204 knots

[denverpilot]

What is the point to be made about that? Can you show me where to find the expiration date on my 1960-model plane? or 1968 house? Or which components of each are original equipment and which have been replaced, refurbed, upgraded, overhauled or spiffed within the past few years?

At some point you've got to understand that your efforts to force an artificially-stimulated perfect-storm industry through a traditional mold will never succeed. It is what it is, and that the eventual outcome has been known for at least 20 years, even if it's just now becoming apparent to you and others who haven't been watching.

As you've said in the past, your group (or more probably the group after yours since you're no longer spring chickens either) will be able to pick up some real nice airplanes at real good prices--assuming anybody has any money left. I figure mine will be worth at least $5,000 when the time comes, but may hold off just a bit longer before running an ad.

You're arguing that the point I made was accurate? LOL. No surprise here, and been very apparent for all of my adult life.

Love light aviation. Wish it wasn't crushed by the general risk-aversion of modern Americans, which started to really pick up steam right around when I started flying. Most of the economic and motivational woes of light aviation can be traced back to that singular emotional change in the collective psyche.

You regularly say no normal folk were buying new in Cessna's heyday, but never mention how to account for the sheer numbers produced vs. today. Were there that many more wealthy folk in the 1970s? I doubt it. Maybe we should actually go back to the 60s really.

Cessna 182 had just under 1000 produced per year until 1971 which dropped to 200-300 in 70-71 then skyrocketed back to over 1000 in 1973 and stayed almost that high through 1978. Then 200-300 thru 1983 which did a dismal 74 aircraft.

Hasn't recovered since.

I'm guessing there weren't ten times the number of independently wealthy people in 1969 as there are today.

If you take a 1956 C-182 at $13,750 times the CPI inflation rate to today, that same airplane today should cost $115,637.50.

Whatever went wrong in the middle, I'd bet Cessna couldn't keep up with demand at all if one could buy even the venerable 1956 model today for that price.

Trying to keep the Garmin tax out of it, even the S model was twice that.

 

[JHW]

You regularly say no normal folk were buying new in Cessna's heyday, but never mention how to account for the sheer numbers produced vs. today. Were there that many more wealthy folk in the 1970s? I doubt it. Maybe we should actually go back to the 60s really.

Ths same reason that people who had never set foot on a farm were spending high 4 figures for bulls. The tax laws were substantially different than they are today. The reasons for the market for aircraft and market for cattle had a lot of bull-droppings in common.

 

[Ted]

Wow - is this what I sounded like when I went through my "I'm ****ing right, dammit, stop telling me I'm wrong!" phase?

Yes. Eggenfeller engine comes to mind.

Did you ever get over that phase?

+1

 

[denverpilot]

Ths same reason that people who had never set foot on a farm were spending high 4 figures for bulls. The tax laws were substantially different than they are today. The reasons for the market for aircraft and market for cattle had a lot of bull-droppings in common.

Was wondering when someone would finally mention that.

So basically we took a tax system that worked well enough to put 1000 Cessna 182s a year (plus Mooneys, Pipers, Bonanzas, etc.) down the assembly line, and traded it for something that "closed all the loopholes" and killed GA.

Welcome to so-called "progressive" thought.

Those "bull-droppings" made a lot of people a decent living.

The market dried up when the government decided to not subsidize aircraft purchases anymore. They're busy subsidizing overpriced houses and overpriced "educations" now.

 

[wabower]

Why are you incapable of understanding the impact of changing demand while you run around chasing only the elements of supply for your buggy-whip economics debate? Your attempt to rewrite history with the bogus "risk-averse psyche" nonsense doesn't fly.

A ready-made market with already-paid-for training created an element of (potential) pent-up demand that our economy will arguably never see again. As those pilots exit stage left (and I'm in the line) the amateur pilot population will normalize at the unstimulated level it would have been without several air wars, GI-bill training and other artificial boosts. It's pretty clear at this point that even little two-seaters (whether LSA or EAB or whatever) will require six-digit outlays and we're quickly creating an economy of five-digit earners.

Where did the pilots come from? How did the "car-in-every-garage-plane-in-every-hangar" movement get started? Those same people were driving station-wagons, wearing suits and ties to work every day and smoking cigarettes by the case and doing spreadsheets on 14-column ledger paper. Why not now?

How did travel options change during the period? How many regional airlines provided hourly service between major markets a few hundred miles apart? When was Southwest founded? People like me bought some used planes and some new ones, but it wasn't because we wanted to spend the money but because we needed to be in places in order to do business using the most convenient method of travel that allowed us to spend time at home.

For a while, GA was an easy winner. Now it's not. One of my ongoing conversations with friends is whether any of us would have ever owned a business airplane if Southwest had been around at the time. Until the oil embargo caused the regionals of the day to cut their schedules by 75%, I was a 12-year VFR-only PPL who thought a localizer was some kind of protractor and flew occasionally to the family farm and for hunting and golf trips.

On a related changing-world rich-guy subject, I ran into Trevino at the repair desk at the golf store last week where he was picking up some grips while I waited for a putter. After talking about the "good-old-days" in the desert he told me about all of the water issues and related costs on the horizon for the golf industry in places like Palm Springs-Coachella, and all of the changes in course maintenance and design that will follow, as well as the impact that additional water charges may cause on home-owners and club members who see an extra $300 per month on their dues or HOA bills.

Annual golf rounds dropped by more than 2 million last year, and more than twice as many people played fantasy football rather than golf. Green fees and dues are expensive, games require several hours to complete, a new driver is $400 and balls are $50/dozen. The game requires ongoing practice to maintain proficiency and many wives and kids don't like it.

Many of the same guys who fueled the airplane market also fueled the golf market. Where is that market going over the next 15 years? Want to buy some nice used Pings?

You're arguing that the point I made was accurate? LOL. No surprise here, and been very apparent for all of my adult life.

Love light aviation. Wish it wasn't crushed by the general risk-aversion of modern Americans, which started to really pick up steam right around when I started flying. Most of the economic and motivational woes of light aviation can be traced back to that singular emotional change in the collective psyche.

You regularly say no normal folk were buying new in Cessna's heyday, but never mention how to account for the sheer numbers produced vs. today. Were there that many more wealthy folk in the 1970s? I doubt it. Maybe we should actually go back to the 60s really.

Cessna 182 had just under 1000 produced per year until 1971 which dropped to 200-300 in 70-71 then skyrocketed back to over 1000 in 1973 and stayed almost that high through 1978. Then 200-300 thru 1983 which did a dismal 74 aircraft.

Hasn't recovered since.

I'm guessing there weren't ten times the number of independently wealthy people in 1969 as there are today.

If you take a 1956 C-182 at $13,750 times the CPI inflation rate to today, that same airplane today should cost $115,637.50.

Whatever went wrong in the middle, I'd bet Cessna couldn't keep up with demand at all if one could buy even the venerable 1956 model today for that price.

Trying to keep the Garmin tax out of it, even the S model was twice that.

 

[JoseCuervo]

Was wondering when someone would finally mention that.

So basically we took a tax system that worked well enough to put 1000 Cessna 182s a year (plus Mooneys, Pipers, Bonanzas, etc.) down the assembly line, and traded it for something that "closed all the loopholes" and killed GA.

Welcome to so-called "progressive" thought.

Those "bull-droppings" made a lot of people a decent living.

The market dried up when the government decided to not subsidize aircraft purchases anymore. They're busy subsidizing overpriced houses and overpriced "educations" now.

We have also lost a lot of middle class. People buy Gulfstreams now.

2% and the 98% . .. . . . . Etc...

 

[airguy]

A ready-made market with already-paid-for training created an element of (potential) pent-up demand that our economy will arguably never see again. As those pilots exit stage left (and I'm in the line) the amateur pilot population will normalize at the unstimulated level it would have been without several air wars, GI-bill training and other artificial boosts. It's pretty clear at this point that even little two-seaters (whether LSA or EAB or whatever) will require six-digit outlays and we're quickly creating an economy of five-digit earners.

There's a lot of truth to that. We will never again see large numbers of people suddenly turned loose on the market with money in their pocket, a zest for life, and the ability to fly piston singles by virtue of free training. The certificated singles market has priced themselves out of reality and the EAB market (or 30-year old certificated) is the only place to go for the common middle-class wage earner.

 

[wabower]

I might agree except for the preponderance of evidence to the contrary. After a couple of rodeos at most, many people (including Nate and his merry men) have already figured out that co-ownership of whatever they want to fly is a viable option to be had without breaking the bank or spending five years bucking rivets in the shed.

That same cost-sharing pattern has been constant for at least 40-some years that I've been watching, and many of the planes including a PA-24 in which I was part owner during 1973-74 are still being flown by the same clubs and/or groups.

Trying to impute some dramatic and imminent change based on the nonsense that "EAB is the only way" is laughable for everybody who needs to travel with more than 2 people and/or luggage or wants A/C, turbos, deice, interiors, real doors and windows and a few other things they have come to enjoy over the years.

For those whose primary mission is overhead breaks and zoom climbs, other options may be equally attractive.

There's a lot of truth to that. We will never again see large numbers of people suddenly turned loose on the market with money in their pocket, a zest for life, and the ability to fly piston singles by virtue of free training. The certificated singles market has priced themselves out of reality and the EAB market (or 30-year old certificated) is the only place to go for the common middle-class wage earner.

 

[denverpilot]

Wayne, we are still making the same argument, whether you want to come at it from supply-side or demand-side. The "official" numbers say the U.S. economy is better, per capita, by far today than in 1969. Everyone is supposedly rolling in dough.

Unfortunately as you and I have pointed out, no one is buying. You'd argue that it's because mom and dad aren't interested in doing interesting things like learn to fly and play golf instead of working all the time. I'd argue that the creditors and government have perfected the squeeze to the point where folks have to make ends meet.

The truth lies in both, actually. But I'd like to think that folks would prefer to do at least a few interesting things in their limited lifespans besides pay the mortgage and taxes.

I'm simply arguing that there has to be an upside, which you correctly described that there once was in GA. You "didn't want to spend the money" to travel via GA but "had to" in order to make better money.

I'm basically looking at it from the perspective of WHY those guys with spreadsheets and supposedly 40 hour a week jobs (well, call it 60 or more with modern connectivity tech where your job follows you around in your pocket with a little electronic leash and no one staffs "the night shift" anymore) aren't spending their money on airplanes and golf. Is it because they choose to spend it elsewhere or do they simply not have it.

Government says we all have plenty of money. 8.4 times what we had in 1956. The question is, do we all have the same purchasing power? The numbers are being used to foist a pretty big lie, IMHO. The CPI says a Cessna 182 brand new should be less than $200K.

Perhaps you misunderstand my "risk averse" comment. Rephrase it as, "Are there any risks worth taking for the average Joe?" Obviously there are some... Lots of them bought Hybrid cars for a $5000 tax break and traded away working vehicles on a vehicle that wouldn't pay itself back in savings over the life of the loan.

For both aviation and golf, you have to find the trigger that gets folks to spend on things that won't pay back in anything but satisfaction. With Mangiamele there's little chance anyone today will use a GA aircraft in the manner you did. They can still get a round of drinks reimbursed by the company at the golf club, so they can make deals there, maybe.

The fun per dollar ratio of numerous pastimes has fallen drastically in my lifetime. Skiing? $75-$100 daily lift tickets? Yeah. No. I'll pass. I grew up skiing every weekend. Lift tickets were 1/3 that price 20 years ago.

So we're saying the same thing. Demand side, supply side... Doesn't matter. The average Joe can't purchase what they could 40 years ago for the same amount of time spent at work.

 

[Henning]

Wayne hit it square on the head, airline deregulation, the price wars and proliferation of regional feeders is what brought the greatest demise in GA, it just wasn't needed to the extent it was previously.

BTW, the official numbers are a lie, they aren't the same as they were then, we've removed all the inflationary items like energy from them.

 

[denverpilot]

Wayne hit it square on the head, airline deregulation, the price wars and proliferation of regional feeders is what brought the greatest demise in GA, it just wasn't needed to the extent it was previously.

BTW, the official numbers are a lie, they aren't the same as they were then, we've removed all the inflationary items like energy from them.

So has the percentage of recreational aviation gone up or down? Obviously the need for travel went away (I suspect you'd both agree the Internet helped kill business use of GA also), so did recreational aviation activities also drop in a "healthy growing economy" with millions more people than the 1950s and 60s?

GA shipments are in the triple digits in a country with 314 million people.

You telling me we seriously can't figure out a way to get that back to four digits?

 

[airguy]

You telling me we seriously can't figure out a way to get that back to four digits?

Do away with frivolous product liability lawsuits, and it'll be a lot more than 4 digits.

 

[Bill]

Unfortunately as you and I have pointed out, no one is buying. You'd argue that it's because mom and dad aren't interested in doing interesting things like learn to fly

For most, there's just better ways to have fun. I love flying, but a lot of it is a big pain in the ass.

Joe blow buys a 30-40yr old $40k spamcan, has to invest a lot to get his license, has to get a medical and BFR every two, an annual every year, and oh yeah, you can't work on it yourself, and an hour of flying costs $100+.

Or Joe blow buys a new $40k boat, gets right on the water, the family loves it, and he can do all the work himself if he desires. And the $100 that buys an hour of flying buys a full day of running round the lake.

So, ask the guy who works his left one off all week which sounds like more fun this weekend?

Substitute boat for motorcyle, RV, etc., and you see the uphill battle.

 

[Henning]

So has the percentage of recreational aviation gone up or down? Obviously the need for travel went away (I suspect you'd both agree the Internet helped kill business use of GA also), so did recreational aviation activities also drop in a "healthy growing economy" with millions more people than the 1950s and 60s?

GA shipments are in the triple digits in a country with 314 million people.

You telling me we seriously can't figure out a way to get that back to four digits?

Priorities my dear sir, healthy growing economy? The economic growth has not kept pace with either the cost of mandatory items, food, shelter and fuel which is why they were eliminated from the inflation figures, nor has it kept pace with the advances in what other optional costs there are to spend money on like cable TV, cell phones, computers, Internet access... all which provide a much larger recreational/entertainment bang for the buck. When you consider the social/recreational aspects, GA is veritably anti social, you can count the annual aviation get togethers by the handful, where as a direct competitor for the dollar, boating, provides innumerable opportunities. As I have always said, the demise of GA is mostly it's extremely limited usefulness, especially in light of its cost. That's why so many people quit flying after getting certificates. Low paying jobs for those who go through the $100,000 AB Initio 141 programs, high cost/low reliability transportation for those who were expecting to avoid the airlines, high cost/hassle for those who just want to putz around every now and then, family resistance, life/medical insurance resistance, public disdain for the noise and pollution, all combine to keep GA a niche market, and for a niche market, GA is actually between OK and robust. The putters with low capital are well served by a hassle free and growing ultralight market and those who want to fly themselves around regardless of cost have a better variety of aircraft at all price points from which to choose and better, safer equipment than ever. The thing most pilots have trouble comprehending is that the vast majority of people have no desire to fly.

 

[wabower]

Let's say the pilot population continues to decline as predicted, planes get cheaper and Bonanzas sell for the same price as Corollas. Will demand change, or is the game over? If it's over, is the reason the purchase price or the ongoing own/op costs? What ownership benefit will become evident that will cause any change in pilot numbers or plane usage? If none, how will the purchase decision be couched when discussed around the coffee pot at the office?

What will account for the change of heart of the buying public? What's the tangible payback that they can wave under their wife's nose while they're reading TAP and talking to the banker? I already had a PPL from college days and could conjure up at least some credible reason that a plane might work. Could you?

In your mind is the fact that a person "wants to afford" something an important factor insofar as whether they actually "can afford it" and will then be likely to do actually do it? Have we lost the "want to afford" rather than the "can afford?"

And I could borrow the plane purchase money from my local bank in 10 minutes with a signature and description of the plane. No heloc's (whatever they are) or other documents required and could also deduct the interest and depreciation without any argument. Can that happen now?

Wayne, we are still making the same argument, whether you want to come at it from supply-side or demand-side. The "official" numbers say the U.S. economy is better, per capita, by far today than in 1969. Everyone is supposedly rolling in dough.

Unfortunately as you and I have pointed out, no one is buying. You'd argue that it's because mom and dad aren't interested in doing interesting things like learn to fly and play golf instead of working all the time. I'd argue that the creditors and government have perfected the squeeze to the point where folks have to make ends meet.

The truth lies in both, actually. But I'd like to think that folks would prefer to do at least a few interesting things in their limited lifespans besides pay the mortgage and taxes.

I'm simply arguing that there has to be an upside, which you correctly described that there once was in GA. You "didn't want to spend the money" to travel via GA but "had to" in order to make better money.

I'm basically looking at it from the perspective of WHY those guys with spreadsheets and supposedly 40 hour a week jobs (well, call it 60 or more with modern connectivity tech where your job follows you around in your pocket with a little electronic leash and no one staffs "the night shift" anymore) aren't spending their money on airplanes and golf. Is it because they choose to spend it elsewhere or do they simply not have it.

Government says we all have plenty of money. 8.4 times what we had in 1956. The question is, do we all have the same purchasing power? The numbers are being used to foist a pretty big lie, IMHO. The CPI says a Cessna 182 brand new should be less than $200K.

Perhaps you misunderstand my "risk averse" comment. Rephrase it as, "Are there any risks worth taking for the average Joe?" Obviously there are some... Lots of them bought Hybrid cars for a $5000 tax break and traded away working vehicles on a vehicle that wouldn't pay itself back in savings over the life of the loan.

For both aviation and golf, you have to find the trigger that gets folks to spend on things that won't pay back in anything but satisfaction. With Mangiamele there's little chance anyone today will use a GA aircraft in the manner you did. They can still get a round of drinks reimbursed by the company at the golf club, so they can make deals there, maybe.

The fun per dollar ratio of numerous pastimes has fallen drastically in my lifetime. Skiing? $75-$100 daily lift tickets? Yeah. No. I'll pass. I grew up skiing every weekend. Lift tickets were 1/3 that price 20 years ago.

So we're saying the same thing. Demand side, supply side... Doesn't matter. The average Joe can't purchase what they could 40 years ago for the same amount of time spent at work.

 

[Ted]

For most, there's just better ways to have fun. I love flying, but a lot of it is a big pain in the ass.

Joe blow buys a 30-40yr old $40k spamcan, has to invest a lot to get his license, has to get a medical and BFR every two, an annual every year, and oh yeah, you can't work on it yourself, and an hour of flying costs $100+.

Or Joe blow buys a new $40k boat, gets right on the water, the family loves it, and he can do all the work himself if he desires. And the $100 that buys an hour of flying buys a full day of running round the lake.

So, ask the guy who works his left one off all week which sounds like more fun this weekend?

Substitute boat for motorcyle, RV, etc., and you see the uphill battle.

That sums it up. For most, if you want to fly you actually should have a need to go somewhere. Most don't have that sort of need on a regular enough basis.

 

[poadeleted21]

For most, there's just better ways to have fun. I love flying, but a lot of it is a big pain in the ass.

Joe blow buys a 30-40yr old $40k spamcan, has to invest a lot to get his license, has to get a medical and BFR every two, an annual every year, and oh yeah, you can't work on it yourself, and an hour of flying costs $100+.

Or Joe blow buys a new $40k boat, gets right on the water, the family loves it, and he can do all the work himself if he desires. And the $100 that buys an hour of flying buys a full day of running round the lake.

So, ask the guy who works his left one off all week which sounds like more fun this weekend?

Substitute boat for motorcyle, RV, etc., and you see the uphill battle.

A coworker just looked at buying a boat that costs as much as my 50 year old spam can, I'm glad I don't have his bills. 13GPH is child's play, and slip fees make the local hangars seem like a bargain. They don't call em' Break Out Another Thousand for nothing...

 

[wabower]

Boat owners on our lake say their biggest monthly cost is from Spec's liquor store followed closely by the electricity bill for their dock appliances and shore power for boat A/C.

A coworker just looked at buying a boat that costs as much as my 50 year old spam can, I'm glad I don't have his bills. 13GPH is child's play, and slip fees make the local hangars seem like a bargain. They don't call em' Break Out Another Thousand for nothing...

 

[bbchien]

Wow - is this what I sounded like when I went through my "I'm ****ing right, dammit, stop telling me I'm wrong!" phase?

Yeah. you did.

 

[Doggtyred]

Thanks Ren and Ted. Would it be fair to say that flutter somehow related to intertia? I'm trying to wrap my head around "forces" which would be different from the ones resulting just from airflow.

Sam (who got poor grades in high school physics)

Kinda...

Its a black art and a bit of science.

Its essentially resonance... EVERY substance and system has a specific frequency it resonates at. Every. Remember Galloping Gertie the Tacoma Narrows bridge that failed on film in the 40s? thats flutter... thats resonance.

Those bays in Newfoundland that have extremely high tides? The wavelength of the tides matches the wavelength of reflected waves and they stack up on each other while the tide comes in.. building higher and higher..

Ever see industrial smokestacks with a spiral lip/ledge around them? Thats to prevent resonance and flutter (and collapse) in the stack (it breaks up the symmetrical front presented to relative wind.. not an option in an a/c, but it still describes an occurrence of resonant conditions)

Take a given airplane.. it may have a designated Vne. Which is a fraction of the Design Dive Speed (don't ask me how its calculated, its been a while since I've read). You can exceed that VNE 100 times in a row by a large margin and never have a problem, and the 101'st time you get bit hard. It could because some bird crap fell in just the wrong spot and unbalanced a control surface.. or a bolt untorqued and altered the stiffness of the control systems or any number of reasons.

Some sort of sudden control deflection excites your control system. It could be dropping something in the cockpit.. or an updraft... or whatever. Some control surface deflects, then is forced back in the other direction by aerodynamic forces... if that particular "frequency" of deflections matches the resonant frequency of that control surface and its linkage/attachments, it can build.. If it builds, it will continue until something gives... like the attachment point.

part of flight checking a homebuilt during your phase 1 is to do flutter testing. Set up at a stable speed, then suddenly deflect the controls.. only in one axis.. keep it simple... if you pick up a buzz or a hum in your ears or in the stick, thats flutter and you need to de-energize the system.. the quickest and easiest is to pull back slightly and pull power back to bleed off airspeed.

I would recommend to Jay that he actually see what his plane can do in a controlled, regimented fashion and perform all the exercises a builder would do in phase 1.. go up, determine stall speeds and AOA's for himself.. loaded and empty. Go up alone and do some flutter testing, by the numbers. There's an AC on all of this. Revalidate all the data.. for peace of mind.. and to make sure its still valid. Set some values that are valid and evidenced based, then stick within those values.

Vans planes are overbuilt... but everything has a breaking point, and the forces involved sometimes increase in an exponential manner, not always a linear one.

 

[SkyHog]

Yeah. you did.

In all fairness, I still think the FAA's medical branch is broken to pieces. I've just come to grips with the fact that I can't fix it, and no one else that can fix it wants to.

The FAA is more concerned with liability and avoiding embarrassment than it is with actually caring for the people it should be protecting.

 

[wabower]

I must have come in during the middle, because it was obvious I needed to quickly achieve separation until things changed in the maturation area. Has that happened yet?

Yeah. you did.

 

[Bill]

A coworker just looked at buying a boat that costs as much as my 50 year old spam can, I'm glad I don't have his bills. 13GPH is child's play, and slip fees make the local hangars seem like a bargain. They don't call em' Break Out Another Thousand for nothing...

Depends on what you buy and how you store it. We bought a new 21ft bowrider, perfect for our little family of three. I keep it in indoor dry storage year round at a local marina. I call as I leave the house and when we get there (15min later) the boat is in the water tied up to the dock. Remove the covers and you're gone! At the end of the day, tie up, cover up, and walk away. The dock crew puts the boat away. For this great service I pay 20% less than I pay for a hangar. (Well, plus the 12pack of beer I bring to the dock crew every couple of times)

And yes, I thought about a bigger boat, but the truth is I'm just too busy to deal with big boat systems. Multi engines, gensets, reverse cycle AC, battery banks, water, and toilets? Just don't want to deal. KISS.

 

[wabower]

Proximity is huge. The marina on Texoma was 1:15 in light traffic, which we don't have since the most recent round of road construction started shortly after WW-I. It made me realize that anything I want to do that's more than 30 minutes from the house is harder than it seemingly should be.

Depends on what you buy and how you store it. We bought a new 21ft bowrider, perfect for our little family of three. I keep it in indoor dry storage year round at a local marina. I call as I leave the house and when we get there (15min later) the boat is in the water tied up to the dock. Remove the covers and you're gone! At the end of the day, tie up, cover up, and walk away. The dock crew puts the boat away. For this great service I pay 20% less than I pay for a hangar. (Well, plus the 12pack of beer I bring to the dock crew every couple of times)

And yes, I thought about a bigger boat, but the truth is I'm just too busy to deal with big boat systems. Multi engines, gensets, reverse cycle AC, battery banks, water, and toilets? Just don't want to deal. KISS.

 

[JHW]

I store my wife's boat on its trailer in my hangar, so the boat storage fees are steep @ nearly $200 per month. Contrast that with the hangar cost for my plane which is free.

 

[Bill]

Proximity is huge.

I agree, living 15min from a large lake makes it easy and fun. One of the reasons I'm back on POA and flying again is to see if I want to keep flying. And if I keep flying, is keeping a travelling machine like the Mooney the right plane?

Ever since we bought the boat, I don't want to fly to the beach anymore. Travel on holiday weekends? Not anymore, I'd rather go to the lake, tube, have fun, tie up with our friends and swim/float/hang out all day. Towards the end of the day, caravan to one of the on-lake restaurants, and then a nice moonlight cruise down the lake back to the marina. Hard to beat. And not one federal hoop to jump thru to enjoy the fun.

Maybe if I keep flying I'd rather have a Citabria or maybe one of the STOL homebuilts like Just Aircraft. No IFR and IPC's, just stay VFR. THAT sounds like fun, KISS flying!

Or not own and rent a 172 on the VFR days when I want to sightsee or hit that $100 burger.

I'm in evaulation mode right now...

 

[Bill]

I store my wife's boat on its trailer in my hangar, so the boat storage fees are steep @ nearly $200 per month. Contrast that with the hangar cost for my plane which is free.

Now there's proper perspective.

 

[wabower]

If you want to see a Cessna taildragger sitting in a hangar that always housed some big retrac until a few years ago, drop by KADS for the tour. I reverted and couldn't be happier. One of the old Lear pioneers in Dallas says that the biggest improvement in travel is when you fly rather than drive, and a 172 is all you need to obtain those benefits. Anything bigger or faster is just incremental.

I agree, living 15min from a large lake makes it easy and fun. One of the reasons I'm back on POA and flying again is to see if I want to keep flying. And if I keep flying, is keeping a travelling machine like the Mooney the right plane?

Ever since we bought the boat, I don't want to fly to the beach anymore. Travel on holiday weekends? Not anymore, I'd rather go to the lake, tube, have fun, tie up with our friends and swim/float/hang out all day. Towards the end of the day, caravan to one of the on-lake restaurants, and then a nice moonlight cruise down the lake back to the marina. Hard to beat. And not one federal hoop to jump thru to enjoy the fun.

Maybe if I keep flying I'd rather have a Citabria or maybe one of the STOL homebuilts like Just Aircraft. No IFR and IPC's, just stay VFR. THAT sounds like fun, KISS flying!

Or not own and rent a 172 on the VFR days when I want to sightsee or hit that $100 burger.

I'm in evaulation mode right now...

 

[Ted]

I agree, living 15min from a large lake makes it easy and fun. One of the reasons I'm back on POA and flying again is to see if I want to keep flying. And if I keep flying, is keeping a travelling machine like the Mooney the right plane?

Ever since we bought the boat, I don't want to fly to the beach anymore. Travel on holiday weekends? Not anymore, I'd rather go to the lake, tube, have fun, tie up with our friends and swim/float/hang out all day. Towards the end of the day, caravan to one of the on-lake restaurants, and then a nice moonlight cruise down the lake back to the marina. Hard to beat. And not one federal hoop to jump thru to enjoy the fun.

Maybe if I keep flying I'd rather have a Citabria or maybe one of the STOL homebuilts like Just Aircraft. No IFR and IPC's, just stay VFR. THAT sounds like fun, KISS flying!

Or not own and rent a 172 on the VFR days when I want to sightsee or hit that $100 burger.

I'm in evaulation mode right now...

That is quite the evaluation. For us the 310 now makes a great family airplane since the milk run to the in laws is 3-3.5 hrs each way in it. When kiddo gets older, we'll probably find ourselves flying more for personal than we are now (I think we've averaged a family trip of some sort every 2-3 months). I start to get a bit stir-crazy if I'm in the same state for too long. And hopefully Cloud Nine will start picking back up a bit more.

But the past year has represented a massive change in my flying, and the past two years have represented an even more massive shift in my wife's flying. It is a change that is still trying to find a new equilibrium.

I can say I would be a lot happier if the 310 burned premium out of the gas pump down the street instead of 100LL.

 

[jsstevens]

LOL. Getting old is a hell of a thing.

But so far, it beats the alternative...

 

[denverpilot]

Let's say the pilot population continues to decline as predicted, planes get cheaper and Bonanzas sell for the same price as Corollas. Will demand change, or is the game over? If it's over, is the reason the purchase price or the ongoing own/op costs? What ownership benefit will become evident that will cause any change in pilot numbers or plane usage? If none, how will the purchase decision be couched when discussed around the coffee pot at the office?

What will account for the change of heart of the buying public? What's the tangible payback that they can wave under their wife's nose while they're reading TAP and talking to the banker? I already had a PPL from college days and could conjure up at least some credible reason that a plane might work. Could you?

In your mind is the fact that a person "wants to afford" something an important factor insofar as whether they actually "can afford it" and will then be likely to do actually do it? Have we lost the "want to afford" rather than the "can afford?"

And I could borrow the plane purchase money from my local bank in 10 minutes with a signature and description of the plane. No heloc's (whatever they are) or other documents required and could also deduct the interest and depreciation without any argument. Can that happen now?

Appreciate you taking the time to type it up a different way. I think I get what you're saying now, and it's not a pretty picture for light GA.

 

[wabower]

I wish it were different, and continue to hope for a 4th-quarter comeback that keeps us (or those who succeed us) in the game in a better way. I think that today's fleet of GA planes can be airworthy for years to come, just not sure where we find the people with the time, motivation and justification to own and fly them.

In retrospect it's easy to see how my group was able to do what we did, and to also understand how much harder it has become for you guys. As much as I might like to think we were smarter or better-looking, some economist would probably point out that it has more to do with when we were born.

Appreciate you taking the time to type it up a different way. I think I get what you're saying now, and it's not a pretty picture for light GA.

 

[bbchien]

In all fairness, I still think the FAA's medical branch is broken to pieces. I've just come to grips with the fact that I can't fix it, and no one else that can fix it wants to.

The FAA is more concerned with liability and avoiding embarrassment than it is with actually caring for the people it should be protecting.

You actually need to get to a nephrologist (a guy who figures out why your stuff keeps forming) and get that worked out. Then FAA will not be a problem at all. In your simple situation, you don't even recognize the difference between a nephrologist and a urologist.

But I can't help guys who spend most of their energy protesting, and little of it understanding. But I think you are changing....

Now you're a dad, too. You really should figure this out.

******

We all go through this sort of phase. I did too. Glad you didn't get to know me when I was 21. You might have mistaken, me for you.

******

And if Jay lives long enough, maybe he will figure out that:

(1) Zoom climbs are idiocy from a safety point of view.
(2) Mounting a Gopro on two screws on an unreinforced rib is idiocy.
(3) You find out what RTV you are using and its' characteristics before you use a whole 10 oz tube to hold a silly little fairing on.

...and he too will figure out how to be mature about maintainence, inspection and flying.

But just as he posts, that he has little tolerance for maroons and idiots, so it goes with me (and with regard also, now to him).

 

[wabower]

Nick's reaction to organizations that don't do things exactly the way he perceives they should be done might not be the best model for effective problem-solving.

You actually need to get to a nephrologist (a guy who figures out why your stuff keeps forming) and get that worked out. Then FAA will not be a problem at all. In your simple situation, you don't even recognize the difference between a nephrologist and a urologist.

But I can't help guys who spend most of their energy protesting, and little of it understanding. But I think you are changing....

Now you're a dad, too. You really should figure this out.

 

[denverpilot]

I wish it were different, and continue to hope for a 4th-quarter comeback that keeps us (or those who succeed us) in the game in a better way. I think that today's fleet of GA planes can be airworthy for years to come, just not sure where we find the people with the time, motivation and justification to own and fly them.

In retrospect it's easy to see how my group was able to do what we did, and to also understand how much harder it has become for you guys. As much as I might like to think we were smarter or better-looking, some economist would probably point out that it has more to do with when we were born.

There's always that "it goes easier if you're prepared" stuff but there is an awful lot of my life that was a mixture of that and "timing always affects the outcome of the rain dance".

I've joked a few times that TSA needs to get even more out of control than they already are. That'd be a pretty good justification to never set foot on an airliner unless absolutely necessary. We should all champion overbearing TSA rules but for airliners only.

Bring on the random strip searches!!! Heh.