Hey guys... just wanted to pop in and say thanks again for everybody who's responded with helpful insights. I really appreciate you guys taking the time to share your knowledge and learnings. Work's really busy right now and I'm just finishing up my annual inspection so I haven't had a good opportunity to respond to some of the things you guys have posted. I've gotten a couple of very insightful PM's and I plan to get back to you guys as soon as I have a couple minutes to respond.

Bonanza man... thanks for the link to that V35 for sale. That is a very attractive plane, good avionics, great range (104gal HOLY COW), and 175kts. Made me reconsider my decision for a second, but alas I'm still thinking the Cessna is probably the right plane for me. We fly from our home airport of 9D9 in the lower peninsula to 6Y9 in the upper peninsula many times a year and that trip always involves crossing the big lake. We usually cross over Beaver Island at altitude to try and maintain the ability to glide back to land in the event of an engine out, but it's not always possible. The thought of trying to get 2 kids out of car seats and 4 people out of the single door in a Bo in the event of a water landing isn't quite as nice as having the second door. I am curious about the V-tail though, how does it handle cross wind landings. It's hard to wrap my brain around what's going on with that tail aerodynamically.

Cary wrote:Consider a pair of Kids Fly Safe CARES instead of car seats. Lots less cumbersome, light weight, convenient. I bought one for my C172 for Angel Flights. Had to lengthen the strap to go around the double back seat rest, but it would fit on bucket seats without any changes. It works perfectly, keeps the kids tied down and safe, but gives them wiggle room. http://www.kidsflysafe.com/

Cary

I think I've looked at those before. Seems like I saw in article in one of the aviation pubs at one time. I think the car seats still have advantages over the Kids Fly Safe CARES belts. Without the seats the kids aren't tall enough to see out the windows well. The seats do a better job of containing/protecting their heads from side impacts. If the kids spill anything, the mess usually ends up in the care seat and not on the upholstery. Thanks for the input though. It's always nice to know there are other options and not everybody has heard of the Kids Fly Safe CARES belts probably.

Headoutdaplane wrote:It is almost embarrassing at this point, but I am running 4000+ hours in 206s, and I will tell you that there is a reason that it is the aircraft for the bush operators up here, they are awesome! The big cargo door, they have the ability to get into short, and bad, and more importantly get out of short and bad, and can carry 1100 lbs of soda pop. Ours all have the seaplane braces, 8.50 10's and either the add on cuffs or the wing tip extension, and cargo pods. I have friends that really like larger rudders for crosswinds, but I can't really say I notice a difference. I flight plan out at 120kts and 16 GPH to be conservative. The turbos are just not cost efficient for the cycles we do, however, we do not have the DAs that I experienced down in AZ and NM where a turbo would really be nice.

Thanks for chiming in. I like hearing from guys like you with your kind of experience in the plane to know how they perform and what typically breaks/wears out over time. You're environment and operation is a really good test. With your experience, how do you think a NA 206 would do going in/out of a strip like S92, Fish Lake in Idaho. It's 2650' long @ 5650' in elevation. Here's a couple of links in case you're not familiar with it:

http://www.shortfield.com/index.php?opt ... =-115.0632

http://www.shortfield.com/index.php?opt ... =-115.0632

I operate my 206s at gross out of my 1450ft grass strip. They have tuned big engines and wing stol mods. I wouldnt buy a early cheap 206. U206 C model or later are not cheap but thats because of the utility and demand. If you were going to fly the 206 empty the stol kits slow you down only a little off the top end. At gross they will give you a little speed. Chin bump can be reduced with Knots 2 you 206 speed kit. I think the Bonanza with VGs is the best value out today. My Dad bought a A36 and flies it in and out of my place. Even on days that I wish he wouldnt, snow, bad winds, etc. He does have a little time in aircraft so dont use this as a recommendation but what the aircraft will do.

Skydive206 wrote:I operate my 206s at gross out of my 1450ft grass strip. They have tuned big engines and wing stol mods. I wouldnt buy a early cheap 206. U206 C model or later are not cheap but thats because of the utility and demand. If you were going to fly the 206 empty the stol kits slow you down only a little off the top end. At gross they will give you a little speed. Chin bump can be reduced with Knots 2 you 206 speed kit. I think the Bonanza with VGs is the best value out today. My Dad bought a A36 and flies it in and out of my place. Even on days that I wish he wouldnt, snow, bad winds, etc. He does have a little time in aircraft so dont use this as a recommendation but what the aircraft will do.

Thanks for the response. I've read a little bit about your efforts to add the turbine to your 206. It seems you've got a lot of experience experimenting with the 206. What STOL mods have you flown with? Do you think there's a big performance difference between one company's kit vs. another. What works good and is there anything to avoid; leading edge cuffs, vg's, droop tips, wing extensions?? I've read stories about the wing extensions creating too much stress on the wing. I also know you can't necessarily believe everything you read as it pertains to GA. One of the 206's I've seen on the market that looks like a potential candidate, preliminarily from the add, only has the standard 64 gallons fuel tanks. 64 gallons doesn't seem like enough to me for a plane of this size feeding an IO520. Do you know if the 80ish gallon long range tanks that Cessna offered would fit in the wings on a plane with the standard range bladders? How much less expensive do you think swapping Cessna bladders, if possible, would be than an after market upgrade from Flint or Monarch?

The performance of a Bo sure is attractive, but I don't see myself spending the money necessary for a decent A36. The V-tails and older Deb's are still attractive from a price and performance perspective, but I really want 2 doors and will be filling a 5th seat quite often.

Thanks again for sharing your insight.

Ive never owned or worked on a 64 gal 206 so dont know what to say about the short range tanks. Pull the wings and remove the rib to open the bay? seems like more work than its worth unless your a 206 restoration shop. If its an A or B model with 64 gal it should go cheap. I use the Sportsman Stol, Wing -X extensions and Madras Super Droops. The Sportsman Cuff creates the most comfortable slow flight wing, Wing X will lift the same weight at a slightly higher takeoff speed but seems like it has better high altitude climb performance at Vx / Vy intersect or above. Ive seen 206 wings without stol kits have wing cracks. I have 1 aircraft that has 3000 hours of maxed out Wing X flying and no cracks. You can see the wings flex more with the wing x so the stress is there. The super droops help out just a little bit more but not the great performance improvements like the other 2 mods. My recommendation for short / soft field work is the Sportsman, heavy long haul work the Wing X.

Pilot117

The thought of trying to get 2 kids out of car seats and 4 people out of the single door in a Bo in the event of a water landing isn't quite as nice as having the second door.

The U206 has two doors BUT in my experience the back doors are going to have luggage piled up against them and in a ditching, shifting luggage, you may be upside down underwater, it would be a VERY difficult if not impossible to actually pull off an exit here. The right flap on the 206 blocks the front 1/2 of that rear door. The front 1/2 must be opened 6", and then there's a tricky little lever on fore-side of the rear door that has to be moved forward in order to open the rear half. It's a very bad emergency egress.

Bottom line, if I ever had to ditch my 206 I wouldn't expect passengers to be able to exit the rear door. In an emergency, with them being disoriented and luggage strewn around, it's just not likely. I brief passengers on the operation of the door with flaps down, but the reality of an emergency are much different. I also teach that both front windows can be opened and easily kicked out if need be. If you want easier egress:

1. Get a P206 which has two front doors and a normal sized rear door.
2. U206 with the copilot door mod. http://www.wipaire.com/myaircraft/cessn ... ations.php
3. Or consider nother plane. I think the Bo's have a nicely labeled emergency window exit on the L side. I think that'd be easier to use than the 206 cargo door in a ditching.

After having a 206 for several years I can tell you it's been a great all-around bird. Good in the BC and will haul a load. I do know the NA 206 is a dog near gross, at high DA's, so don't expect STOL performance in that situation. The turbo 206 is a completely different animal and performs well out of high DA strips, but has a bit more maintenance and shorter TBO w the turbo. Here's a good read: http://www.aviationconsumer.com/sample/ ... views.html

Since youre considering 30-50 year-old planes, consider having a fine toothed pre-purchase inspection by an experienced 206 mechanic who's seen damage in these planes. If its anywhere near Denver call Scott at Beegles, they're very good. http://beeglesaircraft.com/

If you tie discrepancies to the purchase, it will likely save you $$$ in the long run with an older plane. Unfortunately I learned this lesson the expensive way. We found some hidden damage from a previous hard landing that made it past prepuchase insp. and two annuals. It had to be repaired and was not cheap. Now that the damge has been fixed and the plane has been very well inspected (visual/eddy current wing inspection), I know that my 35 year old airframe is in great shape. Feel free to PM me if you want more details. Best of luck.

Where in the water will a 206 be sitting after you've come to a stop? If right side up will the entire cabin be under water as it floats for a short period on its wings? That won't be any fun. In the Bo you have the main door, both middle windows open completely and the baggage door can be kicked open if need be. In fact I could see the middle seaters getting out before the front seaters. However who buys a plane based on how you can get out of it in a water ditching? How many a year go down like this?

Emory Bored wrote:

Bonanza Man wrote:

pilot117 wrote: because I'm trying to keep my purchase under $100K and would like some decent avionics. .

Under $100K and some goodies? Here you go:

Pics here:
http://www.hubgarage.com/mygarage/dburk ... cles/31527


Contact Dave Burkart 914-262-7336

This is a horrible development Dave. I hate to see a dream airplane like this go. And Bo's are an incredible buy these days. That's cheap with all that stuff. Say it ain't so....

EB

Here's another one. 1100 pound useful. Email the owner for pics, it really looks great.


Year: 1965
Type: BEECH C33-260 HP
Registration: N5878S
Airframe Total Time: 3810 hours
Engine/HP: IO-470-N Conversion, 260HP
Engine Time: 890 SMOH
Propeller: 3 Blade Hartzell Scimitar, 890TTSN

Price $98,000

AVIONICS
PS Engineering 7000 Audio panel/Intercom/Marker
Garmin GNS 530 Nav/Com/GPS/ILS with TAS,
Garmin GTX 330 Mode S transponder with TIS
GDL 69 Data Link XM Weather
King KX 155 w/KI 208 VOR indicator
KT 76 Standby Transponder,
King KCS 55 A HSI (Bootstrapped)
WX 10A Storm scope
Ryan 8800 TCAS
S-Tec 60-2 autopilot with electric trim and GPSS
External handheld com antenna
Ameri-King ELT with remote activation switch

OTHER EQUIPMENT
D’shannon Engine Baffle kit.
70 Amp Alternator
B&C 20 Amp Standby Alternator
Spin-On Oil Filter
D’Shannon Gap Seals
D’Shannon Tip Tanks (104 gal. total useful, 165 Lb. Gross Wt. Increase)
FS-450 Fuel Flow Monitor
Aerospace Digital Computer Fuel Gauges for Main and Tip Tanks
Single Control Yoke with 2 tone leather wrap
Rosen Visors
New Glass, Sloped Windshield, Pilot and Co-Pilot Windows with Vents
D’Shannon Cabin Air Exhaust Kit
Pulselite
Alpine Main Gear Landing Lights with Alternating Pulselite (60ppm)
5 Point Whelen Strobes, top, bottom, wingtips and tail
RC Allen Electric Standby Artificial Horizon
Precision Vertical Flat Card Compass
Electronics International UBG-16 Engine Analyzer
Guardian Carbon Monoxide Indicator
Davtron Oat/Voltmeter
Davtron yoke mounted digital clock/timer
Nu-Lite Instrument Lighting
New magnesium Tail Surfaces (2005)
New wing bolts (2003)

EXTERIOR-8.5+
Soft white, Dark Green, Gold Jaguar Paint Scheme with Custom Logos

INTERIOR 8.5+
Light Cream Leather Seats and Side Panels with tan trim Dark Green Carpet
Front Seat Shoulder Harness

REMARKS
ABS Bonanza of the Month, March 2004
Annual due 9-11
No damage history
Meticulous logs and records
A Truly Exceptional Aircraft Formerly owned by Russell Norris MD (BT Member)

Contact Bob Stephens [email protected] 928-300-4045

I think I would rather be in a A36 (any seat) during water ditching than a U or P 206.

I dragged my wife to an egress training session last fall. Although we don't often fly over significant water I thought it would be great emergency 'acclimatization' whether water or fire. It certainly did open our eyes to a lot of small things to think about from 206 flap interference mentioned to making sure your seatbelts are not twisted over. The rest of the class were 20-somethings but the average time to panic, if the egress procedure didn't go smoothly, was about 11 sec.to shear uncontrollable panic (great instructors ensured our safety in the excercises).

On topic, I just purchased a C-205 last month to upsize from our Cardinal FG of the past 13 yrs. I narrowed my search down to P206 or 205 models given my wife's criteria of having her own door to get in/out of, high wing because we camp a lot and nothing beats a lawn chair under the wing, 6-seat roominess (with the back two seats left in the hangar until I sell). Useful load is more than we need for our family of three but I'll be able to haul my folding mtn bike or inflatable kayak which I haven't done since our son was born.

A question for the group, any specific comments on the BUSH STOL kit? Our 205 has it but I'm wondering if a VG kit would be worthwhile or necessary to improve the "small" stabilizer on the early 205's.

Michael
N775DB soon to be C-FDAM '63 C-205 in sunny CYBW

Skydive206 wrote:I operate my 206s at gross out of my 1450ft grass strip. They have tuned big engines and wing stol mods. I wouldnt buy a early cheap 206. U206 C model or later are not cheap but thats because of the utility and demand...

I don't agree with that, Skydive. There are 2 of the old cheap 206's here on the field, one a -p the other a -u that the air taxi who owns them flys the heck out of everyday. They are paid for and make money. When I was shopping for one, I couldn't really see the need to spend 120K for an airplane made in the 1970's that could legally haul a few more lbs. when I could buy one built in the 60's for half the money and do 99.9% of the same thing. This is especially relevant if all you need is a private family hauler.

Many of the big boys say you must have the large horizontal and I guess it would be fine but one can learn to fly the small tail with very little effort. I can say that I do wish I had the flap switch like the '68 and newer, but that's about all I'd change. With regard to resale, it's better not to bank on that for any Cessna right now built before 1998.

Gross weight differences between early and late models can be an issue. Working airplanes need all the useful load they can get, and as often as not, those early airplanes are being operated at some pretty high weights....after all, it's a 206, isn't it???

Also, the later models (F and G, I believe) can go to even higher GW with certain modifications. Not always true with the early ones.

"Family" airplanes don't always fly light, either, by the way. Remember the 206 that crashed coming out of Merrill Field a year or so back?

MTV

mtv wrote:Gross weight differences between early and late models can be an issue. Working airplanes need all the useful load they can get, and as often as not, those early airplanes are being operated at some pretty high weights....after all, it's a 206, isn't it???

Also, the later models (F and G, I believe) can go to even higher GW with certain modifications. Not always true with the early ones.

"Family" airplanes don't always fly light, either, by the way. Remember the 206 that crashed coming out of Merrill Field a year or so back?

MTV

The one that crashed coming out of Merrill was a newer one and it was a lodge support. It was something like 900lbs over gross. Think they were asking a bit much out of her.

I don't personally have much use for any gross increases legal or not on a 40 year old or older airplane.

Older 206 is a good bang for the buck, unless you really want a hauler then get a Cherokee 6.

YBW Flyer wrote:I dragged my wife to an egress training session last fall. Although we don't often fly over significant water I thought it would be great emergency 'acclimatization' whether water or fire. It certainly did open our eyes to a lot of small things to think about from 206 flap interference mentioned to making sure your seatbelts are not twisted over. The rest of the class were 20-somethings but the average time to panic, if the egress procedure didn't go smoothly, was about 11 sec.to shear uncontrollable panic (great instructors ensured our safety in the excercises).

On topic, I just purchased a C-205 last month to upsize from our Cardinal FG of the past 13 yrs. I narrowed my search down to P206 or 205 models given my wife's criteria of having her own door to get in/out of, high wing because we camp a lot and nothing beats a lawn chair under the wing, 6-seat roominess (with the back two seats left in the hangar until I sell). Useful load is more than we need for our family of three but I'll be able to haul my folding mtn bike or inflatable kayak which I haven't done since our son was born.

A question for the group, any specific comments on the BUSH STOL kit? Our 205 has it but I'm wondering if a VG kit would be worthwhile or necessary to improve the "small" stabilizer on the early 205's.

Michael
N775DB soon to be C-FDAM '63 C-205 in sunny CYBW

Michael:

I don't know about the STOL kit, but I can tell you the VG's make a big difference in the 205. I can fly at 55 indicated, 40 degrees of flaps and still have great contol authority in a 30 degree bank with factory wing. You can even get a flare for landing. I swear by them. A friend with another 205 had the Sprotsman STOL and kept wondering about VG's. He finally did it and is kicking himself in the ass for not doing it sooner.

PM me with your phone # if you want to talk about them. I have 38 yrs of 205 time.

Rich

My problem with the small horizontal stab 206s is not at gross but empty. Not enough elevator. With just the pilot or 2 in the front seats you are stuck outside the fwd cg. You can keep the wing from stalling with stol mods and get it real slow but then the tail stalls and the nose drops and you bend the shit out of the whole keel system that supports the nose gear. Those planes loaded at gross (#3600lbs like the stock C-H models (I think) or at lower weights and against the aft CG are perfectly fine. My style of operation Im landing empty, my wings are almost maxed out on mods and need all the tail I can get to hold the nose up. You pencil out an A or B plane and everything looks fine. No body thinks they will be out flying a 206 alone and empty. Now your stuck doing flaps 10 landings to keep your speed up and air going over the tail on short final. If you are flying with a load that is balance-able, or landing empty and have a long runway it is a fine value aircraft. Sure you can always fly around with oil in the back on the shelf. 2 Cases? You quickly become limited with the smaller CG range airplane and Cessna worked to expand it for a reason. I need that CG range not just for Johnny Law but if I am at Max GW and have a Fat Ass sitting in the back pushing my CG to far Aft I start to run short of elevator to hold the nose down at Vy/Vx. Resale of an A or B model 206 is also harder because your market is limited to fewer buyers where the C-G (really F-G because all the C-Es are used up) has the buying demand of the 135 operators. There is a reason why the late model planes cost more. My operations (Short Field, Gross and within Aft CG limit, Empty and within the Fwd CG limit) need the larger Horizontal and my statement still stands " I wouldnt buy one. " I have a B model poh somewhere and will check my figures against the C. I have flown A and B models and its not fun running out of elevator when your trying to do short field landings.

I also think the 205 has a smaller wing and flaps than the 206. Lower Gross weight. So the smaller tail works with that wing. They changed the wing but not the tail, increased the gross and called it a P206 . Then had to change the tail.

Yes I fought those empty landings for awhile, I sure know what you mean. A lot of times we are empty one way and loaded coming back. Seemed like hot approaches and flaps 10 made it worse. Finally had to go ask one of the pros who does it every day what to do. Slow it down, flaps as needed and full forward elevator trim. Lands like a giant 150, albeit with a heavy yoke. Works for us, we do have the luxury of low DA's here every day though. And I fly so little anymore that 3000 ft looks pretty short these days!

Yes the smaller tail on the early 206 makes a difference, find some one who has a field approval to add 2" to the trailing edge of the Flippers!
Also like above use the trim!! Just about touch down add 200 RPM!
Hauled a lot of fish with a 64 206, nobody else liked it as it was the old one, Made more money with that bird than any I ever had!
Don't be afraid of the old ones!!
My $.02