My checklist for the 172 sits neatly between my ears. 
Yes, I think many checklists are OTT (or not really check lists but “to do lists”).
My ME instructor in the US was a senior MD-11 first officer at the time. His philosophy is if they can get the MD-11 checklist onto a single laminated sheet of A4 (well, “legal paper”, since this is the US) then the checklist for an Apache ought to also fit on a single laminated sheet, too.
Of course you have amplified procedures in a folder, but for the actual day to day running, the order of the day was a flow and then check the very concise checklist.
Our Auster is even simpler, the checklist is a small printed card stuck to the panel. The Auster is about the same complexity as a Cessna 172 really – there’s no reason why you can’t do the same with any typical single engine fixed gear fixed pitch prop type.
On the original article (which concerned checking the flaps) I think it is on many types worth checking them. It’s not that the probability of non-deployment is particularly high, however, it does allow you to look at the structure that’s normally hidden. We do have the advantage with ours that no one will ever forget to put them back up after the preflight because the flap lever partly blocks the pilot’s side door when it’s down so you’ll struggle to get in the plane if you’ve forgotten to retract them!
My ME instructor in the US was a senior MD-11 first officer at the time. His philosophy is if they can get the MD-11 checklist onto a single laminated sheet of A4 (well, “legal paper”, since this is the US) then the checklist for an Apache ought to also fit on a single laminated sheet, too.
Sounds right to me, except in my plane I use a small plastic multi-page folder that I could put in my shirt pocket.
“Legal Size” is substantially bigger than your A4, the closest ANSI size would be ANSI A or Letter Size. Then ANSI B is two As, C is two Bs, D is two Cs etc. For those of use who like to review engineering drawings on paper, C-size (four As) works well 
If all else fails, I won’t forget CIGARS any time soon, and it works for my simpler #2 plane.
Cigars?
I only have a pre-takeoff checklist TTMPFFHCDLAT which is in my head. Everything else tends to flow from what you are doing. It is a fairly simple aircraft though. The list built up over the years through the various things I’ve forgotten to do at one time or another.
I saw one I liked the other day, in a post on a different forum. It was “MP3”. Mixture, Propeller, 3 [green]. I like it. I could agree that for some aircraft, including an “F” somewhere in there for fuel pump, would be wise, as I tend to forget them from time to time. For most single engine GA aircraft, that would do it. Anything else either is not that important, or you’re going to notice it (forgetting flaps on final, for example – you’re gonna know!)
I more use paper checklists when flying unfamiliar aircraft, particularly pre start, pre takeoff, and shut down. Not so much for a safe flight, but to prevent damaging the engine or other system (like a hot start). In flight, I try to use “Configuration assurance” for everything. Have I assured that the aircraft is in the configuration for the next thing I’m going to do in it? If I don’t understand what that aircraft requires to be in that configuration, I’m in real trouble! So, presuming that I do understand what the configuration should be, it’s pretty easy to go around the cockpit, and check everything. If I’m flying something unfamiliar, I may use a paper checklist to aid that assurance. But, if it is that unfamiliar, I’m lacking training, if I cannot figure out configuration.
A checklist is just that – a list of items to check. It is not a shopping list or instruction book! Airmanship and competence are what keep you flying the aircraft as it should be flown, the checklist is just an assurance tool. If you are using the checklist as an operating instruction for the aircraft, you’re in over your head!
With only two exceptions which come to mind, I am quite opposed to operators making up their own checklists for aircraft, where the aircraft manufacturer has provided one with the flight manual. The one in the flight manual is “approved”, and thus has passed evaluation for being complete, yet appropriately brief. Unless the operator has the authority to approve a flight manual, they should leave that to the authorities who do. The exceptions I see to this would be a unique environmental operating difference where the aircraft is operated, which might be some special action or checkpoint unique to that airport, or the case where the aircraft is equipped or modified in a way which requires additional or different operating steps than the flight manual checklist specifies. Other than that, fly it the way the manufacturer built and documented it, and the authority approved it!
An operator might choose to adopt a standard operating procedure, and I can go along with that – the pilot is obligated to follow it. But, if it so complex that it requires a checklist to be used in flight to assure the SOP is followed, something is wrong.
The owner of the highly modified 182 amphibian I’m working on, has asked me to draft a checklist specific to that aircraft, which I am doing, because there are so many modifications to this aircraft, and a few gotcha’s, that it is justified, but it will be brief, and I will train him a lot. There will be an “amplified procedures” section in the flight manual supplement, which will describe “the shopping list”, but the checklist will only be “safety” items.
Checklists are being used as liability protection for manufacturers and operators, who are not able to assure pilot competence. It’s “well we gave him paper to read”, where in another era, it would have been “we trained him”. Now, you can go and buy a new Cessna Citation, jump in, and fly it away. Hopefully, you read the instructions, but no one forced you to. In past eras, anyone flying an aircraft that complex was doing so within an organization, who controlled training. You just did not fly until you were trained. Once trained, the checklist was just that, not an operating instruction for the aircraft. If you went to fly the 172 away from Wichita, they’d just let you – what could go wrong?
