New BasicMed regs questions

I see this sort of post a lot on this forum.

There is a whole lot of "that won't work" and "you can't do that" and "you can't afford it" that seems rather knee-jerk from a variety of sources here.

What is there for small family travel that you can't get from a Malibu? A Twin Comanche with tip tanks? A newer Bonanza w/ tip tanks?…
There’s a whole lot of utility in light GA that comes with a whole lot of risk and compromise because physics often collides with emotion and/or ego.

The key to light GA is understanding what compromises have to be made. FrEx, schedules. The emotional argument is I this $750K aviation appliance so we can travel like we do in the SUV, only go farther for the weekend.

We’ll just blast off Friday after work and be back Sunday evening because work/school/etc. on Monday. There’s been plenty of blood spilled in that decision over the decades, most recently, I think about the in flight breakup of the Bonanza in Tennessee.

Winter overcast in the northeast could have no impact when driving. That becomes an icing issue because you have to climb/descend thru it and the freezing level is low enough. From a risk perspective, you’re risking your family on a wet wing, a system that isn’t foolproof, in a plane that’s at the edge of it’s operating weight, but little Bobby has a math test in the morning and Bob the senior just wants to get a good night’s sleep so he can drop the kids at school on his way to work Monday and it just really isn’t convenient to slip a day for better weather and we don’t want to cancel because everyone’s been looking forward to this trip for so long. But it’s also too expensive to have standby airline tickets and we have the plane to avoid the airlines, anyways.

The less you compromises you want to make, the more you move toward something that burns kerosene, because they’re designed to do those things from the outset. That’s usually a SETP today, but could be a pressurized piston single or twin correctly configured.

But ice weighs a lot. That requires more horsepower to overcome. And disrupts airflow over the wings. If you don’t get the wet wing early enough, physics wins. If the system hiccups, physics wins. If ice accretes faster or for longer than the system can handle, physics wins. All those wins is why most light GA FIKI systems are in place to get you on the ground as quickly as possible, not so you can slog it out over 500nm to get home.

Aviation decision making starts on the ground. You’re the one who voluntarily chooses to launch. Do you do so eyes wide open or eyes wide shut?

Me? When I put any pax onboard, I’m liable for getting them back on terra firma in the same condition or better than when we took off. The risk I accept isn’t mine, it’s theirs.

Imagine if I started my pax brief with “The icing forecast indicates we’ll likely encounter some light icing and that means we have to hope the system works right or we will may die in a crash. Would you still like to go forward with this, because remember also we heat the plane with the engine exhaust system do there’s a chance we could also suffer from carbon monoxide poisoning that impacts our ability to recognize we’re getting ice on the wings?

But if all that works out, we’ll be flying at night and unless the windscreen flashes over, I’ll need you to keep a flashlight pointed at the wing to watch for ice since we only have 45mins worth of goop available and our flight is planned for 3hrs.”

Now Bobby Jr thinks this sounds like an adventure, so he’s on board. Good thing the six-year old’s mom isn’t here because she’d actually understand what I said and she gets mad enough when I let him cross the street without holding my hand, so all’s good.

Meanwhile, the good missus doesn’t even know the pilot is testing actuarial table of the life insurance policy that likely excludes death in a light GA plane as a covered event.

IBM presents You Make The Call.
 
"that will haul my family comfortable 1,000+NM non-stop" That screams turbine, either a fast one or a slower one with a large cabin and lavoratory.
 
There’s a whole lot of utility in light GA that comes with a whole lot of risk and compromise because physics often collides with emotion and/or ego.

The key to light GA is understanding what compromises have to be made. FrEx, schedules. The emotional argument is I this $750K aviation appliance so we can travel like we do in the SUV, only go farther for the weekend.

We’ll just blast off Friday after work and be back Sunday evening because work/school/etc. on Monday. There’s been plenty of blood spilled in that decision over the decades, most recently, I think about the in flight breakup of the Bonanza in Tennessee.

Winter overcast in the northeast could have no impact when driving. That becomes an icing issue because you have to climb/descend thru it and the freezing level is low enough. From a risk perspective, you’re risking your family on a wet wing, a system that isn’t foolproof, in a plane that’s at the edge of it’s operating weight, but little Bobby has a math test in the morning and Bob the senior just wants to get a good night’s sleep so he can drop the kids at school on his way to work Monday and it just really isn’t convenient to slip a day for better weather and we don’t want to cancel because everyone’s been looking forward to this trip for so long. But it’s also too expensive to have standby airline tickets and we have the plane to avoid the airlines, anyways.

The less you compromises you want to make, the more you move toward something that burns kerosene, because they’re designed to do those things from the outset. That’s usually a SETP today, but could be a pressurized piston single or twin correctly configured.

But ice weighs a lot. That requires more horsepower to overcome. And disrupts airflow over the wings. If you don’t get the wet wing early enough, physics wins. If the system hiccups, physics wins. If ice accretes faster or for longer than the system can handle, physics wins. All those wins is why most light GA FIKI systems are in place to get you on the ground as quickly as possible, not so you can slog it out over 500nm to get home.

Aviation decision making starts on the ground. You’re the one who voluntarily chooses to launch. Do you do so eyes wide open or eyes wide shut?

Me? When I put any pax onboard, I’m liable for getting them back on terra firma in the same condition or better than when we took off. The risk I accept isn’t mine, it’s theirs.

Imagine if I started my pax brief with “The icing forecast indicates we’ll likely encounter some light icing and that means we have to hope the system works right or we will may die in a crash. Would you still like to go forward with this, because remember also we heat the plane with the engine exhaust system do there’s a chance we could also suffer from carbon monoxide poisoning that impacts our ability to recognize we’re getting ice on the wings?

But if all that works out, we’ll be flying at night and unless the windscreen flashes over, I’ll need you to keep a flashlight pointed at the wing to watch for ice since we only have 45mins worth of goop available and our flight is planned for 3hrs.”

Now Bobby Jr thinks this sounds like an adventure, so he’s on board. Good thing the six-year old’s mom isn’t here because she’d actually understand what I said and she gets mad enough when I let him cross the street without holding my hand, so all’s good.

Meanwhile, the good missus doesn’t even know the pilot is testing actuarial table of the life insurance policy that likely excludes death in a light GA plane as a covered event.

IBM presents You Make The Call.
Yeah, you're right.

GA is not something anyone should get involved in.
 
Yeah, you're right.

GA is not something anyone should get involved in.

Read what you want, I clearly stated light GA is a great tool but like any tool, compromises are made, both is design and in operation.

What compromises anyone makes and what risks they accept are their choices.
 
If OP's considering a Malibu, I don't think he's too worried about paying for college.
I've been considering a Malibu (not a Meridian mind you) and I'm very much worried about paying for college.
 
Years back, the Bonanza infamously and incorrectly became known as the Doctor Killer. More accurately, 'Schedules' were more responsible for the moniker. It is part of what has kept me from getting my PP certificate until later in life. I know myself well enough that, flying in my own plane as a means of cross country travel, my work schedule would be too tempting of an incentive to made bad decisions when it comes to weather/fatigue.
 
Does anyone regularly do 5 hours in a car without stopping?
Yes, I do it on a regular basis. We make a drive between Wisconsin and North Carolina multiple times each year, in one day. We stop twice for fuel (both people and vehicle), and that's about it; it can be done with one stop, but you're pulling into the destination with a completely empty gas tank.

We drive because it's a lot less hassle than flying commercial, and we can carry stuff (and pets) that you wouldn't trust with the airlines. A 5-hour stint in a small plane would be far preferable to 11-12 in a car. The commercial alternative generally involves a stop in ATL, MSP or DTW, plus hour-long drives at each end, so the GA option would be the fastest alternative (even if we had to stop for fuel halfway).
 
Last edited:
Does anyone regularly do 5 hours in a car without stopping?
Yes. Quiet, air conditioned, super comfy and adjustable seats, one with built in seat massagers, driving aids like adaptive cruise control and lane keeping makes 5 hrs easy-peasy.
I find most light GA planes significantly less comfortable than any modern car
Concur, for all the things above that the 172 doesn’t have. Autopilot (we don’t have) is super helpful to reduce active workload, but does nothing for all the other environmental factors.
 
Yes, I do it on a regular basis. We make a drive between Wisconsin and North Carolina multiple times each year, in one day. We stop twice for fuel (both people and vehicle), and that's about it; it can be done with one stop, but you're pulling into the destination with a completely empty gas tank.

We drive because it's a lot less hassle than flying commercial, and we can carry stuff (and pets) that you wouldn't trust with the airlines. A 5-hour stint in a small plane would be far preferable to 11-12 in a car. The commercial alternative generally involves a stop in ATL, MSP or DTW, plus hour-long drives at each end, so the GA option would be the fastest alternative (even if we had to stop for fuel halfway).
You do that with little kids? I couldn't even sell that to my teenagers.
 
You do that with little kids? I couldn't even sell that to my teenagers.
With little kids, there's not really a way to do it as they're going to need to go to the bathroom/diaper changed/fed at about the 2.5-3 hour mark. However, if you drive at night, it is often possible to pull it off and once they get to be eight or nine, that is an easy stretch with judicious management of beverages (kind and frequency). My parents used to do it a lot with eight of us kids in the car, ranging from baby to teenagers - and I even remember it fondly somehow, even though I probably could still sing a whole CD's worth of children's songs backwards from listening to it over and over one vacation! The driving got a lot easier once the youngest got to be five or six for sure.
 
You do that with little kids? I couldn't even sell that to my teenagers.

We’d tell the kids we’re going to wherever is 5hrs away and let them know we’d tell them when we were 45mins from out from a stop or getting there. If they needed to go to the bathroom, they needed to tell us early because it might take a while to find one.

They loaded up on books to read, music to listen to, and when portable DVD became a thing, had one of those with individual screens.

What we did not do was load them up with caffeine and sugar in their daily lives, much less on a trip. To this day my son doesn’t do any sodas of any type and he’s 30.

Everybody’s different, but long road trips were part of our life when we had kids. We made it fun, laid out our expectations, and if somebody needed to stop, we honored it. The kids were more excited to get there than they were to stop and it worked for us. Primarily because they slept a lot of the way.
 
You do that with little kids? I couldn't even sell that to my teenagers.
When the kids were younger, we did it in a 35' class A motorhome. SUPER easy. Grabbing lunch or a bathroom break was literally a 1 minute stop. Plenty of games, entertainment options, space for each kid, refrigerator, etc.

The only downside was that I did 100% of the driving. It was worth it.
 
When the kids were younger, we did it in a 35' class A motorhome. SUPER easy. Grabbing lunch or a bathroom break was literally a 1 minute stop. Plenty of games, entertainment options, space for each kid, refrigerator, etc.

The only downside was that I did 100% of the driving. It was worth it.
So what's the GA equivalent of a 35' class A motorhome? And a 1 minute lunch/bathroom break?
 
With little kids, there's not really a way to do it as they're going to need to go to the bathroom/diaper changed/fed at about the 2.5-3 hour mark. However, if you drive at night, it is often possible to pull it off and once they get to be eight or nine, that is an easy stretch with judicious management of beverages (kind and frequency). My parents used to do it a lot with eight of us kids in the car, ranging from baby to teenagers - and I even remember it fondly somehow, even though I probably could still sing a whole CD's worth of children's songs backwards from listening to it over and over one vacation! The driving got a lot easier once the youngest got to be five or six for sure.
Did your parents stop every 3 hours? Also 8 kids in the car. Dad's rule every year driving Chicago to Salt Lake was "the car stops when it needs gas. You figure out the rest." This is why I am able to do a 10 hour Atlantic crossing commercially without getting up out of my seat.

:rofl:
 
Did your parents stop every 3 hours? Also 8 kids in the car. Dad's rule every year driving Chicago to Salt Lake was "the car stops when it needs gas. You figure out the rest." This is why I am able to do a 10 hour Atlantic crossing commercially without getting up out of my seat.

:rofl:
Only during the day and only when the youngest was under two. During those years, we'd drive a lot at night and then we drove until the baby woke up or the car needed gas, whichever came first. Once we all were over the age of two, the average time between stops rose over 4 hours, closer to 5 most of the time. I think our record, though, was about 6.5 hours in a middle-of-the-night leg when my dad joined a convoy of semis and just drafted behind them for hours.

It was a requirement that everyone use the facilities every time we stopped for gas even if you didn't think you had to, and if you needed to stop later and you were the only one...it could be quite an adventure getting in and out of the vehicle after it was packed and between that and the time wasted on an extra stop, let's just say you were not very popular. There was a lot of peer pressure to learn how to hold it. :lol::lol:
 
It was a requirement that everyone use the facilities every time we stopped for gas even if you didn't think you had to
“Go to the bathroom before we get in the car (or airplane.)”
“I don’t have to go.”
“Go anyway.”

Before Facebook, my younger brother was going to build a website that the family could post pictures on, etc. Never actually happened, but we determined that GoBeforeWeLeave.com was available. :biggrin:
 
Only during the day and only when the youngest was under two. During those years, we'd drive a lot at night and then we drove until the baby woke up or the car needed gas, whichever came first. Once we all were over the age of two, the average time between stops rose over 4 hours, closer to 5 most of the time. I think our record, though, was about 6.5 hours in a middle-of-the-night leg when my dad joined a convoy of semis and just drafted behind them for hours.

It was a requirement that everyone use the facilities every time we stopped for gas even if you didn't think you had to, and if you needed to stop later and you were the only one...it could be quite an adventure getting in and out of the vehicle after it was packed and between that and the time wasted on an extra stop, let's just say you were not very popular. There was a lot of peer pressure to learn how to hold it. :lol::lol:
Next question. Were you like us and counted off after every stop? Had to make sure we were all in. :happydance:
 
Next question. Were you like us and counted off after every stop? Had to make sure we were all in. :happydance:
Pretty much - my parents called by row and you were responsible for alerting them if your seat buddy/buddies were missing from your row. We never left anyone behind, so I guess it worked!
 
I guess you all liked each other. I would have seen this as an opportunity to ditch a sibling... :devil:
I mean, most of the time...but also, my parents were a lot scarier when I was a kid than they are now. :biggrin:
 
So on the original question of what’s the best basic med 1000 mile airplane considering the new rules that will be enacted soon for a young family of 4.

I believe it depends on what compromises you’re willing to make. And how much you’re willing to spend.

As mentioned many twin Cessnas would meet the new basic med rules (all 340s would, 414s and 421s might if you stc to 7 seats I believe they were originally certified for 8)
Also there are many other options like Barons, Dukes, Navajos, Aerostars, Malibu, or a TBM that would meet the new rules too. But it’s a compromise on one thing or another.

In my case I have taken my family on many 1,000+ mile trips (with stops). We used to do this in a Turbo 182 RG and now have a Cessna 310. We’ve done this as my family has grown to now an infant, 3 year old and 6 year old.
Once we get flying everyone settles in and 4 hour legs seem to work the best. I have done a few 6 hour legs before but that gets pretty long.

Weather is always a consideration and all GA airplanes have limitations here so you do need to have some flexibility in your plans, that said I’ve usually been able to make a trip work within a day of our original plan.

Back to the best airframe question, it’s going to be a compromise no matter how you look at it. For me the 310R was the best choice. It’s been reasonable to purchase, fly and maintain, and does all the things I needed it to do. I would consider my 310 a good comfortable 700-800 mile non stop airplane, but could stretch it to 1,000 if I fill it up and want to stay in the air that long.
A 414 or TBM would be more comfortable and do some things better but they would have their catches too and do cost more.
 
KFRG-KMYR-OLBEC-KMIA puts a stop halfway between Long Island and Miami with legs of about 500 nm and no long segments with your feet wet. Your entire family will be happier (and be able to afford better colleges) if you get the best plane for the 500-mile mission and enjoy lunch somewhere like Myrtle Beach when you make the longer trips.
Great reply! Thank you. I agree on that 500 mile mission.
 
Back
Top