GA, is it dying a slow death?

ClimbnSink said:
There are these folks: http://www.stopthenoise.org/
Apparently their poop doesn't stink. Society as a whole has a problem when you can be charged with careless and reckless for putting yourself(and no one else) in danger.
Click to expand...
No one was charged with careless and reckless, in fact according to their site the FAA is the problem for doing nothing, so they sued.

http://www.stopthenoise.org/faaistheproblem.htm

Here is their settlement. It doesn't sound like much of anything other than it took 5 years to come to this conclusion. Too bad they couldn't have resolved it outside the courts.

http://www.stopthenoise.org/docs/CvG/Joint Settlement Statement.pdf
 
I've always wanted to fly. I was either born with it or it was instilled in me at a very early age. Society at the time, (early/mid 60's), seemed to embrace aviation and pilots. It was seen as cutting edge, adventurous and just plain fun. Now aviation is demonized by the media and government. Airlines are a terrible experience and have become bus-like.

Cost and lack of interest by younger people are going to kill GA. Why fly a real airplane when you can do all kidns of things on a TV screen. I don't get it, but it seems the younger generations do and they are fine with virtual reality. I'm not.
 
Everskyward said:
No one was charged with careless and reckless, in fact according to their site the FAA is the problem for doing nothing, so they sued.
Click to expand...

The trouble with "Stop the Noise" was that they tried to use the courts to make it so expensive to fly that ALL GA would cease. This was their stated purpose at one time. They beleived that no one had the right to fly over their property for any purpose other than high altitude airline travel. They would record the N numbers of any GA aircraft that flew over and try to report violations to the FAA. Since there WERE NO violations, they filed civil suits against certain individuals. One of the STN organizers was a lawyer working for free so they figured they could just use the courts to bankrupt the pilots with leagal fees.

After some initial interviews and press releases demonstrated just how fanatically anti GA they were, they changed their website and changed their tone to APPEAR to be less extreme. Make no mistake, they are still people that GA should consider a real threat.
 
maddog52 said:
After some initial interviews and press releases demonstrated just how fanatically anti GA they were, they changed their website and changed their tone to APPEAR to be less extreme. Make no mistake, they are still people that GA should consider a real threat.
Click to expand...
You're always going to have the fringe element for any cause. I could name a few but we would be going right into the SZ. I still don't think the general public is anti-GA. I think they are mostly indifferent although when an airplane crashes into a house it usually gets their attention. But who can blame them?
 
I think that the general public has been conditioned to be anti-GA inadvertently by the media. By focusing on crashes and danger the media has painted a very one-sided picture of GA. By having extensive coverage of celebrity aircraft mishaps they have painted it as a rich man's game. Most people have little to no capacity for critical thinking, and assume the media is correct, and is not just showing them the stories that garner the most attention to sell stuff.
 
Everskyward said:
No one was charged with careless and reckless, in fact according to their site the FAA is the problem for doing nothing, so they sued.

http://www.stopthenoise.org/faaistheproblem.htm

Here is their settlement. It doesn't sound like much of anything other than it took 5 years to come to this conclusion. Too bad they couldn't have resolved it outside the courts.

http://www.stopthenoise.org/docs/CvG/Joint Settlement Statement.pdf
Click to expand...

I didn't mean STN having folks charged. But that in our modern world you can be charged for putting yourself at risk. Speaks to how civilized we have become.
 
Everskyward said:
You're always going to have the fringe element for any cause. I could name a few but we would be going right into the SZ. I still don't think the general public is anti-GA. I think they are mostly indifferent although when an airplane crashes into a house it usually gets their attention. But who can blame them?
Click to expand...

Exactly right.

Which is why we need to police our own ranks. Too many of those "little airplanes" kiling people on the ground will cause the usually tolerant majority to sit up and take notice.
 
dmccormack said:
Do you have to work at being an a-hole, or is it simply a gift?
:sosp:

"Policing our own ranks" means confronting pilots who wilfully disregard basic flight safety.
Click to expand...

So as an example of how you would do this is like your response here to my question?:nonod: Name calling is really childish.

When you start "policing our own ranks" this opens up the "fantasy feds" who begin their own interpretations of what's "willfully" disregarding basic flight safety. Reminds me of one Pilot who became an Aviation Safety Counselor that proceeded to walk around the airport with a lanyard that read "FAA" with her ID showing she was a Safety Counselor. She would walk up and identify herself as "FAA" then proceed to chastise for what she perceived as a "safety violation".
 
Last edited:
Rotor&Wing said:
So as an example of how you would do this is like your response here to my question?:nonod: Name calling is really childish.

When you start "policing our own ranks" this opens up the "fantasy feds" who begin their own interpretations of what's "willfully" disregarding basic flight safety.
Click to expand...

::sigh::

If you seriously think there is only a binary answer here (Gestapo or "Say nothing"), I suggest you remain mute and let other, more mature pilots discuss unsafe piloting with fellow fliers.

When we laugh along and backslap at stupid pilot trick stories we provide tacit endorsement.
 
dmccormack said:
::sigh::

If you seriously think there is only a binary answer here (Gestapo or "Say nothing"), I suggest you remain mute and let other, more mature pilots discuss unsafe piloting with fellow fliers.

When we laugh along and backslap at stupid pilot trick stories we provide tacit endorsement.
Click to expand...

Hey Dan, got news for you. I have far more ratings and experience than you will ever achieve in your lifetime. I have as much right to voice my opinion here as you.

I asked you a simple question and you couldn't answer it so you resorted to childish name calling. Perhaps this is how you deal with your students when they ask you a question.
 
Good lord not the police ourselves routine. Sorry but standards of safety vary. As do standards of risk aversion. What is safe for some isn't safe for others. Not bloody likely your average GA pilots knows anything about the SOP for anything but average GA flying. Go police yourself. Fly free or die for there is a fate worse than death.
 
Rotor&Wing said:
Hey Dan, got news for you. I have far more ratings and experience than you will ever achieve in your lifetime. I have as much right to voice my opinion here as you.

I asked you a simple question and you couldn't answer it so you resorted to childish name calling. Perhaps this is how you deal with your students when they ask you a question.
Click to expand...

Good grief -- you really are a baby, aren't you?

:frown2:

I answered your question but you choose to ignore.

Your loss.
 
dmccormack said:
If you seriously think there is only a binary answer here (Gestapo or "Say nothing"), I suggest you remain mute and let other, more mature pilots discuss unsafe piloting with fellow fliers.
Click to expand...
I think you should have used a word other than "policing". Policing doesn't work well because it's negative reinforcement. People resent being told what to do especially if you have no authority to do so. You're not their boss; you're not the FAA; you're not their mother. Perhaps the best you can do is encourage safe practices and set a good example.
 
Everskyward said:
I think you should have used a word other than "policing". Policing doesn't work well because it's negative reinforcement. People resent being told what to do especially if you have no authority to do so. You're not their boss; you're not the FAA; you're not their mother. Perhaps the best you can do is encourage safe practices and set a good example.
Click to expand...

Exactly! :yes:
 
Everskyward for president in 2012! Mari, your posts are always spot on; reasoned and without vitriol.

Scott
 
Everskyward said:
I think you should have used a word other than "policing". Policing doesn't work well because it's negative reinforcement. People resent being told what to do especially if you have no authority to do so. You're not their boss; you're not the FAA; you're not their mother. Perhaps the best you can do is encourage safe practices and set a good example.
Click to expand...

That's my military background showing up. We use "policing" for cleaning up trash, checking for lost items, and generally making sure stuff is squared away.

"Encouragement" doesn't work because sometimes the offender has a bit too much "courage."

It's a tough one, because in other small population activities I've participated in (hunting, fishing, cycling, motorcycling, backpacking) it's usually a small few that really make it harder than it should be for the rest.

For example, in MT (nearly) everyone now practices catch and release. Here in PA I've seen many nice fish laying on the side of the river, left to rot because Clem was "too tired" to carry his catch to the road.

What's the difference?

I think in MT there has been a steady shift after years of fishermen telling each other, "Hey, dude -- don't ruin it for the rest of us." They pick up riverside trash, give the evil eye to someone walking out with a stringer full, and generally approve of the "So I threw that on back.. even though he was a keeper..." story.

You can't tell too many fishermen anything like that in PA without a fight.

So in PA we fish for hatchery-raised slothful fish while MT maintains a healthy naturally regenerating trout population.

Same thing with camping -- 100 backpackers can use a trail in a month, then one slug comes in, burns down half the woods, leaves plastic bags lying all over, and then the landowner says, "That's enough of that!"

Offroading? Same problem. 300 dirt bikes run a trail without a problem. Then Cletus shows up with pipes off, runs up and down the edges of the landowners pond, muddying up the water and killing the fish.

A week later, lots of "No Posted" signs.

Sure, we all love our freedom and we pilots are individuals to the core.

But it's a small, small world we inhabit, and we all pay a price when numbskulls do stupid stuff.

How to fix? I don't know. Better training? A look of disapproval instead of a chuckle when Joe tells us about the barn he buzzed?
 
dmccormack said:
Thanks for the info that helps put our flying in perspective!

Though I have to ask.. is your logbook filled with "Flew XC, .0225 hours" entries?
Click to expand...

Hi

Not quite...:fingerwag:

But it does contain a lot "Armageddon (LLMG) Practice Area" - not many interesting options to choose from around here...

Take care
 
steingar said:
Mah schlomchah,

I was half-joking about Israel being 2 miles wide, although the dimensions of Israel are really small compared to the US. I figured if you wanted to really go cross country you would fly internationally. If we fly in circles here in the US, it is to land repeatedly while remaining in the traffic pattern. Lots of us do that from time to time.

I wasn't joking at all when I said that GA was dead elsewhere, including most of Europe. I figured there wouldn't be that much activity in Eretz Israel due to the small dimensions and troubles with the neighbors. In Europe the gas is outrageous and there are fees for just about everything. I don't think people do touch and goes often because they're charged per landing. As I understand it a sizable number of the aircraft are from the US and many (if not most) of the pilots are trained here. Mind you this is all second hand information, I have not flown GA outside the US.

We live in fear of that here in the US things will become similar. We've seen more and more regulation regarding airspace and where you can and can't go. Successive administrations have tried to implement user fees similar to what they have in Europe. I've read that we loose an airport every two weeks.

Add to all this the aging pilot population, and we see a grim picture. However, I have no doubt that it looks really good from over there. But remember, loose the US and you loose the US GA aircraft manufacturing. That could truly have worldwide repercussions, and make things that much worse where you are.

Damn, its late over there. Don't you dudes ever sleep?
Click to expand...

Hello again...

We do sleep around here...but not much :yes:

I guess that with so many laws and regulations in effect nowadays, a lot of the freedom experienced by early aviators is long gone now...

GA (that's a well kept secret) is not so good as an alternative mode of transportation - certainly not where I live - but it used to be a great way to get the adrenalin pumping...

That's the kind of flying I was dreaming about when I got my license...
http://shaunlunt.typepad.com/

Take care

Alon
 
Armageddon Aviator said:
Hello again...

We do sleep around here...but not much :yes:

I guess that with so many laws and regulations in effect nowadays, a lot of the freedom experienced by early aviators is long gone now...

GA (that's a well kept secret) is not so good as an alternative mode of transportation - certainly not where I live - but it used to be a great way to get the adrenalin pumping...

That's the kind of flying I was dreaming about when I got my license...
http://shaunlunt.typepad.com/

Take care

Alon
Click to expand...

Come on over to Seattle Dude. We have a cool place for you to stay where you can look at the new Highlander Amphibion from your waterfront window that you can also fly or get ratings in and land on off airport sites in the mountains and beaches.
 
Last edited:
Dave Krall CFII said:
Come on over to Seattle Dude. We have a cool place for you to stay where you can look at the new Highlander Amphibion from your waterfront window that you can also fly or get ratings in and land on off airport sites in the mountains and beaches.
Click to expand...

Hi Dave

Thanks for the invitation - that's very kind and generous :)

One day perhaps...

All the best

Alon
 
Armageddon Aviator said:
Hello again...

We do sleep around here...but not much :yes:

I guess that with so many laws and regulations in effect nowadays, a lot of the freedom experienced by early aviators is long gone now...

GA (that's a well kept secret) is not so good as an alternative mode of transportation - certainly not where I live - but it used to be a great way to get the adrenalin pumping...

That's the kind of flying I was dreaming about when I got my license...
http://shaunlunt.typepad.com/

Take care

Alon
Click to expand...

One of the advantages of North America is there are large stretches of it that are grossly underpopulated. Fewer people invariably means less regulation. Big spaces make aircraft useful as well as fun.

I doubt it is so in Europe or Israel, so like Dave said come here! The US is cheap for foreigners, and there's lots to do, including flying. I met the fellow last year who flew his Cozy all the way from Israel to the big airshow at Oshkosh.
 
Multiple factors at play. Money is a biggie, but it's not only the money itself, but the low practical value most people get for their money. The value of aviation has to be highly subsidized by enjoyment value. For transportation or time value, it's a loser in 95% of circumstances, and the reality is, there's way more people who don't like flying small planes than that do. AOPA has been trying to get more people into GA for as long as they've existed, and the results have always been marginal at best. Personally I think it's a good thing because most people shouldn't be pilots, hell, many shouldn't be allowed behind the wheel of a car. As for costs, your shop guy had it right, it's what the market will bear. People who don't know the details of the technology or how to implement it will pay good money to feel safe. Garmin went and made products for the lowest common denominator pilot, no need to know anything about navigating anymore, just follow the magenta line, and quintupled the price of a navigational radio over night and have been doing booming business since buying and bullying competitors out of the market. None of it actually makes you safer, it just makes it easier to be as safe. Now if you're a bit more sophisticated and don't operate commercially, you can go AB experimental, but then you have to rely on yourself and most people just aren't that adept so they choose to stay certified and rely on someone else to tell them they're safe. If you're married and/or with children, your household budget has to be considerably higher than if you're single unless you are in the rare situation where the aircraft has actual value that can be shown on a spread sheet using real numbers. Momma's not gonna let you have a plane and p---y until her closet is full of shoes.... If you have $30k annually of discretionary income after making momma happy, then you can afford aviation as an owner. That's not being an elitist either, that's being a realist, that is unless you're hooked up with a girl who finds value in the act of aviating and would rather fly than have shoes or remodel the house again. Until the future hovercar/flying car come into existence and increase the usefulness (you have to be able to land in your driveway and the parking lot of the grocery store and work and do 300kts+ cruise and get 15 cent a mile fuel efficiency) of flying, the numbers for GA will stay roughly proportionate to how they are now.
 
Henning said:
Multiple factors at play. Money is a biggie, but it's not only the money itself, but the low practical value most people get for their money. The value of aviation has to be highly subsidized by enjoyment value. For transportation or time value, it's a loser in 95% of circumstances, and the reality is, there's way more people who don't like flying small planes than that do. AOPA has been trying to get more people into GA for as long as they've existed, and the results have always been marginal at best. Personally I think it's a good thing because most people shouldn't be pilots, hell, many shouldn't be allowed behind the wheel of a car. As for costs, your shop guy had it right, it's what the market will bear. People who don't know the details of the technology or how to implement it will pay good money to feel safe. Garmin went and made products for the lowest common denominator pilot, no need to know anything about navigating anymore, just follow the magenta line, and quintupled the price of a navigational radio over night and have been doing booming business since buying and bullying competitors out of the market. None of it actually makes you safer, it just makes it easier to be as safe. Now if you're a bit more sophisticated and don't operate commercially, you can go AB experimental, but then you have to rely on yourself and most people just aren't that adept so they choose to stay certified and rely on someone else to tell them they're safe. If you're married and/or with children, your household budget has to be considerably higher than if you're single unless you are in the rare situation where the aircraft has actual value that can be shown on a spread sheet using real numbers. Momma's not gonna let you have a plane and p---y until her closet is full of shoes.... If you have $30k annually of discretionary income after making momma happy, then you can afford aviation as an owner. That's not being an elitist either, that's being a realist, that is unless you're hooked up with a girl who finds value in the act of aviating and would rather fly than have shoes or remodel the house again. Until the future hovercar/flying car come into existence and increase the usefulness (you have to be able to land in your driveway and the parking lot of the grocery store and work and do 300kts+ cruise and get 15 cent a mile fuel efficiency) of flying, the numbers for GA will stay roughly proportionate to how they are now.
Click to expand...

Having a "moment of clarity" there?...:cheerswine:

I do agree with your assessment. :thumbsup:
 
wsuffa said:
I've been known to tip good service.
Click to expand...

Then you should have been able to get someone out to fill your O2. I even flew into our shop at LGB from Catalina once to do a quick bit of service for a good customer. Buddy up with one of the mechanics and let him know you'll make it worth his while to come in and get his cell number. I've also talked my way into filling my own O2 from an FBOs cart. You can also leave a set of hangar keys/combos with both FBOs and call them during the week to fill your O2. They'll drag the cart over to your hangar and set you up. I used to do that a lot working at a repair station, "Take the tug and O2 cart and go over to (whomevers) hangar and top it up. Here's the keys and the radio", no sweat. There is always a way to get things done, and if you think it's bad there, try Europe, "Can't be done", or Australia, "We can't get that here."
 
flhrci said:
GA is dying because it is cost-prohibitive to most folks, especially in this economy. I am on my second extended non-flying period, currently at 8 months and growing. I am a CFI and can't get work as a CFI nor can I afford to fly even privately with the current non-flying job that I have now.

David
Click to expand...


I have to agree. I also think that a big contributor to the slow rotting of GA is insurance. This sue-happy society we live in with all the slithering liability lawyers is like a gangreen eating away at our world here.

:nonod:
 
More airplanes available each year with fewer pilots who want to fly them. This ain't rocket surgery.

Henning said:
Multiple factors at play. Money is a biggie, but it's not only the money itself, but the low practical value most people get for their money. The value of aviation has to be highly subsidized by enjoyment value. For transportation or time value, it's a loser in 95% of circumstances, and the reality is, there's way more people who don't like flying small planes than that do. AOPA has been trying to get more people into GA for as long as they've existed, and the results have always been marginal at best. Personally I think it's a good thing because most people shouldn't be pilots, hell, many shouldn't be allowed behind the wheel of a car. As for costs, your shop guy had it right, it's what the market will bear. People who don't know the details of the technology or how to implement it will pay good money to feel safe. Garmin went and made products for the lowest common denominator pilot, no need to know anything about navigating anymore, just follow the magenta line, and quintupled the price of a navigational radio over night and have been doing booming business since buying and bullying competitors out of the market. None of it actually makes you safer, it just makes it easier to be as safe. Now if you're a bit more sophisticated and don't operate commercially, you can go AB experimental, but then you have to rely on yourself and most people just aren't that adept so they choose to stay certified and rely on someone else to tell them they're safe. If you're married and/or with children, your household budget has to be considerably higher than if you're single unless you are in the rare situation where the aircraft has actual value that can be shown on a spread sheet using real numbers. Momma's not gonna let you have a plane and p---y until her closet is full of shoes.... If you have $30k annually of discretionary income after making momma happy, then you can afford aviation as an owner. That's not being an elitist either, that's being a realist, that is unless you're hooked up with a girl who finds value in the act of aviating and would rather fly than have shoes or remodel the house again. Until the future hovercar/flying car come into existence and increase the usefulness (you have to be able to land in your driveway and the parking lot of the grocery store and work and do 300kts+ cruise and get 15 cent a mile fuel efficiency) of flying, the numbers for GA will stay roughly proportionate to how they are now.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
More airplanes available each year with fewer pilots who want to fly them. This ain't rocket surgery.
Click to expand...

There's now and always been plenty who "want" to fly them, just been declining in numbers as it becomes more demanding and restrictive because they don't "want" it enough to make real flight materialize. It's an ongoing trend in others areas as well with no change in sight.
 
steingar said:
One of the advantages of North America is there are large stretches of it that are grossly underpopulated. Fewer people invariably means less regulation. Big spaces make aircraft useful as well as fun.

I doubt it is so in Europe or Israel, so like Dave said come here! The US is cheap for foreigners, and there's lots to do, including flying. I met the fellow last year who flew his Cozy all the way from Israel to the big airshow at Oshkosh.
Click to expand...

I spent some time in the U.S...I really love the country :yes: and its breathtaking landscapes.

But then, who doesn't ? (apart Al-Qaieda and some other morons of the same kind...)

I indeed consider doing some flying in America, there is a bit of apprehension since we are not familiar with your system.
The truth is that we are "spoon fed" by the ATC system who monitors our every move and provides precise instructions...

Flying VFR without the help of the Big Brother is somewhat frightening - but we're seriously contemplating this option.

Have a nice weekend.

Alon
 
Ultrabuzzard said:
I have to agree. I also think that a big contributor to the slow rotting of GA is insurance. This sue-happy society we live in with all the slithering liability lawyers is like a gangreen eating away at our world here.

:nonod:
Click to expand...


I pay less for my airplane insurance than I do my car insurance.
 
Armageddon Aviator said:
I spent some time in the U.S...I really love the country :yes: and its breathtaking landscapes.

But then, who doesn't ? (apart Al-Qaieda and some other morons of the same kind...)

I indeed consider doing some flying in America, there is a bit of apprehension since we are not familiar with your system.
The truth is that we are "spoon fed" by the ATC system who monitors our every move and provides precise instructions...

Flying VFR without the help of the Big Brother is somewhat frightening - but we're seriously contemplating this option.

Have a nice weekend.

Alon
Click to expand...


A good hand held GPS will help you through a lot of that. The rules really are pretty basic, and Dave's a good instructor to run you through them. As you mentioned, one of the great things here are the landscapes, and what's cool about flying small planes is that you can get multiple landscapes in a day, and sometimes the transitions are just awesome. You can fly out green high mountain pastures over a pass into a striped, once ocean bottom, desert carved by glaciers. A "must do" is one I discovered at night and led me to buy a twin, is Vegas to Long Beach. You do it on a nice clear night, dark, but before the marine layer builds. You do it around 11,000 and when you clear over the ridge N of Big Bear, the sea of lights is a spectacular sight. Then click 7 on 122.7 and light up the runways out on Santa Catalina and San Clemente islands. It reallyt is cool to see, especially if you get on a Santana night when you'll have a healthy 70kt tailwind.

You could fly into Seattle, spend a few days (I could easily do 10 in the area with floats) and check things out in the Highlander. It ought to be a good little airplane. I did some of the building on it, and Dave was determined to build it right. I wouldn't hesitate to get in it. It should perform reasonably well too. Then take off East across the Badlands, stop at Jackson Hole. I used to go there as a little kid and it was a great small mountain town with a spectacular view of the Grand Teton range out across a marsh. Lots of wildlife from moose on down. Next place is Yellowstone. It's a bit restrictive, but still worthwhile, the geyser pools are really beautiful. Head down the Rockies in the valley West of the front range(the Eastern Range on the edge of the Prarie). It's an irrigated valley with large irrigated fields of alfalfa. It also provides the safest routing between mountain destinations (Steamboat Springs is still one of my favored destinations, the springs, and horses are available in the area) along with the best views. Fly it down to Alamosa, and from there to Albuquerque, Sedona AZ, Vegas, So Cal, Catalina, Santa Barbara, up the coast and back to Seattle. That would give you a high value program and tour that can be done in as little as 7 days., although if you had a month for the trip, you'd still end up wishing you had a few more days.
 
Henning said:
A good hand held GPS will help you through a lot of that. The rules really are pretty basic, and Dave's a good instructor to run you through them. As you mentioned, one of the great things here are the landscapes, and what's cool about flying small planes is that you can get multiple landscapes in a day, and sometimes the transitions are just awesome. You can fly out green high mountain pastures over a pass into a striped, once ocean bottom, desert carved by glaciers. A "must do" is one I discovered at night and led me to buy a twin, is Vegas to Long Beach. You do it on a nice clear night, dark, but before the marine layer builds. You do it around 11,000 and when you clear over the ridge N of Big Bear, the sea of lights is a spectacular sight. Then click 7 on 122.7 and light up the runways out on Santa Catalina and San Clemente islands. It reallyt is cool to see, especially if you get on a Santana night when you'll have a healthy 70kt tailwind.

You could fly into Seattle, spend a few - days (I could easily do 10 in the area with floats) and check things out in the Highlander. It ought to be a good little airplane. I did some of the building on it, and Dave was determined to build it right. I wouldn't hesitate to get in it. It should perform reasonably well too. Then take off East across the Badlands, stop at Jackson Hole. I used to go there as a little kid and it was a great small mountain town with a spectacular view of the Grand Teton range out across a marsh. Lots of wildlife from moose on down. Next place is Yellowstone. It's a bit restrictive, but still worthwhile, the geyser pools are really beautiful. Head down the Rockies in the valley West of the front range(the Eastern Range on the edge of the Prarie). It's an irrigated valley with large irrigated fields of alfalfa. It also provides the safest routing between mountain destinations (Steamboat Springs is still one of my favored destinations, the springs, and horses are available in the area) along with the best views. Fly it down to Alamosa, and from there to Albuquerque, Sedona AZ, Vegas, So Cal, Catalina, Santa Barbara, up the coast and back to Seattle. That would give you a high value program and tour that can be done in as little as 7 days., although if you had a month for the trip, you'd still end up wishing you had a few more days.
Click to expand...

Thanks a lot for the advice :)

I am going to keep that on file.

I am not familiar with the airspace and the regulations but there are excellent resources available...so hopefully it shouldn't be too much of a problem.

The weather is rarely a factor in Israel, not so in America...

I will try to do this during the month of May, I just hate it when it's hot...:D

Oregon and North California will be probably included in the plan.
The Appalachians could be an alternative...
As for the Rockies and Washington State...I don't have any experience in mountain flying and flying a rented C-172 near its max service altitude with anemic performances would give me the creeps...

Take care

Alon
 
ClimbnSink said:
2 Reasons:
1. Without owning a pilots license is useless at least in respect to the utility promised.
Click to expand...

Bull****. I don't own an airplane, and I get a TON of utility out of GA.

I am in a flying club, which helps, but I also have a good FBO locally with lots of airplanes. Sure, it's hard to take a 172 for the weekend on a whim, but you'll have better luck with the higher-performance birds. Looking at the FBO schedule for this weekend, I could right now rent a Seneca or an SR22 for the remainder of the weekend, and I could even take a 152 if the FBO would move one person's reservation to a different 152 (which I think they normally would, with that person's permission). As far as the club goes, the 182 is available for the remainder of the weekend as well.

2. Pilots are jerks- well maybe not jerks but not friendly, unless there is mutual appreciation to spread around. Don't believe me leave the AOPA hat and A2 in the car and walk around an unfamiliar airport.
Money and time are important but the above is the problem. Good luck getting some change.
Click to expand...

Pilots are VERY friendly, but almost too friendly with each other. Try going up to a group of six or so non-pilot people who are good friends and laughing and having a lively conversation and see how easy it is to break in.

I think the problem isn't necessarily pilots, but FBO's. It seems that the main reason people get into the FBO business is that they like flying. They may be great pilots, but they often absolutely suck at customer service. I think AOPA would do well to spend some bucks doing some business consulting for small-airport FBO's to make them more welcoming to non-pilots.
 
dmccormack said:
There are several online calculators to get the relative value of money. This page has a link to quite a few: http://projects.exeter.ac.uk/RDavies/arian/current/howmuch.html

According to the relative value of money calculator, $4500 in 1960 equals $32,000 in 2008.
Click to expand...

In 1958, a brand-new Piper Comanche 250 sold for $21,250, which equates to $158,201.55 in 2008 dollars. To my knowledge, the only airplanes that you can buy for that kind of money today are LSA's. Or you could buy half a new 172. :nonod:

Current high-performance four-seat load-haulers are running about 4x that amount. No wonder GA is shrinking...

Liability and other factors have hurt prices in other industries too, though - For comparison, a 1958 Corvette went for $3,591 which would be $26,734.20 in 2008. Corvettes are now starting at $48,565.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top