workload. Pilots have to wear many hats. Pilot. Engineer. Navigator. Removing the need to manage the engine that much needs to happen now. Let the pilot have to worry about one less thing.
The planes now come with an insurance policy dedicated to each individual aircraft…no joke. Aviation should be cheaper…not more expensive today…but here we are.
I have been flying a 2017 182T (not turbo) for a few years. The NXI and G700 spoils you... and yes, the IO-540 at 2400 rpm just is so quiet and it takes a LOT of stress off longer journeys
At the beginning of my career I started off flying cargo in a Cherokee Six (IO-540), and then did a bunch of time in a 206 (IO-520). The 520 was ear-pounding -- its what prompted me to upgrade from my old Davie-Clarks to the Bose A20, which had just come out. But I don't know if I'd call them quiet -- I also remember the Navajo with twin IO-540s being loud as well...
It’s amazing how far aviation has come with electronics. I started in 1997 steam gauge Piper Cadet with no GPS and to be honest, it wasn’t all that fun. How people can navigate to a non VOR airport in ND back then with no GPS is beyond me!
I started in 1990. Learning how to navigate without all the electronics doing it for you really helped with situational awareness. If those navi systems failed on a newer pilot today, I'm not sure if they could manage without getting lost.
Back in the day (80s) I'd do cross-country VFR with no VOR, no ADF, no GPS of course, and depending n the specific airplane, not even a VHF com radio. All we had was a WAC chart, the compass and a watch. Today this would be considered borderline dangerous hard-core VFR, but then it was the bread-and-butter of flying small aircraft. And it was fun!
I started flying in 1969 and dropped out around 1995 after 4000 hours in several different single and light twin aircraft after suffering a heart attack. Just started watching your video after a 25 year absence from flying. Absolutely amazed at the technological upgrades in light aircraft today. I took special interest in this one as I had owned a 182 back in the late 70s. While I’ll never be able to get back in the game at age 70 due to health concerns, I truly enjoyed this update on the 182. Thanks!
To each their own, but if you trim in the flare and have to go around, it's a recipe for disaster if you're not proficient in go arounds. I fly a nose-heavy 235 and I just keep a touch of power in until touchdown for normal landings
I do it but I’m of the philosophy that if you need to go around by the time of the flare you messed up several hundred feet (distance and altitude ) ago Doesn’t mean don’t do it but even most turbine jets won’t allow you time to recover if you initiated a go around that late in the game.
Steep turns were a requirement in the GFT back in 1975/6 .... and they were at 60 degrees ... I believe that nowadays this is a max of 45 degrees .. could be wrong?
You and Derek did a great job showcasing this aircraft. I appreciate the high level of detail in this review and the overall production quality of your channel. I see that the C182 has rudder trim but does the GFC700 have a yaw damper function? Cheers!
Thank you! This was a fun video to produce. It took a lot of work but I'm really happy with the result. It was fun to be able to showcase this awesome airplane for everyone so that more people could be exposed to aviation.
For the amount of time you fly alone, then occasionally with another on board .. few aircraft beat the RV8…165kts @ 33 litres…constant speed when fitted…with Flymore tip tanks 6.5 hours endurance. More baggage than you can ever need.
You don't trim during the flare, period. Fly a balked landing and find out exactly how devout you are. Any airplane that can't be flared properly by application of yoke/stick/whatever alone is poorly designed. The 182 is obviously _not_ poorly designed so trimming is absolutely not necessary. Nice ride, though.
Actually, the 182 did tend to be a little nose-heavy in the flare, which required a small amount of extra vigilance so as not to accidently plant it on the nose gear. I assumed the weight of the A/C unit just forward of the empennage would have eliminated that in this new 182, but apparently not.
Using electric trim on flare sounds dangerous to me in the event of having to go around. Am I wrong? Been a lot of accidents lately on go arounds done wrong. Theory has been too much UP trim on landing and making it stall due to not enough forward pressure on the yoke during the go around.
In my opinion, that depends on the pilot’s proficiency and level of training. If the pilot does have to go around in the flare, the worst thing he can do is stiff arm the throttle. The prop wash will make the elevator more effective and cause the nose to come up abruptly, while at the same time P factor, torque, and spiraling slipstream are yanking the nose to the left. Not good. Full flaps is also an issue. However, if the pilot was trimming in the flare using the electric trim, he likely didn’t add that much nose up trim because the trim doesn’t move that fast. If a go-around is necessary, it would be better to add about 50% power initially, with coordinated right rudder, reach over and raise the flaps one notch, then bring in some more power, using electric trim as needed and eventually getting to full throttle and flaps up or 10°, and a smooth safe go around is the result. No need to rush it.
@@cwhitty05 Did you watch the end of the video? The sales guy said he likes to reach the full aft limit of the trim at touchdown. Makes me wonder if he’s ever done a last second go-around. But I dont know the 182 well enough. Maybe the trim limits aren’t that drastic?
Great video ! Thank you guys for sharing this impressive aircraft. Much improved from my past 172/182 experiences. I really like the range and payload capabilities. Just a nice 182.
Oh wow this plane looks amazing for a first airplane. If i have enough money in the future I want to maybe own one of these planes :) I just completed my first solo flight on June 2nd, 2022 which is a huge confidence builder for me to continue my training and I hope to be a commercial pilot for a career!
Don't buy a 182. Learn to fly 172/182 'cause they are available for rent everywhere. And arguably better than the whole Piper family. But to purchase - do yourself a favor and go for some newer designs.
It's beautiful. I had hoped that someday when I retired from airline flying, I could hope to own something like a 182. But, of course no way, even the 40 year old ones are very expensive and that is only the beginning when you think about fuel, maintenance, annual checks, etc. etc. I flew a 182 a few times as a youth, pleasant memories.
Obviously, you do not know how to budget well. Lol if your a airline/commercial pilot, and lived a low budget lifestyle, a used one at around $380K is totally possible. I’m training to become a pilot and companies like FedEx and Southwest are paying beginner pilots above $150K a year. If your experience.. past $200K. There a pilot shortage so pay has increased dramatically. Owning a plane like this is very much possible is one’s lifestyle is low and reasonable.
@@Brady_Da_GOAT a first year pilot makes first year pay. A second year pilot makes second year pay. There is no such thing as experienced pay or beginners pay.
This is probably the most perfect plane that exists. Can take it almost anywhere and it'll handle the ride with stride. I only hope Cessna considers adding the Lycoming 540 ie2 engine to it and give it something north of 300 hp of power. I'd wager it will woo quite a few Cirrus buyers away.
It's amazing just how little the Cessna has changed. I suppose it's hard to improve on such an iconic design though I would like to see nicer interior design (more akin to modern cars). I mean if I can get a fully equipped Audi S4 for under 50 grand, surely a Cessna 182 can look just as nice inside for the price it's sold.
Flown different 182 Cessnas a few times. Most recently it was $215 / hour, 12.5 gph, and only 122 kt GS at 2'400 RPM with throttle firewalled at 10'500. Now, okay the IO-540 powered ones with wheel fairings may be faster. A bit. Maybe 130 kt GS. Okay-ish as a rental. Wouldn't purchase a new one today. So many much better aircraft in 2022 Faster, more efficient gas-wise, MUCH better view. Much easier to fly. Alas, struggling to get market traction because 80% of disposable income in the U.S. comes from 60+ year old who are set in their ways. Also because many newer people in aviation are heavily biased towards "tried and true" designs, even if it's 60+ years old, and inefficient as f_ck. Seriously though.
@@joem8615 Wow a 2021! Is the 2021 equipped with the same features than the 2022? I'm mostly interested in the performance figures like cruise speed, rpm, fuel burn, MP, etc. Some climb performance data too. 1100 lbs of payload is not a whole lot but the 200 lbs rear baggage capacity is very impressive. How does it fly with 200 lbs in the back?
Hmm…nice but a very expensive version of my 1969 182M. I also have 265hp Pponk conversion. I am just finishing a avionics upgrade that basically gives all the same features as this one.
Love the old school paint job, my favorite airplane, but over 750,000 for a new 182? absolute insanity, cant see the type lasting much longer at that price, cessna will price it out of the market like they did with the ttx240..
Agree... what could the market for this plane possibly be? You'd be better off buying a Sling TSI and two Bentleys, one for each leg of your trip to the airport.
Everything about certificated aircraft is out of control, price-wise. The only way for a mere mortal to get into a new plane is for them to build it themselves. Avgas has a lot of enemies in the environmental/political space and aerodiesel engine options are far and few between, leaving experimental+automotive diesels as the only option for an affordable plane that burns affordable fuel.
@@rogerdickinson920 I thought that's what the Skyhawk was for? I don't doubt it's an incredible aircraft and it's not even really Cessna's fault they have to charge this much. I'm just bummed new planes went from accessible for the top 5% of incomes to the top 0.5%.
@@rogerdickinson920 Flying schools wouldnt buy a 182, especially when the 172 is the most popular trainer out there, but still over 500 thousand a copy.
As an older guy who flew the 182 fifty plus yrs ago I think the safety features of the G1000 and autopilot are wonderful but the pilots should hand fly it all the time, at least on short hops like this and look outside a lot more. Sitting there staring at the screens ain’t cool. That said, I’d love to fly one of these.
I think you should still fly sitting in the open on the wing like Wilbur Wright. Vacuum instruments are wonderful but pilots should have to stick their finger into the wind to judge speed, at least on short hops like this and feel the outside a lot more. Sitting there behind a wind screen ain't cool.
I had flightstream in my company 206, through the 750, it was fantastic. Especially flying on the coasts where ATC gives you like 20 fixes, ALWAYS different than filed. So much better than the endless twisting. Although not quite so bad in the 750 vs 530.
I'm legally blind, so I can't fly real aircraft, but I'm seeing this instrumentation in the aircraft in Flight Simulator 2020, and X-Plane sims. I only wish the G1000 had a soft key that would enlarge the instrumentation. For real world pilots, I think this would help, especially in the event of a smoke filled cabin, or other emergency that impairs a pilot's vision. Thanks for sharing.
@@blake9908 No. WITH glasses, my right eye is 20/500, WITH glasses, the left eye is 20/2000. Field of vision is less than 25 degrees vertically, in both eyes, and about 40 degrees, laterally, in right, about the same in the left. Also, there's astigmatism (distortion), as well as nystagmus (jittery eyes) in both eyes. Nope. No pilot's licenses in my near future. LOL
Very very nice product and complete. I mean, none of this tech is new or whatever, but it's definitely cool to finally see some of those instruments also on mono propelled airplanes like this Cessna. Lucky both of you that got the chance to experience it. I look forward to it.
A plane like that could have a price tag well over $700,000. Not to mention the cost of fueling it would be in excess of $500 today. He mentioned the turbo version being the same horsepower as the standard. I think that is a mistake. If I had a couple of million dollars to blow I would probably invest in an aircraft that was a turbo prop for speed and utility. The 182 still is unable to fly in any known Icing conditions where the cirrus SR 22 can.
How does an SR-22 deal with icing? I've seen a video of a Cirrus become unable to climb, then even maintain altitude, and eventually crash after accumulating ice... :-( Somewhere in the northeast...
Not sure about the price but turbo charging allows the engine to maintain it's power at higher altitudes. It seems like they often don't have more power to start with than the normally aspirated versions. And if $ really isn't an object then sure maybe a turbo prop but they seem to blow through the fuel significantly faster.
@@lancepeltier1081 A turboed IO-540 is about $100k while the non-turbo is around $50k, so yeah, like x2 difference. Turboed means it keeps it's power all the way up, which is where you need it most. At sea level a non-turboed engine usually produces enough power as it is. It's mountains where the lack of power makes a difference.
The SR22 costs about 50% more than the 182, so not a straight comparison. Also, you can get TKS ice protection for the 182, but it's not a factory option, and also not approved for 'known ice'. Not a great idea to fly into known ice in this class of airplane regardless. Also, the HP of the NA and turbo version is the same. It is turbo-normalized, not boosted. Always been like that since the TR182 version in the '70s.
@@SkylaneGuy sr 22 is about 900k new for the last one I saw ordered. If this 182 is 700k the extra 200k is well worth it. I have about 800 hours in a 182a nd 1940's engineering vs 2000 engineering, is well, 60 years apart....
Common people can no longer afford this hobby, only the rich. I have my PPL, but can’t afford to rent a 152 anymore, much less own one. Around 1995, I could rent a 152 for $37.50/hr wet. Piper warrior was $45/hr wet. Now it’s 4 times that or more, I have not checked in years, it is probable worse now. Pilot shortage? LOL 😂
When I learned in 2008, a 152 was $68/hr wet, and an older 172 $88/hr wet. I miss those days, and don't fly for similar reasons - cost. My family also grew and renting a 6-place aircraft was prohibitively expensive!
As a Cessna pilot, I wonder if Cessna will ever have a more automotive finish to the cockpit like the sirrus.instead of Philips head screws we have hidden clips
Other than the GPU plug, the Kelly AC and avionics this plane is basically the same as the 1969 182 Skylane, right down to steps on the wing struts and copious aerodynamic impediments. If this aircraft was $150,000 that would be reasonable, but this is like GM selling a 1969 Caprice with a fuel injected motor, airbags and GPS. This is disgraceful.
Hey guys! I wanted to let you know I just launched an "Insiders" Newsletter where once a week I'm sharing an important lesson I've learned in aviation, links to my latest content so you don't miss out, and links to any other interesting or helpful content I've found. I'm also working on a HUGE project I can't announce yet but I'm going to be sharing more behind the scenes info with Insiders first - Subscribe (it's free) at: airplaneacademy.com/insiders
I work at the Cessna plant in Independence ks where this very plane was assembled. I have personally worked on this very aircraft. It is kind of cool to see a plane you have helped get ready for flight on a youtube video.
I really like the retro font on the Cessna logo. Has the equipment used for riveting of the panels changed in the last decade or so or done in the same fashion?
@@My_Fair_Lady You sound more like the attention seeker. I think the odds of a person who builds Cessna 182's finding a video of a... wait for it... Cessna 182 would be super high.
So, any attempts on Johnny Cashs "one piece at a time" song?
@@gingerman5123 super low but yeah I get wat u mean
Great plane !!!!
I learned to fly in a 172 and a week after I got my license my flight school got two 182s . My instructor invited me back to go out in one of the new 182s . We got to level flight and he let me take over. This thing was brand new . It still had plastic covers on the seats. It still had that new aircraft smell.
I just got mine! Thinking about a 2nd one for the wife and spare for guests.
Is this a bragging competition?
That must have been an awesome school then, or at least a great instructor! Sounds like he was a stand up guy. He probably felt bad that they got the new planes right after your graduation?
Back in the early 1970s I was a young paratrooper stationed at Fort Campbell Kentucky. We had a sport parachute club for off duty jumping. On the weekends we would drive to Elkton Kentucky and meet up with a pilot that had a Cessna 182. He would take off the right door and remove the front seat and rear seats. We could fit three parachutists in the plane and away we would go off the grass airstrip. As soon as we started our free fall jumping the local residents would show up and watch use jump the whole afternoon. I have fond memories of jumping out of that Cessna 182. I'm glad they are still making them. It was a fun time for all.
If you ever get to buy a new Cessna the delivery process is unimaginable. 4 days of fun in the air with your brand new bird and the best of everything. I bought a new T206H and took delivery in June. You will know your way around Wichita when you finally depart on day 5. Eat lunch at Steerman airport……at least one of the flying days.
Jeff.
Who cares about you?
Im getting ready to purchase a new 182. Delivery in 2025. I'm excited
@@everettfarr8036let us know how it goes!
Having all those wonderful avionics and self recovering auto pilot is not cheating it's reducing pilot work load. I got my licence on a 152 and did the next 500 odd hours on 172's and then the 172 Cutlass retractable gear for my commercial licence. Flying passengers around the east coast of the states could be hard work and at times very tiring.
I absolutely love that aircraft. 1100lbs is just about 500kg; that's a serious load. 145 knots cruise, perfect. The ability to make flap selections and have the AP take care of the trim; luxury.
Reduced work load means safer flying and allows the pilot to maintain better situational awareness. What's not to like?
It seems almost bizarre to me that you can have an aircraft with instrument-reliant features like the self recovering autopilot and yet it's NOT certified for actual IFR...?
Fuel flow?
Exactly, but non pilots have no clue what your talking about but would love to voice their opinions!
@@ska042 the comment was only for the visual approach settings- the IFR approaches are different and the plane is certified for IFR using the IFR approaches. The visual's are not IFR procedures / not for IMC. The visual approaches would help with VFR situational awareness much like foreflight is an assist and not IFR certified. That's my take.
The costs to maintain and update all those fancy bells & whistles. And the insurance for it all.
That retro paint and logo is AWESOME
I absolutely love the throwback vintage paint scheme and font. Such an iconic plane.
FSF - Full Self Flying. Literally AutoPilot. This is fantastic. A seasoned, knowledgeable and unable to be distracted, electronic co-pilot ready to take over when needed. And Flight Plans by touch screen - also fantastic. Cessna has made hobby flying fun, safe and relaxing. Thank you both for sharing...
My comments are full self typing, literally my brain on autopilot
Derek is obviously a CFI… couldn’t stop himself from saying “Right Rudder”. Lol.
Nice video
Haha
Something you can almost get away with in a trainer, but when you get into high performance airplanes, your rudder skills (or lack thereof) will become apparent. 🙂
@@HiTechRob agreed. I hope it was an obvious joke. 👍
Derek looks like Cristiano Ronaldo
I am a big fan of the auto correction for extended bank angles. Cant help but think such a feature would save a lot of lives over the years.
As long as you can turn it off its ok I guess. I'm left wondering -- if the plane has such an advanced autopilot as this one, and you're not proficient on instruments and go inadvertent IMC -- why would you continue to hand-fly the airplane? Just activate the autopilot -- which kind of turns this feature into a useless gimmick doesn't it? Either let the autopilot fly the airplane, or don't. This half/half thing seems kind of pointless.
I have an ATP and am currently an airline pilot and would love to have an airplane but the thought that these 4 seaters with a naturally aspirated engine goes for $500k brand new, is absurd. These planes haven’t changed other than avionics since the “restarting of the type” in 1996 and was first certified in the mid 50’s. It is super light aluminum and a tight tolerance engine that runs at a constant speed. The airplane in 1958 sold for just under 18k and adjusted for today’s inflation goes for 190k. I understand we have GPS, G1000, etc. and better manufacturing, but that should make it cheaper. Not more expensive. $250k with all the current items in it new and I would have one but the manufacturers are way too proud of their product. In the end, great video and really nice to see what is going on in GA today but it is a big miss for me.
Agreed
The pilot community on youtube is something I love watching, though I definitely don't earn near enough money to be able to start on this journey myself, so it's just nice to watch.
You don't need money to be able to fly, just someone who will let you sit in the pilot seat and do it. 😉
Me to.
I had an friend, totally I.T based, I was amazed when he said he was training for a license etc, it honestly doesn't seem so difficult. You can definitely plan for this if you really wanna fly. You don't need to own these planes for flying them :v
you can get a loan between multiple people and do a sharing ownership, that would put you in a brand new 182, and you could split the annual maintenance costs. I would like someone to let us know what the annual maintenance inspection costs on a 2022 Cessna 182 (Textron) in 2023? Thanks for helping
I had a 2006 turbo 182 before I lost my medical. Best airplane I ever owned. It would do 155 KTAS at 12,500’, running lean of peak at about 12 GPH with Gamijectors (if I remember correctly; that was 10 years ago). It would fly circles at 70 kts over sites my passengers wanted to photograph, steady as a rock. It was indeed a great short field airplane. I could easily land and make the first exit taxiway at my airport every time, just to show off.
It would true 170 KTS at 17,500’, though I almost never took it that high unless there was a screaming tailwind. I loved that airplane. The new one in this video almost brings tears to my eyes. I envy anyone who can get himself one.
We don't use VFR altitudes above FL180...I really hope you meant 17,500.
If you were flying at 18,500, sure hope you had an ATC assigned altitude of FL180 block FL190.
@@stancotton4778
What??
@@danl.909
Did you really fly at 18,500 or is that a guess?
@@stancotton4778
I never flew at 18,500 in my life. A guess? What are you talking about?
@@danl.909
You stated that your airplane would true out at 170kts at 18,500. And that you ALMOST NEVER took it that high unless there was a screaming tailwind. Those are your words... so now you're are saying you NEVER took it that high. I was only questioning whether you knew that FL180 and above is class A airspace, formerly known as PCA...Positive Controlled Airspace, requiring an IFR assigned altitude by ATC.
Darren is a great ambassador for Cessna. Excellent commentator in explaining the aircraft’s abilities and new features. Hell I’m not even a pilot just a guy that enjoys flying along in small aircraft videos. Thanks
I jumped many time out of a 182 back in the 70’s. Owned a 170B. Great planes! ♥️
We had a company owned 182 with cuffed leading edges. I loved practicing 50 knot approaches with a high sink rate at a higher than normal approach. Great for night time operation as inexperienced pilots can make lower than normal approaches at night. Also a good economical workhorse.
I remember back in the day when a 150 cost 16 or 18 an hr, 172 was 21 and the 182 was 23 including gas. Those were the days when ww2 pilots were instructors costing 10$ hr. One was a Mosquito pilot, another flew Vulcans and a third water bombers. I had some pretty good instructors.
When was this?
Now cost me £210 for an hour in a 152 yesterday
Those prices are about what I paid back in 1981. I think a brand new 152 cost about 40 k back then. This thing has got to be about 500k
@@chekyerego There is a vid out there recently where the new cost of a 172 was 487k US,,,I think
@@flyinginak4824 1976 to mid 80;s
I’m a member of the Civil Air Patrol and we have the world’s largest fleet of single engine Cessnas and our 172’s/182’s are being equipped or come with the G1000, which is great and a huge help for our missions, but this new 182 just blows my mind. Can’t wait to see if we’re going to get any of the new 182’s in our Wings in the near future.
My daughter joined CAP a year ago to get a feel for military service, without any thoughts of flying. THEN, she did a weekend deployment where she got stick time on a glider. Done, and done. She is going to be a pilot, whether as a vocation or as a PPL. CAP is great for type-A all-star performers, and creating leaders. Thanks and keep up the good work.
We are primarily flying G1Ks in VAWG. We took delivery of a 172NXi last year. Very cool flight deck.
Great video !
Great plane !
Great paint scheme !
Great everything
about this plane !
Carl...
But you don't sound great, just repetitive and boring!
@@redblade8160
Have a great day !👍🤣
@@carlfichtner8148
There you go again!
That sales rep knows his product inside out. It's so nice to see. So many third party guys are just salesmen. Really great video.
What an amazingly well done video! Great job to you both. This airplane is very VERY nicely done, and I absolutely love the retro '60s paint job on this version. I so much enjoy your videos!
Thanks so much! Glad you enjoyed!
@@AirplaneAcademy Yes--There has to be a sizable demographic that prefers this retro font and paint. i love it. Also, sounds like Cessna has really worked on less NVH. Noise/Vibration/Harshness.
Got my PPL 7/24/22, I own a 172 and fly out of KRYW in Lago Vista. I watched your videos throughout all of my flight training. Thanks for all of the great videos and tips!
I live in Lago!!
Wonderful aircraft. I learned to fly on the Cessna 150 and 172. I found that the Cessna wing was so efficient that sometimes I had trouble getting it to settle on the runway on landing.
Me to! Earned my PPL in June 1967 and entered the Air Force one month later and sent to Viet Nam one year later as a security cop! :-(
Getting the plane to settle has nothing to do with the wing design -- it's all about speed management. If you're floating during the flare, you've got too much speed.
Great aircraft. I have fond memories of skydiving from a 182 over 40 years ago. Strut & step exit, so you would spend a bit of time hanging onto the strut, before dropping away into free fall.
I'm liking the Cessna representative here. I did work as a Salesman for a little while( I decided it wasn't for me). Between my experience in and as a consumer I've realized there are two kinds of salesmen. The typical " greasy used car salesman" type, and the one that actually believes in the product.
He seems like he really believes in the product and genuinely wants people to enjoy it as much as he does. It's going to be quite a while before I can afford my own plane, but I'm gonna have to ask to talk to him when I start looking at what Cessna has to offer.
If you listen attentively you’ll hear say The tio540 is 235 hp which is wrong. It’s 310hp not 235 so yes I agree with you …yup he’s GREAT and also gay as hell good rep for “the times”
He' very handsome.
He’s gay
Awesome! Back in the day (70's) I spent quite a bit of time in 182's, I couldn't have imagined the avionics or performance of the 2022 model.
And how about that price (and waiting list)! Great vid and plane and I'd love to get one but they are all now so priced out of the range for any normal human to buy.
I realize this is different take but other than the GPU plug, the Kelly AC and avionics this plane is basically the same as the 1969 182 Skylane, right down to steps on the wing struts and copious aerodynamic impediments. If this aircraft was $150,000 that would be reasonable, but this is like GM selling a 1969 Caprice with a fuel injected motor, airbags and GPS. This is disgraceful.
@@GasIPass So, aside from accounting for inflation since 1969 and the exorbitant cost of a G1000 NXI, the 182 has similar useful load, slightly less fuel burn and is 10-20 kts slower than an SR22 , but is half the price.
@@sircrapalot9954 in 1980 a brand new 182 cost $17,000. Taking into account inflation that same plane would only cost $60,000 today. If you are happy with the lazy/non-improvement of air frame design since this aircraft was first released in 1956, that’s on you.
@@GasIPass To really be fair in comparing these things to cars, we have to remember that these planes use an ancient ghetto mechanical fuel injection from the 60s and 70s. No car manufacturer would dare sell an engine with zero-feedback Bosch K-Jetronic dribble system where just going over a mountain pass requires manual tuning by the driver. But getting something new certified and STCs available is so expensive it's basically illegal, so we're all frozen in time.
@@GasIPass you are quoting the original MSRP from 1957, not 1980. Adjusted for inflation, the 1980 price is roughly $200k. Still a far cry from the price today, but the airplane is also far more capable in terms of mission, avionics and autopilot. It’s a numbers game, numbers are too low to bring down prices, but we can’t bring down the price in order to get the volume up. Tough world.
I wear my Cessna T-shirt proudly. These planes are so reliable and safe. Great job, Cessna!
I've had the 172 for 4 years, and the 182 for 8 years.... Derek does a really good job of explaining the new aircraft.
please excuse my ignorance ( i have only flown carbureted 172s/cherokee 140s ) - why this 180 in the video has mixture control if it's fuel injected?
When they talk about the fuel range I started laughing cause the plane looked parked but it was just so stable in the air. Awesome plane
My Dad started with a 172, then upgraded to a 182. He just got his multi engine rating when he developed Afib and was grounded. Broke his heart, but he sure had fun flying all his friends to cool destinations, including me !
I feel your Dad's pain as I had also had a medical grounding way too young. I started flying a 172R then moved up to the 172S after I soloed just for the extra 20HP which was helpful in Phoenix's heat. Day after my checkride I got into a '99 182S and never looked back until I started having episodes of lightheadedness. Grounded before I started my multi but was 75% through my IFR.
Interesting fact; that 182 had a new sticker price of right around $230,000 and rented for $115/hr. The biggest bargain anywhere.
My kids never got to know me when I flew so it's just an oddity when someone is digging through a closet and finds my flight bag.
@@9HighFlyer9 that’s weird, I contacted a Cessna representative and they said a new Cessna Skyhawks costed $499,999. With what you do, how much money do you assume you need to own a plane, something even basic as a Cessna 150.
@@poochie5543 Now they cost half a million $. But in 1999 they were $135,000. There's an article, from 1997, on Avweb if you search for it. Discusses the price and if they're too high.
@@9HighFlyer9 I did the math, that 135k is actually more than 500k in todays money due to inflation.
@@9HighFlyer9 in reality which is surprising, it’s actually cheaper to buy a plane today than before during 80’s. I know I’m still new and working for my ppl at 18, i hope I can get a tour at one of Cessnas dealership on what they have in person, very fascinating non the less.
Derek certainly knows his stuff....very clearly spoken as well. Thanks for the video fellas.
All throughout my childhood I had real at home simulators with all the controls, rudder pedals. The 172 was my absolute favorite to fly. Super forgiving airplane. I just recently started playing the simulators again and it's like I never stopped flying even though it's been 15 years since I last been on a simulator.
Just like Riding a Bike ! 😄😀😃
I flew my 1959 Cessna 182B for 15 years with upgraded radios and nav. Never had a problem. The old 'STABILIZER' trim was the best as the stabilizer and elevator were always in line (less drag) when in cruise. I also raised the ailerons 1/2 inch. This improved cruise speed plus improved low speed handling due to slightly more wing 'wash out'. I really mis her.
I agree. I flew the C182C. Best experience ever in a Cessna.
I've never owned a plane, don't have the fund's to do so, but love watching the videos. This 182 would be a awesome choice to have..
I'm guessing that aircraft is probably $250k? With that setup...
It has certainly grown out of a hobbyists grasp.
@@jamesburris4078 Hell, I can't afford the fuel to fly the thing, maybe drive it around the airport a time or two.. HAHA
@@bubbacole1657 I wasn't even close to what 1 actually cost.
$500k +...
And that is not with all the bells and whistles.
@@jamesburris4078 DAM,, Guess I won't be buying one anytime soon. Crazy Cost for a bunch of aluminum
@@bubbacole1657 Look into your local EAA chapter scene. There may be some budget builders in your area. Another option is taking a ground school course. It’s cheap. If you really want to fly on weekends, you can figure it out. Owning is expensive. You can get paid to fly.
Totally dig the vintage paint scheme! I have a 1979 Piper Dakota I did major flight deck upgrade - all Aspen Avionics PFD/MFD and Garmin flight deck, but I kept my retro paint scheme. I have 235 hp and 1,150 lbs of useful load. Love it!!
I’ve been out of aviation for a while. I didn’t realize this was “vintage”, I just thought they never changed.
I think I prefer the Dakota. Very stable airframe.
This is Awsome! The 182 is my favorite plane! I am 13 and just did my first Discovery flight, hope to own one of these in the future!
better start saving your peenys there is drug king pins that can not afford one
Don't wait any longer than you have to kid. I put off getting a pilot's license and then I had to work, I got married and had kids and never did get it. Now I'm in my 50's watching other people fly on TH-cam videos.
@@lancepeltier1081 Thanks! I am trying to convince my mom to let me, I really want to!
@@Reacta-dev yea what Lance said …I waited til age 26 which wasn’t bad but I knew I wanted to fly since your age. I say that to say the journey is been rough and because I waited long I almost didn’t finish. So get on it soon as your 15/16 make it your goal to have your ppl at or before 20
A man of ability and the desire to accomplish something can do anything.
Cool dude, always teaching and adjusting the mixture just like my CFI always did.
In the pattern, I just push my mixture full forward. Since there is a mixture control, am I to assume there is no FADEC on this aircraft?
Every time they talked about the range I remembered flying from Prince Rupert, BC to Victoria, BC in a 182. What a day! As for cabin space, I'll take my Cardinal.
None of it cheating... it helps reduce workload. Althrough I do like to practice flying approaches by hand as well to stay fresh, trim, pitch, and power settings... The C182 is such a great plane. Great job on the video.
The problem is - when pilots 'cheat' too much, they can't fly the plane.
@@markadams7328 Yeah, don’t disagree with you at all. It’s why I make it a common practice to fly several approaches by hand within the same six-month requirement period and not just rely on automation.
Ok...so I have to say when I was in flight school back in the 80's I flew all Pipers. Warriors, Archer II's, Turbo Arrows, etc...and I LOVE low wing aircraft. I grew up in both low and high wing, but my love of low wing is forever. That said...this is one beautiful plane and if I could afford a plane...I would seriously have to consider this plane. WOW!!!!!!!!!! And NO ONE that knows me would believe that I just wrote that!!! LOL
Greg
Great video Charlie! Really enjoyed your presentation of the features of the new 182.
Thanks so much! Glad you enjoyed!
Fredricksburg,TX, airport!! I've been there! Spent a long time working there!
Very impressive those features are going to save lives excellent progress Cessna
A shout out to Derek, I met Mark Trimble years ago at the hanger at College of the Ozarks where my old Navy buddy taught A&P students till they shut the aviation program down. He was the nicest man, his son though is another story. Great video on the 182.
This review was great right up until the point he told you to adjust the mixture. Just WTF. 2022 and FADEC still isn’t the standard. A $600,000 plane with 1950 engine technology. I realize a number of people will say managing mixture is no big deal but technology should be reducing Pilot workload. Pilots have to wear many hats. Pilot. Engineer. Navigator. Removing the need to manage the engine that much needs to happen now. Let the pilot have to worry about one less thing.
Totally agree.
Completely agree. It's just ridiculous.
Right, for as much as these airplanes cost new it should manage the RPM and mixture automatically by now.
The planes now come with an insurance policy dedicated to each individual aircraft…no joke. Aviation should be cheaper…not more expensive today…but here we are.
And presumably still running exclusively on leaded fuel. Do we really have to dump toxic residue on people living under flightpaths?
My Dad was a piolet and we flew in a Cessna 172 all the time. Great plane for short take offs and landed like a parashot. Miss those days.
I have been flying a 2017 182T (not turbo) for a few years. The NXI and G700 spoils you... and yes, the IO-540 at 2400 rpm just is so quiet and it takes a LOT of stress off longer journeys
At the beginning of my career I started off flying cargo in a Cherokee Six (IO-540), and then did a bunch of time in a 206 (IO-520). The 520 was ear-pounding -- its what prompted me to upgrade from my old Davie-Clarks to the Bose A20, which had just come out.
But I don't know if I'd call them quiet -- I also remember the Navajo with twin IO-540s being loud as well...
Throw-back logo and paint is killer!
It’s amazing how far aviation has come with electronics. I started in 1997 steam gauge Piper Cadet with no GPS and to be honest, it wasn’t all that fun. How people can navigate to a non VOR airport in ND back then with no GPS is beyond me!
I started in 1990. Learning how to navigate without all the electronics doing it for you really helped with situational awareness. If those navi systems failed on a newer pilot today, I'm not sure if they could manage without getting lost.
Yet still ancient engine technology. Avionics are a game changer though.
It’s really important to to train pilots without the use of GPS, just in case all the satellites fall out of the sky!
Back in the day (80s) I'd do cross-country VFR with no VOR, no ADF, no GPS of course, and depending n the specific airplane, not even a VHF com radio. All we had was a WAC chart, the compass and a watch. Today this would be considered borderline dangerous hard-core VFR, but then it was the bread-and-butter of flying small aircraft. And it was fun!
Excellent. Beautiful and very capable aircraft. Congrats Cessna. Thanks guys for this video.
Sure thing, glad you enjoyed!
Wow, the designers really went all out on this one! That black stripe was not in the same spot as the 1960s version. We’re making ground!
I started flying in 1969 and dropped out around 1995 after 4000 hours in several different single and light twin aircraft after suffering a heart attack. Just started watching your video after a 25 year absence from flying. Absolutely amazed at the technological upgrades in light aircraft today. I took special interest in this one as I had owned a 182 back in the late 70s. While I’ll never be able to get back in the game at age 70 due to health concerns, I truly enjoyed this update on the 182. Thanks!
Welcome to the channel, glad you enjoyed the video!
To each their own, but if you trim in the flare and have to go around, it's a recipe for disaster if you're not proficient in go arounds. I fly a nose-heavy 235 and I just keep a touch of power in until touchdown for normal landings
Same
I do it but I’m of the philosophy that if you need to go around by the time of the flare you messed up several hundred feet (distance and altitude ) ago Doesn’t mean don’t do it but even most turbine jets won’t allow you time to recover if you initiated a go around that late in the game.
Steep turns were a requirement in the GFT back in 1975/6 .... and they were at 60 degrees ... I believe that nowadays this is a max of 45 degrees .. could be wrong?
You and Derek did a great job showcasing this aircraft. I appreciate the high level of detail in this review and the overall production quality of your channel. I see that the C182 has rudder trim but does the GFC700 have a yaw damper function? Cheers!
The GFC700 is YD capable. I can't find any literature that says whether or not it's utilized in the Skylane but I would be surprised if it wasn't.
Thank you! This was a fun video to produce. It took a lot of work but I'm really happy with the result. It was fun to be able to showcase this awesome airplane for everyone so that more people could be exposed to aviation.
Beautiful aircraft. Almost makes me want to get back in the air! Thank you!
For the amount of time you fly alone, then occasionally with another on board .. few aircraft beat the RV8…165kts @ 33 litres…constant speed when fitted…with Flymore tip tanks 6.5 hours endurance. More baggage than you can ever need.
Far too exciting and radical for a conservative 182 flyer!
High wings aren’t sexy, but if you are fat and out of shape or have bad joints, they sure are a lot easier to get in and out of.
@@droge192 Planes fly as you fly them. If all you want is a cruiser, the RV-8 will dutifully obey your commands. The RV-8 is hard to beat.
I want one. I lean't on Cessnas and loved flying them. Great memories.
You don't trim during the flare, period. Fly a balked landing and find out exactly how devout you are. Any airplane that can't be flared properly by application of yoke/stick/whatever alone is poorly designed. The 182 is obviously _not_ poorly designed so trimming is absolutely not necessary.
Nice ride, though.
You are 100% right!
Keerect!
Actually, the 182 did tend to be a little nose-heavy in the flare, which required a small amount of extra vigilance so as not to accidently plant it on the nose gear. I assumed the weight of the A/C unit just forward of the empennage would have eliminated that in this new 182, but apparently not.
An extra plug in seat option for the backage area could be useful.
Using electric trim on flare sounds dangerous to me in the event of having to go around. Am I wrong? Been a lot of accidents lately on go arounds done wrong. Theory has been too much UP trim on landing and making it stall due to not enough forward pressure on the yoke during the go around.
I just saw your comment after I posted... you are spot on.
I agree, trim for the approach to meet stabilized standards, then no more trim. Not a good habit to get into.
In my opinion, that depends on the pilot’s proficiency and level of training. If the pilot does have to go around in the flare, the worst thing he can do is stiff arm the throttle. The prop wash will make the elevator more effective and cause the nose to come up abruptly, while at the same time P factor, torque, and spiraling slipstream are yanking the nose to the left. Not good. Full flaps is also an issue.
However, if the pilot was trimming in the flare using the electric trim, he likely didn’t add that much nose up trim because the trim doesn’t move that fast. If a go-around is necessary, it would be better to add about 50% power initially, with coordinated right rudder, reach over and raise the flaps one notch, then bring in some more power, using electric trim as needed and eventually getting to full throttle and flaps up or 10°, and a smooth safe go around is the result. No need to rush it.
@@cwhitty05 Did you watch the end of the video? The sales guy said he likes to reach the full aft limit of the trim at touchdown. Makes me wonder if he’s ever done a last second go-around. But I dont know the 182 well enough. Maybe the trim limits aren’t that drastic?
@@CaptVII Same, i haven't flown the 182, but the nose is heavy according to those that fly them
Great video ! Thank you guys for sharing this impressive aircraft. Much improved from my past 172/182 experiences. I really like the range and payload capabilities. Just a nice 182.
Oh wow this plane looks amazing for a first airplane. If i have enough money in the future I want to maybe own one of these planes :) I just completed my first solo flight on June 2nd, 2022 which is a huge confidence builder for me to continue my training and I hope to be a commercial pilot for a career!
Don't buy a 182. Learn to fly 172/182 'cause they are available for rent everywhere. And arguably better than the whole Piper family. But to purchase - do yourself a favor and go for some newer designs.
Your timing is immaculate. Prospects have never been better.
Charlie G. did you do a segment on when you bought your Cessna 182 and what your cost, etc., was on purchasing your plane, etc.?
It's beautiful. I had hoped that someday when I retired from airline flying, I could hope to own something like a 182. But, of course no way, even the 40 year old ones are very expensive and that is only the beginning when you think about fuel, maintenance, annual checks, etc. etc. I flew a 182 a few times as a youth, pleasant memories.
You are correct....prices and flying costs are insane.
Obviously, you do not know how to budget well. Lol if your a airline/commercial pilot, and lived a low budget lifestyle, a used one at around $380K is totally possible. I’m training to become a pilot and companies like FedEx and Southwest are paying beginner pilots above $150K a year. If your experience.. past $200K. There a pilot shortage so pay has increased dramatically. Owning a plane like this is very much possible is one’s lifestyle is low and reasonable.
@@Brady_Da_GOAT that’s funny, 380k. And that’s just the beginning. Good luck dude.
@@Brady_Da_GOAT btw if you’re learning to fly for the money and not because you love it, you’re making a mistake.
@@Brady_Da_GOAT a first year pilot makes first year pay. A second year pilot makes second year pay. There is no such thing as experienced pay or beginners pay.
I have always wondered why Cessna has not gone to an arrangement like Cirrus has where the prop control has been eliminated.
This is probably the most perfect plane that exists. Can take it almost anywhere and it'll handle the ride with stride. I only hope Cessna considers adding the Lycoming 540 ie2 engine to it and give it something north of 300 hp of power. I'd wager it will woo quite a few Cirrus buyers away.
agree
I'd take a 206 over a 182 any day of the week. Just as easy to fly, and more capable in every way.
Fantastic features on this new airplanes. Thank you for the video! 👍
😂. It's got 1950's technology + modern avionics
As my old boss used to say " If it F**ks ,Flies or Floats, you're better off renting "....
It's amazing just how little the Cessna has changed. I suppose it's hard to improve on such an iconic design though I would like to see nicer interior design (more akin to modern cars). I mean if I can get a fully equipped Audi S4 for under 50 grand, surely a Cessna 182 can look just as nice inside for the price it's sold.
what is the price?
@@kalleblom5564 300k
@@kalleblom5564 that one u just saw is 750k 🙁😞😢
I would like to see flush rivets and other speed improvements.
Wonderful. Excellent demo. Fantastic landing as well. That was a joy
Thanks so much! Glad you enjoyed!
Would love the hear an actual review of this, feels more like a sales pitch. Nice plane all the same.
Especially done by a 182 guy! You can tell he's sold on it even before going in! Can't blame him though I would do the same!
Flown different 182 Cessnas a few times. Most recently it was $215 / hour, 12.5 gph, and only 122 kt GS at 2'400 RPM with throttle firewalled at 10'500. Now, okay the IO-540 powered ones with wheel fairings may be faster. A bit. Maybe 130 kt GS.
Okay-ish as a rental. Wouldn't purchase a new one today. So many much better aircraft in 2022 Faster, more efficient gas-wise, MUCH better view. Much easier to fly. Alas, struggling to get market traction because 80% of disposable income in the U.S. comes from 60+ year old who are set in their ways. Also because many newer people in aviation are heavily biased towards "tried and true" designs, even if it's 60+ years old, and inefficient as f_ck. Seriously though.
I have a 2021 Cessna 182T, what would you like to know?
@@joem8615 Which aircraft did you consider before purchasing it, and why did you end up getting a 182T ?
@@joem8615 Wow a 2021! Is the 2021 equipped with the same features than the 2022? I'm mostly interested in the performance figures like cruise speed, rpm, fuel burn, MP, etc. Some climb performance data too. 1100 lbs of payload is not a whole lot but the 200 lbs rear baggage capacity is very impressive. How does it fly with 200 lbs in the back?
Its always amazing to see all the parts i build in bench assembly on the actual aircraft.
Aircraft Specs parts are Measured with a micrometer, marked with a crayon, and cut with an axe. Tolerance is 1/32 of an inch. 😅
@@jamesburns2232 not far off, we did upgrade to colored pencils recently though lol
Hmm…nice but a very expensive version of my 1969 182M. I also have 265hp Pponk conversion. I am just finishing a avionics upgrade that basically gives all the same features as this one.
This plane with an added BRS parachute system is perfect for families. It just gives that extra piece of mind
Love the old school paint job, my favorite airplane, but over 750,000 for a new 182? absolute insanity, cant see the type lasting much longer at that price, cessna will price it out of the market like they did with the ttx240..
Agree... what could the market for this plane possibly be? You'd be better off buying a Sling TSI and two Bentleys, one for each leg of your trip to the airport.
Everything about certificated aircraft is out of control, price-wise. The only way for a mere mortal to get into a new plane is for them to build it themselves. Avgas has a lot of enemies in the environmental/political space and aerodiesel engine options are far and few between, leaving experimental+automotive diesels as the only option for an affordable plane that burns affordable fuel.
Flying schools, they are easy to fly.
@@rogerdickinson920 I thought that's what the Skyhawk was for? I don't doubt it's an incredible aircraft and it's not even really Cessna's fault they have to charge this much. I'm just bummed new planes went from accessible for the top 5% of incomes to the top 0.5%.
@@rogerdickinson920 Flying schools wouldnt buy a 182, especially when the 172 is the most popular trainer out there, but still over 500 thousand a copy.
When did we get rid of the non-electric powered instruments that used to be required? Attitude indicator and such?
Salesman’s favorite word is ‘really.’
Yes, really.
So with the turbo charged option here you’re looking at what 200 mph???
As an older guy who flew the 182 fifty plus yrs ago I think the safety features of the G1000 and autopilot are wonderful but the pilots should hand fly it all the time, at least on short hops like this and look outside a lot more. Sitting there staring at the screens ain’t cool. That said, I’d love to fly one of these.
I think you should still fly sitting in the open on the wing like Wilbur Wright. Vacuum instruments are wonderful but pilots should have to stick their finger into the wind to judge speed, at least on short hops like this and feel the outside a lot more. Sitting there behind a wind screen ain't cool.
Cool to see y’all flying around Fred! Love the Hangar Hotel. Great video and aircraft!
Nice. Where’s mindy😀.
Schmiiiiindy lol
I had flightstream in my company 206, through the 750, it was fantastic. Especially flying on the coasts where ATC gives you like 20 fixes, ALWAYS different than filed. So much better than the endless twisting. Although not quite so bad in the 750 vs 530.
I'd buy a plane from that Textron/Cessna bon bon any day. What a great video and a delight to the eyes!
I'm legally blind, so I can't fly real aircraft, but I'm seeing this instrumentation in the aircraft in Flight Simulator 2020, and X-Plane sims. I only wish the G1000 had a soft key that would enlarge the instrumentation. For real world pilots, I think this would help, especially in the event of a smoke filled cabin, or other emergency that impairs a pilot's vision. Thanks for sharing.
@ThomasGrillo Pay some low time pilot to take you up. Pay for the plane and he or she racks up left seat time
Thomas Grillo, is your vision correctable with glasses or contacts to 20/20?
@@blake9908 No. WITH glasses, my right eye is 20/500, WITH glasses, the left eye is 20/2000. Field of vision is less than 25 degrees vertically, in both eyes, and about 40 degrees, laterally, in right, about the same in the left. Also, there's astigmatism (distortion), as well as nystagmus (jittery eyes) in both eyes. Nope. No pilot's licenses in my near future. LOL
It is really great to embrace the more robust customers. Some in incredible lift.
I don’t get why Christiano Ronaldo is flying the cessna
Very very nice product and complete. I mean, none of this tech is new or whatever, but it's definitely cool to finally see some of those instruments also on mono propelled airplanes like this Cessna.
Lucky both of you that got the chance to experience it. I look forward to it.
that was a joy to watch , that guy knows his plane for sure!
how much is this plane
Ever hear of google ?
Google is your friend
Please have Derek demo every plane from Cessna and Beechcraft! If you're not inspired watching this I'm not sure what'll do it lol Awesome.
A plane like that could have a price tag well over $700,000. Not to mention the cost of fueling it would be in excess of $500 today. He mentioned the turbo version being the same horsepower as the standard. I think that is a mistake. If I had a couple of million dollars to blow I would probably invest in an aircraft that was a turbo prop for speed and utility. The 182 still is unable to fly in any known Icing conditions where the cirrus SR 22 can.
How does an SR-22 deal with icing? I've seen a video of a Cirrus become unable to climb, then even maintain altitude, and eventually crash after accumulating ice... :-( Somewhere in the northeast...
Not sure about the price but turbo charging allows the engine to maintain it's power at higher altitudes. It seems like they often don't have more power to start with than the normally aspirated versions. And if $ really isn't an object then sure maybe a turbo prop but they seem to blow through the fuel significantly faster.
@@lancepeltier1081 A turboed IO-540 is about $100k while the non-turbo is around $50k, so yeah, like x2 difference.
Turboed means it keeps it's power all the way up, which is where you need it most. At sea level a non-turboed engine usually produces enough power as it is. It's mountains where the lack of power makes a difference.
The SR22 costs about 50% more than the 182, so not a straight comparison. Also, you can get TKS ice protection for the 182, but it's not a factory option, and also not approved for 'known ice'. Not a great idea to fly into known ice in this class of airplane regardless. Also, the HP of the NA and turbo version is the same. It is turbo-normalized, not boosted. Always been like that since the TR182 version in the '70s.
@@SkylaneGuy sr 22 is about 900k new for the last one I saw ordered. If this 182 is 700k the extra 200k is well worth it. I have about 800 hours in a 182a nd 1940's engineering vs 2000 engineering, is well, 60 years apart....
Man I'm so jealous. What a treat it would be to fly a band new C182. Nice little plane!!
And you too can have this aircraft for $495 down $16,900 a month at 12%apr
Common people can no longer afford this hobby, only the rich. I have my PPL, but can’t afford to rent a 152 anymore, much less own one. Around 1995, I could rent a 152 for $37.50/hr wet. Piper warrior was $45/hr wet. Now it’s 4 times that or more, I have not checked in years, it is probable worse now. Pilot shortage? LOL 😂
Im paying $159 wet for a PA-28-181
When I learned in 2008, a 152 was $68/hr wet, and an older 172 $88/hr wet. I miss those days, and don't fly for similar reasons - cost. My family also grew and renting a 6-place aircraft was prohibitively expensive!
As a Cessna pilot, I wonder if Cessna will ever have a more automotive finish to the cockpit like the sirrus.instead of Philips head screws we have hidden clips
Other than the GPU plug, the Kelly AC and avionics this plane is basically the same as the 1969 182 Skylane, right down to steps on the wing struts and copious aerodynamic impediments. If this aircraft was $150,000 that would be reasonable, but this is like GM selling a 1969 Caprice with a fuel injected motor, airbags and GPS. This is disgraceful.
Funny, I am selling a 1969 182M when my 2022 arrives in September. This is a great airplane and something I am excited to put my family in...
Touch button activated air conditioning?? In a cessna 182? hahahahah