Dec 10, 2012, 3:38 PM
Post #1 of 12
Upgrading to a C-206
We're hoping to upgrade from a C-182 to a C-206 within a year or so, but there's a couple things we can't decide on, and I was hoping to get some feedback. We do a lot of static line and tandem jump. For static line, we love being able to get the students hanging from the strut for exit. For tandems, we have to do a poised exit on the step, which we're hoping to get away from. To fix this, we were thinking about a C-206 U model because of the door in the back. Then that turns into an issue getting static line students out on the strut unless we use the pilot door on the left. My solution was to have the pilot sit on the right and put sl students out the left, continue climbing and put tandems out the back for an easier exit. Does anyone know if this has ever been done? If it is possible, what are the negatives and positives of this set up?
For tandems, we have to do a poised exit on the step, which we're hoping to get away from.
What do you mean by a poised exit? Your not talking about the 1990's retro shit where you and your student jungle gym it to the outside of the plane on the step are you?
Tandem pairs can do a perfectly fine diving exit from a 182 without the instructor ever getting out the plane and poised on the step.
I am open to correction but I think that the old school exit is dangerous, stresses the student out, and is unnecessary. I think all of the manufacturers have now advised against this style of exit from a 182.
As far as SL students, why couldn't you either switch to IAD, or do them out of the cargo door on the U206? The sit in the door with their left ass cheek spliting the door frame, left leg forward, right leg trailing. That is how I have seen lower level AFF jumped launched.
(This post was edited by DougH on Dec 10, 2012, 4:07 PM)
Seriously, the last time (1990) I did a poised exit from a Cessna 182, the student tried to stand up on the step, jammed me into the underside of the wing and bent my reserve ripcord pin. Since then I have done more than 4,000 tandems - including a few thousand diving exits from Cessna 182, 205, P206, 210, etc.
As for static-line students, tell them to sit on the cargo door sill and hang their right leg out so far that they start arching it. Left hand on the front door frame. Chin up and push off aggressively with their right arm. If they keep their eyes on the wing, they will fall away stable.
We static -lined jumpers out of a U-206 in 1969 until 1976. It worked OK Later we had a P-206 .It is very short with a jump door than a straight tail C-182 . The distance from strut to step is further than the same C-182 . We had some J/Ms say the students went between the step and strut. I never did . With out a floater bar on top its not much fun for launching 5 or 6 ways.There have been outside handles under the windows to get to a right wheel step. Check with Joe Webber at Skydive Oregon or Paul Fayards old place in NC forSTC's. The standard engine sucks but mods are expensive. A C-185 with a jump step will out perform it and easier to do all jumps.Check to see how much yoke mods you can do. Its not like unbolting a C-182 especially if you want left door U-206 exits. A step for them is just a right one on the left. Most jumpers didnt like left side . It was like jumping a right door DC-3 it worked but awkward.
Our DZ started with a 182 then moved to a 206. Here are our results.
182, wing tip extensions, STOL kit, IO-470 with Norland Conversion (230hp upped to 260hp). By far this is our performer and quickest ride to altitude 12,500 ASL.
Began to have more and more students over the years. Bought a P206 (P-passenger, door opens like a 182, step and usual strut). IO-550, 3 blade prop, wing tip extensions. This is the bus to take the kiddies to school. Unless you put a turbo charged engine in a 206 once you get to 10,000 ASL the climb rate sucks as the manifold pressure drops. Turbo engine gives you more hp all the way up and doesn’t drop off.
The 182 is our tandem ride. Yes there are only two tandems per load but the turn around is much much faster. The only time the 206 goes to altitude with two tandems is if people get out at 10,000 ASL. Takes way to freaking long to get 3 tandems up and with the burn rate on a IO-550, taking that extra tandem really isn’t worth it (and the TM complain on how long they have to sit there to get to the top floor).
The 206 is the bus to take all the IAD's to altitude. With 6 slots available, the JM has one with 5 students. The biggest money maker by far in per hour by dispatching IAD’s.
What to watch out for. The 182 is like a Ford truck. There are STC’s everywhere for them. The 206 is virtually nonexistent for jumpship STC’s mods unless you go down the expensive road of L-STC’s. If you live in America land you can play the 337 form game but even at that, the silliness of the past years is clamping down on that. People have migrated their forms away from the southern US up to places like Montana where the FAA offices have not seem to have received all the “clamp down hard” memos yet :)
We run the 182 and 206 and by far that is the best combination. Keep the tandems happy, keep the student IAD’s happy in being able to jump and it keeps the regulars happy that there are slots. It takes a bit more organization so planes don’t sit idle on the ground waiting but in the past few years our student numbers have got (x3), yes three times.
Extra profits we built a new hanger and bought a replacement 182 and retired our old girl. There is no such thing as a perfect skydive plane in the Cessna world because they are built differently. Once you get to the $1M plane turbines like a twin otter, PAC or Porter then you must have the people to service that capacity and away you go.
In the mean time the best clubs you can have in your Cessna golf bag are a 182 wood and a 206 iron.
PS, watch out for buying a too new 182 though. A 1972 182P is a hard bugger to get STC's for. Whoda thought?
(This post was edited by goobersnuftda on Dec 15, 2012, 2:04 PM)