dkkim73

This is another area where IFR melts away the problems. Sounds like poor culture and practice on ATC's part, though.

The Cessna Mixmaster holds an odd fascination for me. It actually looks like a pretty usable airplane, great vis, and at least some I've seen aren't that pricey.

No, you're not wrong. The argument is that if you get runaway trim, or the trim state is very different than you think, it will fight you when the AP clicks itself off (or you click it off). IIUC from Junkman's description above, the PFD/AP display will tell you to trim with a little arrow. In effect, you become the pitch trim axis servo in that design. IIUC The argument is that that makes you more aware.

I had a 2006 Subaru STi as a daily driver. "It's a 4-door, it's practical..." uh, yeah. Actually it was. Amazing car. My dad had an old (60s? 70s?) Citroën SM he worked on and loved. We took a ski vacation as a family of 4 with baggage and skis in it. If the clowns can do it, so can we. But seriously, if you can make the W&B work it's an adventure (early on at least). I don't think it obviates the issue about more hauling capacity. Since you @Zippy_Bird are open to the idea of novel/dual solutions, consider if you can't find a good rental/club plane, you could try a partnership with the one that is a better fit (more common mission, more predictable scheduling, better shared cost, etc). And yes, definitely, do some fun/intro flights. Make it light, easy and a treat. Go when it's calm, etc. You probably already know some of this. And, minor correction, not to be pedantic. Technically, it doesn't turn money into noise, it turns fuel into fun, with the waste energy dissipated as the sound of freedom

Agree, esp. for 6-pack flying. And man, the 430W's still pack a lot of value...

I've thought that from time to time. Here's the other end of the spectrum from the MPPP in early June:

Your post is pretty thought-provoking for me. I don't think I agree about it (PTRM) being bad to include in an autopilot, on balance. I can see the other side of it. E.g. You point out it is has a few potentially sinister failure modes. OTOH so does flying a coupled approach without an autothrottle. I suppose I'm generally pretty aware of the trim state, and sometimes use the AP to trim for me. E.g. doing engine runs (working out power settings) or slow flight... I hit ALT or adjust power and I am aware it's trimming for me. But sometimes it can do things you aren't specifically thinking of that moment, like on a level-off. That would still happen with only an elevator (PTCH) axis. And if you get way behind it takes longer to undo. Intersting thread. It actually had never occurred to me that a GFC500 or GFC700 would be installed without a trim servo.

Mistakes don't kill people. Guns don't kill people. iPads kill people. Those, and people with mustaches.... I'm making a list.

I think it's an axis in a control-theoretic sense. Ie. a degree of freedom with feedback etc. Obviously not orthogonal to the pitch axis, but not trivially related, either. Geometrically, you're of course right, it's about the same spatial axis.

Couple good ideas above. If time is an issue, and there is rental availability, @Utah20Gflyer's plan makes a lot of sense and gets you moving sooner. Might have the benefit of giving you some hands-on with different panels and getting a sense of what you'll want. I remember the first time I flew a modern turbo C182, it was a revelation, at least compared to my 1960's club trainers. OTOH if you're attached to your plane, the GI275 + IFR GPS plan gives you the benefit of carrying forward that familiarity. Assuming you can get it done in a timely fashion. Agree on the value of selling an IFR-capable plane. Unclear how much money you recover, so to speak, but you'll appeal to a wider range of pilots.

Having the AP trim you is a nice workload saver. It's also really more elegant. Do you want the elevator servo potentially constantly pushing on something? Maybe a tech will weigh in, but seems like wear on that servo. Getting a GFC500 and skipping that channel seems retrograde to me... Leaving capability on the table. If you really needed to pinch pennies I agree with the above, at least lay the groundwork with wiring. And if you install the capstan, you might as well install the motor. Data point: My AP went out recently due to failed PTRM channel servo. Still wouldn't not have it. AP out a week to get fixed. The Garmin design is nice in that the clutch/capstan is separate from the servo motor, easier to fix quickly. HTH

In addition to The first sentence is, in my mind, the linchpin. My general observation in this situation is that they won't want to do that forever. Maybe not even very long if it's not encouraged. I miss my children's enthusiasm for anything I was doing when they were young. For some families getting early time together makes for life-long memories and passions. I took a long hiatus from flying and kick myself for not going back sooner. So, I'd bias towards just making the decision and finding a bigger plane. No idea of your budget, but some good suggestions above. You might also consider a C210 (or T210 if you need that). You haven't mentioned desire for a turbo, but your base shows 410' MSL in KY, so I'm guessing not a hard need. Too bad to hear about your CFII feedback. My bias is that you don't need a modern glass panel to learn IFR. One thing to consider is that the situational awareness of a big display can be nice for safety IMHO, but you can get 80% of the SA by just getting a really good portable GPS or an iPad. I agree with Rick, the instrument rating is a real safety boost and enabler if you're flying with family. Even if you don't fly hard IFR, it makes complicated VFR trips occasionally into simple IFR trips, and improves your mental bandwidth. Your plane sounds nice. Let that M20E be the next guy's ticket upwards! Unless of course you can keep both

No dramatic scenery today (the Sapphires are low-ish mountains), but Philipsburg MT (U05) is a fun little destination. Wanted to scout it for taking people on a day trip, and exercise the plane after a hiatus from my commute. 3599' runway with cracks and some asphalt spalling (good soft-field technique practice). Old-school country airport with just a bunch of hangars and a courtesy car with "character". Very pleasant. Small downtown with tourist things to do, big candy store, whiskey bar if you're going to stay overnight...

Haven't been in about 20 yrs. This is making me think about it. I lived at the time in MN so I just drove up. The point about "lots to do" bears under lining. I was struck by the number of talks, experts, show cases, etc . Huge density of real av people. I will say the day was long and hot, so take advantage of amenities and bring sunscreen. Talking a nap beside your own plane would a nice siesta! Curious what the experience has been bringing people with mild interest in aviation. Ie enough for them to do these days? None of my family are quite as into it as I, though my son would probably rally.

Doesn't the toasting risk depend significantly on the design? Eg a turbo normalized design like the Acclaim would seem to offer the same boost risk as flying at sea level. Well it's got a tiny bit of boost over that, but not much. I'm not saying it's not more complex, with additional failure modes, but the implication seems to be excessive ICPs and this CHTs, bad mixture, etc. I actually think it's easier to operate, too. Since you control MAP, doesn't take quite as much mixture vigilance.

FlySto has some pretty extensive and well done features, but they aren't all obvious. It feels as if some are a bit hidden. Eg it extracts and allows you to review approaches. One of the better pieces of software I've seen in a while. Also good performance over the web. Their front-end coding is slick.

No, but I looked hard at a Cozy and an RV-7A. Even ordered plans and visited the RV factory and took a test flight. They might still do those, I don't know. Crossed my mind to buy a used RV at some point. Some good deals when you consider the work. But you did say you wanted a project...

I like the 3D visual feature (in theory, I haven't used this yet). Might be particularly nice flying into a new place. As for clutter, I suppose it partly depends on how configurable it is, how intuitive, and how easy to "get it out of the way". The Garmin product is actually very lean. Almost too lean at times. I find myself flipping back to the FAA charts along the way (maybe just a security blanket ;))

I love cruising in the upper teens. To paraphrase an old movie line from Thelma and Louise "now I know what all the fuss is about!!". All of the above. I've been getting more comfortable in the low flight levels. Building my own protocols for cross-checks re: O2 etc. I always wear the Wellue ring and early on cross-checked with a different pulse ox. Some similar advantages. @Pinecone's point is well-taken. If planning to stay below 18,000 but something happened, very reasonable under the general discretionary reg to climb.

Do *not* give them ideas, my friend.

I had another thought with this example: We have a lot of deleterious medical and food stream/dietary substances these days, and they are all within the context of the all-knowing regulations. Red dye #4, Vioxx, Oxycontin, Trovafloxacin, high-fructose corn syrup, and other things I won't name because they'll be more "controversial". The "food pyramid" itself even is arguably serving us ill. I see it every day. So getting the big stamp of approval doesn't really protect a person from harm or exploitation for profit. There's arguably a fair bit of regulatory capture, inertia in public health, etc. A wise ruler looks for his blind spots. Contrariwise, lot of hubris in the big agencies. And yes, I know a lot of FAA aeromedical types and bureaucrats are well-intentioned.

Yeah, part of my view right now is the terrain I'm flying. Seeing MIAs not infrequently in the mid to upper teens. I think I could mostly get away below 18000, OTOH I ended up at FL210 avoiding ice coming back from the MPPP in Cheyenne. I'm not really worried about maintaining and defending my situation aeromedically to another flight surgeon/AME. I'm more worried about falling afoul of the timing and the bureaucracy. Esp. if a routine thing needs to be signed off by a civil servant in OK at some point. Vide supra. I was kind of thinking of your viewpoint when I asked the question, so thank you

Not really a straw man. A bit simplistic a post, I'll admit. The story that was posted above is way beyond your example in scope. The process of regulating high-risk, high-reward, non normal economic goods like medicine tends to be a ratchet. It only goes one way. More rules, more rules about rules, more process about rules about regulation. More reporting. More businesses generating metrics about the above. More meta-businesses feeding on those. Rules about regulation, and unfunded mandates. Then regulation to "bend the arc" about the meta-picture. In the military, this was referred to as a self-licking ice cream cone. It's quite arguably the case in medicine. I was being blunt, but it's not a straw man argument in the bigger sense. We can argue in person some day over a drink.

I took a quick look at Basic Med last night. The big limitation in my mind is to 18,000 ft and below. I wonder if this was conceived in terms of where "simple" private flying would end, or if the aeromedical folks made a more specific assessment that high altitude risk factors would be better assessed by AMEs. For those instrument rated turbo mafiosi on Basic Med, how did you approach this trade off in your thinking?

Just think. Some people want *more* government and bureaucracy (including contacted) injected into medicine. I just remind them of the DMV... So sorry to hear of this young man's ordeal.