That’s very wise from you Medewok.
Take them on a short flight on a nice day (easier said than done, I know 
), in an airplane you know.
Somebody told me, never go on a flight where you’ll have to manage 2 special/new variables. Like new type and bad weather, or new type and family on board.
Then you have 2 strategies :
Personally, I would take option A, but it is up to you.
It is not that you are too young for the TB20, it just requires time, money and dedication. I guess staying current is hard enough for you.
Myself, with my limited means, I prefer being very current on the 172, take friends and do small trips, than taking new ratings and types … I guess someday it will change.
@MedEwok, probably a good decision. What I don’t really understand in your decision making process is the ‘need’ for a TB20. A C172 is way good enough for a trip like that, people fly these things around the world, ya know! It doesn’t make sense to complicate your flying for no good reason at all. Sure, a TB20 is a nicer a/c, goes faster and flies further. But – it’s still an SEP, so you don’t really gain anything other than speed over a C172 (and, perhaps, an autopilot, but your C172 may well have one).
172driver wrote:
What I don’t really understand in your decision making process is the ‘need’ for a TB20. A C172 is way good enough for a trip like that, people fly these things around the world, ya know! It doesn’t make sense to complicate your flying for no good reason at all. Sure, a TB20 is a nicer a/c, goes faster and flies further. But – it’s still an SEP, so you don’t really gain anything other than speed over a C172 (and, perhaps, an autopilot, but your C172 may well have one).
There was no need in a strict sense of the word. I looked for a four-seater and the TB20 was actually initially the most easily accessible one, requiring no club membership or anything similar and with very good rental conditions (no minimum billing hours per day!). I underestimated the difficulty of flying this kind of plane when all I had flown previously was a very benign and much more modern (especially ergnomically) two seater with Rotax 912 engine (the Aquila A210).
Now that I’ve flown the C172 I must say it beats the TB20 in a lot of ways that are important to me at this stage of flying, such as simplicity, very forgiving handling characteristics and it is actually roomier which is important when carrying the family and assorted stuff. Of course it looks less elegant and is about 30 kts slower at the typical VFR altitudes.But it is also 50% cheaper to rent, so there’s that. I’m sure I’ll have another go at the TB20 later in my flying life, but for the initial family trips the C172 should serve nicely.
There is nothing special about a TB20. It has no dodgy handling and generates no surprises. Obviously landing it is a “bit different” from say a C152 but nothing you can’t learn in a few landings.
The only real difference is that flying at 140-150kt requires a different mindset to flying at 100kt. Flying at 100kt, where most PPL training is done, you fly to the airport you want to land at, and gradually close the throttle and land Flying at 140-150kt, you need to think ahead. If I am at say 5000ft AAL I start about 30-50nm away and do a gradual descent, reducing the power and in the last 5-10nm reducing the speed also (by trimming back). You need to be below 130kt to drop the gear and Flap 1 and that provides further braking. But it’s quite easy because a TB20 cannot go too fast to do damage, unless you are full throttle or descending. It isn’t a 200kt plane with a Vlo of 130kt… But any ~150kt+ plane has to be flown like that: by planning ahead. If you arrive with 3nm to run and still doing 150kt, you will never get down. These planes are flown “by the numbers” as they say here.
For low level VFR trips the TB20 won’t do anything a C172 won’t do, however. Well, looking up some C172 figures e.g. here the TB20 has way more payload – around 500kg of fuel and contents. It’s a plane which can be filled to full tanks nearly all the time, which gives you 2x to 3x the useful range of a C172.
Currency is very important and the less you have the simpler plane you want to be flying, and the slower you want to be flying it
MedEwok wrote:
Now that I’ve flown the C172 I must say it beats the TB20 in a lot of ways that are important to me at this stage of flying, such as simplicity, very forgiving handling characteristics and it is actually roomier which is important when carrying the family and assorted stuff.
The TB20 has much higher wing loading than the C172 which makes for a smoother ride in turbulence. This is something that I would consider quite important when flying with family or pax in general. On nice summer days there is almost always thermal turbulence.
MedEwok wrote:
By character I fall squarely into the second half but reading EuroGA I often get a nagging feeling that I’m not doing enough thinking through situations beforehand.
It’s called lack of experience. The more experience you have, the less you have to think. You intuitively know what you can do, you know how you handle things and so on, and don’t bother your head with thinking about unnecessary stuff. Particularly stuff like will I or will I not handle the flight with this or that aircraft and with my family on board. There is nothing wrong with taking it step by step, on the contrary, it’s good airmanship.
Look at it this way. With more experience you wouldn’t bother asking all these questions about the merits of this little trip. You would just do it, or you wouldn’t, and it would take you less than a second to decide.
Generally a good decision on many points but also one you have to be careful it won’t be defining for the future. What I have noticed also for myself recently is that this whole risk discussion and working in the field of accidents and incidents tends to undermine my own confidence to the point where I have been wondering if I ever will get back to flying.
Currency is everything. The less you fly or do anything which requires particular skills the less confident you become as things start to become so abstract that you wonder how you managed it ever. I flew as P2 the other day for the lack of a better description to a difficult mountain field and we both had been doing a lot of thinking about it. It was a non event. So why did we think it to death almost? Lack of currency.
Overthinking is another problem. Thinking through and planning is one thing. That is the operational stuff and practical things too. But then come those things which really make you stop doing things rather than help you. And I am afraid that asking if you should do something or not in a forum almost always will produce a flood of ’you’re gonna die’ posts which will not encourage but stop most people.
In the end, only doing things make you confident that you can. Talking about them steals confidence.
MedEwok wrote:
General lack of currency after not flying for six months (until Feb 2018)
You should fly more often. Seriously. No excuses. For a proper currency, consider 50-80 hours per year as a good figure. You won’t be gaining experience with these large gaps between your flights, and if you want to be properly able to fly a TB20 with retractable gear, constant speed and high cruise speed, you need more flying hours and less gaps inbetween. So you either fly the the 172 alone, at least bi-weekly (!), or you take the TB20 with an instructor a couple of times and fly that one alone then. But don’t always take an FI with you. They tend to micromanage, they fumble with the controls and avionics, they tune in frequencies and so on, which means you don’t learn it. Fly alone, more often, and get used to the responsibility for yourself.
EuroFlyer wrote:
You should fly more often. Seriously. No excuses. For a proper currency, consider 50-80 hours per year as a good figure.
No excuses eh? You obviously don’t have a family with two little kids, a wife sceptical about flying and a demanding job with lots of shift-work and overtime. Nor do you need to rent your plane with restricted availability.
Sorry but at this stage in life 50-80 hours a year is just unrealistic.
I do not for a second doubt your good intentions. You are certainly right that my skills and currency, thus safety, would benefit a lot from flying 50 to 80 hrs year. But this is no problem of lack of will, rather, life gets in the way.
Also, 80 hours equals one net (monthly) salary for me (@200€/hr), quite a lot I would think.
Relax, I didn’t want to sound cocky, all I’m saying is, in the situation you’re in (which I am still in as well, although the kids are a bit older now), take a smaller plane, and fly more often, to stay in practice ;) Maybe 30 will do. Shift work, two little kids, a sceptical wife (like mine) is a challenge to that and to many people. Yet, you still can do it and gain practice and keep it up. I told my wife flying is what I like, it’s what I need to do to stay happy, and she had to accept it, just as I accept her hobbies. It’s not selfish. There is a life beyond the pampers.
