Disclaimer: I have never flown 182T in real life *although I have flown many other turbo aircraft. So my experience is based on "F" and "R" models

 

Part 1. Interior and point of view.

Carenado  has exceptional level of visual representation of  interior on exterior. I understand that could be difference in size of the cowling between different 182 models. To my taste seems default pilot view in Carenado  a bit low as in shown in image below

 

Of course like in real life seat height can be adjusted to some extend. I tweaked my POV to more like in real life (image below)

Same view, POV angle view from real life:

 

However, if use custom height I prefer and move camera to the left Carenado view looks like that

While in real life I more familiar with this view 

 

So whatever parallax involved in visual representation of pilot view I can easily adjust camera up and down depending on view. Certainly it's not a big of a deal or immersion killer.

Next page is Part 2. Flight model and engine ops 

Part 2 Flight model and engine ops :

Both F and T model have cowl flaps and they are for a reason, In my 182 I could really see CHT temperature rise climb if cowl flaps are close. We do prefer cruise climb  in real 182 just to keep temperature in bay. In Carenado version cowl flaps seems do affect CHT temperature but not to an extent as I remember. And probably climbing with maximum continuous power 32 in and 2400 rpm I would expect to see CHT temperature much higher. Again knowing that Carenado using default MSFS system I don't know if there a way to tweak it, but it would definitely  would be nice to see why cruise climb is recommended on the first place.

below is an example of descent with cowl flaps closed. In climb  (cowl flaps open) temperature goes close to 400. You can see glimpse of CYL TEMP gauge on the right side of the image. As 182 descent  cylinder temperature noticeably drops even with cowl aps closed. So cruise descent and climb it something do all the time in 182 to avoid engine stress and consequent damage 

So current level implementation is not a show killer, but it would be great if  Carenado could step up their game and enhance a bit engine management!

 

Another pic shows that we do lean aggressively especially in 182!

 

Now, move on to a quick view of flight model. It's surprising for me but Carenado 182 does indeed feels like 182 in IRL. It's nose heavy on touch down - check! Flaps do produce a lot of drag comparing with 172 and causing 182 decelerate faster - check. Also cutting power while on speed, on short final will settle down 182 very quickly - check. 

 In my personally experience 182 is very stable platform for instrument flying  and it shows in Carenado model as well. Even though engine management of 182 requites little more attention than 172, I would take 182 in IMC over 172 at any time!  So I can give Carenado thumbs up for flight model which is very surprising for me given my priors experience with Carenado in XP11 and P3D

 

Part 3: Final verdict:

Carenado 182 is actually exceeded my expectation. Yes it's not A2A level of system modeling but very decent  and right for money. With the hope that Carenado continue improve and take care of their model it's good buy I think.

As of 1.9.3.0. patch I found following bugs in 182

- defrost knob inop. I would be nice to move and it  could take on function of window heat especially in icing condition 

- prop heat move only with mouse wheel and have no sound associated with it

- interior sound could be better. fuel pump is too load. I do wear Bose A20 in real life and so I use headphone option in MSFS and with this preset fuel pump is atrociously laud!

 

Few more pic my son some time ago with our 182  

Pilot view from my 182

@sd_flyer Thanks for sharing your thoughts.  

I too am gratified by @Carenado's efforts.  If they take the lead they have, and run with it, they could do A LOT to improve their reputation with simmers who like more than just eye-candy.  Both the 182 (which I do not own) and the Mooney (which I do own) are great starts on a complex aeroplane simulation in MSFS.  If @Carenado steps up to the plate with an incremental series of releases, they would, in my opinion, benefit greatly.  If not, they will return to the eye-candy market and all the serious simmers will avoid them until folks like @Bert Pieke come along and mod them into more than mediocrity.

Fingers x'ed!

C

Edited October 5, 20205 yr by cavaricooper

I always preferred a C182 to anything smaller, but, would opt for a C210 any chance I got.  The 210 was the ultimate SE Cessna for me.  It looked a lot like a C182 from the pilot's seat (the 210 had a 3-bladed prop) even the view out the side.  You never got to see the absolute broken duck looking retract pattern but it was very obvious when the gear was tucked in.

There was a C177RG that looked great and was fairly fast, but it still felt like a Skyhawk to me.  I rented one for one person day charters for some time and it worked out OK.

But, day in and day out, I would opt for the Skylane.  I taught my brother-in-law how to fly in a C172 because he was so tall that he couldn't fly a C150.  He bought a 182 within a month of getting his PPL and has owned one ever since (many years - 3 or 4 different ones).  

I am old school and would love to see Carenado introduce a C182 with round gauges, but, even better would be a C210 with round gauges.

... @raymar a P210 with round gauges would REALLY be something- a personal mile muncher way before the likes of Pilatus and TBM...

Totally agree with you- the 182 is a GREAT instrument platform- simple, stable and solid...

C

3 minutes ago, raymar said:

even better would be a C210 with round gauges

Carenado does have the Centurion. In X-Plane it was augmented with the Simcoders reality pack. It was actually a lot of fun to fly back then.

I would take that one in MSFS in a heart beat. 😉😁

I just sent a formal nudge to Carenado for the x-plane/sim-coders Centurion to be one of their future planes for MSFS.  Now wouldn't that be a kick in the butt?  We could find a thousand things that doesn't work right. ha.

2 minutes ago, raymar said:

I just sent a formal nudge to Carenado for the x-plane/sim-coders Centurion to be one of their future planes for MSFS.  Now wouldn't that be a kick in the butt?  We could find a thousand things that doesn't work right. ha.

I'm pretty sure they're already working on adding another aircraft. I wonder if Dan Klau would be interested in MSFS?

https://disciplesofflight.com/cessna-210-centurion/ Some great reading here.

1 hour ago, raymar said:

I always preferred a C182 to anything smaller, but, would opt for a C210 any chance I got.  The 210 was the ultimate SE Cessna for me.  It looked a lot like a C182 from the pilot's seat (the 210 had a 3-bladed prop) even the view out the side.  You never got to see the absolute broken duck looking retract pattern but it was very obvious when the gear was tucked in.

There was a C177RG that looked great and was fairly fast, but it still felt like a Skyhawk to me.  I rented one for one person day charters for some time and it worked out OK.

But, day in and day out, I would opt for the Skylane.  I taught my brother-in-law how to fly in a C172 because he was so tall that he couldn't fly a C150.  He bought a 182 within a month of getting his PPL and has owned one ever since (many years - 3 or 4 different ones).  

I am old school and would love to see Carenado introduce a C182 with round gauges, but, even better would be a C210 with round gauges.

Flew a 172SP with CSU a few times. The extra power and constant speed prop made quite a difference.

If the MSFS 182 had round gauges I would have bought it straight away.

Edited October 5, 20205 yr by Glenn Fitzpatrick

My personal  wish list is for Carenado Cessna 185

The 185 was a bit of an odd ball when I was flying.  It was like it was skipped over.  I don't think I ever flew in a C185.  C195 yes.

How about a U17B? Every heard of this one?

1 hour ago, airlinejets said:

I'm pretty sure they're already working on adding another aircraft. I wonder if Dan Klau would be interested in MSFS?

No doubt in my mind Carenado is working on several models for MSFS.  I'm sure many folks will be pleasantly surprised. I just wish there was a route to the files so the user community could finish the job, as usual.