Aviathor wrote:
I think you are a little harsh on Mooney_Driver. He meant well. And some of the things he wrote are a direct consequence of what you wrote and the way you portrayed yourself, so please give him a break.
Let’s assume you are correct and “the things he wrote are a direct consequence of ……the way you portrayed yourself” Fair enough but, according to Peter, 1000 people read what I wrote but Mooney_driver was the only one who felt the need to be obnoxious.
Compare Mooney_driver’s approach to Michael who asked “care to develop this part? What is causing so much anxiety”. That is how to keep threads from descending into flame wars.
He deserved what he got.I hope it keeps him more polite in the future.
Peter wrote:
“VFR routes”? Gosh that is even more backward than the school(s) I went to, and that is really saying someCould you explain what you mean? Are VFR routes retarded? For the avoidance of doubt I am talking about, for example, DG ND BJ PL which is a stunningly beautiful route between Cannes and Aix les Milles and starts at Draguignan.
Just to finish the story of the VFR routes: on my next trip I dutifully ploted a route via what seemed the obvious reporting points, and the FI said “no, you don’t want to do that…just fly straight across country to the LUC VOR and follow the river valley into Le Castellet.”
I am normally pretty good at pattern matching but I have yet to devine the general principle of VFR routing in this area. 
@tinfoilhat One thing I forgot, when you go try an aeroplane for a size, don’t forget your bike. Because that could prove to be a problem. And only you know what kind of compromises are you willing to do. I can only tell you that there are transport cases you can put a bike into. It’s more hassle, but it’s an option.
As for the deicing. As I wrote, it’ll seriously limit your options. Since you plan on upgrading in a few years, I could probably skip it in your position. I’m not suggesting you fly into something nasty on purpose. But you can get it where you don’t expect it. So i would like at least a deiced prop. To buy me some time. Your only option to get rid of the ice is to descend to warm air (well, you could also climb, but I don’t think that option is relevant here). Which might not be a good option (it’s cold down there, you’re above mountains, etc.). You can definitely do IFR without deicing, it has been done. That is just my preference. I think I’m disciplined enough to turn around when I should but saying the thought of icing on approach is uncomfortable is an understatement.
I have never heard of VFR routes. You can fly VFR in any airspace B C D E F G and you need ATC clearance to do it in B C D (speaking of Europe). You can generally do it non-radio in E F G, IIRC. So basically you can fly “anywhere” where the airspace class is OK, and keeping out of “prohibited” areas.
There are indeed recommended VFR routes e.g. the ADRIA1 route down the Adriatic, along the Croatian coast, but nobody has to obey that.
BTW, a general comment on the thread:
Everybody is going to recommend the plane they love
If one was to stick to objectivity as far as possible… remember that in GA everything is a compromise and many of the compromises are really severe. Much more severe than most of the compromises one has to make in life generally.
For example a plane with full TKS will sell for some 20k more than the same one without. I have seen this on TB20s. And the stuff makes a big mess. It’s bad enough on my prop-only TKS; I normally try to fly through some cloud (above 0C) after using it, to get the droplets off as far as possible. The full TKS system makes a much bigger mess.
A turbo engine delivers a lot of high altitude performance, and typically the ceiling goes up from FL200 to FL250, but it is pointless for low levels, pointless for VFR unless you fly over mountains, and (many dispute this, but evidence is hard to come by) there is significantly more downtime. One pilot I know personally was grounded for 6 months at one stage. The engines are far more likely to suffer cracked cylinders, cracked exhausts, and turbo expertise is generally more scarce in Europe (which was the reason for the 6 month downtime mentioned).
I bought my TB20 in the same point where you are i.e. VFR and wanting to go IFR at some future point. The one thing I might do differently is to get full TKS, but I would not buy a turbo (TB21) based on what I know now. A big disclaimer: I have prop-only TKS which also protects the front window. I would never want to lose that.
Remember every 20k extra you pay is 20k less you have to spend on keeping it going. If I was to choose the one factor most critical to flying enjoyment, it is being very comfortable financially. I see too many people stretch themselves to the limit to fly (unsurprisingly since flying is pretty addictive ) and then at some stage they have to either massively downsize or just give up.
The best de-icing strategy is to stay out of ice, but as you say that is impractical. My only experience with carb icing was on a warm, sunny evening in the UK.
Structural icing is not the same as carb ice, BTW.
Peter wrote:
A turbo engine is pointless for low levels, pointless for VFR unless you fly over mountains
I beg to differ
A Turbo offers a much better take off performance under hot & high conditions, on short grass fields, brings you on top (which is more comfortable, especially on hot summer days) also on shorter flights, gives you a completely different aircraft in the flightlevels (yes, also achievable VFR ) etc. etc.
However I agree concerning complexity and hence (a little more) downtime.
I beg to differ
I beg to differ too :-) To have a “hot and high” problem with an SR22 NA with 310 hp, you really need a lot of heat and height. I have flown it + 36 C (more like 40 over the runway) this summer and I never needed more than 400 m to get airborne, maybe 450 once or twice when there was no wind …
on short grass fields
Not unless you overboost quite a bit
Okay, I have to concretise my post on aircraft below 300 hp 
Peter wrote:
Structural icing is not the same as carb ice, BTW.
You know, when I wrote that I thought some pedant is going to point out that structural icing is not the same as carb icing. I am a low time PPL but I was paying attention in ground school
I was just pointing out that….oh never mind…sigh!
Peter wrote:
Not unless you overboost quite a bit
As said already – only Level 4 English
I meant the negative influence under hot and high are not that significant, ESPECIALLY on grass.
