Dan0321

Thanks, I haven't done a tandem for over 2 years so that's not an issue, but seeing as you are so well connected maybe you could get the AOPA to stop sending me a truck load of junk mail every month.

Thanks for the thoughtful insight. I'll be sure to go to you first for all my future questions.

The airport I would be located at has a maint facility, and one of my instructors is also an A&P. I've been able to find similar 182s to the one you are describing with the O-520 engine for around $75000, but they tend to not have the Graphic Engine monitor with fuel flow, Wing-X extensions, Sportsman Stol leading edge, or a skydiving door/step mod. What would each of these additional add ons cost, and how much of a performance improvement do you see with each?

First off, thanks for all the replies, all of you have brought up some really good points. The whole hypoxia issue is something that I have considered. I know that I will need to provide O2, especially since most of my students are probably going to be tourist who aren't even acclimatized to the high field elevation to being with. So I understand the potential dangers and I'm taking that into consideration along with everything else. Leasing a turbine is something that I have considered, I just don't know if I'll have the traffic to fly it during the week, and I honestly have no idea what a turbine leases for. Something like a PAC750 would probably work ok, but it doesn't seem like many of those are offered for full season leases. The 2 stock 182 route is something that I haven't considered. With a upgraded 182 taking 2 tandems to 9000' I've estimated a fuel burn of somewhere between 10 to 13 gallons. If you think a stock 182 with 1 tandem could do this with a full burn of somewhere in the 7 gallon range it might be worth it.

I'm in the preliminary stages of planning a small cessna dropzone primarily catering to tandems. The proposed dz field elevation is 5700' , average summer high temperature of 85 degrees. I would like to run 2 tandems to a minimum of 9000' AGL, ideally I would like to get to 10500' AGL (16200 MSL). Any lower and I feel like I would be cheating the students. I would also want to be able attain 35 to 40 minute turns. I understand that a stock 182 would have zero chance of attaining this altitude in a timely manner, if at all. I'm looking at keeping my costs down, so a turbine 206 is out of the question. I prefer to avoid a turbo 182 if at all possible. I've heard about reliability issues with them, and upkeep seems to be much more expensive. If I'm wrong about this please let me know. I prefer to go with a straight tail 182 with either a 275, 285 or 300 hp conversion. In your experience, would this be adequate for my performance criteria? What specific airframe upgrades would improve the climb rate? I've heard mixed reviews about the different STOL kits. The runway is 7000ft long, so takeoff performance isn't as important as climb rate. I'm sure I'll have plenty of other questions as I continue planning, and thanks for the help.