Nice, got to fly with a pilot who had a beautiful Rawson conversion up in MT this summer, it was also very impressive.

Was the 88" C203 a field approval, or does the Rawson allow for seaplane prop?

boyfalldown wrote:Rich, That's a fine looking machine! Great job on the conversion, I don't even want to ask how many hours that took. On another note, I believe my 182 was the very next one off the line after yours.

I know this 182 -at Whiteman (WHP) -across from Able Air -2-3 hangers to east. Craig comes to mind.

Yes sir, you are correct. Craig sold her to me 2.5 years ago.

Boyfalldown,
That's a pretty airplane, and I'll bet it's super fast. Dusty has another 61 182 with very low time engine. It's a lot of fun to fly. Not sure yet if we will convert it yet or not. One draw back of the 60 & 61 models is you have to come up with a straight tail and rudder.

Skalywag,
The FAA was great to work with on this conversion. They suggested we do a model change, which sounded like a very simple thing, but we elected not to as we really didn't see the point. It would still have the same serial number, which might have been confusing. As far as the Seaplane prop installation, the 180 type certificate provides for a long prop on a land plane as well. Since it's essentially now a 180, it's simply a log book entry similar to this:

"Aircraft reworked per Cessna Service Kit SK180-46 by installing new propeller assembly McCauley part # 2A34C203-C/G-90DCA-2. Instructions for Continued Airworthiness: IAW McCauley Propeller Operators Manual and Log Publication MPC26 Rev 3, dated August 2014."


Here are some additional in process photos.

Everything has been drilled apart, and the new parts are starting to be fitted and dummied up with old bolts and draw clecos. The locations for the gear box fittings are established at the factory and have the holes pre drilled. This makes it nice, as there is no guess work or oops I guess I was fairly close, wish it didn't want to head for the sidelines all the time. Perhaps more important at Simonds as it has yet to be widened.

In this photo, you see the PPonk outboard casting. It's not actually a casting like Cessnas, but a beautiful precision machined PMA part. On the top of the forward bulkhead you can see the heavy duty extruded angle. This is not actually 90 degress, but has a slight angle off of that. Notice the piece of steel reinforcement being drilled and draw clecoed on the forward side of the forward bulkhead.



Eveything is well primed, no excuse not to leave it better than you found it.



A couple pictures of the tail modifications. The new aft skin has to extend aft past the rear bulkhead. Looking forward you can also see the half bulkhead installation that supports the forward end of the tail gear spring (stinger). Notice the tail cone attach doublers, as well as a couple of Cessna Parts that you can't make, or at least would be challenging.





One draw back on the 60 and 61 is you have to come up with a different vertical and rudder. This can be difficult if there are only Maules on your field. Notice some of the external doublers on that wrap around aft skin.






Again, Don't put stuff back together without priming it.



The floors are going back in. In this picture you see the reason the angle previously pointed out is not 90 degrees. It establishes the floor transition going forward from the thick bulkhead tie in skin (floor). Notice the PPonk beef up fitting through the right hand inspection hole that sits on top of the gearleg and is bolted to the inboard fitting.
The smaller 1" hole just inboard is installed (drilled) to facilitate installation of the bolts through the beef-up. When your gear does decide to come loose, it brings a rather large chuck of the fuselage and bulkhead section with it. Makes a great show and tell piece.




Another shot of the finished product.



If anyone is interested in additional heavy aircraft structure repair pictures, primarily Hueys, but some Cessna as well, there is about a ten minute presentation on the top right of the home page at http://www.acsr.net. It is set to music, hope I don't get in trouble like I did on the Maule long wing versus Cessna Thread, with my selection.

Thank you Rich! Good to know it's just a logbook entry for the seaplane prop.

Someone is going to have an awesome machine, sure looks like top notch work!

richpiney wrote:

Rich,

Do you know what the new weight came in at after the conversion? What about useful load?

I wish someone would just buy my airplane already!!!

Crzyivan13,
The total as Weighed weight was 1707.0
Less oil of 18.75 and adding the unusable Fuel of 60 lbs required by type certificate the total was 1748.25.

Max gross weight of 2650 - 1748.25 left a useful load of 901.75.

It has the monster weight starter, standard battery, original back seat, interior, stol kit, etc.

Richard

richpiney wrote:Crzyivan13,
The total as Weighed weight was 1707.0
Less oil of 18.75 and adding the unusable Fuel of 60 lbs required by type certificate the total was 1748.25.

Max gross weight of 2650 - 1748.25 left a useful load of 901.75.

It has the monster weight starter, standard battery, original back seat, interior, stol kit, etc.

Richard

Thank you Richard!

I request Zane delete this thread. Its really really going to push me over the edge. If I start posting pictures of me drilling apart my fuselage it's all your fault.
Really nice looking install. What gear legs did you go with for the 182 conversion?

Start drilling, it's winter anyway!
The gear legs are the heavy duty ones, I believe .750" thickness.
I think we may have another set...

Hmmm..... Looks pretty good, eh?

Photoshop is a lot quicker and cheaper than STC's!

Very Nice! Need more pictures and a lot more details. Please.......

How do STC’s apply to a converted 182? Is it still just 182 STC’s that are applicable or do 180 STC’s become available as well?

I know there is a lot of cross over between the models, but I am just curious.

Also, what did it end up weighing?

The plane looks great!

Thanks,
Joe

I was just wondering if ezflap had anymore updates on the 172/175 conversion?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

richpiney wrote:Very Nice! Need more pictures and a lot more details. Please.......

Delta Romeo hit the nail on the head. Photoshop.

Rich, I actually talked to someone at ACS about the conversion before it took the 182 plunge. If I do it, it will be coming to Stevensville. I was pretty close to just pulling in and dropping off the keys this summer....

88Echo wrote:I was just wondering if ezflap had anymore updates on the 172/175 conversion?

I was kinda hoping to hear more on this as well. I'm in the final stages of converting my 175 to the O-360 and I'd like to do the tail wheel conversion next.

twflyer wrote:How do STC’s apply to a converted 182? Is it still just 182 STC’s that are applicable or do 180 STC’s become available as well?

Thanks,
Joe

Type certificate says it’s a 182... therefore, in the eyes of the FAA, it will always be a 182... so the only STC’s that are applicable are only ones specific to the original model, that being a 182...

This coming from an STC/PMA holder that deals with this stuff on a daily basis...

Brian



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Bump.... for 2020!

I'm going through the process now but with a C172. It's the same exercise, just different in the tail.

I have the main gear box section about 80 percent done, using genuine Cessna 185 parts.

I have a pair of 0.750 swept forward gear legs (assuming these are 185 legs), will these be too stiff for a C172 on bushwheels? I have a single Cessna 170B gear leg here and there's a pretty significant weight difference.

I'd love to swap them for some C170 or bird dog legs if anyone in Australia has some?

Cheers
Brady