Too much airplane for you

[ArrowFlyer86]

Often times you'll hear people thinking about upgrading aircraft and say things like "I want more speed, more seats, more useful load, a turbo..."

I'm curious about the reverse. Have you ever flown in an airplane and been like "this is TOOOOO fast" or "this is too big!" or "TOOOOO complicated!" or "too dangerous".

I know it goes against everything in the Y chromosome to admit it. But I'm wondering if anyone's hopped in a prospective aircraft and decided "noooooo way, this is too much".

 

[WDD]

Not too dangerous, too fast, etc., but after flying a 182 retract, I decided the complexity of a retract just wasn't something I wanted to deal with. Wanted the simplicity of a fixed gear.

I also know I don't want the speed and complexity of a multi if that adds anything.

 

[ArrowFlyer86]

Not too dangerous, too fast, etc., but after flying the 182 retract, I decided the complexity of a retract just wasn't something I wanted to deal with. Wanted the simplicity of a fixed gear.

I also know I don't want the speed and complexity of a multi if that adds anything.

Curious - Was that decision on the 182RG from the maintenance POV or the pilot operations POV? Both?

 

[WDD]

Curious - Was that decision on the 182RG from the maintenance POV or the pilot operations POV? Both?

A 182 retract can get stupid expensive with maintenance. Insurance costs on a retract is a lot. Bonus: In 5 years or so, at my age probably wouldn't get insurance. And yeah, in back of my mind I'm thinking what if I don't get three green lights one day when setting up for a landing. And always the chance I'd do something stupid and not pull that lever down when I should have.

 

[ArrowFlyer86]

A 182 retract can get stupid expensive with maintenance. Insurance costs on a retract is a lot. Bonus: In 5 years or so, at my age probably wouldn't get insurance. And yeah, in back of my mind I'm thinking what if I don't get three green lights one day when setting up for a landing. And always the chance I'd do something stupid and not pull that lever down when I should have.

Totally fair. Especially on the insurance angle.

Someone posted recently about their 182 retract gear costing an unconscionable amount to get fixed. Made me wanna vomit.

 

[texasclouds]

a man has got to know his limitations…

 

[ArrowFlyer86]

a man has got to know his limitations…

Some men know they can't handle a 195..
*Single tear drop

 

[Gilbert Buettner]

We were talking about this on a flight today in an Arrow with a guy who needs five hours with a CFI for his insurance. I remembered moving from Green Bay to Eau Claire back in the 70s and wanting to rent a Piper Arrow at what was then Gibson Aviation.

FBO guy: "Do you have any time in retractable gear airplanes?"

"Yeah. 90 hours in a T-37, 120 hours in a T-38, about 1250 hours in a C-130... but only about 80 hours in a Piper Arrow."

FBO guy: "Ah... OK."

 

[Jim K]

I think you can get used to anything. When I first flew the Lance I was afraid I screwed up. Couldn't see anything with that big nose, and everything seemed to happen so fast. Now it feels completely normal, and when I get into a Skyhawk or Archer it feels like slow motion. I presume that stepping up to even bigger/faster aircraft would go about the same.

I suppose there comes an age where that slower plane would be a better match to your reaction time. I also think there might be value in small steps as opposed to going straight from a SR-20 to a TBM. That seems to be where guys get into trouble. How big of a step is appropriate is a good question. I felt like my Dakota (PA-28-236) time helped with the Lance transition, but the Lance isn't really all that far removed from an Archer.

@SixPapaCharlie how was it going from the Comanche to a E175? That's an actual big transition. Do you think your twin time was valuable, or is the jet completely removed from piston planes?

 

[Rockymountain]

Speed and complexity require more pilot. Pilots come in many flavors, and even pilot of one flavor vary from day to day week to week and year to year in their depth of flavor. My gut feeling from observation over the years is that some people know when they’re in too much plane, and some are oblivious just promoting themselves to failure. Personally, I like to have a buffer around me when flying. so happy with a little less speed and a little less complexity than I am capable of.

 

[Racerx]

Not airplanes... But in cars I'm too stupid to know my limits.

 

[deyoung]

Not airplanes... But in cars I'm too stupid to know my limits.

Curious - why is one fundamentally different from the other for you?

 

[35 AoA]

Curious - why is one fundamentally different from the other for you?

I wont speak for racerx, but in my personal opinion, there is a much smaller menu of ways to maim/kill yourself in a car than an airplane. Though probably much more commonly ordered, in a car.

 

[Flocker]

Often times you'll hear people thinking about upgrading aircraft and say things like "I want more speed, more seats, more useful load, a turbo..."

I'm curious about the reverse. Have you ever flown in an airplane and been like "this is TOOOOO fast" or "this is too big!" or "TOOOOO complicated!" or "too dangerous".

What about too expensive?

 

[iamtheari]

I know of a pilot who decided after a few hours of dual in an LSA that it was too much airplane for him. I know of other pilots whose awareness of their limits lagged behind the decision to simplify (such as from a retract to fixed gear).

I hope to be like the former when the time comes to get out of twins and taildraggers and into a fixed tricycle gear single that you get in and out of without climbing onto the wing and slide-hopping from one seat to another.

 

[schmookeeg]

I turo'ed a Model X plaid edition, and yeah, that was too much for me.

Haven't done that with planes yet, but that probably says more about the inadequate width of my checkbook.

 

[Let'sgoflying!]

All the airplanes I flew after the C150/152/172 felt exactly like that for the first ~10 hours.
With training and experience, the feeling faded.

 

[Bell206]

But I'm wondering if anyone's hopped in a prospective aircraft and decided "noooooo way, this is too much".

FWIW: While I’m sure in a few cases the “too much” figured into it, most of my past customers that either up graded or looked into it had more issues with the aircraft abilities or added costs for those abilities vs their ability to fly it. Some went as far to buy the upgraded aircraft, then ended up selling within a short timeframe and going in a different direction.

 

[bonefishpete]

Curious - Was that decision on the 182RG from the maintenance POV or the pilot operations POV? Both?

The juice not worth the squeeze for the speed gain. Engine is good except for the dual mag.

More speed is always desirable.

 

[midlifeflyer]

Have you ever flown in an airplane and been like "this is TOOOOO fast" or "this is too big!" or "TOOOOO complicated!" or "too dangerous".

Not yet (30+ types of singles), but I have definitely flown in airplanes in which I knew that I'd need more dedicated instruction before I would fly it solo and/or some solo time before I felt comfortable.

 

[WDD]

Another thought. Going down in performance can be tricky as well.

I flew with a safety pilot in a club 172 who was an airline pilot. He had several hours with a CFI to kick the rust off of flying a Skyhawk. Good pilot, but even he needed to get acquainted with with lighter wing loading, no automation, etc.

And….. LSAs. Given the light wing loading, these can be harder to fly, less stable than your typical Skyhawk or Cherokee.

 

[midlifeflyer]

And….. LSAs. Given the light wing loading, these can be harder to fly, less stable than your typical Skyhawk or Cherokee.

That's definitely true. Many flight schools with traditional aircraft require longer checkouts for the LSAs. Personally, when I check someone out in an LSA, I will not sign them off unless we have had significant crosswinds. I'm not talking about exceeding the max demonstrated crosswind component; even half can be a challenge for someone used to a heavy aircraft like a 152.

 

[HPSL]

My wallet protects me from making poor decisions.

 

[texasclouds]

Some men know they can't handle a 195..
*Single tear drop

It’s not for the faint of heart. Not for todays trainer trike pilots following the magenta line flying so high they can’t see the cow’s legs. You see there was a time when men were men. They flew behind a Shaky Jake radial with the wing up high and the little wheel where it was intended to be. They flew just high enough to read the water towers and low enough to wave at the train conductors while they traversed this great land following two America Steel tracks.

 

[ArrowFlyer86]

Another thought. Going down in performance can be tricky as well.

I flew with a safety pilot in a club 172 who was an airline pilot. He had several hours with a CFI to kick the rust off of flying a Skyhawk. Good pilot, but even he needed to get acquainted with with lighter wing loading, no automation, etc.

And….. LSAs. Given the light wing loading, these can be harder to fly, less stable than your typical Skyhawk or Cherokee.

Whet I met a delta pilot who was working as a Hurricane Hunter in Curacao (he was there flying a HH mission), he said exactly this. He was so accustomed to flying bigger aircraft that he said he was afraid to hop back into a 172 and fly for fun. His exact words were: "I'ts been so long -- I'm afraid I'd touch down hard enough to snap the gear off".

 

[Ed Haywood]

My wallet protects me from making poor decisions.

Strong post.

 

[WDD]

It’s not for the faint of heart. Not for todays trainer trike pilots following the magenta line flying so high they can’t see the cow’s legs. You see there was a time when men were men. They flew behind a Shaky Jake radial with the wing up high and the little wheel where it was intended to be. They flew just high enough to read the water towers and low enough to wave at the train conductors while they traversed this great land following two America Steel tracks.

Ah yes. Land where you like, jump out and kill something for dinner and cook it under your wing while fighting off bears hand to hand. Women get the vapors and swoon when you swagger into a saloon with your goggles and leather flying helmet.

 

[Ed Haywood]

Ah yes. Land where you like, jump out and kill something for dinner and cook it under your wing while fighting off bears hand to hand. Women got the vapors and swooned when you swaggered into a saloon with your goggles and leather flying helmet.

Don't forget Indian raids.

 

[Kevin Holbrook]

I had a 180hp 172 that I thought was just "OK." Thought about upgrading to faster, retract, sexier, etc, but never did. Then, at the height of the bubble a few years ago, someone asked to buy it. I threw out a "go away" price. Which they took. Crazy money.

Bought the Comanche I always wanted. It was too much plane, at first. With a lot of focused training, I'm now comfortable flying it.

But I miss the 172 and wish I had it back. Everything was just simpler, I flew just for fun a lot more. I love the Comanche for my trips, but never just go out and fly it for fun.

Plus insurance is 3X the cost, maintenance is higher, etc.

Looking to downsize...

 

[texasclouds]

Ah yes. Land where you like, jump out and kill something for dinner and cook it under your wing while fighting off bears hand to hand. Women got the vapors and swooned when you swaggered into a saloon with your goggles and leather flying helmet.

That’s right friend. It was kill to survive and men thrived. Well some of them did. The others grew their hair out and started flying low wing trikes. Those guys actually got the pretty girls, but we don’t talk about that.

 

[Jim K]

I had a 180hp 172 that I thought was just "OK." Thought about upgrading to faster, retract, sexier, etc, but never did. Then, at the height of the bubble a few years ago, someone asked to buy it. I threw out a "go away" price. Which they took. Crazy money.

Bought the Comanche I always wanted. It was too much plane, at first. With a lot of focused training, I'm now comfortable flying it.

But I miss the 172 and wish I had it back. Everything was just simpler, I flew just for fun a lot more. I love the Comanche for my trips, but never just go out and fly it for fun.

Plus insurance is 3X the cost, maintenance is higher, etc.

Looking to downsize...

@cowtowner told me a similar story. He bought a Columbia 400 for business travel. Loves the plane, but said he misses having a cheaper, less thirsty plane for those breakfast runs.

"There are no solutions, only tradeoffs"

 

[ArrowFlyer86]

@cowtowner told me a similar story. He bought a Columbia 400 for business travel. Loves the plane, but said he misses having a cheaper, less thirsty plane for those breakfast runs.

"There are no solutions, only tradeoffs"

One of the reasons I like that new $70k single-person spirit airplane so much is because of that kind of mission. While it ain't that involved to pull the Arrow out of the hangar and get it going, I find the idea pretty enchanting of a cheaper, easier-to-move, 3gph, low+slow, fly 1k AGL, taildragger for those sorts of missions.

Even for going some place like my routine flights to MI. Even though my current plane isn't a speed demon, there's times where I get to Michigan and I feel almost disappointed because I only got an hour of flight time.

 

[ArrowFlyer86]

That's definitely true. Many flight schools with traditional aircraft require longer checkouts for the LSAs. Personally, when I check someone out in an LSA, I will not sign them off unless we have had significant crosswinds. I'm not talking about exceeding the max demonstrated crosswind component; even half can be a challenge for someone used to a heavy aircraft like a 152.

I can understand that.

For me LANDING my training aircraft, the Remos G3/GXs, required a lot more skill than what I graduated into. With the LSA you feel every single knot of crosswind as you float too far down the runway losing rudder authority. With the cherokees/arrows you can be seriously sloppy and still scratch out a decent landing. Both a blessing and a curse since it can give way to bad habits!

On the flip side FLYING the P28R is only incrementally more difficult/involved than an LSA. Sure you have a couple extra buttons and levers, but assuming you can read a slightly longer POH and deal with aforementioned buttons/levers, it's dead simple. To me it's funny that the airplane is labeled "complex"

 

[Jim K]

there's times where I get to Michigan and I feel almost disappointed because I only got an hour of flight time.

You know you can throttle back, right?

I hear you though. I feel silly when I'm solo burning 15gph. And the lance is fun to fly, but not fun to  fly. I'm thinking the RV will solve both of those issues. Pretty long & expensive road to get there though.

I was very convinced i wanted to move up to a Seneca, but watching @NealRomeoGolf with his, a twin is much more involved and expensive than I thought. Maybe once the rv is done and I can get a bigger hangar.

Otoh, I know a guy who has a vision jet and flies it like it's a 182. Young eagles, breakfast runs. Then he also goes across the country at 30k feet. It works just fine at low altitudes if you can stomach the fuel burn.

 

[Clip4]

A 182 retract can get stupid expensive with maintenance. Insurance costs on a retract is a lot. Bonus: In 5 years or so, at my age probably wouldn't get insurance. And yeah, in back of my mind I'm thinking what if I don't get three green lights one day when setting up for a landing. And always the chance I'd do something stupid and not pull that lever down when I should have.

As far as aircraft maintenance, more stupid expensive maintenance dollars are spent by pilots who fail to push the red knob forward when adding power than not putting the gear lever down. One gets a lot of attention, the other not so much.

 

[WDD]

As far as aircraft maintenance, more stupid expensive maintenance dollars are spent by pilots who fail to push the red knob forward when adding power than not putting the gear lever down. One gets a lot of attention, the other not so much.

The problems caused by failing to push the red knob forward are the same on a retract vs straight leg. You just get to add retract problems on top of that with an RG.

Apples to apples, a retract vs a straight leg is going to have more maintenance. The 182 retract is even more so. Additional maintenance, additional inspections. Additional Repairs will be needed. Saddles on the main gear will crack (club spent over $30,000 to get used parts from Canada). Same plane last December had a nose gear that didn't want to come down. Between the repairs to the plane, new prop, engine tear down, it was out for over six months. And even with the insurance, was expensive.

 

[schmookeeg]

It’s not for the faint of heart. Not for todays trainer trike pilots following the magenta line flying so high they can’t see the cow’s legs. You see there was a time when men were men. They flew behind a Shaky Jake radial with the wing up high and the little wheel where it was intended to be. They flew just high enough to read the water towers and low enough to wave at the train conductors while they traversed this great land following two America Steel tracks.

Dang. Liked and Subscribed.

 

[Daleandee]

Another thought. Going down in performance can be tricky as well.

I flew with a safety pilot in a club 172 who was an airline pilot. He had several hours with a CFI to kick the rust off of flying a Skyhawk. Good pilot, but even he needed to get acquainted with with lighter wing loading, no automation, etc.

And….. LSAs. Given the light wing loading, these can be harder to fly, less stable than your typical Skyhawk or Cherokee.

Probably one of the strangest incidents ever investigated:

 

[midlifeflyer]

Sure you have a couple extra buttons and levers, but assuming you can read a slightly longer POH and deal with aforementioned buttons/levers, it's dead simple. To me it's funny that the airplane is labeled "complex"

It's the additonal buttons and levers that led to the complex definition; mostly that one lever.

 

[Kitch]

I thought I wanted to upgrade to a twin so I went and got my ME rating. It was a ton of fun and a great learning experience. I also learned enough to know I don't want a twin as much as I thought I did. While I felt comfortable flying the twin I didn't want to get into a situation where flying wasn't fun based on cost alone. (fuel, MX, insurance etc)
My 206 is a ton of fun to fly and does the majority of our missions very well, and it will get in and out of places a twin won't.