dzswoop717

Read my previous post about the door removal. The other STC that USPA has covers the removal of the seats and the addition of an extra seat belt to allow 4 jumpers on board. I bought it but haven't used it yet. I just remove the door, yoke, and copilot seat when we use my plane for jumping.

The USPA stc was issued in 1959 and revised in 1963 that was a few years before any jump planes in our area had in flight doors installed. I think my Dad got his door installed in 1968 or 69. The stc also includes the installation of a jump step and removal of the copilot side yoke. Provision 6. of the stc says the pilot needs to have an emergency parachute. ( not the exact wording, I forgot the exact wording while walking from the hangar to the house, OLDSHimers)

The uspa stc if very old. It was before the top hinged door was figured out for jump operations. I recently bought a USPA door removal stc for one of my personal planes that I jump out of occasionally. I did it to be legal, to protect the pilots who fly for me. Most of these guys fly for a living and a ramp check with no stc could hurt their careers. I think it mentions that the pilot must were an emergency rig. I'll look in the log books to see if it does.

In my cave now, won't be coming out. dog fight is over, nothing to see here.

I already apologized to him in a private message for the name calling. I NOW APOLOGIZE PUBLICLY. It still annoys me when someone asks a specific question and some one who has no experience in the specific aircraft answers everything except the dudes actual question. I think everything he said is correct and true, he just had 0 hours in a supervan 900 flying jumpers so he really can't help the guy with a decision on spending over half a million dollars on an engine upgrade. There are so many things that could come into play when putting a more powerful engine on an airframe designed for a lower horse power engine. These things can lead to metal fatigue which leads to cracks which leads to big repair bills and high maintenance. There could be flight characteristics that are undesirable, over heating issues, and so on... with not time in this specific airframe\powerplant combo he can't really give the advice that the guy was asking for. Rant over, I'll go back in my cave and take my meds.

Do you know if there are any mechanical issues with this conversion? have there been cracked motor mounts, overstressed firewall attachment points. Do the numbers jive with the expense of the mod for the performance gains. You are just another internet big mouth telling us everthing you have done with no answers to the recent question of how the supervan 900 actually works out, because you have "0" experince with this mod. Another dickhead who brags about something he has NO experience with. I'm not on meds but your EGO is on steroids.

what does anything you said have to do with the Supervan 900 mod. Have you got any time in one flying jumpers? WTF????????????????????

A 2 inch by 3 inch flag could be tied to your Johnson and you could back fly. Or did you mean a 2' x 3'?

What Peek said. I have a small custom painting business. During the Biker build off , American Chopper, Jesse James craze there was a custom paint shop on every corner pumping out stenciled crap paint work. We did better work, at a fair price and got stuff done on time. Our reputation grew and the other shops faded away. We are still busy, and haven't done any advertising in over 10 years. I haven't had business cards for the last several years. Consistantly sending smiling customers out my door is all the advertising I need. It is a business plan that has worked since the beginning of time.

Skip Eckert, a world renown airbrush artist and skydiver can do the job!!!! There is no one better. I private messaged the OP but got no response. IT AINT FUCKIN' CHEAP, probably why I got no response. He has been airbrushing for over 40 years, His motorcycle work has won every major motorcycle competition in the USA. His work has been featured in every motorcycle magazine in the USA. He does portraits, tatoo design, and add work. Hands down the best skydiving airbrush artist on the planet.

A 61 is a good choice. The cowl flaps aid in keeping that 550 at the correct temps. You won't be dissapointed with the performance.

I jumped a narrow bodied, straight tail 182 in Australia that had the O-550 and a tail wheel conversion. It had the flat floor extended bagage compartment. I think it had wing extensions also. Hands down the fastest cessna I have ever jumped. It took 11 or 12 minutes to 13k with 4 jumpers on board. WE WERE CLIMBING AT CLOSE TO 1500 fpm up to about 5k from sea level. We were still getting 800 fpm at 12k. It was in the winter and the surface temps were in the low to mid 60's. We did a low jump because of clouds on one jump We got from surface to exit in 2.5 minutes. The pilot had a lot to do with the performance, He was a very experienced Cessna jump pilot.

Agree about a stock 206, I have owned and operated one ,it was slow. with the 550 it will do 2 loads an hour with 6 on board a little better but still no rocketship. I don't agree with sticking more money in his 182p. He could put it back to stock configuration (interior and door) and sell it and buy a lighter Pponk or Texas skyways converted early wide body and have money left over. Just my opinion, I am no expert but I have owned and operated Cessna 180, 3-182's, and a 206 over the last 25 years. I just think the P model and newer are too heavy to be good climbers. Basiclly any 182 with tubular main landing gear seem to be the slow ones.

A 182p is very close in empty weight to a 206 and we all know how slow a stock 206's climbs. You can start adding wing extenions and what ever other mods you can find but, most climb performance comes from horse power and prop selection. A 206 becomes a better climber with an io550. The newest 182 jump plane that I have any experience with is a 1966. I flew it with the stock o470 and with an io550 after it was converted. The climb rate doubled, decent time was the same, we didn't have any spoilers or dive brakes on it. With a stock engine it was considerably slower than a straight tail 182. It took 25 to 30 minutes to get to 10500'. After the 550 conversion it only took 12 to 13 minutes to get to 10,500' More HP is the answer, but before I would hang a 550 on your P model 182, I would sell it and get a 206 with a 550 or pt-6 so you could haul that extra tandem. You are using a lot of your HP hauling a heavy airframe to altitude and still ony carrying 4 jumpers.

I googled it, it was called the Conroy Stolifter. It was N1414G. The Conroy company was better known for their turbine DC3 conversions. If you google the images of it the black and white picture is the picture I remember from my childhood. There is a guy with gutter gear that has exited and feet of the next guy hanging out of the back.

Total thread drift but, There was a picture on the cover of parachutist in the late sixties or early seventies of jumpers exiting from the rear of a stretched single engine Cessna Skymaster. It had a turbine engine on the front and an exit in the rear like a skyvan. There was only ever one modified to this configuration if I remember correctly.

Miss Him. He was one of the good ones.

The Twin Bo has a distinct sound. I made well over 1000 jumps out of them. My dad owned one for a few years, it was a great jump platform when set up with handles and a step. We routinely launched 8 ways off of it. We had a D50 with the non supercharged engines. It would do 2 loads to 12,500 in an hour with ten jumpers on board. I don't think the neighbors would appreciate that wonderful sound that is music to our ears in this day and age.

Nothing, Beech 18 is collest of them all. It is the Harley davidson of jump planes. But I am talking Panhead not Evo.

Skydive Greene county operates a turbine Beech 18 every weekend. Endless mountain Skydivers was operating one as of 2014, I don't know if it is still flying.

I have 3 of them some where in a box. If anybody is interested. I was going to rig up a small parachute and drop it from our LSA and see if they would work. Never had the time.

Every DZ should do that. I'll bet there mal rate is lower than average if they follow manufacturers recomendations.

Maitenance plays a big part in malfuntion rate of tandem rigs. also. Just a worn out set of lines, putting the canopy out of trim, can cause a malfunction. You could look at it this way, a fun jumper making 150 jumps a year will need a new line set every 3 to four years depending on type of lines and wing loading. A tandem rig can need new lines every few month at a busy DZ. How often do you see DZ's changing line sets at the recomended times. A commercially operated cessna 182 gets a 100 hour inspection and a privately flown 182 only needs an annual inspection every 12 months no mater how many hours it flew during that year. Should tandem gear be held to a higher standard than personal gear because it is being used comercially? Sorry for the thread drift.

Glide Path, owned by Mike Fury, formerly Dejango. He had to close down Dejango because he infringed on Steve Snyders direct line attachment patent. He took the 7 cell Dejango Pegasus canopy and added small flares for the suspension line attachment points and changed the name of the company to Glide Path, and the Fury was born.

Me too. I grew up at a DZ and spent many hours of my childhood riding in the copilots seat of the Beech C-45 my Dad flew. A year or so after my Dad died in 2009, I flew up to Endless Mountain DZ in PA and made a jump out of their beautiful Beech 18. The smells, vibrations, sounds and atmosphere took me right back to my childhood.