K

kshortt

I'm New Here
Hello All, I'm new to the forum and hoping for an RV in my future. I commute a couple of times a week between home and my employer's main office, about 150 miles. I'm hoping to change this to a flying commute down the road but am concerned about how often weather would ground me. I'm in northern California and would be flying into Palo Alto from the Sacramento (Cameron Park) area. There's regularly cloud cover going over one of the mountain ranges and we get pretty steady rain during the late winter / early spring.

Is an RV a good choice for this type of flying?

Your thoughts would be much appreciated.
 
No expert as I'm still building...

From what I gather, it should be fine if you avoid icing. Most of the guys suggest an autopilot in any RV for IFR.
 
I can't specifically address your question, but as a fellow NorCal'er who lives in Livermore and commutes by road to Redwood City all I can say is... think about all the days that weather won't be a factor (the other 9 months of the year). :)

I commuted from Livermore to San Carlos in my Citabria a few times and I always has a smile on my face when I arrived at the office. I can't say that when I drive. ;)

PS - Welcome to VAF!
 
Last edited:
When I worked in Sunnyvale I commuted to Palo Alto from Oakdale a couple of times. I couldn't do it most of the time because of that stinkin' marine layer that lives there a lot of the time. I'm not IFR rated and don't plan on becoming such. If you seriously want to commute that way I'd say you'd be able to do it almost 300 days out of the year just popping up or down through the marine layer. I've sneaked through the passes once or twice but wouldn't do that again nor would I advise it to anyone! Much less anyone going as fast as an RV goes!
 
Speaking as a VFR pilot, I've come to think that flying should be viewed primarily as recreation.

Living in CA, the weather (especially fog) will screw up your plans frequently. You always have to be prepared to make the drive and making the go-no go decision creates interesting logistical problems if you have a schedule to keep. Also, KPAO is famous for fog.

What's more, you have to be really careful not to let your desire to fly lead you into dangerous circumstances.

With an instrument rating of course your ability to make flying work improves substantially.

S_tones
 
kshortt said:
I'm in northern California and would be flying into Palo Alto from the Sacramento (Cameron Park) area.
Click to expand...

I also live in Cameron park, but luckily am now retired, so no commute. There are a lot of folks here in the airpark who do that commute on a regular basis, not sure if any are doing it in an RV. There are at least 6 flying rv's here, and at least 3 more under const.

I think the main concern would be the capabilities of the airport, not the aircraft when things get IFR.

If you want, I can get you a list of folks flying to the bay area, send me a PM.

Mike
 
Thanks for the responses from everyone. Definitely encouraging, I will plan on seeking the IFR cert and all of the avionic goodies when I'm able to ramp this pllan up.
 
kshortt said:
Thanks for the responses from everyone. Definitely encouraging, I will plan on seeking the IFR cert and all of the avionic goodies when I'm able to ramp this pllan up.
Click to expand...

Where the IFR ticket will help is with things like the June gloom and marine layers. It is not going to get you through icing or convective activity. No airplane is truly 'all weather' - and this is especially true with light GA airplanes.

Still, for the relatively short trip and with an instrument rating to get you in and out of marine haze and cloud decks, I'd bet on no-go's being pretty rare - especially if you have some flexibility on arrivals and departures.

I was flying back and forth from Los Angeles to San Jose once or twice a week for over a year and never had to go to plan B (Southwest ;)). However, I had O2 and Turbo at my disposal. Had I been flying normally aspirated, I would have probably skipped or deferred two flights.

Good Luck,
-jjf
 
[
QUOTE]Originally Posted by kshortt
Thanks for the responses from everyone. Definitely encouraging, I will plan on seeking the IFR cert and all of the avionic goodies when I'm able to ramp this pllan up.
Click to expand...


Where the IFR ticket will help is with things like the June gloom and marine layers. It is not going to get you through icing or convective activity. No airplane is truly 'all weather' - and this is especially true with light GA airplanes.[/QUOTE]

just a data point -- in 1993-94 i commuted between fort worth and austin, tx (yeah, i know it's not kalifornia). i did 122 legs -- 61 round trips. i shot 35 instrument approaches for real, two or three down to minimums during that time. i scrubbed two planned legs and postponed one due to weather. without the ir, i would have had to scrub about 25% of the missions.
 
Commute to PAO

My wife and I have been commuting almost daily between Westover (Jackson) and PAO for almost a year. The nasty weather in March and April caused us to stay in the Bay Area a few weeks in the other kind of RV.

Between May and August there were only 5 days that we had to stop in Livermore or Byron and wait for an hour or two before we could get in to PAO. We typically try land at PAO between 6:15 and 7:30. The days we were late we were usually at work by 9:30AM. On three or four occasions getting in was under special VFR conditions. The last part of August and September the marine layer has been low and persistant which makes us stay in the RV during the week.

I am scheduled to take the IFR written next thursday and will start one of those 10 day courses next month so the marine layer will not be much of an issue. I would estimate the 95+% of the time the GPS 1 approach will get you in to PAO through the marine layer.

I am curious to see how much the IFR ticket will help in the winter. We do not plan on flying through nasty storms only getting through the mild ones that block VFR through the Altamont and Sunol.

I only have one year of experience but I think you will be able to fly more than often than not for sure.

Blue Skies,
Jim Bray
 
I'd say that the RV-9 has about the same IFR capability as a similarly equipped Bonanza flown by a similary qualified pilot.

In other words, there will be days when you will stay on the ground, there will be flights on which you turn tail and go home, there will be flights on which you'll divert to an alternate, and there will be those rare flights that you wish you hadn't attempted.

However, on most days, you'll be able to complete the flight safely. You'll get good at reading the weather the day before and deciding if you should wake up early enough to trigger your backup plan: drive, telecommute, take the day off, or whatever your particular job dictates.

Some days you won't be able to fly home. So keep a beater car at the office airport and expect to drive home occasionally. Which, of course, means driving to work the next day.

The RVs have the speed, ceiling, climb rate and range to give you lots of ways to stay out of trouble, unlike (say) a C-172. I've flown in IFR a bit in the Northeast in Warriors, C-172s etc. Headwinds take a huge toll on 110 kt airplanes. Limited range sometimes means the inability to circle around the weather, or having to make a fuel stop at an airport with lousy weather or a difficult approach. Being able to fly at high altitude means you can stay out of the clouds more often, letting you steer around nasty-looking buildups and avoid ice. It's better of course to avoid ice and buildups by not flying on those days, but it doesn't always work out that way.
 
How should the 9 compare to the 7? There seem to be few differences in performace with the same engine, other than 12% more lift surface and a less than 10% lowering in stall. How would the 9 and 7 be different in high crosswind, wind shear, heavy rain?
 
I can't speak from any specific experience about the -9 (or -7) in IFR, but will mention one thing that I don't think has been mentioned already. While I think that the -9 would be best IFR platform (among the 2-seaters) in smooth air, it's lighter wingloading will probably make it bounce around a little more in bumpy air. Enough to matter while flying IFR?? Not sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.