Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Introduction to the 260se/stol and stablemates

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Introduction to the 260se/stol and stablemates

    We have a number of new members and others curious about these aircraft logging on to this site. Accordingly I have made a brief "index" of discussion threads that in my opinion can provide a rapid but thorough introduction for those just learning about the Peterson modifications of the Cessna 182. I will update this on a regular basis as particularly relevant and "pithy" threads are posted.

    For a brief history of the 260se/stol, 230se/stol, and their ancestor the Wren, visit the Peterson's Performance Plus website, including the downloads page. 182N, P & Q are eligible for Peterson conversions; a pdf summarizing the 182 model history is available here. The Cessna Pilots' Association (CPA) sells a Cessna 182 Buyer's Guide that is also a good reference.

    For a discussion among owners of why they chose to buy and continue to like the plane, view this thread. One owner wrote an article in Cessna Flyer magazine on this subject, which is available on the Peterson's Performance Plus downloads page. You can view many photographs of owners and their planes, as well as interesting places they have flown, in the photo gallery section of this website.

    For detailed discussions of performance and flight characteristics, click here and here. There is also an article by Budd Davisson from the December 2001 issue of Plane and Pilot that captures the 260se/stol's unique characteristics very well. Cruise speeds obtained by 260se owners have been discussed here, here and here. Due to low stall speed and consequent slow speed maneuverability the Peterson modified 182's can make significantly tighter turns than the stock Skylane as discussed here. A brief discussion of obstacle clearance after takeoff is found here. The Petersons have created a set of instructional videos for current and prospective owners & customers. Discussions about use of short unimproved (dirt, grass) airstrips are here, here and here.

    The Peterson 182's are good load haulers with impressively broad CG envelopes. 182P and 182Q airframes can be upgraded with an STC to increase MGTOW from 2950 lb to 3100 lb. With this STC, useful loads over 1300 lb and full fuel payloads well over 800 lb can be realized on lightly or moderately optioned airframes. A detailed description of loading scenarios in a BRS-equipped Katmai is presented here.

    You can also read a discussion of ownership costs here and here. Not surprisingly, the 260se/stol costs about as much to own and fly as a 182. The main differences are fuel--a 260se run lean-of-peak (click here and here) uses 20-30% LESS fuel than a 182 with no sacrifice in cruise speed compared to the O-470-powered unmodified airplane--and hull insurance premium, which is proportional to the plane's value. An additional advantage to Peterson aircraft is that they do not depreciate as much as newly manufactured aircraft that are being produced in volume.

    There is also a thread about the 230se/stol, an otherwise stock Cessna 182 with the high-lift canard. A flight review of the 230se can be downloaded here.

    The "260sx/stol," a 260se/stol with wingtip extensions that approaches the Wren's remarkable low speed and short field performance has been described. The wingtip extensions were incorporated into a new model, the "Katmai," which combines the 260se/stol bushmaster's rugged landing gear with oversize tires and a variety of add-on options to suit back-country fliers. The Katmai's stall speed is a remarkably low 31 kt--landing this plane into any headwind will almost be like planting a helicopter on a spot! Click here for a Katmai pirep posted by a 260se owner, and here for a comparison by a pilot experienced in both the stock 260se and the Katmai.

    You can download a discussion of the rationale behind the choice of the IO-470 engine for the 260se here. Remarkable efficiency can be achieved with the 260se/stol's IO-470 engine via lean of peak operation (click here and here). Nonetheless for those pilots to whom "more power" is an overriding consideration, the canard and aerodynamic cleanup can be installed on IO-520 or IO-550-equipped 182 airframes. Regarding efficiency, the IO-550 will burn 18-20 gph at 75%, best power, rich-of-peak (ROP) settings. Running lean of peak (LOP), expect more like 12-15 gph depending on altitude, temps etc., with slightly lower speeds. The IO-550 running LOP will burn somewhat less fuel than the IO-470 running ROP. At LOP settings, the IO-470 fuel flow should be 11-13 gph depending on altitude with the IO-550 running about 1.5-2 gph more (LOP). Some educated speculation on "300se" (Kenai)/King Katmai performance with an IO-550 can be found here; you can read to what extent this speculation correlated with the real-world performance of the King Katmai and Kenai here, here and here.

    This plane can be customized to fit a range of cost and performance objectives. Among the choices are:

    230 hp O-470 / 260 hp IO-470 / 300 hp IO-550
    Speed kit
    Extended wing
    Standard, heavy-duty, or tundra landing gear
    Standard, extended, or "really extended" baggage area
    BRS airframe parachute
    New interior
    New paint
    Abrasion boots
    Stainless steel landing gear strut leading edges
    Avionics to suit your needs/wants

    For those who want a less expensive entry point than a fully tricked out 260SE/300SE/Katmai, there's another way to "go Peterson:" start with a really nice airframe, with decent interior and presentable paint, a mid-time engine and perhaps even a GNS430 in the panel. Then add just the canard (~$27K) and you have a 230se/stol with all of the slow-speed capability. If you want, add a speed kit (~$6K) and even the extended wing (~$10K) that gives you an extra 4-5 kt cushion on the low end. This would make it a Katmai 230 (Katmai Lite? Queen Katmai? ). For perhaps $140-150K you'll have a very capable airplane that cruises 140-145 KTAS @75% ROP and stalls at 31 kt. After flying it a while you can decide whether it's "for you" or not. If not, you can sell it at virtually no loss. If you like it, you can spring for the 260 hp (260se/stol or Katmai) or 300 hp engine (300se/stol or King Katmai), paint, interior, and perhaps some extra avionics.

    Used ones are difficult to calibrate. Historically there are generally very few--0,1, maybe 2--on the market at any given time. Recently in the bad economy the number has been larger, perhaps four? Thus it's impossible to establish a benchmark on used 260se values--each plane is different and there are few sales--and each sale is pretty much just an agreed-upon-transaction-between-consenting-adults.

    For some new owners' experiences with delivery and first few hours flying their 260se's, click here and here. One owner has provided a narrative describing the construction of his Millenium Edition Katmai 260se/stol during 2005-2006, the first to be equipped with a BRS. A similar thread has been started by another owner in early 2007.

    It is commonly asked whether the canard can be installed on 182RG or restart 182's (S and T models). Unfortunately the answer is "no," because the canard support structure is incompatible with the Lycoming engine and engine mount in these "restart" skylane models.

    There is a periodic fly-in for owners of these aircraft. Fly-ins have been held in McCall, Idaho and Sedona, Arizona. A photo album chronicling an Idaho backcountry flying weekend involving two King Katmais and a Katmai is here.

    This forum started out on Yahoo! Groups. I have transferred a select number of posts that I feel are informative and entertaining from that forum to this one.

    Other suggestions for linked threads are welcome!
    Last edited by kwmoore; 02-27-2014, 11:50 AM. Reason: New short strip discussion links
    Kevin Moore
    Former 260se/stol Katmai with BRS owner; planeless for now
    sigpic

  • #2
    Why do I like the 260se?

    I've flown a fair number of different ASEL, although not as many as some folks here. Among those that I have flown the only ones I would want to own are the Peterson 182's, Cirrus SR22, and Grumman Tiger. They all press my joy-of-flying, safety and/or utility buttons, but in different ways.

    Among these I personally judge the Peterson 182 to be the best (for me), that's why I own a Katmai with 260 hp IO-470. Here's why:
    Takeoff in 400 feet or less

    Climbs with an SR22

    Cruises with an SR20 (150+ KTAS ROP, 140+ KTAS LOP)

    5 hr endurance + 1 hr reserve WOTLOP

    Same WOTLOP nmpg efficiency as SR22

    Great fun loitering at 50-60 KIAS with the window open

    Stall 31 kt--if you can make it stall in the first place!

    Lands in 400 feet or less, including unimproved strips

    Updated interior is as comfortable as the Cirrus although with not quite as good exterior visibility

    BRS available

    Full fuel payload 700+ lb even with BRS

    The IO-470's reliability record is unmatched

    The Petersons' support has been great

    Simple 182 airframe, basic systems, every A&P knows Cessnas

    Advanced avionics retrofits available

    Ready parts availability & support--hey, it's a Cessna

    Gets attention on the ramp--still an unusual plane

    Low insurance premiums

    Relatively low depreciation losses: made money on my first one, 7% loss on the second one after two years, who knows how the third one will turn out though.

    Now, I don't regularly fly really long distance (500+ nm) trips or take on really challenging weather trying to meet a business schedule with little flexibility. Were that the case I would have chosen something else.

    Still, the final answer for each person is that the best plane is the one that (a) you can afford to fly and (b) puts a big smile on your face each time you fly it.
    Kevin Moore
    Former 260se/stol Katmai with BRS owner; planeless for now
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      Yeah!

      Kevin,

      I agree with each of your points.

      My plane just came out of 3 1/2 week final and my first flight -- after this forced separation -- made me realize all over again why I love this plane.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by nworth View Post
        My plane just came out of 3 1/2 week final...
        Wow, must have been a really strong headwind on approach!
        Kevin Moore
        Former 260se/stol Katmai with BRS owner; planeless for now
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by kwmoore View Post
          Wow, must have been a really strong headwind on approach!
          ...and it took eight months for someone to catch it.

          Louise

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Louise Scudieri View Post
            ...and it took eight months for someone to catch it.

            Louise
            Damn Spell Chek...

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Louise Scudieri View Post
              ...and it took eight months for someone to catch it.
              I resisted for that long but finally I just couldn't help myself.
              Kevin Moore
              Former 260se/stol Katmai with BRS owner; planeless for now
              sigpic

              Comment


              • #8
                A few minor updates following the introduction of the Kenai:

                Originally posted by kwmoore View Post
                Takeoff in 400 feet or less

                Climbs with an SR22 (rate of climb) but superior climb gradient

                Cruises with an SR20 (156+ KTAS ROP, 150+ KTAS LOP)

                4.5 hr endurance + 1 hr reserve WOTLOP (75 gal usable) or 5.5 hr endurance + 1 hr reserve (88 gal usable)

                Great fun loitering at 50-60 KIAS with the window open

                Stall 31 kt (Katmai) or 35 kt (Kenai)--if you can make it stall in the first place!

                Lands in 400 feet or less, including unimproved strips

                Updated interior is as comfortable as the Cirrus although with not quite as good exterior visibility

                BRS available

                Full fuel payload 700+ lb even with BRS

                The Petersons' support has been great

                Simple 182 airframe, basic systems, every A&P knows Cessnas

                Advanced avionics retrofits available

                Ready parts availability & support--hey, it's a Cessna

                Gets attention on the ramp--still an unusual plane

                Low insurance premiums

                Relatively low depreciation losses: made money on my first one (260SE), 7% loss on the second one after two years (260SE), 5% annual depreciation on the third one (Katmai-260)--overall GA market conditions matter!

                Now, I don't regularly fly really long distance (500+ nm) trips or take on really challenging weather trying to meet a business schedule with little flexibility. Were that the case I would have chosen something else.

                Still, the final answer for each person is that the best plane is the one that (a) you can afford to fly and (b) puts a big smile on your face each time you fly it.
                Kevin Moore
                Former 260se/stol Katmai with BRS owner; planeless for now
                sigpic

                Comment

                Working...
                X