On May 23, 7:18 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Chris Nielsen writes:
Why?? What difference does it make?

You never know when having something to fly the plane for you for a few
minutes (or longer) might come in handy. Additionally, on trips of any
length, I'm pretty sure I'd get very tired of holding the controls all the
time.

For IFR flights, especially alone, an autopilot would be invaluable. It would
also be extremely useful in congested airspace when there are many other
things to do besides flying the plane.

At least that's how I see it. I like to have lots of options.

Well I don't know **** about IFR and don't claim to. Autopilot for a
small plane VFR, i.e. Warrior, is just about pointless for short trips
at least. Yeah, it's nice to be able to hold heading but you still
got to keep the bug in the right place so it flies where you want. And
you gotta trim it up nicely before engaging it or you end up with a
constant bank. And you got to maintain your altitude yourself. On
the Archers I have flown it takes so long to get the thing trimmed up
nicely, especially elevator trim, that for a short trip it's more
trouble than it's worth.

I did a couple of 300nm trips recently in a 172 without autopilot or
rudder trim and found I didn't miss the autopilot one little bit.
Missed the rudder trim though, especially since it was 180hp and
whenever you had a high cruise power setting you had to hold constant
pressure on the rudder. And the ball on 172s swings from side to side
in turbulence, I've found, so it makes it harder to know how much
rudder to hold. Oh, and the because of uneven loading (me sitting on
one side) it was leaning to one side the whole trip - had to hold
right aileron the whole way. Autopilot would not have helped me
very much.


It does sound a bit strange, but as far as I am concerned you would have
to experience it to actually judge that.

Mooney aircraft seem to be unusual in many respects. Their Web site makes
them look like they build racing aircraft.

They're known for being fast, that's for sure