Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Back Country planes

  1. #1
    Member Searunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    103

    Default Back Country planes

    What kind of planes are most of you flying? What horse power? Where are the planes capable of landing and how many passengers (payload) can you carry?
    Just trying to learn the ropes a little. Is there a goos book out there to learn from?
    Kinda got myself addicted to this learnin to fly thing.

  2. #2
    Member akaviator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    195

    Default

    I'm flying a Bombardier CRJ-200 which carries 50 passengers, produces a maximum of 9202 lbs of thrust per engine, and cruises at about 460 kts true. It needs at least 5000 feet of pavement. Yeah pretty boring for an old bush guy.

    Check this link out for some great bush flying info:

    http://www.fepco.com/

    When I lived in the bush I owned a little Champion 7ECA. 115hp, 8.50x6 mains. Good little airplane, cheap to operate but more HP would have been nice, I don't think anyone ever says they'd like fewer ponies.

    My Christmas list has a Cessna 180 at the top.

  3. #3
    Member Searunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    103

    Default

    Doesn't sound so boring to me! Why the Cessna 180?
    Thanks for the link!

  4. #4
    Member akmac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Kenai
    Posts
    143

    Talking

    I fly a 1947 Aeronca Champ with a 115 hp Lycoming on wheels and skis. It only seats two people but it is loads of fun to fly and it serves my needs well. I use it mostly on the trapline in winter.

  5. #5

    Default

    Champs and Chiefs are great little Alaska planes.

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Kodiak
    Posts
    158

    Default

    I have a 65 hp Taylocraft. You can't get much more basic (or fun) than one of those
    At sea, it's force not reason that confers sovereign rights

  7. #7
    Member akaviator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    195

    Default

    Why the 180....Plenty of power with decent fuel burn, good speed, load carrying ability, and short field/no field capability. And my wife likes them which any man will agree is a very good thing.

  8. #8

    Default

    I have a 160hp Arctic Tern (2 place tandem)

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    chugiak, ak
    Posts
    630

    Default

    I have to totally agre with AKaviator. I grew up with a C-180 on straight floats. It's a great plane. I was looking HARD for one this spring, and stumbled upon a C-185 that was much nicer than most of the 180s I was looking at, and less expensive!!! Bottom line, I am the proud owner of a pretty nice C-185F. In my opionion a C-180 is the perfect A/C for AK, but the C-182 is pretty Good too, and a heck of an airplane for the money!! Don't get me wrong I LOVE my 185, but she is a little thirsty!!

  10. #10
    Member Casper50's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Sterling
    Posts
    627

    Default

    a 1948 Stinson with original 165hp Franklin. Just started my lessons about 11 hours ago. My CFI is surprised at the way the Stinson gets up and flys very well.

  11. #11
    Member Searunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    103

    Default

    What is the difference between the 185 and the 180? weight carrying capacity, feul usage, etc...

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Searunner View Post
    What is the difference between the 185 and the 180? weight carrying capacity, feul usage, etc...
    About thirty thousand dollars

    Seriously though it depends on the year models you are comparing. Unmodified you are talking about a decent step up in horsepower which means more fuel usage per hour, less miles per gallon (even though they are generally a little faster) shorter takeoff at gross. The difference in useful load is there but highly variable depending on model years and individual airplanes. Gross weight of a 185 in a given model year is 400 lbs more than the same model year 180 but the engine and fuselage are both a bit heavier so that doesn't translate to a 400 lb. payload advantage.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    3,293

    Default

    Old 180s had gross weights of 2550 and 2650. Later they upped it to 2800. Early 185s grossed at 3200, went to 3300 in 1966, and finally to 3350 in 1968. All 180s came with some variant of the o-470 engine. all were carbureted. All 185s were fuel injected, first using the IO-470 and then the IO-520. Both models got heavier in their later model years. After 1963 they shared essentially the same airframe but had different engines and props. Lots of 180s have been modified with big engines and props to close the power gap, but the 185 still has the gross weight advantage no matter what.

  14. #14
    Member ocnfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    542

    Default C-180's can be morphed into more for less ...

    I have a 56 with Sportsman STOL, 260hp IO470, c230 Mccualley prop, beefed up tail for a 3,000 lb gross weight. Climb out at 1500 fpm cruise at 140 kts at 5500 ft, even with a big XP tail wheel. Everytime I take off I smile .... Duane Wallace and Clyde Cessna got it right the first time, but a few additions over time keep it at the front of the pack ...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •