58Skylane wrote:I gotta say, after reading this thread and some of these awesome pictures, it's starting to really get me inspired and motivated to at least start doing some of the easier, cheaper items on my 182. The lighting in my cabin needs a major upgrade, too.

I would love to do bubble windows, too. That alone should gain some elbow space. Wouldn't you say?

No no no, Pat.... Nothing is worth a damn unless you have an engine! Keep your eyes on the prize.

Zzz wrote:

58Skylane wrote:I gotta say, after reading this thread and some of these awesome pictures, it's starting to really get me inspired and motivated to at least start doing some of the easier, cheaper items on my 182. The lighting in my cabin needs a major upgrade, too.

I would love to do bubble windows, too. That alone should gain some elbow space. Wouldn't you say?

No no no, Pat.... Nothing is worth a damn unless you have an engine! Keep your eyes on the prize.

haha C'mon Pat, stay focused.

55wagon wrote:58
...That's about the only benefit but its a good one. ... You'll need an extra latch towards the front to keep from sucking it out.

You forgot to mention the A/C looks damn cool w/ them on...

RE: the latch. I did it on my C170, but it wasnt needed. It never moved.

Greg-

What basis did you use to make installation of the windows legal?

I know that at least some approvals for the 180/185 require the forward latch.

I installed the fwd latch on my 170 though it wasn't required, and would do so again, but that a/c has the middle over center latch.

Check your basis for installation.

MTV

will do...

whee wrote:

Zzz wrote:

58Skylane wrote:I gotta say, after reading this thread and some of these awesome pictures, it's starting to really get me inspired and motivated to at least start doing some of the easier, cheaper items on my 182. The lighting in my cabin needs a major upgrade, too.

I would love to do bubble windows, too. That alone should gain some elbow space. Wouldn't you say?

No no no, Pat.... Nothing is worth a damn unless you have an engine! Keep your eyes on the prize.

haha C'mon Pat, stay focused.

I know..... I should stay focused. But there are a few little things I can at least get started on. The panel and cabin lights don't work. So I can dig into that. I'm not planning to do anything to the engine until I can get home in ID on a more regular schedule. A few of you know what I'm trying to do to accomplish that

I'll start my own thread when the time comes. I totally dig progress threads like this and when Kevin was working on his 180.

55wagon wrote:58
The bubbles do give you more elbow room. That's about the only benefit but its a good one. I have them on mine and it goes from being cramped with 2 guys to plenty comfortable. You can stick your head in and look straight down to. That's nice as well. You'll need an extra latch towards the front to keep from sucking it out. I've heard that the latches you buy at the boat store work great. The kind that have a claw type receiver and a bolt with a wing nut that fold into it. You could snug it right down.

I'll check into that.

With the full size bubble. Can you still open the window all the way like the stock window?

I believe there's a straight tail 182 at Nampa with bubble windows I might be able to look at.

mtv wrote:I know that at least some approvals for the 180/185 require the forward latch.

MTV

FYI... I just called GLA, and then re-checked the instructions A-9 from Great Lakes Aero RE: bubble window installation and there are no Cessna models that require a second latch.

http://www.glapinc.com/Cessna/180/c-180d.htm

In the notes it says: "The change in airflow over the window may cause the frame to leak air and hiss or make other noises at the front of the frame." One may install a second latch if desired...
"

Well I have almost finished creating my list of goodies, upgrades, and STC's for the C180 project. (I almost puked when I added it all up on the spread sheet.) Perhaps the PPonk-50 and MT prop will be on hold for the time being...

I started nibbling at the list in earnest and among other items ordered the skylights. I'm not going to go crazy with installing the full-on greenhouse 5, but will do only the two. Got the STC SA4379NM from Cub Crafters, plexi from Great Lakes, and the surrounds P/N 0411174-3 from Yingling. Surrounds were the heftiest at $335 each. Ouch!




Also in the shop sit the firewall batt kit, ski fittings, boot cowl step and handle, BAS Tail Pull, and Monarch Caps (inboard and outboard.) Before I come to my senses, I am also ordering the WingX.

Left over from the C170 (never installed) are the Sportsman, RMD tips, AeroLED landing/taxi, SL30, GTX330, and Garmin 106. This is going to be a fun January/Feb...

Great details... the thread is generating all kinds of ideas here. Good work.
The LED conversion dilemma bothers me. A while back I got NAV light replacements in LED from Spruce. Then the manufacturer recalled them. They generated noise into the coms of all things. Not what I expected. Since then, everybody and their uncle, including the Chinese sell 12v LED's in a variety of bases. I have them in my trailer, truck etc. Low current draw etc. But... the question is... for aviation, are they legal? I know it bugs the crap out of me that a Whelen replacement LED landing light is very expensive due to certification costs... but is safer, cooler and lasts a LONG time.
So between the FAA making it hard for companies to get signed off LED's with the cost of PMA etc. I haven't changed out as many lights as I would like.... YET.

Anyone else who likes to stay on the legal side... but is in favor of trashing the incandescents.. chime in here. We all could learn a few things.

Skylights are one thing I wish I could add to the 170. I have a few hundred hours in a 120 that has the stock skylights and I found them quite useful. They're nice to keep an eye on the runway when turning base (especially right base).

robw56 wrote:Skylights are one thing I wish I could add to the 170. I have a few hundred hours in a 120 that has the stock skylights and I found them quite useful. They're nice to keep an eye on the runway when turning base (especially right base).

Having never looked into it myself- is there no STC available? Could you do it as a 337? Or is it a conflict with a carry-through spar or something like that?

There's no STC that I know of for skylights on a 170. There is a thread on here somewhere with pictures of a 170 in the Fairbanks area I believe that had skylights field approved.

bigrenna wrote:

mtv wrote:I know that at least some approvals for the 180/185 require the forward latch.

MTV

FYI... I just called GLA, and then re-checked the instructions A-9 from Great Lakes Aero RE: bubble window installation and there are no Cessna models that require a second latch.

http://www.glapinc.com/Cessna/180/c-180d.htm

In the notes it says: "The change in airflow over the window may cause the frame to leak air and hiss or make other noises at the front of the frame." One may install a second latch if desired...
"

Good info, thanks. Looking at your photos, your bubbles are a LOT smaller than mine and the ones we installed on a couple Cessnas. When I installed mine on the 170, the front edge of that window really tried to pull out some, and while I didn't need to install a forward latch, I opted to do so. These are very big bubbles, though.

Our 185s had the forward latches on the bubble windows, and the mechanics told me they were required on those aircraft, but i don't know who the manufacturer was.

MTV

My 68 185 had a bubble on the pilot side without a forward latch....

What size bubble windows did you install? Is there much difference between 4" & 6" ? Do you know the speed penalty?

We installed 4". For me, the 6" was just too much. Firstly, I thought aesthetically they looked a bit silly, secondly, I looking at other airplanes with 6"ers, I felt there was too much distortion. Thirdly, I really didnt have any idea what to pick and just guessed.

I am very happy with the 4" and see no personal reason and no regret on the choice.

RE: speed, its almost nothing. I didnt do any official testing, but I would guess 1-2 mph at worst? Great Lakes claims none. I liked em so much I moved them from the C170 before I sold it.

I have the six inch, and went there for good visibility of my wheel skis--up or down.

I think the four inch look better as well, and I'm not sure they offer that much better view of the skis.

They DO pull out in flight without the forward latch, though. I flew it that way once or twice and installed the fwd latch.

MTV

Greg,
Great thread going here, I have the 6 inch bubbles and can't say i notice any speed change.

This thread along with other motives have encouraged me to remove these boat anchors from my panel.

Thanks



Bkn

Yesterday I started the discussion with Trevor at Avion about the panel design for the C180. The goal for this project will be to have the most simple, light, and elegant panel possible while still having a modern sophisticated aircraft.

The question came up about just what we could omit in the new panel by using an engine analyzers/systems monitor. Neither Trevor and I were sure, (yes I know JPI does the same thing, but I am an E.I. fan so) I spent some time on the phone today with the Tech over at E.I.

Of course there is the age old fear (and I dont think we need to debate the obvious) of a catastrophic failure of a single piece of equipment. I think for me, the allure of the simplicity, precision, and weight savings overshadows the fear of a catastrophic failure.

One could wax poetic on the prestige of analogue or the desire for redundancy, but that's prob a discussion for another thread.

Regardless, here is what I found...

By installing the MVP-50 I can loose pretty much everything:

RPM
Ammeter
Voltmeter
Oil Temp
Oil Pressure
Manif Pressure
OAT
Clock
Gryo Vac
Fuel Level

I can also have a whole host of other info... AND it only weights 1.9lbs. There is also $300 rebate now till Dec 31st. Hmmmmm.......