Can you stick ski's on a tri gear? I am looking at a 58 model 182, know very little about ski flying, but if memory serves I have seen skis on a 172.

Anyone have any info?

Saw this nugget on east ramp last weekend:

Well it must be possible then.

Si...

http://www.backcountrypilot.org/knowledge-base/pilots/ski-flying

Part 2 is going up tomorrow or the next day.

Z

UH-60andC-180 wrote:Saw this nugget on east ramp last weekend:

The owner of that plane is a friend of mine. His chief pilot used to be on this site occasionally, so maybe he'll chime in. Been several threads here previously dealing with skied 206's (DonC, Hudson Air...) I'm trying to recall one about skied 182s, but am coming up empty at the moment.
Congrats on making the deal.
-DP

We were discussing 182s on skis, but like DP, I can't remember the thread. It is possible for sure.

I know of a couple 182s on straight skis. I also know of at least one that was on retractable wheel skis.

There are four major problems with the 182 on wheel skis:

1. Expense....the skis pictured above retail new for around $18 K for the MAIN gear skis....and you need a nose gear ski as well"......yes, you can get them used, but bring a big bundle of cash.

2. Weight....You are looking at somewhere on the order of 170 to 190 pounds additional weight added to the planes basic weight.

3. CG.....Cessna 182s tend toward forward CG anyway, particularly when empty, or near so. Add that brick of a nose ski up front, and you will need some serious ballast aft. See 2. Above. Also, some model years of 182 had less elevator effectiveness than others, which would exacerbate this issue.

4. Structural issues......One of the challenges of the 182 driver is protecting that nose gear, and what it's attached to: The firewall. Now, you're adding LOTS of mass to that gear leg, and introducing it to REALLY rough surfaces.

I've run a couple different 206s on retractable wheel skis, and they actually do pretty well, as long as you carry some weight well aft (survival gear works), but that loooong cabin really helps the CG. And the tail is bigger and more lever arm on a 206. Sandy has run that pictured 206 for quite a while, and there's a fur buyer/trapper who's run one out of Chena Marina for years. Then there was Hudson's in TKA.

The problem with the 206 on the Fluidyne skis is the GW is restricted.....at a time when you need to carry more, not less. The skis on the 206 pictured and the others i mentioned are Fli Lites.....some lighter than the Fluidynes, and the GW isn't restricted, as with Fluidynes...on the 206.

I've never seen a 182 on Fli Lites but there may be an approval out there. This is something you're going to need a STC for....nobody these days is going to field approve this.

The 182 on straight skis works well, but you need to be able to work it off snow all the time, obviously.

At one point, we tried a 206 on Fluidyne main wheel skis and a Schneider penetration ski on the nose, to save weight and complexity up front. That's the configuration in the 182 photo posted by BRD. I got nominated to do the test flights....lucky me. Every time I put it in any depth of snow, that nose ski would slam over to full deflection one way or the other. It was actually pretty scary. The steering springs and my leg strength weren't enough to keep it straight. I'd have to shut down after every landing, get out, yard the ski around to straight ahead, then get in and go....without turning.....if you tried to turn, that ski would slam over again, and there you were. I flew that pig twice, with four landings in snow, then told the mechanics they could fly the thing all they wanted, but I was done with it. The skis came off. The problem there was there was too much ski ahead of the axle.

Oh, and did I mention these skis are expensive and heavy? Even the Fli Lites are heavy, though not as bad as Fluidynes.

Landes' new skis are lots lighter, but I doubt they'll ever approve them on the 182, and again bring lots of $$$.

MTV

Whoops wrong thread! (I have too many windows open!)

mtv wrote:I know of a couple 182s on straight skis. I also know of at least one that was on retractable wheel skis.

There are four major problems with the 182 on wheel skis:

1. Expense....the skis pictured above retail new for around $18 K for the MAIN gear skis....and you need a nose gear ski as well"......yes, you can get them used, but bring a big bundle of cash.

2. Weight....You are looking at somewhere on the order of 170 to 190 pounds additional weight added to the planes basic weight.

3. CG.....Cessna 182s tend toward forward CG anyway, particularly when empty, or near so. Add that brick of a nose ski up front, and you will need some serious ballast aft. See 2. Above. Also, some model years of 182 had less elevator effectiveness than others, which would exacerbate this issue.

4. Structural issues......One of the challenges of the 182 driver is protecting that nose gear, and what it's attached to: The firewall. Now, you're adding LOTS of mass to that gear leg, and introducing it to REALLY rough surfaces.

I've run a couple different 206s on retractable wheel skis, and they actually do pretty well, as long as you carry some weight well aft (survival gear works), but that loooong cabin really helps the CG. And the tail is bigger and more lever arm on a 206. Sandy has run that pictured 206 for quite a while, and there's a fur buyer/trapper who's run one out of Chena Marina for years. Then there was Hudson's in TKA.

The problem with the 206 on the Fluidyne skis is the GW is restricted.....at a time when you need to carry more, not less. The skis on the 206 pictured and the others i mentioned are Fli Lites.....some lighter than the Fluidynes, and the GW isn't restricted, as with Fluidynes...on the 206.

I've never seen a 182 on Fli Lites but there may be an approval out there. This is something you're going to need a STC for....nobody these days is going to field approve this.

The 182 on straight skis works well, but you need to be able to work it off snow all the time, obviously.

At one point, we tried a 206 on Fluidyne main wheel skis and a Schneider penetration ski on the nose, to save weight and complexity up front. I got nominated to do the test flights....lucky me. Every time I put it in any depth of snow, that nose ski would slam over to full deflection one way or the other. It was actually pretty scary. The steering springs and my leg strength weren't enough to keep it straight. I'd have to shut down after every landing, get out, yard the ski around to straight ahead, then get in and go....without turning.....if you tried to turn, that ski would slam over again, and there you were. I flew that pig twice, with four landings in snow, then told the mechanics they could fly the thing all they wanted, but I was done with it. The skis came off. The problem there was there was too much ski ahead of the axle.

Oh, and did I mention these skis are expensive and heavy? Even the Fli Lites are heavy, though not as bad as Fluidynes.

Landes' new skis are lots lighter, but I doubt they'll ever approve them on the 182, and again bring lots of $$$.

MTV

After reading this I can see why it is not something that has become the standard and why tail wheels are still the norm.

Eventually I want to convert my 182 to a tail wheel, probably just do that and save myself the stress on the nose gear. I can also do water assisted landings then.

Eventually I want to convert my 182 to a tail wheel, probably just do that and save myself the stress on the nose gear. I can also do water assisted landings then.

Not to expand on thread drift, but it is your thread and you brought it up........

About a year ago, I gave very serious consideration to doing a TW conversion on my 182. I got some great information on this site. In the end, the only way I could justify it would be to simply sell my 182 and purchase a 180. I have elected to spend the money on a panel upgrade and avgas for my 182. I also just paid my insurance bill w/ a hull value of $84k my annual premiums was $612 You may find different results if you look to convert your 182 to a TW, that is just my experience. Best of luck.