Ah, the one at BNO. I used to keep air in the tires, pull the prop through every now and then. Try to keep the birds ran off. Makes me sad seeing it sit there and going to he**.

Couple of stories about it, better saved for a campfire and beer.

Walked over to close and latch the door on that old bird myself. You could see it and hear it quite plainly from the gas pump. The way it was banging in the wind I figured it probably would have been torn from the airplane before long.
Guess some jerk opened it to look inside and never latched it?

My BNO Helio story...

I heard and saw the door on that poor old bird banging in the wind last time I stopped for gas there. I had to walk over and see if there was anything I could do to stop it. I was surprised the door hadn't gotten thrashed clean off the airplane but then who knew how long it had been flapping there?
I figured something on it was broke so I took along something to hopefully tie it closed with or at least stop the banging.
Heck, I reckon somebody (some may call a jerk) opened the door and never latched it? The mechanism was fine it seemed. It's been a while ago but I think the door had suffered a pretty good beating if I remember right?

Yep door bangs quite often. I think that sometimes wind gusts will just pop it open. I know if I leave my 182 out for some reason I'll go in though the baggage door and cam over the latch. If I don't the wind will pop it open. And believe me we can get some wind.

I have watched more than one tail dragger ground loop, and it ain't pretty.

That was one of the reasons I picked up the 182 vs the "54" 180 I flew for 5 years. Loved the 180, but couldn't afford to fly enough to stay profishent in Xwind landings. Heck one time after making 3 attempts I said the heck with it and landed on the taxi way.

In the June issue of Plane and Pilot, they have the "10 Best Adventure Planes." ...according to them. It has a short paragraph on the Helio, Husky, Super Cub, etc. I bought it to have an idea and picture of what the heck I'm looking at. I flipped to see #10 and it was the Peterson 260SE. I had already set up a tour and demo flight up in El Dorado next week to check out the 260SE/Katmai. I'm considering the same thing with buying a cheap airplane to build tailwheel time or just biting the bullet and buying what I want. Right now I'm still pretty sold on the Sportsman but am considering the Katmai too. I heard a rumor yesterday in our pilot lounge that Superior is going to make an XP-400 available in August to homebuilts with 230 or 250 rated HP that will strap right into a Sportsman. Since I got a rate quote from Avemco for $8000 for annual insurance on a Maule (with no tailwheel time and $140K hull value), I figured I better look at other options. Geez you'd think an ATP would count for something but I guess autopilot time doesn't count... The Sportsman is a good compromise, especially since I can mount a couple kayaks underneath the fuselage. Can't do that on a certified bird. But the Katmai does have an extended aft cargo area.... ugh that's a lot of money.

I'm going to fly the Katmai and 260SE and check them out too. They look like a real option too.

For what it's worth from someone who wants to fly what you guys are flying....Cheers!
Awol Arn

Just remember that the "Katmai", a fancy name notwithstanding, is still a Cessna 182, when it comes to nosegear assemblies.

The nosegear on any airplane is the weak point in off airport or backcountry work, and must be treated with great care.

This is not to suggest that you can't operate a tri gear airplane off airport, but you really better have your technique down pat. And, even then, it's pretty easy to bend something up there.

The 182 doesn't have the strongest nosewheel attachment either, and if you bend it, you bend the firewall.

That is what one would call an expensive oops.

MTV

MTV,
I hear what you are saying. The Katmai does have the beefed up -210 fork on the front. The company says the canard will help prevent the nose gear from slamming down into the dirt. They also demo how the nose gear can be held off until taxi speed. But I get your point about pilot technique. I'll see how she flies Monday afternoon. It just looks like an interesting option, one worthy of checking out.
Awol

I was thinking about this earlier today. Like Mike sez, the nosewheel attach is a known weak point of the 182. Does Petersen beef it up as part of their 260SE or katmandu mod? After all, their product IS aimed at off-airport or at least back-country type op's-- or at least that's the niche market targeted by their advertising.

Eric

I realize this discussion was about specific aircraft, but, if you opened it up to what additional aircraft perform similar missions, you would definitely add the Cessna 180/185.

Acquisition costs can be similar to a late model Maule and less than a Bush Hawk. Parts availability is no problem. Insurance seems to be reasonable related to pilot experience. Operating costs are reasonable for this category of aircraft. And will they carry some weight! Most 180's have a nice useful load and 185's have even more capacity. With the extended baggage option I would think that ski's would fit in the back, I have never tried but my fishing rods fit just fine and ski's should be about the same I would think.

I have flown a M7-235 with VG's, it was a 2000 model, the owner purchased it new. It was very nice, but as has been said, the useful load was very limited. This airplane was very well equipped and included all of the fuel options, I can't remember the exact quantity but it held a lot of fuel. With full fuel I remember that you could legally take two adults and a very light duffle and that was all.

AwolArn wrote: ... The Katmai does have the beefed up -210 fork on the front. ..........

From what I understand, the nose fork is not the problem. The weak point is the structure (or lack thereof) that the nosewheel assembly mounts to. I've heard many times of buckled or otherwise damaged 182 firewalls. I guess that the structure immediately aft of the firewall is vulnerable too. "Holding the nosewheel off" with the contri=ols or the canard is fine, but as they say, shit happens.
180: the 180 and the Supercub are the two light airplanes that everything else is compared to for backcountry flying. Nuff said.

Eric

I'll ask about the firewall weakness tomorrow when I meet Peterson at the factory and fly the Katmai.

Arn,

It's not so much that the firewall is weak, it is simply that this is where Cessna attached the nosegear strut. Apply sufficient force to that strut, via the nose tire, and you can bend or buckle the firewall.

By the way, right behind that firewall and attached to it, is a tunnel, which contains the cables for the elevators and ailerons. If you bend the firewall, it can impinge on that tunnel, and conflict with the control circuit movements. I have found this to be the case in two Cessna tri gear airplanes, one a 172 and one a 182.

A MANDATORY pre flight check on these airplanes, whether they are used off or on airports, is to run the controls throughout the EXTREME limits of their movements and look for any anomalies. Just moving the yoke fore and aft, followed by moving it right to left won't find this sort of problem (unless it's REALLY bad).

You need to run the yoke all the way to the forward and far left limit, holding full left aileron, move the yoke smoothly to the aft limit (in here is where you'll find a bent firewall) then transition the ailerons to the far right limit, then move the yoke full forward to its limit, and then move the aileron to its full left limit, ie: the starting point. THAT is checking the conbtrol circuit for freedom, not just stirring the yoke, as I see most people do.

Firewall problems due to nosegear strikes aren't common, but they happen. It doesn't mean it's a bad airplane, simply that you need to take VERY good care of that nosegear attach point.

Note that on the Cessna 206, Cessna moved the nosegear attach point to the engine mount for this very reason. Bend that, and it's a lot cheaper and easier to replace. There may have been other reasons to move it, but that's a big one in operational use, at least.

The man from Peterson is absolutely correct that holding the nose gear off with the canard will help to prevent this. Understand however, that its hard to see around that big nose, and easy to hit something you don't see. For established airstrips, the airplane should be fine. For real off airport, I'd be very careful.

I have a couple friends who used their 182's on skis. Both wound up with bent firewalls. Skis are tough on gear.

MTV

Skylane wrote:Ah, the one at BNO. I used to keep air in the tires, pull the prop through every now and then. Try to keep the birds ran off. Makes me sad seeing it sit there and going to he**.

Couple of stories about it, better saved for a campfire and beer.

Hi, Skylane;
Is that *your* Helio that's composting away on the Burns ramp??
What's up with it? Will it ever fly again? How? When?
That ship always turns my head, even in it's current condition.
Thanks, Berk

Berk,

PMed ya,

See ya Bub