• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

C180 rental cost?

There is one in the "Plus One Flyers" club. It is drop-dead gorgeous! I have no idea what it rents for, but I can find out. They pay me to ride in the right seat.
 
N34CF at Plus One rents for $175/hr wet. Great plane, and as Bob says... gorgeous.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
RCPackard said:
N34CF at Plus One rents for $175/hr wet. Great plane, and as Bob says... gorgeous.
Click to expand...

I don't know boo about Plus One, but keep in mind that a "flying club" usually has a buy-in, sometimes several thousand dollars, plus usually a monthly fee which may or may not go toward some flying time. So the actual cost to fly might end up being more than that $175 / hour wet.
 
Hotrod is correct. Plus One charges $129.00 initiation (one time fee) and $34.50/month in dues. Dues include insurance coverage for aircraft.

I feel lucky to have access to Plus One (fleet includes a Super Cub, very nice newer American Champion Citabria, and two Great Lakes approved for acro).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Thats actually pretty darn reasonable.
Ive heard of airplane clubs with buy-ins oc several thousand dollars.
 
We are actually not getting much activity. So far, I am the only authorized instructor. Several more want to get qualified, but we have experience requirements. Maybe I charge too much.

One of the guys suggested advertising nationally. Not sure that comports with "flying club" privileges.

I was dead set against the "five hours in a Citabria and a pattern checkout" that most folks want. We currently will not let low time tailwheel pilots solo the thing without ten hours dual in the Super Cub and 15 hours in the 180. Those are pattern hours - I assume a licensed pilot knows how to do a stall and a steep turn. And we are currently asking experienced tailwheel instructors to do five pattern hours before instructing in the thing.

It is truly a beautiful aircraft. Flies and lands dead straight. We should get Randy to post a photo here.
 
I dunno. I often see on the Skywagon club site requests for familiarization training from prospective or new buyers of 180’s and 185’s. Seems to me that, as long as your insurance would allow it, folks from out of area would be interested in coming to Gillespie for a fam course. They wouldn’t ever have to solo it.
bob turner said:
We are actually not getting much activity. So far, I am the only authorized instructor. Several more want to get qualified, but we have experience requirements. Maybe I charge too much.

One of the guys suggested advertising nationally. Not sure that comports with "flying club" privileges.

I was dead set against the "five hours in a Citabria and a pattern checkout" that most folks want. We currently will not let low time tailwheel pilots solo the thing without ten hours dual in the Super Cub and 15 hours in the 180. Those are pattern hours - I assume a licensed pilot knows how to do a stall and a steep turn. And we are currently asking experienced tailwheel instructors to do five pattern hours before instructing in the thing.

It is truly a beautiful aircraft. Flies and lands dead straight. We should get Randy to post a photo here.
Click to expand...
 
The thing I would recommend if you are going to do basic training in a 180/185 change the tires. The little tires are soooo easy to bounce higher than the tail of a 747. The best is the 29x11x10's but I would at least put a set of Goodyear 26" on it. They will save a lot of wear on the gear , and lots less scary for the instructor.
 
Funny... I was thinking same thing. However, since it appears they are predominantly landing tarmac, the 850's would be a good compromise with more absorption but acceptable wear. Kenmore still holds the STC and it's not very expensive. Will work on the old McCauley3-bolt wheels and brakes, if that's what's on there.

Ain't it great when we spend other people's money?!
 
LOL, yep love to. I had GaeAero's on a 180 w/29's then went to the ABW10x10 aluminum wheels and the 4 ply 29's on the 185 that's the best I've found. The 29's wear like iron and if you are brave I've been told you can run them at 5-6 psi. I run 12, they make even me look good.
 
bob turner said:
…...I was dead set against the "five hours in a Citabria and a pattern checkout" that most folks want. We currently will not let low time tailwheel pilots solo the thing without ten hours dual in the Super Cub and 15 hours in the 180. Those are pattern hours - I assume a licensed pilot knows how to do a stall and a steep turn. And we are currently asking experienced tailwheel instructors to do five pattern hours before instructing in the thing.…...
Click to expand...

My new hangar neighbor has owned a C180 for a number of years, and has a lot of time in it....all on floats.
No tailwheel time at all, in anything.
About a year ago, he decided to put it on wheel gear & keep it at the airport.
His insurance told him he needed 15 (or 25?) hours of dual (and a t/w endorsement) before they'd cover him.
I was quite surprised, esp since he already knew how to fly the airplane--
my insurance required only 5 hours of dual (and a t/w endorsement) to cover me in my first taildragger (C170).
Of course, that was about 20 years ago, so I guess things have changed,
But 4 years ago, they only required "a 180 signoff by a CFI" (no minimum number of hours specified)
& a high-performance endorsement when I stepped up to a C180.
 
Last edited:
Things have indeed changed. Club insurance requires only a checkout. That scares me! Stearman insurance originally had a 100 hr. requirement. Avemco was the new insurer with a more reasonable minimum.

Anybody who thinks float time in a 180 is enough depth for the taildragger version is looking for an expensive insight.

Most insurers are now looking for 25 hrs in type for tailwheel insurance. They pay claims for botched landings every day.
 
I don't think float time is a substitute for no tailwheel time,
but in my neighbor's case I did think the number of hours required (15 or 25) was excessive-
basically just to learn ground ops.
 
15 and 25 in type are becoming the norm. That is now true even if you are an experienced taildragger type. And now there are more and more airplanes out there where it is tough to find an instructor with time in type. Wacos, for instance - how many instructors are qualified in the RNF?
 
bob turner said:
15 and 25 in type are becoming the norm. That is now true even if you are an experienced taildragger type. And now there are more and more airplanes out there where it is tough to find an instructor with time in type. Wacos, for instance - how many instructors are qualified in the RNF?
Click to expand...

I can not answer that, but if you found me one to get up to speed in, I would be happy to learn how to fly it!!:p

I do agree that time in type does help the safety aspect. One thing that is forgotten is that even within "type" there are differences. A 53 180 is a different machine to fly and land than a 74. Lower time pilots might get a big surprise if they fly train in a 74 and then hop in the early models.
 
hotrod180 said:
My new hangar neighbor has owned a C180 for a number of years, and has a lot of time in it....all on floats.
No tailwheel time at all, in anything.
About a year ago, he decided to put it on wheel gear & keep it at the airport.
His insurance told him he needed 15 (or 25?) hours of dual (and a t/w endorsement) before they'd cover him.
I was quite surprised, esp since he already knew how to fly the airplane--
my insurance required only 5 hours of dual (and a t/w endorsement) to cover me in my first taildragger (C170).
Of course, that was about 20 years ago, so I guess things have changed,
But 4 years ago, they only required "a 180 signoff by a CFI" (no minimum number of hours specified)
& a high-performance endorsement when I stepped up to a C180.
Click to expand...

First, float time means the pilot can probably stall the thing, and do steep turns. Landings? May as well start off with a brand new private pilot out of a Cessna 150.

And, yes, some insurers used to require a "check out" by a CFI. Sometimes they actually noted this needed to be by a "qualified" CFI. But, as the accident record clearly shows, there were apparently a number of "qualified CFIs" who weren't doing a great job at checkouts.

And, as I'm sure Bob can verify, that process can vary WILDLY from one individual to the next. In my experience, many of the folks that were actually pretty handy in the airplane from the git go actually insisted on the "full meal deal", even though I offered to sign them off earlier. But, there are those out there who want the "minimum" when it comes to a checkout.

And, that's often when the wingtip meets the pavement.

MTV
 
When I got the 185 a few years back my wife wanted to get checked out and the insurance company wanted 10 hours in type before she to carry passengers.
She did have about 75 hours of T/W time.
 
I don't do the "full meal deal" unless asked. I try for ten-twelve landings per chargeable hour. After the basics are done, I look for serious crosswinds.

And yes, there are young pilots who can competently do this stuff in five hours. Most folks who can afford 180 time are older, and it takes longer. Sometimes lots longer. It is a motor skill.

We were out today in pretty strong winds in a J-4, and my buddy, who is a high time 180, Cub, and Stearman pilot, was not able to keep it within the runway edge stripes. Different airplanes can eat your lunch.
 
Alright, so I'm ignorant so please forgive. What is different in the 180 from other tailwheel planes? Other than we short guys can't see forward - -
 
Thats a hard one to answer, but I'll give it a try and could very well be way wrong. Empty to full it's a different airplane. Things can happen very fast also and surprise you. The way I explain it is , it's the first Cessna in their line not designed and made not to hurt you.the trim can cause a stall in go around. Take Off accidents are very prevalent because of torque, add a wheel alignment problem and X/W you need to feather the brake to stay on the RWY way. The gear will throw you 10 feet in the air if you mess up a landing at which time you are rapidly running out of AS , the Trim is full nose up and the RWY/ bar is running out. Going around now is busy. Also you have two window and three window which fly way different, the older one being much more pilot friendly . Hope this made some sense, and it's worth about 2C also.
 
I had a ragwing 170 for about 11 years and 1700 hours,
then a C150/150TD for about 6 years & 800 hours.
Then bought my 53 C180 about 4 years ago.
Got a pencil-whipped "signoff" from a high-time 180 owning CFI friend, just for insurance purposes,
then flew it about 3 times with the previous owner (thanks again Mike!).
It wasn't a difficult transition--
it flies like a Cessna (that's a positive, BTW!), just heavier than the ones I'd previously owned.
In some ways, it's easier to fly and land than the smaller ones.
You let it get sideways, yeah, you're gonna have a problem.
And yeah, you are busy on a go-around--
trim, cowl flaps, flaps.....all at the same time!
 
algonquin said:
….The way I explain it is , it's the first Cessna in their line not designed and made not to hurt you.the trim can cause a stall in go around. ….The gear will throw you 10 feet in the air if you mess up a landing at which time you are rapidly running out of AS , the Trim is full nose up and the RWY/ bar is running out. Going around now is busy......
Click to expand...

I don't quite understand the first comment, the 120/140 & 170 & the pre-war Airmaster weren't designed to be stall proof or whatever like the Ercoupe either.
No experience with the 190/195 so can't comment on those.
All spring gear Cessnas can bounce you if you don't get your landing right.
And my two previous airplanes were both a handful for a go-around as they also landed with full flaps & full nose-up trim.
You are busier with the 180, due to the cowl flaps, and it is harder to over-power the trim if you actually need to apply full-power for the go-around....
which quite often you don't need to do. There was some discussion on this very subject here not long ago.
 
Well, I've never flown a 180 or 182, so please don't shoot me for dumb questions - - -

1. Is full nose-up trim really necessary on landing? (I'm one of those guys who never touches the trim in my -12)
2. Can't cowl flaps wait until "normal" climb-out is achieved?
3. Will the plane climb satisfactorily with full flaps at gross, (assuming trim setting is acceptable)?
 
1. No. I like to carry a slightly heavy stick/yoke. Simplifies things in sticking a wheel landing. Also lessens the forward pressure in a full throttle go around.

2. Yes. Throttle, flaps to 20, trim, trim, trim. Cowl flaps can wait till the flaps are at 20 or less and the trim is set.

3. Depends on density altitude and other factors. In most cases, yes.


Gordon Misch said:
Well, I've never flown a 180 or 182, so please don't shoot me for dumb questions - - -

1. Is full nose-up trim really necessary on landing? (I'm one of those guys who never touches the trim in my -12)
2. Can't cowl flaps wait until "normal" climb-out is achieved?
3. Will the plane climb satisfactorily with full flaps at gross, (assuming trim setting is acceptable)?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Flight lessons in a Supercub?
2
Replies
41
Views
9K
Bob408SS
B
hotrod180
C180/185 jackscrew inspection cover
Replies
11
Views
3K
Dave Calkins
Dave Calkins
Cardiff Kook
Ballpark Cost- C180/185 Interior Redo
Replies
10
Views
2K
stewartb
S
B
Aircraft Rental NC
Replies
0
Views
9K
bgriffel
B
texmex
C180 Fuel drain.
Replies
7
Views
3K
stewartb
S
Back
Top