Since I retired I've found it's just too expensive. I do keep my CFI current, though I'm not sure why - maybe because it was so damn much work to get it in the first place.

That was fun to watch. What kind of airplane do you have?

I never got any instructor rating. Not long ago I got typed in the Challenger 601 and have been doing a bit of contract work on the side, but the Skylane is my hobby. I haven't had time to fly it much in the last few months other than a bit of weekend flying and a couple of short trips. Next month I'm going to fly it to Lakefront in New Orleans, which is one of my favorite airports. I love the terminal there. Someday I'm going to fly the Skylane around Denali, but I'll need about 3-4 weeks of nothing else to do in August or September.

It's kind of the airplane equivalent of a good old Chevy station wagon; the only quirk is that they're nose-heavy and given to prop strikes if not landed well; but you get used to that quirk pretty fast. Most of the instruction I did was in the C-172, which is a pretty good airplane too. I had a student who bought a Commander 115TC - it wasn't fast but it was very luxurious, had all the bells and whistles. It was sort of the opposite of the 182 because you had to land it flat, or with a sight picture that at least looked flat, or it would bounce.

Instruction was fun most of the time, though there were a few students who scared me...

Sometimes I think a twin or at least a retract would be nice, but then I remember that would just cost more and not really do anything more than I want to begin with.

I've always called it an old man's airplane, and now that I'm older it seems to fit me better all the time.

I do keep it IFR certified, which comes in handy sometimes.

http://vimeo.com/137554534

as much. They are yuuge maintenance hogs, especially if you get one that has engines with counterrotating props like the Seneca (I think) because a lot of the engine parts aren't interchangeable between the two. Light twins are also more dangerous because they aren't certified to climb on one engine; they just take a little longer to get to the scene of the accident. (The Vmc demo during my multi-engine training was one of the scariest experiences I've had in GA.) And then there's the retractables. An FAA guy I knew used to say that it's not a matter of *if* you'll land gear-up; it's when. And it's not just GA pilots: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR9701.pdf

Stick with your good old Skylane. You can go darn near anywhere in it, comfortably and safely.

I had one instance where I *almost* landed gear up. After that I always say out loud, "3 in the green, fully configured, cleared to land" and recheck all of those things 3 times before every single landing regardless of whether I'm flying a retract or not. So that's not to say it can't or wouldn't happen to me, but it's all about checklist discipline. There's a good reason why the airlines have virtually eliminated the problem, although I'm sure having a RAt and extra no gear indications certainly helps.

I have some time in the Seneca 1 and I actually like that plane. Even though it was an older plane I still managed to get pretty close to book values out of it. On a hot day (no shortage of those in Texas), you will go down on a single engine, but you will at least get a lot farther. But at the end of the day it's hard to justify the extra expense of a multi and retract, not to mention I just love my old Skylane.

I need to get out more (or get a pilot's license!)

The identifier is still RBD. You might know it as that.

I miss those days.

Piper Cherokee and a Cessna 310.

We had some fun times. Miss ya dad.

I know, I know.