RV10 or C182 or Other for my needs...?

[handcuff]

Hey guys,

I’ve been trolling for months (years, really) but joined today to get experienced pilots’ perspective regarding immediate/mid-term plans for a plane:

My dad was a professional pilot as I grew up, flying Cessna Citations, Learjets, Kingairs, and several of the larger commercial jets, along with almost every type single/twin engine I can think of. I flew with him a lot, but never pursued getting my license (never had the time to dedicate the time needed to become and stay a good pilot, and he was vastly opposed to be being anything less safe than ‘good’) – he suggested I wait until the stresses of my career and life tuned down enough to let me focus on flying. Over the last 10 years, that has happened and I came close to buying a plane several times for my personal training/use, but always had a reason not to.

My dad passed during covid, and I lost a wonderful opportunity – I don’t want more to go by. My son wants to be a commercial pilot, and I want to fly for a wide range of reasons (but mostly because it’s thrilling). We are close, but this is a desire that both of us share and are excited about - I finally bought my first ‘trainer’ plane (C182 P-ponk) for my son and I to train in.

My plane is with my son in Cincinnati – he already has his license, and is working his way through the remaining certifications/hours/etc. He will be getting his hours/certifications by end of year, and the C182 will come back to Louisville for me to do my training (him being one of my instructors). The important fact there: I won’t be doing much/any flying for the next ~9 months and I thought I’d use that time to prepare.

Key Mission Parameters:

1. I’m married – my wife doesn’t mind flying, but is terrified of commercial flights (it isn’t the flying, it’s the inability to have ‘control’).
2. I’ll be retiring in next 10’ish years and look forward to using the plane both while I’m still working, and after I retire.
3. I currently live in Louisville, but travel to NYC, NJ, and FL for work. Once I retire, I will likely consult/be a board member for companies – requiring some level of travel.
4. My family enjoys travel – we owned a couple cabins in Gatlinburg, TN (sold during the pandemic when the numbers were crazy) and have looked for other cabins near ski resorts in NY/VA/etc. Thought about getting a beach place in NC or FL.
5. We have 4 sons, 2 with special needs that will continue to live with us until we are unable to take care of them – at that point, they will likely go live with the other two sons. They probably won't always travel with us, but they do enjoy traveling, and we like having them with us.
6. We have 2 dogs (75-100 lb each) – they normally don’t travel with us, but we would like them to.

Opinions/wants:

• Space/Seats: Comparing the ‘space’ available - the ability to carry 4 ppl (us and 2 kids, or us and 2 dogs) vs. ability to carry 6 ppl (us and 4 kids, us +2 kids + dogs). My 2 ‘neuro-typical’ sons have significant others, so I realize a 6 seater won’t be able to carry the entire family – we’d need an 8 seater for that.
• Speed: I’d like something that cruises at 150+kts, with a top speed well above that, if possible. I see a few of my key options that cruise ~165kts, and top out in the 185’ish range.
• Fuel Burn: I am attracted to the lower gph possible in Vans RV10. I’d pick a C210 but [1] fuel costs for non-loaded missions (14-15GPH seems to be the relative ‘minimum’), and [2] gear/maintenance issues
• Size: I’m a big guy – 6’1, 300’ish pounds (currently losing weight, but I’ve had a 52 inch chest since I was 23, so I won’t get much below ~250 or so). I don’t want to feel like a sardine in a can for an extended flight.

Options I’ve looked at:

• RV10: I’ve been seriously looking at the Vans rv-10 (hits the majority of my mission criteria, and allows me to have more control/input on maintenance, upgrades & updates, etc. Challenges: [1] time to build; [2] It’s useful load is borderline, and [3] space - it couldn’t carry both the boys and the dogs with us.
• Cessna 182: I already have it, and C182’s are great planes. P-ponks make them even better. It’s a wonderful plane, and my son wants us to keep it. Challenges: [1] It doesn’t hit the speed criteria I’d like – it’s at the very bottom range, with a lot of headroom opportunity; [2] same challenges with space and usable load as the RV10; [3] avionics are not as ‘new’ (or airframe).
• Cessna 210 (205/6/etc): Lots of load/lift capabilities, and all the space needed. Challenges: burns more fuel, even when it’s just me flying myself. Same problem with older avionics & airframe.
• Other 4 seaters: Most don’t have the usable load to be beneficial.

I am leaning towards the RV10 option – gives the opportunity to be in a new plane with new avionics. If I were to go the Rv10 route:

I’m thinking I kick it off while I’m waiting the ~9 months (I would prefer to fly than build, so once I’m ready to ‘fly’ I’d like to spend the time doing that). This is why I’m posting now vs. waiting till I finish my IFR…I have a limited amount of ‘flying time’ left in my future (20-25 yrs), and if I’m going to build, I want to get started NOW vs. 12 months from now.

I believe I’d do the assisted/accelerated build, but I know little about this. I’ve read really good things about Saint, but don’t know how it would work operationally – if they are assisting, how does that count against the 51%? How quickly does it typically get ‘done’ with an assisted build?


Questions:
Given what I’ve outlined and the large amount of experience that you guys have, what direction would you point me towards?
Has anyone done the assisted build program – how did it work for you? How much did it speed you up?
Is there other options I should consider? I recently started looking at Piper Comanche 260s because they seem to fit a similar niche – thoughts?
Should I just fly the 182 for now, and wait to make a decision until after I’m totally finished with any training/certifications? Will that put me ‘behind’ in building?


Thanks for any input.
-Scott
(image added for attention - my son, after going to pick up the C182 and bringing it home to show us for the first time)

 

[Racerx]

PA32.

 

[tsts4]

The RV-10 will not meet your mission criteria. The useful load (~1050 on avg) and available cabin space aren’t there. FYI I have over 500 hrs in my 10 that I built. I suggest a 206/210, Cherokee 6, or the larger Bonanzas.

 

[kyleb]

If you have to have all of that, the RV-10 won't work. It has 4 honest seats, I took myself (170 lbs), my buddy (250 lbs - 6'4), his son (190 lbs, 6'5) and my son (<5', <90 lbs) to Oshkosh in my RV-10 last year with 100+ pounds of baggage. Plenty of room for all and plenty of performance. But that's it. There is no more...

A 250 or 260 Comanche *should* have slightly more useful load, but will still be right at or beyond its limit if you need to check all those boxes.

 

[texasclouds]

You need a Bonanza my friend.

 

[455 Bravo Uniform]

Buy, don’t build. You don’t have enough time.

Rent for now, if you have time, then fly the 182 and decide then if it’s too slow for you.

Get in the water, but go one foot at a time, just because you can. You don’t need to dive head first. Just an opinion on the internet. Enjoy your family!

 

[Rein Hart]

Bonanza or get creative and stretch the RV-10 for 6 seats.

 

[Randomskylane]

I don’t think a 6 seater is big enough.

You need a B18!

 

[CJones]

I thought the 182RG that I was flying was the ultimate cross-country machine...until I flew the RV-10. It has the most shoulder and head room and backseat leg room of any four seater I've been in or around and it's pretty close to 'if it fits, it flies', not to mention access to newer avionics and upgrades without having to mortgage two houses to get it. With that said, it sounds like your missions are going to exceed the capacity of the -10 fairly frequently. For up to 4 adults and their associated stuff, the -10 is a clear winner. Not sure I would try to tackle four adults and two dogs.. It would get quite hairy (literally and figuratively).

Also, as far as building goes - if you want to be successful at it, you have to be building because you enjoy building. Building in an attempt to save $$ or with the sole motivation being the flying machine at the end of the road will not end well - you'll get frustrated at how slow the process goes and throw your cleco pliers in the air and stomp away saying "I want an airplane, not a canoe!"

 

[OneCharlieTango]

It’s going to depend partly on whether your sons with special needs are able to climb up into an RV-10.

But others have already told you the whole truth: Cherokee 6, Lance, A-36 Bonanza. You want those big doors.

Or keep the 182. Anything between those two options is wasted effort.

 

[handcuff]

Thank you for the opinions so far, guys. I appreciate it, and back-of-mind has been the thought "just fly the 182 while you figure it out" -
As a bit of additional information: My wife is ~140 and my sons are 135 & 165.
we may decide that the two youngers don't go with us everywhere (that sounds like bad parenting, but we've been the parents of two kids on the spectrum and we need time as a couple rather than as parents). They are both very physically capable - but we need to be able to have just ‘us’ time also.
we may decide that the dogs don't need to come
we may decide that speed isn't that important
I’m just trying to plan, and evaluate options (some of which I am not yet aware of, yet).
Finally, I enjoy building - I built my house (like, I swung the hammer, not joust the designer or GC) - but I think I will enjoy flying *more* than building and want to use my remaining time on this rock wisely.

 

[tspear]

Like others have said, stay with the C182 for now. If you get an older one, you will not lose much if you sell it. They have had a fairly stable value.
Among four seaters, once you have a bit more experience, there are a lot more options. e.g. Cirrus, Columbia, RV-10, Velocity, Mooney...

The only part that seems consistent in your description is you are mostly looking for a "travel" plane. For OpEx reasons, longer term you want a slippery plane which is very efficient.

Tim

 

[keen9]

I believe I’d do the assisted/accelerated build, but I know little about this. I’ve read really good things about Saint, but don’t know how it would work operationally – if they are assisting, how does that count against the 51%? How quickly does it typically get ‘done’ with an assisted build?

There is not any "accelerated" build with an RV. You can start with the quick-build kit, and places like Saint Aviation will help you, but building is going to be a big project even with the help. As others have said, build if you want to build an airplane, otherwise buy one.

 

[kyleb]

There is not any "accelerated" build with an RV. You can start with the quick-build kit, and places like Saint Aviation will help you, but building is going to be a big project even with the help. As others have said, build if you want to build an airplane, otherwise buy one.

There are more than a few places that will "help" you build an RV - especially an RV-10, since there's money to be made. Some of those places really, really push the limits and the builder mostly needs to write checks. I don't like that approach at all, but it is out there if you look.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Not much I enjoy more than buying airplanes with other people's money, so here goes.

The C182 is my go-to recommendation for the first airplane. Bonus, you already have it. Second bonus, it comes with an instructor! Keep it until you have your private and probably your instrument too. One of the reasons it's great is that it's very versatile, so you can use it to figure out what kinds of flying you like. I've had a 182 from the Midwest to the east coast, west coast, and gulf coast; to the highest and lowest airports in the US; on grass, pavement, and gravel; done a mountain flying course in it, and had a lot of fun with all of the above even if it is a bit slow for the fuel burn.

Right now, I own a Mooney M20R - And I'm 6'4" 325# so don't let anyone tell you it's "small and cramped". But while it is a wonderful machine - 175 KTAS on 12 gph, faster than the airlines for most trips east of the Rockies at a cost per mile lower than a 172 - it's not one that's going to meet your 4 people + 2 dogs mission.

Truthfully, it sounds like you need/want a 6 seat, comfy load hauler. That has PA32 (or PA34 if you want a twin) written all over it. Given that you're looking for some level of speed and efficiency, you'll probably want a retract. So, definitely take a look at the Lance or Saratoga, and for the Cessna equivalent, the 210.

None of these will be as cheap to go poke holes in the sky, but only you can decide how important that is compared to hauling a big load.

Another thing to consider - Since you have another pilot in the family now, if you do want to take everyone, you can use the C182 as well (presuming you can afford to not sell it to buy the next plane). Another option if you can afford two is to get a Lance or the like for traveling or larger groups, and something fun like a Citabria for poking holes in the sky by yourself.

 

[hindsight2020]

Lance would be a good spot. They're piggish in climb at gross (as most of these spam cans are), so turbo lance since we're dealing with other people's money.

 

[pilotrick]

Stick with the 182. Fly it and own it for a couple of years. After you get used to airplane ownership and flying yourself your entire perspective will change. You will realize for instance that the speed advantages the RV-10 has over the 182 don't really buy you much time in the real world. An extra 20 minutes of flight time is a drop in the bucket when considering any trip.

 

[tspear]

Stick with the 182. Fly it and own it for a couple of years. After you get used to airplane ownership and flying yourself your entire perspective will change. You will realize for instance that the speed advantages the RV-10 has over the 182 don't really buy you much time in the real world. An extra 20 minutes of flight time is a drop in the bucket when considering any trip.

Depends on how far fly you fly. Flying from home to my parents was a fairly normal trip for me. In the SR22, that trip was 2:30 to 3:15 in flight time depending on winds. In the SR20 I had many years ago, that same trip was between 3:30 and 5 hours (pushing the limit on the range for those flights). The KTAS of the SR20 is really a 135 knot plane the way I flew it, and the SRR was a 165 knot plane. So that 35 knots makes a huge difference.

In addition, the GPH has a huge impact on the cost to own and maintain the plane.

Tim

 

[pilotrick]

Depends on how far fly you fly. Flying from home to my parents was a fairly normal trip for me. In the SR22, that trip was 2:30 to 3:15 in flight time depending on winds. In the SR20 I had many years ago, that same trip was between 3:30 and 5 hours (pushing the limit on the range for those flights). The KTAS of the SR20 is really a 135 knot plane the way I flew it, and the SRR was a 165 knot plane. So that 35 knots makes a huge difference.

In addition, the GPH has a huge impact on the cost to own and maintain the plane.

Tim

I find this a little hard to believe. Where is home and where is mom and dad? In my experience most trips in general aviation planes with a family tend to do 2 hour legs. 3 hour legs are usually a stretch but at 5 hours you might as well just forget it. Someone's gonna have to pee.

 

[tspear]

6B6 for me, and 2G4 for my parents. Right though some of the busiest airspace on the east coast. So, you never get a straight route.
I grew up doing long road trips with my parents. I also started doing road trips with my kids when they were infants, way before I could afford to get my PPL. My family was used to driving from DC to Tampa with two stops for gas, food and bio breaks. Or DC to Montreal (ski trips) is ten hours by car, single stop is the norm. Or now, driving Boston to western MD, 10.5 hours, single stop is the norm. Four to six hours between stops is no issue for us.

Tim

 

[2-Bit Speed]

Don't know if you've done this, but if you have, just ignore me.

First thing is probably to look at the last 12 months of your life. Where have you gone? When and why did you go? Next thing would be to plan flight plans to each of those destinations in whatever aircraft you're considering. This way, you're not dreaming about things you think you might-maybe-possibly want to do, you're planning around what you have actually done. This should put the cruise speeds of the various aircraft into perspective and help you see how often you actually traveled with others (Thus seeing the real, non-imagined need for useful load and seat-count).

Now... since I'm spending someone else's money? Keep the 182 for solo trips and buy a nice twin for longer family-hauls. A nice, turbo twin.

 

[Kinder]

Stick with the 182. Fly it and own it for a couple of years. After you get used to airplane ownership and flying yourself your entire perspective will change. You will realize for instance that the speed advantages the RV-10 has over the 182 don't really buy you much time in the real world. An extra 20 minutes of flight time is a drop in the bucket when considering any trip.

However if you throttle the RV10 back to C182 speed you get a HUGE reduction in fuel flow.

 

[benyflyguy]

PA32.

The doors and seats on these are great for dogs and special needs kids.

 

[Rcmutz]

Buy, don’t build. You don’t have enough time.

Rent for now, if you have time, then fly the 182 and decide then if it’s too slow for you.

Get in the water, but go one foot at a time, just because you can. You don’t need to dive head first. Just an opinion on the internet. Enjoy your family!

Agree with this. Make sure the wife really does like flying before getting into the deep end of airplane ownership. You may find out it is just you 85% of the time. If it is still a go, I see 2 airplanes in your future… a PA 32 or Bonanza A36 and then something to bebop around on the weekends by yourself.

 

[AlphaMike]

Depends on how far fly you fly. Flying from home to my parents was a fairly normal trip for me. In the SR22, that trip was 2:30 to 3:15 in flight time depending on winds. In the SR20 I had many years ago, that same trip was between 3:30 and 5 hours (pushing the limit on the range for those flights). The KTAS of the SR20 is really a 135 knot plane the way I flew it, and the SRR was a 165 knot plane. So that 35 knots makes a huge difference.

In addition, the GPH has a huge impact on the cost to own and maintain the plane.

Tim

am I missing something here? Going from 165 to 135 knots added an hour to a 2.5 hour flight?

 

[flyingcheesehead]

am I missing something here? Going from 165 to 135 knots added an hour to a 2.5 hour flight?

On average, you'll have a 10-15 knot headwind. So, 150 knots and 120 knots. 450nm is then 3.0 in the SR22 and 3.75 in the SR20 if the whole flight is at cruise... But the SR22 will climb to cruise altitude faster which would make up the rest of the difference.

 

[tspear]

@AlphaMike

@flyingcheesehead nailed it.

 

[AlphaMike]

@AlphaMike

@flyingcheesehead nailed it.

So do you typically have a head wind in both directions? I know I seem too most of the time. I still don’t understand the math, but I’ve never flown an sr20 or 22. Sounds like the 20 has a very slow climb

 

[tspear]

So do you typically have a head wind in both directions? I know I seem too most of the time. I still don’t understand the math, but I’ve never flown an sr20 or 22. Sounds like the 20 has a very slow climb

Mathematically, you will have a headwind 75% of the time assuming you are flying in random directions. And this flying is along the eastern seaboard, where the winds are predominately from the west, so statistically the chance of a tailwind is likely even lower.

The 20's climb is not too bad unless at MTOW and getting above 6K feet or super hot.

Boston to western part of Maryland, you have two choices in a single (well, ATC will not stop you from going over the ocean but my sense of self-preservation will). Go over NYC or go farther west. To deal with NYC you are typically between 6-9K if going over NYC; if headed to the DC area this is fine, since the detour around Philly is not that bad headed to DC. If headed west, coming out of NYC you get some pretty massive detours around Philly plus a few altitude changes. (I have found Philly does not seem to like small planes, they really are not very accommodating, they bend over backwards to commercial traffic, but send us little guys all over the place.) What is actually the shortest time for me and to reduce altitude changes was to fly at 9-10K; and to take a route almost due west and bend southward to just miss Philly class B by a good 20-30 miles while staying far from NYC. Closer than that and under IFR, Philly ATC will usually want you to descend; if VFR you can ignore them or go over Philly.

Overall NYC/Boston Tracon are very good and will work with you. Philly, seem much more of the old man yelling "get off my grass" mentality.

Since I am fat, and rarely fly by myself, I was often at MTOW or very close to it. Therefore, in summer, I got used to effectively step climbing. Fly the first half hour at 3K, then a half hour or so at 6K, and finally get to cruise altitude. This actually made the trip much shorter time wise, and also reduced total fuel used.

Tim

 

[NordicDave]

The RV-10 will not meet your mission criteria. The useful load (~1050 on avg) and available cabin space aren’t there. FYI I have over 500 hrs in my 10 that I built. I suggest a 206/210, Cherokee 6, or the larger Bonanzas.

The 206 is worth a hard look. People don't always realize the 206 is dimensionally the same as a 182. I think it's actually an inch shorter. The 260hp fuel injected engine is great. The pre 86 206's are essentially fuel injected P.Ponk performance engine with 250-300 extra useable load as compared to the 182.

Unlike the 182 with its asymmetric fuel distribution, the 206 will reliably run LOP.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

So do you typically have a head wind in both directions? I know I seem too most of the time. I still don’t understand the math, but I’ve never flown an sr20 or 22. Sounds like the 20 has a very slow climb

Climb is a function of excess horsepower. It takes a certain amount of horsepower to fly, and while the SR22 is heavier than the SR20, it's not 50% heavier. The SR20 has 200hp, the SR22 has 310hp. I wouldn't necessarily classify the SR20 as a "very slow" climber, but it's moderate at best while the SR22 will climb quite well, among the better piston singles.

Now, headwinds. Yes, you'll typically have a headwind in both directions, and no, it's not just you. There's two reasons for that. For the purposes of this thought experiment, let's say you're traveling 400nm west, and then returning 400nm east, and you're flying a 200-knot airplane.

1) The direct headwind/tailwind scenario: Let's say the winds aloft are out of the west at 25 knots. On the westbound leg, you'll be getting 175 knots over the ground and your flight time will be 2.285 hours. On the eastbound leg, you'll be getting 225 knots over the ground, and it'll take you 1.777 hours. The total trip will thus take you 2.285+1.777 = 4.062 hours, whereas if there were zero wind it would be 4 hours on the dot. The reason this happens is because you'll be exposed to the headwind for a longer amount of time than you'll be exposed to the tailwind, so even if there is no change in the winds whatsoever, the tailwind will never make up for the headwind.

2) The direct crosswind scenario: Now, let's say the winds are out of the north at 40 knots. This means you'll need to crab into the wind to maintain your course. The westbound leg, you'll be flying a heading of 281.54 degrees and eastbound you'll be flying a heading of 078.46 degrees. In both cases, you'll be crabbed into the wind 11.54 degrees, and your resulting groundspeed will be 196 knots in both directions. Even though it's a crosswind, not a headwind or tailwind, the fact that you have to point your nose slightly into it means you'll be going slower over the ground, so the net effect is the same as if you had a 4-knot headwind in both directions.

Now, in reality you rarely have a direct headwind, tailwind, or crosswind, especially for an entire flight, but it's these effects mixed together that result in the average groundspeed of an aircraft always being slower than its cruise speed in the long term.

This can get really fun in the flight levels in the winter. Here's what it looks like when you're flying a TBM in cruise with a 194-knot crosswind:

 

[handcuff]

Don't know if you've done this, but if you have, just ignore me.

First thing is probably to look at the last 12 months of your life. Where have you gone? When and why did you go? Next thing would be to plan flight plans to each of those destinations in whatever aircraft you're considering. .... This should put the cruise speeds of the various aircraft into perspective and help you see how often you actually traveled with others (Thus seeing the real, non-imagined need for useful load and seat-count).

Now... since I'm spending someone else's money? Keep the 182 for solo trips and buy a nice twin for longer family-hauls. A nice, turbo twin.

I appreciate this thought exercise, so thank you! I believe (outside the covid envelope) that's kind of what I was thinking - how can a family plane help us in being more efficient with our travels. We travel as a family to places that are ~8-12 hour drive (each directions) with the boys, normally 4-8 times per year (we owned a couple cabins in Gatlinburg TN). During covid, I was battling cancer and we shaved our travel down significantly. I'm 3 years post chemo, so we are starting to travel again. Two of the boys have moved out and are starting their own families, but the other two will stay with us...I don't exactly know what to expect, but am assuming that 'travel' to places in TN for mountains/Northeast for skiing/FL for the beach are still on our radar.

I've already looked at the twins. Not a high likelihood, but I keep having to throttle back my enthusiasm.

Thanks again!

 

[Racerx]

Congrats on whipping cancers ass.

 

[handcuff]

Not much I enjoy more than buying airplanes with other people's money, so here goes.

The C182 is my go-to recommendation for the first airplane. Bonus, you already have it. Second bonus, it comes with an instructor! Keep it until you have your private and probably your instrument too. One of the reasons it's great is that it's very versatile, so you can use it to figure out what kinds of flying you like. I've had a 182 from the Midwest to the east coast, west coast, and gulf coast; to the highest and lowest airports in the US; on grass, pavement, and gravel; done a mountain flying course in it, and had a lot of fun with all of the above even if it is a bit slow for the fuel burn.

Right now, I own a Mooney M20R - And I'm 6'4" 325# so don't let anyone tell you it's "small and cramped". But while it is a wonderful machine - 175 KTAS on 12 gph, faster than the airlines for most trips east of the Rockies at a cost per mile lower than a 172 - it's not one that's going to meet your 4 people + 2 dogs mission.

Truthfully, it sounds like you need/want a 6 seat, comfy load hauler. That has PA32 (or PA34 if you want a twin) written all over it. Given that you're looking for some level of speed and efficiency, you'll probably want a retract. So, definitely take a look at the Lance or Saratoga, and for the Cessna equivalent, the 210.

Your suggestion is in tight alignment with my initial (and continuing) thoughts - continue on with the 182 through my IFR, using my son as the instructor. Then make the decision regarding other planes.

When thinking about the 'build' option, I just wanted to get the opinion of others if I should "start building NOW, so it's ready for me when I'm done with my instructions/license/certifications & ratings" or if I should wait to start building - I figured the answer was 'wait' but I have a bit of a polaroid mentality about things and figured I may be able to use others' opinions to convince my wife that buying an RV-10 NOW was a great choice. =)

I actually DO want a 6 seat, but I want it at the efficiency of a 4 seat, and the speed of a small jet. Not likely to happen, though.
In reality, I want to know what others think and how people with similar family situations view their mission/strategy for airplane ownership. I'm guessing that there aren't a lot of other ppl with 2 special needs kids, but I teenage kids as filling the same criteria - I could leave them home for a period of time with some supervision, but usually will think of taking them with me. I don't have enough experience to be wise about these situations yet, so figure it's best to listen to others who have much more experience/wisdom.

 

[tsts4]

I’m looking hard at the CompAir 6.2 as a replacement for my RV-10. Sat in the prototype at SnF and have stopped by their operation in Titusville and Merritt Island. They should be out of Phase I by Osh and ready to publish real-world performance numbers. Anyway, it fills your squares so might be something to look into. https://compairenterprises.com/comp-air-6-2/

 

[Racerx]

Your suggestion is in tight alignment with my initial (and continuing) thoughts - continue on with the 182 through my IFR, using my son as the instructor. Then make the decision regarding other planes.

When thinking about the 'build' option, I just wanted to get the opinion of others if I should "start building NOW, so it's ready for me when I'm done with my instructions/license/certifications & ratings" or if I should wait to start building - I figured the answer was 'wait' but I have a bit of a polaroid mentality about things and figured I may be able to use others' opinions to convince my wife that buying an RV-10 NOW was a great choice. =)

I actually DO want a 6 seat, but I want it at the efficiency of a 4 seat, and the speed of a small jet. Not likely to happen, though.
In reality, I want to know what others think and how people with similar family situations view their mission/strategy for airplane ownership. I'm guessing that there aren't a lot of other ppl with 2 special needs kids, but I teenage kids as filling the same criteria - I could leave them home for a period of time with some supervision, but usually will think of taking them with me. I don't have enough experience to be wise about these situations yet, so figure it's best to listen to others who have much more experience/wisdom.

Build an rv14. Buy a Lance...or a Seneca. I'd suggest a Bo, but you might find them a little tight. I love shoulder room.

 

[tspear]

@handcuff

Congrats on beating cancer back!

Tim

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I actually DO want a 6 seat, but I want it at the efficiency of a 4 seat, and the speed of a small jet. Not likely to happen, though.

Efficient single-engine 6 seater at the speed of a small jet? Well, if you can afford it, that has "TBM" written all over it. $5 mil for a new 960, or there's a used 700A for $1.5M right now. Dunno about the performance of the 700, but the 900 series is good for around 320 knots at around 52-55 gph up high.

 

[Mongoose Aviator]

Keep the 182 for solo trips and buy a nice twin for longer family-hauls. A nice, turbo twin.

If you can [realistically] afford the twin then you can probably also afford to keep the 182.

@handcuff - Do you already have a medical done or will there be difficulties that will push you in a particular direction in terms of which aircraft will fit with your medical path?

 

[CJones]

When thinking about the 'build' option, I just wanted to get the opinion of others if I should "start building NOW, so it's ready for me when I'm done with my instructions/license/certifications & ratings" or if I should wait to start building - I figured the answer was 'wait' but I have a bit of a polaroid mentality about things and figured I may be able to use others' opinions to convince my wife that buying an RV-10 NOW was a great choice. =)

I think the challenge is that it will be an 'either/or' rather than 'both' when looking at training vs. building. Should you read a few pages on IR weather stuff OR go squeeze the rivets for the pieces you prepped the night before? So in reality, trying to split time between both tasks will end up extending the timeframe for completing each of them.

Don't get me wrong - I love the RV-10 and have travelled all over the place in it, but just want to make sure you're taking into consideration the time suck that building is - especially if you're building it away from home where you can't sneak away for 10-15 minute tasks in the basement/garage when you have a chance. And it sounds like you're looking more for a way to travel SOON rather than a 1-2 year timeline for being able to do so.