I've read quite a few posts about how the C182 has it's nose gear attached to the firewall. The cautionary tales imply that this arrangement is somewhat weaker than other aircraft, and definitely more expensive to repair, should damage occur during a rough landing. So, what about the other trike-model Cessnas? How are the nose gears attached on the C152, C172, C206, etc? Are they the same, better, worse, or just different than a C182?

Thanx, Dave.

Part of the older 182’s problem is in the firewall is a weak design. Our 68’ was manufactured without doublers, or reinforcements. Later legacy models had them, not sure what year that started. Most of the damaged 182 firewalls I’ve seen were more of the bent or buckled variety. We do have the option of beefing them up ourselves if we want to install doublers such as cessna part number: 0753600-3.

The 206/207 nosegears attach to the engine mount. All the smaller Cessnas attach the nose gear to the firewall.

I’m not sure the firewall attachment is necissarily “weaker”, but damage is indeed massively expensive to fix. Also, depending on the damage, firewall damage can create control system jams in severe cases.

MTV

mtv wrote:The 206/207 nosegears attach to the engine mount. All the smaller Cessnas attach the nose gear to the firewall.....

I'm not sure that's correct.
I know the C150TD conversions including cutting some of the nosewheel bracketry off the engine mount.
I think maybe the 152 & 172 nosegear mounts the same way.

hotrod180 wrote:

mtv wrote:The 206/207 nosegears attach to the engine mount. All the smaller Cessnas attach the nose gear to the firewall.....

I'm not sure that's correct.
I know the C150TD conversions including cutting some of the nosewheel bracketry off the engine mount.
I think maybe the 152 & 172 nosegear mounts the same way.

The C172 mounts to the firewall like the 182. But the lighter engine/prop make it seem stronger. Not sure that it actually is. In either case, it would be nice to get an STC for some tunnel stiffeners. It's the tunnel that is really the weak point.
On the 206 the tunnel continues through the firewall right to to front and the nose gear is attached in there. Engine attached on top of it.

mtv wrote:
I’m not sure the firewall attachment is necissarily “weaker”, but damage is indeed massively expensive to fix. Also, depending on the damage, firewall damage can create control system jams in severe cases.

MTV

Fair point. I guess my thinking is, if it wasn’t a weak point cessna wouldn’t have made a kit to beef it up. I did a little digging and the kit was offered in 1971. That was the same year the 182 was given a gross weight increase as well. The kit is no longer available, as a kit, but the parts are.

The other point with the 182 is that they all tend to be nose heavy. Without some substantial weight aft, it’s easier to bang that nose down, and/or hit an obstruction at a slightly higher speed than the lighter planes.

I was set to do a spin training flight with a CFI candidate in a 172. During runup checks, he kind of wiggled the controls and announced free and appropriate.

Which happens to be one of my pet peeves. So, I demonstrated the Navy style “Wiping out the cockpit”, and with full left aileron, as I moved the yoke from full forward to aft, the yoke stopped and we heard a distict “bonk”. Tried that again, same result.

Taxied back, and pointed it out to a mechanic. Tunnel was bent by nosegear, and was binding up the elevator with full right or left aileron.

Pretty happy not to go spin the thing.

MTV

My 150f seems fairly stout up front. Not that I've ever had a rough landing to test the accuracy of that statement...............

mtv wrote:The 206/207 nosegears attach to the engine mount. All the smaller Cessnas attach the nose gear to the firewall.

I’m not sure the firewall attachment is necissarily “weaker”, but damage is indeed massively expensive to fix. Also, depending on the damage, firewall damage can create control system jams in severe cases.

MTV

MTV,

The 206 gear does not have anything to do with the engine mount. There is a casting which is mounted behind the tunnel that the vertical stress is applied to. This casting essentially allows the gear to pivot. To stop the gear from pivoting there is a drag link that is connected to another casting further back in the tunnel. It is a joy to remove this whole setup!

Tim

behindpropellers wrote:

mtv wrote:The 206/207 nosegears attach to the engine mount. All the smaller Cessnas attach the nose gear to the firewall.

I’m not sure the firewall attachment is necissarily “weaker”, but damage is indeed massively expensive to fix. Also, depending on the damage, firewall damage can create control system jams in severe cases.

MTV

MTV,

The 206 gear does not have anything to do with the engine mount. There is a casting which is mounted behind the tunnel that the vertical stress is applied to. This casting essentially allows the gear to pivot. To stop the gear from pivoting there is a drag link that is connected to another casting further back in the tunnel. It is a joy to remove this whole setup!

Tim

Good information.....I always assumed that tunnel was part of the engine mount. In any case, not attached to the firewall.

MTV