what do I need to know about buying a new experimental airplane?

[Ken Ibold]

I try to think the best of people. But the more I read, the more this just sounds like intellectual masturbation.

 

[max_reason]

Not necessarily. Unfortunately as an instructor that used to be more full-time in the light sport side of things I used to hear a lot of very passionate dreams like this from otherwise rational seeming individuals. Some of them were very successful businessmen who just thought they could make it work like some accountant’s balance sheet. I humored a few, too to my own regret. There was this guy that said he owned three taildraggers and finally wanted to get legal and he seemed like he could talk the talk... when it came to flying, it was quite scary, but I tried to let him prove himself wrong. That part wasn’t sooo very scary as it maybe could have been, but he couldn’t hold centerline to save his life. He took me to the edge several times and I would take it back but then an FAA guy later questioned me why I was letting a student get that far (I thought I was doing my job as a line of defense in this case). My belief at the time was that this particular student who did hold a pilot certificate wasn’t ever going to be “safe” to solo in tailwheel because of his hazardous attitudes and lack of ability to accurately self-evaluate and I had to let him figure that out within my comfort zone and I will say he *kept* taking it to the edge. I sent that guy home without an endorsement with a very good conscience. There were others that this thread reminds me of even more...

Just one question. Have you ever met ANYONE who could self-evaluate reasonably well?

I mean someone who did something significant in life. Anyone? Or is this impossible for human beings?

I have had my pilot certificate for decades. Back when I flew a lot, I mostly did bush flying to spots that 99% of pilots would never go... period. However, to be fair, I worked up to those kinds of places slowly. Start with a bunch of easy places. Then several a little more difficult. And so forth, and so forth... until I reached the point where I decided "the risk of going further would be too high".

I guess what amazes me most is the attitude that just because some humans are incapable of making reasonable judgements, therefore every human is incapable. Just read this thread and you will find that people pretend to know the case about me without knowing me at all, without knowing my history, without knowing my attitudes or skills, without knowing anything specific. Which leads me to believe they believe that no human can self-evaluate. Is that what you believe? Just curious.

 

[max_reason]

I try to think the best of people. But the more I read, the more this just sounds like intellectual masturbation.

If you read my posts, you'd know I've been a scientist, engineer, INVENTOR and product developer my whole life.

Do you know what INVENTION is? It is fairly accurate to say invention is mental masturbation. After all, what you are considering DOES NOT EXIST... until you make it exist. Then it is real. Then it is not mental masturbation. Then it becomes an everyday reality.

So you know what? I agree. But I've gone through this a great number of times in my life. Sometimes I decide "no go" and drop it. Other times I carry it all the way through and make it real, make it happen... and enjoy the results.

Most people are not inventors, and do not think like inventors. That's okay, somebody needs to just turn the crank or poke the buttons on what inventors create.

But know this. So-called mental masturbation can and has led to some good things. Go ahead and discount it all you wish. I'm sure that's exactly what people did to the guy who already flew this same kind of airplane around the world twice, once in each direction. And he had to fly these same long range hops over the south pacific that I'm planning. And he accomplished some other feats too, ones that I won't try. So know this. He had to go through his mental masturbation too... before he did it for real.

Good thing for him that he planned before he jumped... I mean flew.

 

[RyanB]

I'm still confused. Did you come here for advice or just to spew your theories? I'd imagine offering advice to someone who has everything figured out, is as good as talking to the wall next to my desk. I'm concerned about the attitude that you approach this idea with.

 

[RyanShort1]

Just one question. Have you ever met ANYONE who could self-evaluate reasonably well?

In every circumstance, no. In many relevant circumstances, yes. Some people are demonstrably better than others.

I mean someone who did something significant in life. Anyone? Or is this impossible for human beings?

Yes, but most of those people, like Jimmy Doolittle, Charles Lindberg, Bob Hoover, Eric Brown, Steve Hinton, etc... have all worked their way to success and also demonstrated reasonable humility and good decision making. You're not in that category yet by a long, long shot.

I have had my pilot certificate for decades. Back when I flew a lot, I mostly did bush flying to spots that 99% of pilots would never go... period. However, to be fair, I worked up to those kinds of places slowly. Start with a bunch of easy places. Then several a little more difficult. And so forth, and so forth... until I reached the point where I decided "the risk of going further would be too high".

That sounds good, but somehow all that experience doesn't seem to have taught you important and relevant information related to your future Pipistrel. For someone with as much experience as you seem to claim, I'm also surprised that you don't approach this with a more healthy skepticism. I'm probably less skeptical than most here of the Pipistrel's capabilities, but I still see big glaring holes in your posts. I've also got my own concerns about your ability to properly research. I'll score you a notch for coming here to ask, but take that notch away for not listening well.

I guess what amazes me most is the attitude that just because some humans are incapable of making reasonable judgements, therefore every human is incapable. Just read this thread and you will find that people pretend to know the case about me without knowing me at all, without knowing my history, without knowing my attitudes or skills, without knowing anything specific. Which leads me to believe they believe that no human can self-evaluate. Is that what you believe? Just curious.

Nope, but I think you've definitely got a hazardous attitude towards a multitude of experienced individuals who think you're going to be a person being searched for by the Coast Guard if you make it that far.

 

[max_reason]

you mention the fuel, in liters of course to tick us all off. GALLONS!

Anyway, what is the oil consumption on that bad boy over a 17+ hour continuous flight? Do they have "oil bladders."?

Please reply in Quarts.

I apologize. Being that I've been a scientist and engineer for decades, I had to switch myself into metric for most purposes. In most of my posts I give both metric and non-metric measures, but not everywhere. For that I apologize. Note that the manufacturer of the airplane is in a region where the only measuring system is metric, so the basic specs are metric, and anything else is an afterthought in parentheses.

I don't know the exact oil consumption, but I have to believe every engine is a little different. I did ask a fellow who flies this exact same airplane with the exact same engine (but without extreme range tanks), and he said I would not need to worry about burning too much oil on an 18 hour flight. However, that's not a specific answer. Truth is, I value and believe actual experiments much more than theory or specifications. Which is why, if you've read all my posts here, you'll see that I intend to get those answers from flights I take in my own airplane in the 6 months or so before I try flying across 3800km of ocean. Though, it looks like the longest leg I need to fly the south pacific is 3000km (or perhaps a bit shorter by the time I finish my research). OTOH, if I actually do fly California to Hawaii... there is no way to shorten that flight, other than landing on an aircraft carrier or cargo ship.

I never heard of oil bladders. Though I'm 95% sure I won't need a larger oil reserve, it should be possible to install a larger oil container in the airplane. Thanks for adding that extra thought to my list.

 

[max_reason]

Here is what I don't understand. You're looking at buying a new factory built airplane that will cost well north of $100k. You intend to do something with this airplane it really was not designed to do. There are plenty of certified airplanes available that cost the same or less and are much better suited to what you intend and will be able to do the task with a much better margin of safety. Why this airplane when there are so many others that can do the job better for similar money?

Please list the best examples of those airplanes that you know of. Unless you're talking used airplanes, I don't know of any others capable of 5000km non-stop flights. Note that I say 5000km even though the furthest I need to fly is 3800km, because 5000km includes a reasonable safety margin. Well, some people think that margin is reasonable, others don't. My maximum budget is $200K including everything (options, shipping, etc).

 

[max_reason]

You're asking questions but don't seem to like the answers you're getting. So I don't expect this to have any impact or sway you, but I'm going to say it anyway. Trying cross an ocean VFR is nothing short of idiotic. Instrument ratings exist as to plenty of airplanes that can legally operate IFR. It ain't rocket science or uncharted territory, get an instrument ticket and get an airplane that can legally fly instruments or don't do it.

Because here's the thing, its all well and good if you don't care whether you end up as a corpse in the ocean. But should that happen, people will be obligated to look for you and will therefore be forced to put themselves in harms way due to your poor choices. Any way you slice it, that ain't cool.

If you read all my messages, you'd know that I am considering getting IFR rating. You'd also know from the list of avionics in my first post, that I'm only missing one or two items for the airplane to be fully IFR capable. The one item I know I'm still missing is the gizmo to enable ILS.

However, if GPS and autopilot can get someone to the point they are below clouds and somewhere close to a reasonable approach to a runway, my (so far untested) guess is, that would be sufficient to save my bacon in 95% of instances. OTOH, I have to add the disclaimer that I've never flown an airplane with GPS, moving maps, synthetic vision or autopilot before... so this assumption is still theory awaiting some trial runs (which obviously I would do before trying the real thing over 3800km of open ocean).

My plans included GPS, moving maps, synthetic vision, autopilot and more. What I figured was, though I might have to become briefly "illegal" in the worst of cases, having a GPS-guided autopilot would prevent the most probable causes of disaster long enough to get through and below clouds to make a VFR landing.

Out of curiosity, how much time is required to get IFR training? And for anyone who really knows (probably a flying instructor, or someone who is thoughtful and not defeatist), how many times will full IFR training and certificate let a pilot save his bacon... when GPS, moving-maps, synthetic vision and autopilot will not let a pilot save his own bacon? In the case of my situation, where I infer there will be boatloads of islands with boatloads of runways that do not have ILS equipment, I have a feeling that knowing how to save ones own bacon without ILS equipment might be more valuable than full-bore IFR training that relies upon ILS equipment at the airport. Note that this may not be true within the 48 states and Canada and a lot of places, but there are thousands of small islands in the south-pacific, many dozens of which have airports, airstrips, runways and/or other suitable places to land... but no ILS equipment. Of course there are a dozen or so island that do have ILS, but what about everywhere else? In such an environment, which skill is more likely to help a pilot save his bacon? The obvious answer is BOTH skills, but out of curiosity, which one is likely to be more valuable?

One more question... a poll of sorts, for anyone to answer.

What is most likely to lead to my death in the island flying I have described:

#1: Run out of fuel, leading to a crash into the ocean.
#2: The engine fails, leading to a crash into the ocean.
#3: Pilot falls asleep, leading to a crash into the ocean.
#4: Pilot drinks then flies, leading to a crash into the ocean.
#5: Turbulence rips off tail or control surface, leading to crash into the ocean.
#6: GPS/avionics/navigation fails, leading to fuel exhaustion and crash in the ocean.
#7: Inability to stay out of IMC, leading to pilot loss of control and crash into the ocean.
#8: This moron of a pilot deserves to die, so god crashes his airplane into the ocean.
#9: Some other reason... please state.

I am actually being serious here. Though some people post sensible messages warning about specific worries they have, others just say "you are insane" or equivalent but do not say why they think my plans are absurd. I'm curious what everyone thinks, because this gives me specific items to think about and hopefully find reasonable mitigation or solutions for.

 

[TCABM]

...I say 5000km even though the furthest I need to fly is 3800km, because 5000km includes a reasonable safety margin.

You repeatedly make two points. You need a 5000km range and Lenarcic already took a Pipistrel around the world.

Looks like his longest leg was 2400km, yours is 58% longer without reserves and 100% further with.

He used a Sinus motor glider. Is this the model you desire to purchase?

 

[RyanShort1]

One more question... a poll of sorts, for anyone to answer.

What is most likely to lead to my death in the island flying I have described:

#1: Run out of fuel, leading to a crash into the ocean.
#2: The engine fails, leading to a crash into the ocean.
#3: Pilot falls asleep, leading to a crash into the ocean.
#4: Pilot drinks then flies, leading to a crash into the ocean.
#5: Turbulence rips off tail or control surface, leading to crash into the ocean.
#6: GPS/avionics/navigation fails, leading to fuel exhaustion and crash in the ocean.
#7: Inability to stay out of IMC, leading to pilot loss of control and crash into the ocean.
#8: This moron of a pilot deserves to die, so god crashes his airplane into the ocean.
#9: Some other reason... please state.

I am actually being serious here. Though some people post sensible messages warning about specific worries they have, others just say "you are insane" or equivalent but do not say why they think my plans are absurd. I'm curious what everyone thinks, because this gives me specific items to think about and hopefully find reasonable mitigation or solutions for.

My concerns would be in this order:

1. Getting the plane legal
2. Getting good training
3. Accurate practice

Then:
1. Pilot stamina / endurance / conditioning
2. Running out of fuel in headwinds
3. Unexpected weather
4. Mechanical issues

If you could get a Pipistrel legal to do stuff, especially if it could actually get certified to do stuff, that would be awesome and a lot of us would tip our hat to you in a big way. A Standard Category Pipistrel would be awesome.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

Please list the best examples of those airplanes that you know of. Unless you're talking used airplanes, I don't know of any others capable of 5000km non-stop flights. Note that I say 5000km even though the furthest I need to fly is 3800km, because 5000km includes a reasonable safety margin. Well, some people think that margin is reasonable, others don't. My maximum budget is $200K including everything (options, shipping, etc).

I am in fact talking used airplanes. As for the rest of your post, can't comment, no idea what a km is.

 

[max_reason]

I'm still confused. Did you come here for advice or just to spew your theories? I'd imagine offering advice to someone who has everything figured out, is as good as talking to the wall next to my desk. I'm concerned about the attitude that you approach this idea with.

I came here for advice. Primarily I came here for practical advice about things like... what category is most appropriate for my purposes ("experimental xyz" or what)?

However, some people decided they'd rather throw rocks rather than answer my questions or offer thoughtful advice. Both you and I must put up with the rock throwing (and my attempts to explain what I can) along with the helpful and thoughtful results. Know that I have no control over what people post in reply. I can't make people helpful or thoughtful.

I am FAR from having everything figured out. That's why I posted the original message in the first place. However, I have been thinking about this plan, and researching some aspects of this plan for several years... since this plane with sufficient fuel efficiency and large fuel tanks and price-within-my-means came onto the market. Which means, I HAVE thought through some parts of this project. And so, when someone posts a comment that relates to a part of the project that I have researched or thought about a lot, I state what I've found out along with my thoughts to this point. But even then, if someone has information or experience I don't, I'm ready to listen, even about aspects that I thought I had considered sufficiently.

Exactly what aspect of my attitude bothers you? Before you answer, go read my posts (at least from today), because I explain that in considerable detail.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

Thanks for the attempt to make people think this is a fake thread. Is that also what you told the guy who flew this same airplane around the world twice?

Did he do it VFR in a light sport?

 

[RyanShort1]

Did he do it VFR in a light sport?

Motorglider, but there are light sport registrations of basically the same plane. Like I said, I'm generally a Pipistrel fan, I just wish I could get one in Standard Category.

https://www.pipistrel.si/news/flight-around-the-world-weexpedition
https://www.pipistrel.si/extras/ext...-flew-around-the-world-and-set-a-world-record
https://www.flyingmag.com/pipistrel-virus-proves-efficiency-around-world
https://www.total-slovenia-news.com...top-in-1st-all-female-flight-around-the-world

 

[Juliet Hotel]

Motorglider, but there are light sport registrations of basically the same plane. Like I said, I'm generally a Pipistrel fan, I just wish I could get one in Standard Category.

https://www.pipistrel.si/news/flight-around-the-world-weexpedition
https://www.pipistrel.si/extras/ext...-flew-around-the-world-and-set-a-world-record
https://www.flyingmag.com/pipistrel-virus-proves-efficiency-around-world
https://www.total-slovenia-news.com...top-in-1st-all-female-flight-around-the-world

Interesting but doesn't change my opinion that trying to cross an ocean VFR is a bad idea. Also might be worth pointing out out that glancing at the links it seems none of those people attempted to go from California to Hawaii. Could it be even they thought it was a bad idea?

 

[Ravioli]

Have you thought about the Pipistrel sponsored STC for a Rotax Hydrogen engine? @ihenning can fill you in on the nonexistent details.

 

[RyanB]

All I can say is...

 

[max_reason]

In every circumstance, no. In many relevant circumstances, yes. Some people are demonstrably better than others.

Yes, but most of those people, like Jimmy Doolittle, Charles Lindberg, Bob Hoover, Eric Brown, Steve Hinton, etc... have all worked their way to success and also demonstrated reasonable humility and good decision making. You're not in that category yet by a long, long shot.

That's why I'm starting this conversation about 6 months before I get my airplane, and about one year before I provisionally fly across open ocean. You and everyone has to realize, when Neil Armstrong at age 11 said he was going to fly to the moon someday, people were appropriately [more-than] skeptical. However, that did not mean that persistence across decades could not lead him to fly to the moon eventually. To be sure, 99.99% of kids who hoped they would fly to the moon someday did not materialize, but 0.01% did (very rough percentages here). And 100.000000000% of those who would never consider such a feat did in fact fail to fly to the moon. What people need to realize is, what I propose is vastly less absurd than plan to "fly to the moon". And so, my chances are better than 0.01% in my opinion. Much higher, I think, based upon my ability to "beat the odds" in the past.

I thought for a couple minutes about that "humility" desire you expressed. I came here full of humility, with the notion that a great many pilots who would be here have a great many experiences that I do not yet have... and so they could provide me insight in those areas. And some of the people here have tried to help. But half or more have demonstrated they only want to throw stones. I think you are being 100% honest about what you say, so I will answer you the same way, with 100% honesty. As I have explained in a previous message, my whole life has been people telling me "you can't do that"... and then I do that. Over and over and over again. So the question is, how does one deal with that experience?

I do feel humble in the sense that a lot of people here have experience that I don't have YET. For example, flying IFR or in IMC. Though the guy who gave me my private pilot training spent 2 or 3 hours training me to fly in IMC with the hood on, I have zero experience with ILS and who knows how many other aspects of IFR that I don't even know exist. But as you should see if you read these messages, those areas where I am extremely weak in my knowledge, and therefore rationally humble, I don't hear much advice. The best I got was "get an IFR rating". Well, that may be good advice, but isn't very detailed. In fact, I just posted a message in which I asked whether being able to deal with IMC conditions is actually more valuable in my specific situation (flying where there are thousands of islands, but only about 5 of which have IFR/ILS equipment), or are flying in IMC skills more valuable. Hopefully I'll get an answer to that question. But even if I do, I'll get one good answer and five people telling me I'm a jerk and moron for asking an unexpected question.

The fact is, having done so many things that people honestly and seriously say "you can't do that" does impact my thinking. It doesn't make me reckless, but I admit that I don't just curl up in a corner and hide from reality... which is precisely what everyone in my past has wanted me to do, and the way many people come across here, sounds pretty much like what I've heard all my life. The bottom line of which is... people who tell me "you can't do that" or "you shouldn't do that"... must provide me with specific arguments backed up by evidence that convince me. Otherwise, I ignore them.

To be sure, that probably does sound a bit arrogant and non-humble.

But what's my alternative? Just curl up in a corner in fear, and never do anything worthwhile the rest of my life? That's what they want. But I refuse. If you read my messages, I hope you will find that I reply honestly and respectfully and with thoughtful replies... to everyone who posted a thoughtful message. If I come across as a bit arrogant or non-humble sometimes, look to see what kind of message I am replying to. If it says "you can't do that" but provides little or no evidence or explanation... well... consider my life experience. Part of which has been that most humans are lame... but a small percentage are impressive. I admit to not wanting to waste my time with those who are lame. Maybe they just don't realize humans can be more impressive than their small little lives, or what their mommy told them they could do in life. Their small boring life is not my problem, and I couldn't fix it even if it was my problem. Want me to seem humble? Just set someone before me who is a brilliant achiever. Then you'll see humble... as I suck as much wisdom and information out of them as I can!

That sounds good, but somehow all that experience doesn't seem to have taught you important and relevant information related to your future Pipistrel. For someone with as much experience as you seem to claim, I'm also surprised that you don't approach this with a more healthy skepticism. I'm probably less skeptical than most here of the Pipistrel's capabilities, but I still see big glaring holes in your posts. I've also got my own concerns about your ability to properly research. I'll score you a notch for coming here to ask, but take that notch away for not listening well.

I explained when this idea started... the day I found out an airplane existed that could do what I wanted, which importantly included "have low operating costs" (as in low fuel costs), and could fly a great distance non-stop so I could explore hundreds of south-pacific islands. And was capable of bush/backcountry/STOL landings at tiny, crazy spots like I used to love to do years ago.

But... the moment I see something that means "this airplane isn't up to this project" or "this venture is beyond my risk tolerance"... I will drop this project like a hot potato. Fact is, it has been obvious to me since the start that though the specifications of this airplane make my projects possible, that inherently this airplane is also "on the edge of being safe enough or reliable enough" for the "long range over open ocean" part of my project. And so, I am QUITE aware that at some point before taking off from the coast of Chile for the airport at Isla Robinson Crusoe... I will decide to abandon those plans. However, as I understand as someone who has done many non-trivial projects, I can't start out as the extreme skeptic, or I will prevent myself from doing anything of significance. The "no go" must come when the time comes to "pull the trigger"... unless I find a "fatal flaw" sooner. However, I don't expect a fully "fatal flaw" in the planning stage, because an owner of one of these airplanes has already flown across the south pacific ocean in this same airplane TWICE... once in each direction. Which means, the question is not "can it be done", but "is the risk low enough, and my skills high enough to justify taking off and heading west". You and others should not confuse my unwillingness to "give up before I even seriously consider this project" with stupidity or arrogance. It is neither... even if it seems like that from the tone you infer I have from the words I write. What you take as arrogance is just me doing what I always do, namely "not give up before I can see why I should give up". Sorry that you misunderstand what is behind my "tone".

Nope, but I think you've definitely got a hazardous attitude towards a multitude of experienced individuals who think you're going to be a person being searched for by the Coast Guard if you make it that far.

What I plan to do IS inherently "hazardous". No doubt about that! I do not ignore messages that I consider to be helpful and from experienced individuals. I do mostly ignore messages that seem to have no helpful intent from people who may or may not have experience, which I cannot determine from one or two word posts like SPLASH, or one or two sentence posts that simply say I'm insane because what I propose isn't what most pilots do.

But you know what? Probably thousands of airplanes fly across the pacific ocean every year, and probably 99.99% of them "make it". To be sure, the chances my tiny little pipistrel "makes it" is well below 99.99%... maybe 99.9% or maybe only 99%. If I thought my chances to complete each 1000km or longer flight was under 99%, I would ditch the whole ocean-flying project... before I had to ditch the airplane in the ocean. That's one question I need to attempt to answer... though those questions can never be answered with excellent precision due to the large number of variables in the experience-set upon which the prediction is made. Nonetheless, 99% is roughly the lowest probability of success that I would tolerate. 99.9% is the number I'd like to see. Or even a bit higher. But I would be seriously stunned to find the probability of success of 1000km flights is greater than 99.9%, and extremely skeptical. Frankly, if someone who has a lot of experience told me the number was over 99.9%, I would not believe them until they provided me with a great deal of believable statistics and investigation that gave good reason to come to that conclusion.

 

[max_reason]

I am in fact talking used airplanes. As for the rest of your post, can't comment, no idea what a km is.

km == kilometer == 0.62 miles (approximately).

If you want to mention a few candidates, please feel free. But I should mention that an airplane with high fuel consumption and enormous fuel tanks would be too expensive for me to be able to feed with fuel on an ongoing basis. Also note (from my first message at the top of this thread) that I also want to resume bush/backcountry/STOL flying like I used to do back when I was flying a lot. That's the reason for the Baringer 26" Tundra wheels/brakes/tires accessory. One reason that I became attracted to this airplane is that it satisfies all four of these desires:

#1: Capable of very short landings and take-offs required for bush/backcountry/STOL flying.
#2: Capable of very long range flying (for a tiny single engine airplane) so I could fly the 3800km "longest-legs" to fly across the south-pacific ocean.
#3: Great fuel economy so I can afford to feed it fuel (50mpg to 70mpg).
#4: Doesn't cost more than my life savings (budget $200K or less).

Until this airplane came onto the market, I assumed I would never buy my own airplane, because I can't afford multiple airplanes, expensive airplanes, or lots of fuel.

I do have a possibly irrational degree of fear of used equipment, which is why I strongly prefer new (and thus know the entire history). However, I am curious to know what you would suggest as alternatives.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

That's why I'm starting this conversation about 6 months before I get my airplane, and about one year before I provisionally fly across open ocean. You and everyone has to realize, when Neil Armstrong at age 11 said he was going to fly to the moon someday, people were appropriately [more-than] skeptical.

You'd have a good point if Neil was 12-1/2 years old when he strapped himself in that rocket. But that's not the case, is it?

But as you should see if you read these messages, those areas where I am extremely weak in my knowledge, and therefore rationally humble, I don't hear much advice. The best I got was "get an IFR rating". Well, that may be good advice, but isn't very detailed.

That advice is exactly as detailed as it could possibly be.

 

[max_reason]

My concerns would be in this order:

1. Getting the plane legal
2. Getting good training
3. Accurate practice

Then:
1. Pilot stamina / endurance / conditioning
2. Running out of fuel in headwinds
3. Unexpected weather
4. Mechanical issues

If you could get a Pipistrel legal to do stuff, especially if it could actually get certified to do stuff, that would be awesome and a lot of us would tip our hat to you in a big way. A Standard Category Pipistrel would be awesome.

That's interesting! My biggest fear is... mechanical issues! Just goes to show (assuming you're correct), I have my head on upside down!

Actually, I worry a great deal about your first #1. Though I really, really, really don't want to build mine from a kit, from what I've heard so far that may be the only way to be legal and remain legal for a substantial period of time. I suppose one way around that, assuming I never land at a serious airport anywhere, is to just "not worry about it". But I really prefer not to go that way.

I'm not sure what you mean by "training". Do you mean "IFR training"? I have to agree that IFR training certainly would not hurt. I am still trying to figure out how much IFR training will actually help in practice compared to "training" or [simulated] "practice" of getting out of bad IMC with capable avionics that includes everything except ILS instrumentation. After all, probably 98% of airports/airstrips/landing-spots in south-pacific islands have no ILS equipment. So if the nearest ILS equipped airport is well beyond my reach (remaining fuel), all the ILS equipment in the world won't save my bacon. But lots of practice navigating out of IMC with the GPS, moving-maps, synthetic vision and autopilot that the airplane will have, could be worth a great deal more. Remember, I mean in my specific mission out in the middle of the pacific ocean where few landing spots have ILS/IFR equipment. To be sure, the value of ILS/IFR within the mainland USA for example would be VASTLY greater. Or so it seems to me at this point. OTOH, maybe there are a lot more benefits and capabilities to IFR systems than I imagine. That could be true.

Boy do I wish the pipistrel virus sw was a standard certified airplane like a Cessna 172 or whatever. I guess that must cost a lot in time, effort and money, or they'd do that.

As an aside, I do believe pipistrel may try to make their new panthera 4-seat airplane a standard certified airplane. So maybe if they go (or went) through that process on the panthera, they will consider that for their 2-seat airplanes. I note that even though the pipistrel virus sw qualifies as an LSA (or SLSA maybe it is), almost everyone who buys the airplane in the USA is a private pilot (not "light sport pilot") and therefore most of these airplanes in the USA are categorized as some version of "experimental".

 

[RyanShort1]

That's interesting! My biggest fear is... mechanical issues! Just goes to show (assuming you're correct), I have my head on upside down!

Actually, I worry a great deal about your first #1. Though I really, really, really don't want to build mine from a kit, from what I've heard so far that may be the only way to be legal and remain legal for a substantial period of time. I suppose one way around that, assuming I never land at a serious airport anywhere, is to just "not worry about it". But I really prefer not to go that way.

I'm not sure what you mean by "training". Do you mean "IFR training"? I have to agree that IFR training certainly would not hurt. I am still trying to figure out how much IFR training will actually help in practice compared to "training" or [simulated] "practice" of getting out of bad IMC with capable avionics that includes everything except ILS instrumentation. After all, probably 98% of airports/airstrips/landing-spots in south-pacific islands have no ILS equipment. So if the nearest ILS equipped airport is well beyond my reach (remaining fuel), all the ILS equipment in the world won't save my bacon. But lots of practice navigating out of IMC with the GPS, moving-maps, synthetic vision and autopilot that the airplane will have, could be worth a great deal more. Remember, I mean in my specific mission out in the middle of the pacific ocean where few landing spots have ILS/IFR equipment. To be sure, the value of ILS/IFR within the mainland USA for example would be VASTLY greater. Or so it seems to me at this point. OTOH, maybe there are a lot more benefits and capabilities to IFR systems than I imagine. That could be true.

Boy do I wish the pipistrel virus sw was a standard certified airplane like a Cessna 172 or whatever. I guess that must cost a lot in time, effort and money, or they'd do that.

As an aside, I do believe pipistrel may try to make their new panthera 4-seat airplane a standard certified airplane. So maybe if they go (or went) through that process on the panthera, they will consider that for their 2-seat airplanes. I note that even though the pipistrel virus sw qualifies as an LSA (or SLSA maybe it is), almost everyone who buys the airplane in the USA is a private pilot and the airplane is categorized as some version of "experimental".

Not necessarily just IFR training. A 500 hour pilot just doesn't have the weather experience to know what he might be up against. I'd say a lot of study on Pacific weather patterns, navigation, dead reckoning, long-range stuff, too. Out in the Pacific, I have no idea what kind of equipment they are are using, if any, but you might find some places you might need to know how to use the ADF, which means one more piece of equipment you need on the plane and more weight, too. You also need to know what to do if GPS quits on you.
I'd worry about mechanical, too, especially if you're trying to keep an engine running for 8-12 hours, but I think all of my other stuff is more likely to kill you percentage-wise. If you experience an engine failure in good conditions you'll know you need to make a mayday call, pull the 'chute (would assume you'd have Pipistrel put one in) and get ready to be floating for a while. Pilot stamina issues, bad headwinds, other bad weather are all more likely to put you in a bad spot to be rescued.

 

[max_reason]

Have you thought about the Pipistrel sponsored STC for a Rotax Hydrogen engine? @ihenning can fill you in on the nonexistent details.

No, I haven't heard about that... yet. However, pipistrel keeps doing a lot of "firsts", so who knows. What is "STC"? I don't know who ihenning is either, so I didn't get the joke. Pipistrel has been improving their all electric airplanes incrementally, but they are still only about 10% or 15% of the way to flying 3800km non-stop (sorry, I meant 2500 miles non-stop).

 

[Juliet Hotel]

km == kilometer == 0.62 miles (approximately).

If you want to mention a few candidates, please feel free. But I should mention that an airplane with high fuel consumption and enormous fuel tanks would be too expensive for me to be able to feed with fuel on an ongoing basis.

Extended range tanks add very little weight or additional fuel burn on flights in which they're not needed and therefore empty. Most aircraft with big engines and higher associated fuel burns also go relatively fast. Pull the power back to LSA speeds and fuel burn drops accordingly.

Also note (from my first message at the top of this thread) that I also want to resume bush/backcountry/STOL flying like I used to do back when I was flying a lot. That's the reason for the Baringer 26" Tundra wheels/brakes/tires accessory. One reason that I became attracted to this airplane is that it satisfies all four of these desires:

#1: Capable of very short landings and take-offs required for bush/backcountry/STOL flying.
#2: Capable of very long range flying (for a tiny single engine airplane) so I could fly the 3800km "longest-legs" to fly across the south-pacific ocean.
#3: Great fuel economy so I can afford to feed it fuel (50mpg to 70mpg).
#4: Doesn't cost more than my life savings (budget $200K or less).

Your brain likes to measure distance in kilometers and measures fuel burn in miles per gallon. Flight planning must be a nightmare for you.

I do have a possibly irrational degree of fear of used equipment, which is why I strongly prefer new (and thus know the entire history). However, I am curious to know what you would suggest as alternatives.

I used to manage the maintenance for a small fleet of airplanes. These days I manage a larger fleet of commercial trucks. One thing that both jobs have taught me well is that brand new equipment breaks too. Sometimes, not often, but sometimes, brand new equipment can be more problematic than older equipment.

As for what I would suggest for alternatives, I'll leave that up to you. Firstly because I don't have a dog in this race and secondly because your attitude here suggests to me that you're at risk of hurting yourself and I kind of don't want my hands on that so I won't make any specific suggestions other than the following. There are row boats and little run-about type sailboats. And there there are robust sailboats that are built to cross oceans safely no matter what may be encountered on the way. People have crossed oceans in all three types. But just because someone crossed the ocean in a row boat or a 15ft sailboat once or twice in no way means its ever a good idea for anyone else to consider one of those boats as a practical option when crossing an ocean is the goal. There are lots of instrument capable aircraft that can be fitted out with enough fuel to be practical for doing what you want to do but I don't think any of them are LSA.

 

[Ken Ibold]

If you read my posts, you'd know I've been a scientist, engineer, INVENTOR and product developer my whole life.

Do you know what INVENTION is? It is fairly accurate to say invention is mental masturbation. After all, what you are considering DOES NOT EXIST... until you make it exist. Then it is real. Then it is not mental masturbation. Then it becomes an everyday reality.

So you know what? I agree. But I've gone through this a great number of times in my life. Sometimes I decide "no go" and drop it. Other times I carry it all the way through and make it real, make it happen... and enjoy the results.

Most people are not inventors, and do not think like inventors. That's okay, somebody needs to just turn the crank or poke the buttons on what inventors create.

But know this. So-called mental masturbation can and has led to some good things. Go ahead and discount it all you wish. I'm sure that's exactly what people did to the guy who already flew this same kind of airplane around the world twice, once in each direction. And he had to fly these same long range hops over the south pacific that I'm planning. And he accomplished some other feats too, ones that I won't try. So know this. He had to go through his mental masturbation too... before he did it for real.

Good thing for him that he planned before he jumped... I mean flew.

The fact that you speak of yourself in such glowing an grandiose terms means you really ARE "all that and a bag of chips" or your a poseur. The fact that $200K constitutes your life savings tells me which one.

I have nothing more to contribute.

 

[tmyers]

Hmmm, interesting read to say the least, not sure it has been mentioned, but what 58 year old can ride in a spam, (OK this one is plastic) can for 16 to 20 hours, much less stay alert and awake. The craft to the left had 72 Gallon tanks which gave me nearly 7 hours endurance. There is no way this body could have taken 7 hours in the air, just wasn't going to happen.

Wasn't there a movie based on a true story about two guys trying to deliver a couple Cessna Crop dusters to Australia with HI as s stop over. Oh yes, "Flight From Hell", a little dated but a good watch none the less.

In all seriousless, if you are determined to purchase the aircraft do so. Start small and work up to 1000 nm trips non stop, then 1500, then 2000 all over land. If that hasn't dissuaded you from your goal keep moving things up till you have the confidence and experience to do what it is you want to do.

POA is like a supermarket, and not everything you see on the shelf is good for you. If you get nothing more than this from 4 pages of posts, understand that no one wants to read about you in the headlines for something going horribly wrong.

 

[max_reason]

That advice is exactly as detailed as it could possibly be.

I want to answer that without being offensive. I understand that a "normal way" exists to accomplish just about everything that has been done before. And I also understand that almost everyone just follows the "normal way" to do XYZ once they decide to do XYZ. Furthermore, I also understand that's how almost everyone thinks.

But I don't. Not that the "normal way" isn't ever the best way [under the circumstances]. But so often I find myself doing different things and/or in different ways. Not because I want to be troublesome, but because I'm an inventor (make things that don't yet exist, so there is no "normal" way) or because I am doing something in unconventional circumstances or environment or situation.

The result of that is... I am often in a situation where I need to ask a lot of questions before I know whether "doing the normal things the normal way" is appropriate for my situation.

This whole IFR question is obviously one of those cases. Because well over 99% of pilots fly over a continent 99.99% to 100.00% of the time where IFR airports are never far away, an answer like "get IFR training" truly is almost a no brainer! The problem with me, and part of the reason people hate me so easily and with no effort on my part, is that I have to ask unusual questions rather often, because I have unusual goals and projects, and work in unusual situations and environments. This has been true of me since first grade when I started dragging my telescope outside and staying outside all night to observe the night sky. No other little kid would stay outside all night long (or even half an hour). And so started my life of being "weird" and "abnormal"... and "annoying"!

So here we are again on the issue of IFR. Because other pilots fly over a continent that contains hundreds of IFR/ILS systems, the natural response is "get IFR training". Now understand, there may be more to IFR training than I realize. And maybe some of those unknown parts will have value when I encounter unexpected bad weather 1000 miles from the nearest island, and 2000 miles from the nearest island with IFR/ILS equipment.

But I don't know that. What I do know is, I better damn well be able to get to an island (possibly even the nearest island) that I can land on... even crash land on in a really bad situation (because that's vastly better than crashing and sinking in 10,000 or 20,000 foot deep ocean). Especially with an airplane that can fly as slow as 35~40 miles per hour, a "crash-land" on some dinky little unpopulated island may cause little harm to me or airplane, and quite possibly zero harm to me and airplane.

And so, given the fact that the entire pacific ocean, which is nearly half the surface area of the entire planet earth, may have only 10 IFR/ILS facilities spread over half the freaking planet... I find myself asking whether we are truly convinced that IFR/ILS training is so damn important?

Seriously! Has anyone but me asked that abnormal and unconventional question? I don't know. Maybe every single one of you completely understand the question, and you understand that there is a whole lot more to IFR than I realize. If that's true, why not realize the strange but true fact that "someone who doesn't know IFR also might not know all the bits and pieces and capabilities that term implies"... then explain it to me! That's what I would do.

And so, let me explain how my brain works. My assumption is, IFR includes "flying by instruments rather than pilot sensations", which is some experience my instructor gave to me 2 or 3 hours of practice with during my private pilot training... "just in case you get stuck in IMC". That was a good plan, I thought. And being a scientist, engineer, technology guru who invented and designed electronic gizmos, I found it vastly easier and more natural to trust instruments than most students, according to the instructor.

So, what else would my naive brain think there is to IFR training. Well, obviously "trust instruments and fly by instruments" was number one. The whole ILS (instrument landing system) was something he didn't get into. I don't think the old Cessna 152 and 172 airplanes were equipped for ILS anyway. They didn't have GPS or autopilots either.

So, being a VFR pilot, what do I imagine IFR is?

#1: Fly by instruments. Today that would mean "program the stupid autopilot and let the autopilot keep your wings level, your nose on the horizon, and point you towards where you want to go".

#2: Navigate. Back then, with no GPS or glass cockpits, that meant navigate by compass directions plus calculations of where I should be (and where I was going) made on the basis of reported winds and airspeed measured by the onboard instruments. That plus compare the expected results to whatever VOR signals were available.

#3: Once that gets me close to an airport I want to land at, do whatever the ILS process is (which I have no idea of even today) to land on the runway.

Now, maybe the above is hopefully simplistic and naive. Maybe all you IFR rated pilots are rolling on the floor laughing. If you are enjoy the laugh. Doesn't bother me.

However, this gets to the point I'm trying to make. From my limited (VFR pilot) point of view, that's what IFR seems like it must be (in broad strokes of course).

So what is the natural question for me to ask regarding IFR and flights across 3800km of empty ocean? I mean, 3800km of ocean with zero islands, and therefore zero signals from any IFR/ILS airports (or any signals of any kind from any airports for that matter, including no VOR, no nothing)?

In this context, what am I supposed to expect from IFR/ILS systems? The answer in my mind is... NOTHING.

That is, until I get relatively near an island with IFR/ILS equipment. Am I wrong about that?

And so, if I do get my butt into jam like bad weather, what is a VFR pilot to do? Or perhaps a better question, what is an expert IFR pilot to do?

Well, how about GPS to help me know where I am at every minute (including a couple portable ipads or spares, just in case the avionics GPS croaks)? That sounds like a plan! Oh, but wait... a GPS is standard equipment for VFR pilots these days. So that's not a special IFR skill.

Well, how about a GPS guided autopilot, to keep wings level and pitch controlled to keep a constant altitude? That sounds like a plan too! That will generally prevent the common pilot disorientation that supposedly kills so many VFR pilots in IMC conditions. Oh, but wait... an autopilot is standard equipment for VFR pilots these days. So that's' not a special IFR skill.

So, if we tell the GPS guided autopilot to fly to the nearest island with a runway [with good weather... or at least no clouds within 100 feet of the ground], a VFR or IFR pilot should be able to get down below the clouds and get the airplane safely on the runway.

Or so my naive brain works.

And now, let's be serious. As far as I can tell, I have no choice but to land on islands that have no IFR/ILS systems at the airports. They have gasoline, but in most cases these are dinky little airports with one or two tiny little buildings... and not ATC, much less IFR/ILS instruments.

Therefore, if I want to be the super-expert IFR pilot, what do I do? Try to fly further than my safe range in order to get to the mental comfort of an airport with IFR/ILS systems in place? Unless I'm making a mistake reading the airport information that I have seen, the only IFR/ILS support is at international airports and very few others. In other words, very few airports in the pacific ocean. And in many cases, airports that my range cannot get me to!

And so, this is how my brain gets to the point where I at least provisionally doubt the value of IFR training and ILS equipment in the airplane. I'm simply not going to be able to get to an airport with an ILS system in most cases. And those other aspects of IFR training that used to be necessary seem to be better accomplished by avionics like GPS and autopilot.

Am I wrong? Is this series of logical thought totally misguided?

Maybe. For example, if there is a whole lot more to IFR systems than I indicate, then I'm wrong because I'm ignorant of what I don't even know exists. In which case, someone might help and mention what these aids are? How do IFR systems help when there are no IFR/ILS airports for 1000 miles? Or are there a bunch of solar-powered floating boxes on the ocean every 100 miles that guide IFR enabled airplanes to wherever they want to go... even non-IFR/ILS airstrips hundreds or thousands of miles from the nearest IFR/ILS airports?

I'm sorry I ask for so much detail. But, as you can see, I will not be in the normal situations (over a continent cluttered with cities) that make IFR a no brainer.

So someone out there. Please explain why one short sentence is so obviously correct, and all anyone needs to know... for the situation I will be in. If someone explains, I'll nod my head and say, "Oh, now I get it". But so far, I don't get it. Other factors seem more important than IFR/ILS.

 

[max_reason]

The fact that you speak of yourself in such glowing an grandiose terms means you really ARE "all that and a bag of chips" or your a poseur. The fact that $200K constitutes your life savings tells me which one.

I have nothing more to contribute.

Then don't! Fine with me.

Not that it matters, the reason I only have $200K savings (plus safety margin, plus monthly income from my products so I never need to work again) is largely because I always worked on projects I was interested in rather than projects with greatest financial potential. However, there are a couple sad stories that I won't get into where I was screwed over for huge sums, but I won't get into that because you and other creeps will just misdirect this thread in stupid, useless directions that have nothing to do with my questions... and then blame me for that.

And BTW, I described myself accurate terms. If you think they are grandiose, that's your problem.

 

[Dave Theisen]

There is more to IFR than weather. JFK Jr. didn’t make it 25 miles over the water on a moonless night, you are going 2500. Good luck.

 

[max_reason]

Hmmm, interesting read to say the least, not sure it has been mentioned, but what 58 year old can ride in a spam, (OK this one is plastic) can for 16 to 20 hours, much less stay alert and awake. The craft to the left had 72 Gallon tanks which gave me nearly 7 hours endurance. There is no way this body could have taken 7 hours in the air, just wasn't going to happen.

Wasn't there a movie based on a true story about two guys trying to deliver a couple Cessna Crop dusters to Australia with HI as a stop over. Oh yes, "Flight From Hell", a little dated but a good watch none the less.

In all seriousness, if you are determined to purchase the aircraft do so. Start small and work up to 1000 nm trips non stop, then 1500, then 2000 all over land. If that hasn't dissuaded you from your goal keep moving things up till you have the confidence and experience to do what it is you want to do.

POA is like a supermarket, and not everything you see on the shelf is good for you. If you get nothing more than this from 4 pages of posts, understand that no one wants to read about you in the headlines for something going horribly wrong.

Well, I obviously have more endurance than most people. Sometimes when I'm in the groove on software project I'll write code for 24 to 36 hours straight. Okay, I do get up, walk to the fridge, and get something to drink now and then. But I write complex code that takes a great deal of focus, and it needs to be exactly correct or it won't work. So... perhaps because I've worked this way (and for myself) my whole life, I've developed differently in some ways. I don't suffer from "I hate this job" and "I have to do this and that for the wife and kids" that I don't have holding me down. I live a different life than most people. I guess most people would hate my life, but I love it. To each his own.

BTW, except for the California to Hawaii trip that I describe as an example (because most people can related to those two places), I am finding ways to reduce the longest flights in the south pacific by careful analysis of small island airports along the way. So far I've got that 3800km (2400 miles) down to 3000km (1900 miles) by finding an airport on a smaller island that definitely has 100LL fuel available. I am finding many other opportunities to cut down the distance of other flights by getting automobile gasoline in the small town the airport/airstrip/landing-spot is at or near. I still need to work out details of the logistics to haul 50 or more gallons of fuel from town to airport/airstrip, but I'm confident I can work that out (in fuel bladders and/or repeated back-and-forth trips if nothing better works out).

Unfortunately, there just is no way to shorten that 3000km (1860 mile) trip from Isla Robinson Crusoe to Easter Island... because there simply are zip, zero, nada islands of any size whatsoever between them. The other long leg that simply cannot be shortened without landing on one of the two empty (population zero) islands along the way is just short of 2100km (1300 miles). I'm still need to accumulate a lot more information, but so far most of the other long hops in my plans appear to be prone to making shorter by landing where I cannot verify aviation fuel is available, but I can verify gas stations exist on the island (with premium unleaded gasoline). Since I very much prefer to never put leaded gasoline into my Rotax 912iS engine, most likely my final plan will involve "getting gasoline from town" everywhere I go. The indication my preliminary checking is... whatever expenses I incur for cab rides or car rentals to fetch fuel from town will be more than compensated for by the cheaper price of auto gasoline at conventional gas stations compared to aviation gasoline at airports.

I never heard of that movie, but I'll try to find and watch it. There are at least two "fly around the world in my Cessna" series on youtube, and they are fairly interesting and instructive. Someone said I should find as many stories about ferrying airplanes from California to Hawaii, and I put that on my list for whatever it is worth. There are lots of airplane disaster stories here and there, but most of them wouldn't happen today with GPS, autopilot, cheap oxygen systems and such. Nonetheless, obviously the chances one can get killed in a small lightweight airplane are numerous and not particularly "impossible".

As I've said many times, I consider it absolutely necessary to work up to these ocean trips. Even if I personally didn't need to work up to the cross-ocean trips (which I do), it is necessary to compile experience with the airplane, find out what the actual fuel consumption is at various altitudes and weights, make sure the engine doesn't crap out when flown for several hours, practice letting GPS-guided autopilot fly me through [pretend] IMC to small rural airports, and so forth.

Yes, POA is quite the mixed bag... like most everything else these days.

PS: Don't worry! If I die out there in the ocean, I promise not to blame any of you, and I also promise never to haunt your homes or appear as a ghost.

 

[WannFly]

This guy needs a boat, not an airplane.

Float?

 

[Juliet Hotel]

I want to answer that without being offensive. I understand that a "normal way" exists to accomplish just about everything that has been done before. And I also understand that almost everyone just follows the "normal way" to do XYZ once they decide to do XYZ. Furthermore, I also understand that's how almost everyone thinks.

You write too much so I'm skipping a lot. This bit I quoted here describes myself almost exactly. I like to build stuff. I like to make stuff. I often like to do it in ways that I think it should be done instead of how everyone else does it. But trying to fly 1000+ miles VFR kills people dead and I don't mess with that. If you're fine it then go. But remember what I said earlier, being willing to die for your own pleasure is all well and good. But people will be obligated to find you and depending on the circumstances, one or more of them could lose their own lives in the process. Putting yourself in harms way is one thing. Putting others in harms way because of it is irresponsible. Those people have families. They shouldn't have to die looking because some bull headed asswipe that didn't want to listen.

As for the rest of your manifesto, yeah yeah yeah I get it. You're unique and smart and special and therefore you must do things your own way. Realize that believe it or not, you've just accurately described quite a few of the individuals who post here. They're not the average Joe. They're the above average Joe and they always made their way being successful at doing things everyone else said couldn't be done, just like you. And some of those folks are telling you they wouldn't try what you're intended to try. Food for thought there.

 

[Ravioli]

I'm sorry I ask for so much detail. But, as you can see, I will not be in the normal situations (over a continent cluttered with cities) that make IFR a no brainer.

So someone out there. Please explain why one short sentence is so obviously correct, and all anyone needs to know... for the situation I will be in. If someone explains, I'll nod my head and say, "Oh, now I get it". But so far, I don't get it. Other factors seem more important than IFR/ILS.

Sorry, I'm going to be the first to ask you, "What the ****?"

You have no PPL and are questioning the value of IR on the way to your mythical LSA flight to HI under VFR.

What else you got for us?

 

[max_reason]

There is more to IFR than weather. JFK Jr. didn’t make it 25 miles over the water on a moonless night, you are going 2500. Good luck.

I have already flown several flight of hundreds of miles on moonless nights... a large portion of which was over completely black wilderness areas and national forests. And the airplanes I flew had no GPS or moving maps or autopilots or fancy gizmos. So if you think moonless nights will scare me, you're talking to the wrong astronomer! If you read all my posts in this thread, you'd already know that I got hooked on astronomy at a little kid, lived alone for 7 years at a remote mountaintop research station (observatory), and have spend more thousands of hours outside at night than anyone you will ever know (by a factor of many, many, many times).

I have a feeling JFK was in IFR weather when he lost control. I have no idea whether he had an autopilot or not.

However, your comment does raise an interesting point. I took my first two flight lessons back east. That was all I needed to know I was not interested in flying in the typical hazy conditions that are common back east. I didn't continue training until I lived outside of Monterey, California where visibility [above and away from the coastal fog] was infinitely better.

I wonder how many pilots here are too afraid to fly 25 miles across a lake or bay. I am certainly not. Of course I do prefer to stay in VFR conditions. In fact, I prefer to fly when actual visibility is measured in hundreds of kilometers, if not hundreds of miles. I wonder whether so many of you pilots are terrified of flying is because... you do live back east where I decided flying wasn't worth the effort due to the horrible haze, humidity, pollution and crappy weather. Who knows. All I can say is, it ain't the same out west, and it ain't the same near Hawaii either. From what I can tell so far (not conclusive), weather in most of the south-pacific is at least roughly similar to Hawaii. We shall see. Honestly, I feel sorry for you poor folks who must fly in terror due to eternally horrible and unpredictable conditions. You have my sympathy.

 

[Juliet Hotel]

...make sure the engine doesn't crap out when flown for several hours, practice letting GPS-guided autopilot fly me through [pretend] IMC to small rural airports, and so forth.

A special flower though you may be, this bit right here scares the crap out of most pilots and CFI's. Your plan is essentially 'I've got an auto pilot so I don't need to know how to fly instruments beyond what I learned for my private training'. There a ton of pilots who have gone before you that had that same attitude and their stories can be found at ntsb.gov. I suggest you get familiar with some of them. If you're looking for a place to start, search for a guy named John Kennedy Jr.

 

[kyleb]

 

[max_reason]

You write too much so I'm skipping a lot. This bit I quoted here describes myself almost exactly. I like to build stuff. I like to make stuff. I often like to do it in ways that I think it should be done instead of how everyone else does it. But trying to fly 1000+ miles VFR kills people dead and I don't mess with that. If you're fine it then go. But remember what I said earlier, being willing to die for your own pleasure is all well and good. But people will be obligated to find you and depending on the circumstances, one or more of them could lose their own lives in the process. Putting yourself in harms way is one thing. Putting others in harms way because of it is irresponsible. Those people have families. They shouldn't have to die looking because some bull headed asswipe that didn't want to listen.

As for the rest of your manifesto, yeah yeah yeah I get it. You're unique and smart and special and therefore you must do things your own way. Realize that believe it or not, you've just accurately described quite a few of the individuals who post here. They're not the average Joe. They're the above average Joe and they always made their way being successful at doing things everyone else said couldn't be done, just like you. And some of those folks are telling you they wouldn't try what you're intended to try. Food for thought there.

You must live "back east", correct? Geez, I was flying several hundred mile trips (all the fuel the rental 152s, 172s, 182s would hold) while I was still flying solo before getting my pilot license! I'm sorry, but weather and visibility out west just ain't the same as back east! This is not bragging, it ain't me that makes weather different in different locations.

If you don't live back east, then I truly don't understand what you're talking about. Why so? Because 99.999% of flying by private pilots occurs over land... land that contains airports every 20 or 30 miles on average. So seriously, if private pilots out west are terrified at the prospect of flying 1000 miles non-stop, I don't know why unless... oh, I get it, they all have terminal "get-there-itis", and they know it. Now it makes sense! They refuse to stop along the way when prudent, and they KNOW they will not stop along the way when prudent, so the thought of planning a 1000 mile trip terrifies them. Either that, or they fly when the weather is problematic if not BAD, because they have some appointment, or friends/relatives expect them to arrive. And, if they are a normal employee like most people, the only time they can get away for more than a day or two is... a long weekend or through the Christmas to New Year break, or their two weeks of vacation. And if the weather sucks or is problematic, well, they just GO FOR IT. Now I understand. Yeah, you see, it is as difficult for me to remember what it is like to be most people, just as they forget what it is like to be me. I just won't go unless the weather and forecast is great. Screw that! I want a beautiful, comfortable trip. If I have to wait, I'll wait.

When I remember what it was like to live back east, what you say makes perfect sense.

As for your other concern... I'll tell you what. I'll think about it further, but maybe I won't tell anyone I'm going. That's my usual modus-operandi anyway... to not tell anyone what I'm doing or where I'm going. That way, nobody will worry. Then if I crash, I'll think long and hard before I press the "emergency" button on that spotify device. I mean, probably an asswipe like me is better off dying than bothering some cargo ship to veer off course and lose a few hours. But seriously, I don't know why someone has to die to steer their cargo ship a few degrees to the south for a day or so. I certainly don't expect anyone to send rescue helicopters 1000 miles into the open ocean! I mean, seriously!

Just to make one thing clear. Nobody is obligated to do anything for me. Of that I am totally clear.

I didn't write a manifesto, I just addressed comments with facts. Geez... and people wonder when I vanish for years or decades and don't contact them! All they want to do is convince me to never do anything fun or cool or seriously productive. I love to see other people do cool stuff. Not sure why so many people are the opposite, but this I've noticed my entire life. So be it.

 

[max_reason]

Sorry, I'm going to be the first to ask you, "What the ****?"

You have no PPL and are questioning the value of IR on the way to your mythical LSA flight to HI under VFR.

What else you got for us?

Why don't you not bother to read anything, and just make up your own facts? I got my private pilot certificate over 20 years ago. Sheesh!

I have nothing for you. If you want something that I can give, just ask. Otherwise, what are you talking about?

 

[RyanShort1]

I have already flown several flight of hundreds of miles on moonless nights... a large portion of which was over completely black wilderness areas and national forests. And the airplanes I flew had no GPS or moving maps or autopilots or fancy gizmos. So if you think moonless nights will scare me, you're talking to the wrong astronomer! If you read all my posts in this thread, you'd already know that I got hooked on astronomy at a little kid, lived alone for 7 years at a remote mountaintop research station (observatory), and have spend more thousands of hours outside at night than anyone you will ever know (by a factor of many, many, many times).

I have a feeling JFK was in IFR weather when he lost control. I have no idea whether he had an autopilot or not.

However, your comment does raise an interesting point. I took my first two flight lessons back east. That was all I needed to know I was not interested in flying in the typical hazy conditions that are common back east. I didn't continue training until I lived outside of Monterey, California where visibility [above and away from the coastal fog] was infinitely better.

I wonder how many pilots here are too afraid to fly 25 miles across a lake or bay. I am certainly not. Of course I do prefer to stay in VFR conditions. In fact, I prefer to fly when actual visibility is measured in hundreds of kilometers, if not hundreds of miles. I wonder whether so many of you pilots are terrified of flying is because... you do live back east where I decided flying wasn't worth the effort due to the horrible haze, humidity, pollution and crappy weather. Who knows. All I can say is, it ain't the same out west, and it ain't the same near Hawaii either. From what I can tell so far (not conclusive), weather in most of the south-pacific is at least roughly similar to Hawaii. We shall see. Honestly, I feel sorry for you poor folks who must fly in terror due to eternally horrible and unpredictable conditions. You have my sympathy.

I fly over desert every week, some of it hostile for landings. I regularly cross 400 mile distances on a schedule and lots of airline pilots fly way bigger legs than that. Even though I know my routes and general weather patterns, I regularly have to alter plans for weather. I don’t think you realize just how much opportunity for bad weather 1500 miles represents.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[max_reason]

A special flower though you may be, this bit right here scares the crap out of most pilots and CFI's. Your plan is essentially 'I've got an auto pilot so I don't need to know how to fly instruments beyond what I learned for my private training'. There a ton of pilots who have gone before you that had that same attitude and their stories can be found at ntsb.gov. I suggest you get familiar with some of them. If you're looking for a place to start, search for a guy named John Kennedy Jr.

Like many others here, you ignore most of what I write, then put words in my mouth. I never said or implied what you said. So why do you pretend I did? What I did is attempt to identify the factors that I am currently aware of, and attempt to put your concerns into perspective... to the extent I am able at this point.

Let me be clear. I do not intend to fly in IMC... EVER. Even if I get an IFR rating someday for extra special security, I will do my best to avoid IMC conditions. I mean, seriously! I'm not an airline pilot! I don't fly for a living. The only reason I fly is to SEE THINGS from the air. You know, with my eyes, my vision? And so, every time I fly, I fly when the weather is great. That's what I've always done, and that's what I always intend to do. That's the entire purpose of flying for me!

Now, the one situation in which I talked about flying where the point is not primarily to look out the window and see for 100+ miles is... when I fly between islands that are a long, long way apart. Then I'm not really there to see 2500 miles of blue ocean... that's a bit more repetition than I need. I'm there to get to the next island group so I can fly 10, 20, 50, 100 miles to other islands in the island group and explore. In other words, weather conditions aren't gonna change much over the next ten minutes or half hour that it takes me to fly and see what I want to see.

In the event that flying for 10 to 15 hours in what are forecast to be "absolutely awesome conditions" turns into a weather nightmare in those 10 to 15 hours, and I cannot avoid getting into IMC or above this magic layer of clouds that just appears outta nowhere and extends for thousands of miles... then what the hell do you expect me or any other pilot to do? Kiss my ass goodbye? Stare at my IFR certificate until I wake up from the bad dream I'm having? What? You completely ignore my long post that endeavored to explain something useful to you... then lie about what I said, and make up some completely unhelpful nonsense.

I even asked you to explain how IFR training would help me when I am no where near any IFR/ILS airports. NO ANSWER. Of course, because you're too high up on your high horse and can't answer a simple question. Instead, you just lie and throw rocks. What is that about?

And exactly WHO has an attitude unsuitable for a pilot? Me, who is seeking information and understanding? Or you who just lie about what I say, provide ZERO information, and just throw rocks. I guess that must be how you get your kicks, but I would never want to fly with someone who has such an absolute, complete disdain for facts or information or explanation of anything whatsoever. I said I would get IFR training and IFR rating... if what I would learn would substantially raise my odds of success out in the middle of the empty ocean where no IFR/ILS systems exist. I know for sure that knowing how to fly and navigate in IMC conditions will improve my odds, and I said so, and said I intend to practice that with the new and improved avionics I will have in this airplane. What I did not know was... whether any other aspect of IFR training... like the ILS stuff... will improve my odds significant if I am nowhere near an airport that has IFR/ILS systems! YOU DID NOT ANSWER, probably because you get no joy from providing useful information, or because you're too busy inventing false slurs to fling. What's wrong with people like you?

I have watched dozens of youtube videos that describe small airplane disasters. I have read a fair number of reports too, though I'm sure there are 10 or 50 more for every one I've read.

I've know the Kennedy story for years. I'm not sure anyone knows for sure what happened. I figure IFR conditions and he didn't respond appropriately. But I don't know and I refuse to pretend to know.

What I do know is... some of you people here are clearly don't realize what you don't know. Same with me, except I'm aware of that and trying to find out what I don't know, while all you people know everything already, and are anxious to prove that to me by making completely supported assertions without any backup. Thanks for nothing.