LoneAspen
Line Up and Wait
I watched that Andy Griffith episode where Aunt Bee learns to fly. Very cool, and brings back memories of watching that show when I was a kid.
GA pilot decline
- Thread starter brien23
- Start date
Great show. Remember the episode where Andy caught Floyd and Aunt Bea in bed together? Or the time Barney busted Opie for pot and Andy tried to destroy the evidence? How about the one where Goober was stealing car parts?
TV sure ain’t what it used to be....
azure
Final Approach
Some news from this morning that's somewhat germane: got an email from a former ROTC commander here who wanted to use my plane for primary training for students. Seems there is a lot of interest in aviation here after all. I know that we used to have a flying club and flight training program here years ago, but for some reason it was canceled. I've been interested in seeing if it might be possible to revive it, but was not sure whether there would be enough interest, nor in how to go about doing it, especially given that I'm not a CFI.
Oh BTW, I told him no as to using my plane for primary training, but that I'd like to help in any (other) way I can. We'll be meeting at 1530 to discuss the project.
Oh BTW, I told him no as to using my plane for primary training, but that I'd like to help in any (other) way I can. We'll be meeting at 1530 to discuss the project.
steingar
Taxi to Parking
When I went to sell my first aircraft, a Cessna 150, the FBO at my airport asked if I would put in on leaseback. I discussed the situation with my insurer, who forcefully dissuaded me from the idea. Indeed, the fellow who sold me the 150 did so because the insurance made his leaseback untenable.
i realize this thread is very old but I appreciated some of the insights. I have considered pursuing a PPL for some time. I am now over 50. Here is what held me back:
1- The insurance and possible liability of flying a plane was prohibitive. My personal umbrella insurance would not cover it (I checked). Frankly, when you are young and have no assets you really do not care about it. When you are older and have assets to protect - liability becomes an issue. So the people that can more easily afford to get their PPL are the same people that think about liability. I think this would be solvable with a more specialized insurance company but it was a hurdle to have to figure it all out. "Is it really worth it" is constantly being asked during this process of figuring out how to handle liability.
2- When I ride in a car from the 70's and then return to a Tesla or even a new Toyota Rav4 from 2019 you can hardly believe they are related things. Frankly, any car from the 70's or even 80's screams 'relic'. Fun to try - yes. Trust your life with it? Heck no. I will take the modern Rav4. However, if you show me a Cessna 172 from the 70's and a new one - you have to carefully point out the differences. Frankly, piston aircraft have really lagged in tech. Cirrus is making an effort but by comparison to the auto industry it is still a laggard. Most students are shown a 172 "to try". That is your first impression of the state of GA. I have no idea why Cessna has failed to move the industry forward. It does not inspire you to think real improvements have been made in the industry.
Which leads to my last point...
3- We have access to worldwide information at the click of a button. As a potential new student, you will always, eventually, type in 'general aviation accidents" in Google. Instantly, you can find thousands of reasons to re-consider the hobby. Frankly, the web distorts danger. You will never read a million articles about all the safe GA flights that have occurred. You will only find article after article after article about all the pilots that have died while flying a GA plane. Google (not by intent - just by the nature of the service) is the real reason why people have an elevated fear of flying.
Combine this with insurance problems and the sense there has been little progress in the plane tech itself from the outside to actually make it safer - it is easier just to pass on it.
I have no idea if my issues are common or not. Just wanted to share them for those in GA trying to make a difference.
1- The insurance and possible liability of flying a plane was prohibitive. My personal umbrella insurance would not cover it (I checked). Frankly, when you are young and have no assets you really do not care about it. When you are older and have assets to protect - liability becomes an issue. So the people that can more easily afford to get their PPL are the same people that think about liability. I think this would be solvable with a more specialized insurance company but it was a hurdle to have to figure it all out. "Is it really worth it" is constantly being asked during this process of figuring out how to handle liability.
2- When I ride in a car from the 70's and then return to a Tesla or even a new Toyota Rav4 from 2019 you can hardly believe they are related things. Frankly, any car from the 70's or even 80's screams 'relic'. Fun to try - yes. Trust your life with it? Heck no. I will take the modern Rav4. However, if you show me a Cessna 172 from the 70's and a new one - you have to carefully point out the differences. Frankly, piston aircraft have really lagged in tech. Cirrus is making an effort but by comparison to the auto industry it is still a laggard. Most students are shown a 172 "to try". That is your first impression of the state of GA. I have no idea why Cessna has failed to move the industry forward. It does not inspire you to think real improvements have been made in the industry.
Which leads to my last point...
3- We have access to worldwide information at the click of a button. As a potential new student, you will always, eventually, type in 'general aviation accidents" in Google. Instantly, you can find thousands of reasons to re-consider the hobby. Frankly, the web distorts danger. You will never read a million articles about all the safe GA flights that have occurred. You will only find article after article after article about all the pilots that have died while flying a GA plane. Google (not by intent - just by the nature of the service) is the real reason why people have an elevated fear of flying.
Combine this with insurance problems and the sense there has been little progress in the plane tech itself from the outside to actually make it safer - it is easier just to pass on it.
I have no idea if my issues are common or not. Just wanted to share them for those in GA trying to make a difference.
Rgbeard
En-Route
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2017
- Messages
- 4,343
- Location
- Phoenix, AZ and Ensenada, Mexico
- Display Name
Display name:
rgbeard
Sort of related:
Here are the reasons why Millennials don't ride motorcycles:
1. Pants won't pull up far enough for them to straddle the seat.
2. Can't get their phone to their ear with a helmet on.
3. Can't use both hands to eat while driving.
4. They don't get a trophy and a recognition plaque just for buying one.
5. Don't have enough muscle to hold the bike up when stopped.
6 Might have a bug hit them in the face and then they would need emergency care.
7. Motorcycles don't have air conditioning.
8. They can't afford one because they spent 12 years in college trying to get a degree in Humanities, Social Studies or Gender Studies for which no jobs are available.
9. They are allergic to fresh air.
10. Their pajamas get caught on the exhaust pipes.
11. They might get their hands dirty checking the oil.
12. The handle bars have buttons and levers and cannot be controlled by touch-screen.
13. You have to shift manually and use something called a clutch.
14. It's too hard to take selfies while riding.
15. They don't come with training wheels like their bicycles did.
16. Motorcycles don't have power steering or power brakes.
17. Their nose ring interferes with the face shield.
18. They would have to use leg muscle to back up.
19. When they stop, a light breeze might blow exhaust in their face.
20. It could rain on them and expose them to non-soft water.
21. It might scare their therapy dog, and then the dog would need therapy.
22. Can't get the motorcycle down the basement stairs of their parent's home.
Here are the reasons why Millennials don't ride motorcycles:
1. Pants won't pull up far enough for them to straddle the seat.
2. Can't get their phone to their ear with a helmet on.
3. Can't use both hands to eat while driving.
4. They don't get a trophy and a recognition plaque just for buying one.
5. Don't have enough muscle to hold the bike up when stopped.
6 Might have a bug hit them in the face and then they would need emergency care.
7. Motorcycles don't have air conditioning.
8. They can't afford one because they spent 12 years in college trying to get a degree in Humanities, Social Studies or Gender Studies for which no jobs are available.
9. They are allergic to fresh air.
10. Their pajamas get caught on the exhaust pipes.
11. They might get their hands dirty checking the oil.
12. The handle bars have buttons and levers and cannot be controlled by touch-screen.
13. You have to shift manually and use something called a clutch.
14. It's too hard to take selfies while riding.
15. They don't come with training wheels like their bicycles did.
16. Motorcycles don't have power steering or power brakes.
17. Their nose ring interferes with the face shield.
18. They would have to use leg muscle to back up.
19. When they stop, a light breeze might blow exhaust in their face.
20. It could rain on them and expose them to non-soft water.
21. It might scare their therapy dog, and then the dog would need therapy.
22. Can't get the motorcycle down the basement stairs of their parent's home.
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 7,000
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
First, Welcome to POA!
At any rate, don't overthink it. The reason you have normalized access to the convenience and "modernity" of advancements in telecommunications and automotive conveyances in your life, is because of economies of scale. That's not a given in all aspects of this life, you're just spoiled by it in the former. So keep that in mind when you display indignation at low volume hobbies and their relative lack of "refinement".
There's no right or wrong answer btw. I have a wife and kid, and more money than I did at 20, when the mere utterance of owning an airplane was readily dismissed in my mind as an impossibility given my pathetic lack of purchasing power. But I didn't start making more money in life just to become subservient to the fear of losing it or being sued.
As to the appeal to modernity in ergonomics, noted. Personally, I find the purism of getting up there worth the "indignity" of dated panels and interiors. I don't care about that part of the hobby, and much to the chagrin of those who do, I get the same traveling capability done with less and more dated radio power. I'm not making a Luddite argument, I'm just saying I recognize the lack of economies of scale, I disavow the pricing, and I go fly IFR anyways. Though in fairness I get my instrument currency and proficiency from work, which does allow me to cross the country IFR in a single piston without a multiple-screen panel for a seeing eye dog. So I saved a bit of dough for the steak dinner.
Thankfully my wife enjoys the shared travel with zero regards to aesthetics, but that's because I made a conscious effort NOT to pick a hypergamous, pretentious, essential-oils-peddlin', soft-bellied woman for a second wife. I still encourage you to NOT take dating advice from me of course, as they don't call me hindsight for nothing
So please dabble in the avocation to the degree your finances allow, and stop second guessing the lack of economic wisdom behind the decision. There's young people out there without medicals that would kill to have the legal ability to solo. I've had to mentor a few with military aspirations, and it's heartbreaking because I know half our collective lots in this business is pure medical lottery luck.
I'll 100% agree with you, if your primary motivation for spending time in an airplane is making it feel like a car, yeah you're gonna be disappointed in present circumstances. Cirrus gets close though, so you can always rent that thing. Otherwise, you're right, and I'm not gonna sugar coat that for ya. I still contend there's quite a bit of fun to be had up there, considering the majority of this wretched species never leaves the ground in their "safe" lifetimes. I feel blessed to have this opportunity by contrast. Good luck to ya.
NHWannabe
Line Up and Wait
I started flying at 17 in college almost 40 years ago, actually attended college for Aviation Management wanted to be an airline pilot. Solo'ed in about 10 hours but ran out of cash just before my solo cross country. Long story short, changed majors started going to school at night and working during the day, but never stopped looking up whenever a plane was overhead. Fast forward 35+ years finally had the time and money to get my PPL, the thrill for me wasn't in what I was flying the thrill, excitement, rush was the flying itself. Passing my checkride last November just before my 57th birthday is/was still one of the greatest moments in my life.
Try it and I guarantee you won't notice or care about the plane you fly.
Lachlan
En-Route
First, Welcome to POA!
At any rate, don't overthink it. The reason you have normalized access to the convenience and "modernity" of advancements in telecommunications and automotive conveyances in your life, is because of economies of scale. That's not a given in all aspects of this life, you're just spoiled by it in the former. So keep that in mind when you display indignation at low volume hobbies and their relative lack of "refinement".
There's no right or wrong answer btw. I have a wife and kid, and more money than I did at 20, when the mere utterance of owning an airplane was readily dismissed in my mind as an impossibility given my pathetic lack of purchasing power. But I didn't start making more money in life just to become subservient to the fear of losing it or being sued.
As to the appeal to modernity in ergonomics, noted. Personally, I find the purism of getting up there worth the "indignity" of dated panels and interiors. I don't care about that part of the hobby, and much to the chagrin of those who do, I get the same traveling capability done with less and more dated radio power. I'm not making a Luddite argument, I'm just saying I recognize the lack of economies of scale, I disavow the pricing, and I go fly IFR anyways. Though in fairness I get my instrument currency and proficiency from work, which does allow me to cross the country IFR in a single piston without a multiple-screen panel for a seeing eye dog. So I saved a bit of dough for the steak dinner.
Thankfully my wife enjoys the shared travel with zero regards to aesthetics, but that's because I made a conscious effort NOT to pick a hypergamous, pretentious, essential-oils-peddlin', soft-bellied woman for a second wife. I still encourage you to NOT take dating advice from me of course, as they don't call me hindsight for nothing
So please dabble in the avocation to the degree your finances allow, and stop second guessing the lack of economic wisdom behind the decision. There's young people out there without medicals that would kill to have the legal ability to solo. I've had to mentor a few with military aspirations, and it's heartbreaking because I know half our collective lots in this business is pure medical lottery luck.
I'll 100% agree with you, if your primary motivation for spending time in an airplane is making it feel like a car, yeah you're gonna be disappointed in present circumstances. Cirrus gets close though, so you can always rent that thing. Otherwise, you're right, and I'm not gonna sugar coat that for ya. I still contend there's quite a bit of fun to be had up there, considering the majority of this wretched species never leaves the ground in their "safe" lifetimes. I feel blessed to have this opportunity by contrast. Good luck to ya.
I'm just amazed that you so openly discuss having two wives, *AND* they let you buy an airplane!!!
BrianNC
En-Route
The logical extrapolation of that would be that you would never drive a car, even a modern one if you Googled car accidents. In spite of all the technology, over a million people are killed every year in automobile accidents. The average aviation deaths the past 5 years is 858, with one year as little as 399. I realize there are' as many people flying as there are driving, but you think nothing about driving.
I'm not saying flying shouldn't be of any concern at all, or that it's even as safe as driving, but we amplify the dangers of flying into something irrational and it keeps us from flying while ignoring the same information related to driving and continue to drive and think nothing about it. So there's almost a hypocrisy to using that info not to fly, but to still continue to drive a car. It's a selective way of thinking.
PeterNSteinmetz
Ejection Handle Pulled
An over-regulated industry always has prices go up and up above inflation. Kills innovation and competition.
I last flew in 1982... took a short 36 years break, and re-entered the "Current" ranks in 2018... bought a plane and helping to reverse the trend. I love GPS, Flight Following and Foreflight. Makes flying much safer than when I was a kid. Speaking of kids, it is good to see all of the "YouTubers" pushing aviation. They are passionate and most of them reiterate the importance of safe flying, above all, they are having fun. I believe the amount of Pilots will continue to shrink, and then it will stabilize -- primarily due to the money issue. It is a luxury activity no getting around that.
Juliet Hotel
En-Route
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2018
- Messages
- 2,634
- Display Name
Display name:
Juliet Hotel
Can't really help you this one, I got all my certs (private, instrument, commercial) when I was young, dumb and full of... no measurable assets.
This was the case in the late 90's when I took my first lessons. It was the case in the late 80's when those students took their first lessons and it was also the case in the late 70's when the cars you list as examples existed and when those students took their first lessons.
Here's the thing. The path then, as now, for a person to get a drivers license is very different from the path for a person to get a pilots certificate. The level of required knowledge and skills is very different. The level of required training is very different. Its an apples/oranges comparison if ever there was one. One does not apply nor compare to the other to say the least.
This is where you're wrong. You will in fact quite easily find lots of data showing just how many flights were completed without incident nor accident vs how many did not. The problem, if there is one, lies in emphasis placed on how that data tends to be presented. Flying GA involves about as much risk as riding motorcycle overall. And very much like riding a motorcycle, your particular chances of an adverse outcome hinge heavily on your particular choices relating to safety, risk exposure and proficiency. Which is to say its as safe as you make it.
Risk free? No. If you want that, stay in your bedroom. Manageable risk? Absolutely. Just like its been since December 17, 1903.
I imagine your ideas are quite common. They're also quite ill-informed and incorrect but quite common non the less. Which is to say your perspective is quite valid but your conclusions are all wrong.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2015
- Messages
- 9,306
- Display Name
Display name:
Aztec Flyer
Your view above on tech is nonsense writ large. A Cessna 182 or Piper Cherokee from the factory today is packed with technology unimaginable when I earned my PPL in 1974.
But I don't think that's very important in respect to learning to fly a plane.
There's one thing about learning to fly proficiently you should keep in mind...simulators notwithstanding, it can't be done without putting students into an actual airplane and leaving the ground. And your ability to fly that airplane well - really, really well - has absolutely SFA to do with tech, even the tech the manufacturers seem compelled to stuff into the panels of their overpriced products these days. That's why lots of people today are learning to fly competently in 1970s & 1980s vintage 172s. Stick and rudder skills are timeless. Touch screens won't get you there.
So get out of your chair, get your azz to the airport and learn to fly a plane, instead of grousing about how today's cars are so much nicer than today's airplanes. You may not find it quite so easy as passing your drivers test. But then nothing worth doing is usually very easy.
Last edited:
SToL
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2016
- Messages
- 779
- Display Name
Display name:
SToL
Try being a helicopter pilot.
Huckster79
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2018
- Messages
- 2,395
- Display Name
Display name:
Huckster79
My Cessna 140 cost around $3000 new in 1947... per google that’s $41,000 today. 41k woulda bought me a 50 year old ok c172? If folks could buy a brand new even two person plane today For $41k bet a lot more folks would go for it...
Root cause of that’s up for debate but the end results not I don’t believe... it by far is not the only issue though either
Root cause of that’s up for debate but the end results not I don’t believe... it by far is not the only issue though either
Huckster79
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2018
- Messages
- 2,395
- Display Name
Display name:
Huckster79
That’s why I bought the $20,000 bird I did, not only is that what I can afford right now but to chase burgers n pleasure fly, with the occasional cross country, even my clubs 1975 c172 is fancier than I need... I wanted to spend time flying a plane, not fidgeting with computers... Im even thinking of canning the foreflight and grabbing out the sectional...
I deal with technology enough at work, after work I want a set of wings with a prop n engine with a carb n mags and low lead running to it, that’s it... transponders labeled Inop and I can fly just fine avoiding controlled airspace...
Last edited:
FormerHangie
En-Route
The number of private certificate holders actually increased (a little) last year, which it has not been doing for quite a while. I suspect much, if not all of this is increased training activity for people hoping to become professional pilots, as the number of commercial and airline transport certs has grown as well. It's likely that at the end of 2019 there will be more pilots with AT certs than privates, and that's never happened before.
Why is that? I have my suspicions, and if you read the entire thread you'll find them.
Why is that? I have my suspicions, and if you read the entire thread you'll find them.
Shepherd
Final Approach
Something else to add here.
After WWII, Korea and Vietnam, thousands of veterans took advantage of the GI bill and got their pilots certificate for free. The VA picked up 100% of the cost except for books. My father and a couple of my uncles fell into this category.
The VA has since put a $12,554.54 cap on flight training, eliminating a lot of guys who would like to learn, but can't afford to foot the bill.
Rockymountain
Pre-takeoff checklist
GA is not super cheap, but you can get a really nice plane for the price of a luxury SUV, with maintenance costs not too far out of line with such. Still can be a great deal of fun to fly these mature birds and they are safe if the plane, pilot and mission are well vetted and match up with each other. If you want reliable transportation, you up the costs quite a bit, as well as the needs for training and proficiency. If you want most weather capability, another big incremental gap in cost, and training and proficiency that should be in line with the pros, but the opportunities are there over a broad range of price points.
If you need most weather travel, you probably have a business use for the plane, and the economics change when you can write off all the expenses and all the depreciation, keeping in mind at some point you can only write off the true depreciation which gets recaptured when you sell. As far as tech, The new planes are amazing. Sure they are expensive, but what you get is in some ways beyond what we dreamed about watching Star Trek in our childhood. None-the-less, they are selling well and the GA airports I frequent are usually too busy for my taste, but that is really good news for GA.
If you need most weather travel, you probably have a business use for the plane, and the economics change when you can write off all the expenses and all the depreciation, keeping in mind at some point you can only write off the true depreciation which gets recaptured when you sell. As far as tech, The new planes are amazing. Sure they are expensive, but what you get is in some ways beyond what we dreamed about watching Star Trek in our childhood. None-the-less, they are selling well and the GA airports I frequent are usually too busy for my taste, but that is really good news for GA.
LongRoadBob
Cleared for Takeoff
I still think it is significant that getting a pilots license (cert.) is not on the radar of many younger people.
It used to be, in the 60’s or so, tv shoes showed GA pilots, (sky king, and often on other shows too) regularly. It was a thing, it was something that caught many kids in the ides that they could learn to be a pilot.
Nowadays, many people don’t even know they can drive right in to local small airports without having some security clearance etc.
Outreach to high schools, scouts, etc. I think could really help with this.
Also he idea that it costs soooo much. It ought to be explained that the cost is a running cost, that it isn’t a lump sum one has to plunk down. GA could do so much more to promote it, I’m amazed that it isn’t done better and with recruitment as main goal.
It used to be, in the 60’s or so, tv shoes showed GA pilots, (sky king, and often on other shows too) regularly. It was a thing, it was something that caught many kids in the ides that they could learn to be a pilot.
Nowadays, many people don’t even know they can drive right in to local small airports without having some security clearance etc.
Outreach to high schools, scouts, etc. I think could really help with this.
Also he idea that it costs soooo much. It ought to be explained that the cost is a running cost, that it isn’t a lump sum one has to plunk down. GA could do so much more to promote it, I’m amazed that it isn’t done better and with recruitment as main goal.
I can tell by some of the more colorful responses my initial post was a little simplistic!
My actual situation was I seriously took a look at getting a Cirrus SR20 and learning to fly.
I commute 300 miles round trip every week for my work. I live in the Midwest where weather is always a factor.
I was evaluating a GA aircraft as a possible transportation option - not just for recreation.
I am an engineer. I was drawn to the Cirrus because it appeared to be a modern aircraft with modern avionics.
However, per my nature, I thoroughly researched the possibility. I reviewed every flight incident for the Cirrus SR20 & 22 to see if all those safety claims translated to better outcomes.
I was surprised, with such a modern plane, how many fatal accidents were still occurring in the pattern during decent flight conditions.
A few really caught my eye. One was a naval aviator who crashed just doing a base turn in decent weather.
The second was the female pilot that crashed her SR20 trying to land in Houston. You probably know the details.
She had two missed approaches at a busy airport with 737's landing all around her. In that situation, I imagine she was pretty stressed. She was going to Houston to visit a relative in the hospital who had cancer. That really hit home for me. I lost my brother to cancer last year. On the third attempt, she power on stalls the aircraft. She dipped the wing and tried to retract the flaps about 10-15 knots too soon. Killed everyone on board.
She had done everything outlined in the plan - she had the proper training - had recent time in aircraft - was flying a well maintained plane - it was decent weather. Under stress, which is pretty common in my life, she simply made a mistake and it killed her and the family members on board. I accept I could have easily made the same mistake under those stressful conditions.
As an engineer, with such a modern aircraft, it frustrated me the machine itself could not have done more in that situation. The avionics knew the airspeed, the altitude, the pitch angle, and everything else about the current flight envelope. However, it allowed her to retract the flaps well below proper airspeed and power stall. I know many will simply "blame the pilot" for a basic mistake. Blame the lack of training, the ATC that were not great, etc. However, I see that accident as a failure for the GA manufacturing community as well.
Competent pilots, in good weather, during routine pattern procedures, should not crash a modern airplane IMO. That should be the standard for the engineering. That is just the engineering side of me talking. The tech should be better than that. Can tech prevent all accidents? Of course not. However, it seams to me, after reviewing these accidents, it is still not preventing some very preventable accidents either.
I personally am not above a simple mistake in the pattern due to stress, etc. I could see myself in that female pilot. Frankly, her "sin" to me was very minor. Under stress, she simply tried to turn and retract the flaps a little too early. Should that be a fatal mistake? Is that an acceptable engineering standard? It turned me off getting a PPL.
This was just my opinion. I certainly respect there are different ones out there!
My actual situation was I seriously took a look at getting a Cirrus SR20 and learning to fly.
I commute 300 miles round trip every week for my work. I live in the Midwest where weather is always a factor.
I was evaluating a GA aircraft as a possible transportation option - not just for recreation.
I am an engineer. I was drawn to the Cirrus because it appeared to be a modern aircraft with modern avionics.
However, per my nature, I thoroughly researched the possibility. I reviewed every flight incident for the Cirrus SR20 & 22 to see if all those safety claims translated to better outcomes.
I was surprised, with such a modern plane, how many fatal accidents were still occurring in the pattern during decent flight conditions.
A few really caught my eye. One was a naval aviator who crashed just doing a base turn in decent weather.
The second was the female pilot that crashed her SR20 trying to land in Houston. You probably know the details.
She had two missed approaches at a busy airport with 737's landing all around her. In that situation, I imagine she was pretty stressed. She was going to Houston to visit a relative in the hospital who had cancer. That really hit home for me. I lost my brother to cancer last year. On the third attempt, she power on stalls the aircraft. She dipped the wing and tried to retract the flaps about 10-15 knots too soon. Killed everyone on board.
She had done everything outlined in the plan - she had the proper training - had recent time in aircraft - was flying a well maintained plane - it was decent weather. Under stress, which is pretty common in my life, she simply made a mistake and it killed her and the family members on board. I accept I could have easily made the same mistake under those stressful conditions.
As an engineer, with such a modern aircraft, it frustrated me the machine itself could not have done more in that situation. The avionics knew the airspeed, the altitude, the pitch angle, and everything else about the current flight envelope. However, it allowed her to retract the flaps well below proper airspeed and power stall. I know many will simply "blame the pilot" for a basic mistake. Blame the lack of training, the ATC that were not great, etc. However, I see that accident as a failure for the GA manufacturing community as well.
Competent pilots, in good weather, during routine pattern procedures, should not crash a modern airplane IMO. That should be the standard for the engineering. That is just the engineering side of me talking. The tech should be better than that. Can tech prevent all accidents? Of course not. However, it seams to me, after reviewing these accidents, it is still not preventing some very preventable accidents either.
I personally am not above a simple mistake in the pattern due to stress, etc. I could see myself in that female pilot. Frankly, her "sin" to me was very minor. Under stress, she simply tried to turn and retract the flaps a little too early. Should that be a fatal mistake? Is that an acceptable engineering standard? It turned me off getting a PPL.
This was just my opinion. I certainly respect there are different ones out there!
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 16,022
- Location
- DXO124009
- Display Name
Display name:
Light and Sporty Guy
https://www.ltu.edu/e-moto/
My problem is that I get companies bugging me for students to hire, but they pretty much all have jobs already. The best ones get full time offers 9 months before they graduate.
dmspilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2006
- Messages
- 6,169
- Display Name
Display name:
DISPLAY NAME
At a local airport we just had a Naval aviator (and instructor) crash a Mooney after unsuccessfully performing an intersection takeoff with a slight tailwind on a 2,000 foot runway. You can't fix stupid. Blaming an aircraft manufacturer for poor pilot judgment, decision making, or skill is not going to get you anywhere. These aren't flying cars.
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 7,000
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
I can tell by some of the more colorful responses my initial post was a little simplistic!
My actual situation was I seriously took a look at getting a Cirrus SR20 and learning to fly.
I commute 300 miles round trip every week for my work. I live in the Midwest where weather is always a factor.
I was evaluating a GA aircraft as a possible transportation option - not just for recreation.
I am an engineer. I was drawn to the Cirrus because it appeared to be a modern aircraft with modern avionics.
However, per my nature, I thoroughly researched the possibility. I reviewed every flight incident for the Cirrus SR20 & 22 to see if all those safety claims translated to better outcomes.
I was surprised, with such a modern plane, how many fatal accidents were still occurring in the pattern during decent flight conditions.
A few really caught my eye. One was a naval aviator who crashed just doing a base turn in decent weather.
The second was the female pilot that crashed her SR20 trying to land in Houston. You probably know the details.
She had two missed approaches at a busy airport with 737's landing all around her. In that situation, I imagine she was pretty stressed. She was going to Houston to visit a relative in the hospital who had cancer. That really hit home for me. I lost my brother to cancer last year. On the third attempt, she power on stalls the aircraft. She dipped the wing and tried to retract the flaps about 10-15 knots too soon. Killed everyone on board.
She had done everything outlined in the plan - she had the proper training - had recent time in aircraft - was flying a well maintained plane - it was decent weather. Under stress, which is pretty common in my life, she simply made a mistake and it killed her and the family members on board. I accept I could have easily made the same mistake under those stressful conditions.
As an engineer, with such a modern aircraft, it frustrated me the machine itself could not have done more in that situation. The avionics knew the airspeed, the altitude, the pitch angle, and everything else about the current flight envelope. However, it allowed her to retract the flaps well below proper airspeed and power stall. I know many will simply "blame the pilot" for a basic mistake. Blame the lack of training, the ATC that were not great, etc. However, I see that accident as a failure for the GA manufacturing community as well.
Competent pilots, in good weather, during routine pattern procedures, should not crash a modern airplane IMO. That should be the standard for the engineering. That is just the engineering side of me talking. The tech should be better than that. Can tech prevent all accidents? Of course not. However, it seams to me, after reviewing these accidents, it is still not preventing some very preventable accidents either.
I personally am not above a simple mistake in the pattern due to stress, etc. I could see myself in that female pilot. Frankly, her "sin" to me was very minor. Under stress, she simply tried to turn and retract the flaps a little too early. Should that be a fatal mistake? Is that an acceptable engineering standard? It turned me off getting a PPL.
This was just my opinion. I certainly respect there are different ones out there!
Copy. It's just your way of saying the risk associated with the activity for you is not worth it. Nothing wrong with that. But mandating the kind of *selective (otherwise the thing would never let you land, if it always took control away from you in order to not to stall) envelope protection you describe so 'pedestrian-mindset' pilots can feel assured they are not going to kill themselves by mishandling an aircraft due to being mentally behind, is simply not cost effective to implement. Understand that for many of us, that's not a bug, but a feature. If I wanted to fly in the back of an airliner, I would buy a ticket in an airliner. I want to fly because I want to be in control, and with that control comes the responsibility of not losing control, the plethora of other things that can kill me outside of my control notwithstanding.
The accident you are quoting with the lady going into Hobby, we are very much familiar with it. It is certainly a good case study of where some of the ADM aspects of PPL training are lacking imo. You are trying to ascribe partial fault to the market allowing a lack of envelope protection to persist, when the root cause of that accident was the decision to go into a Bravo airport without the familiarity of a pilot who is able to mentally keep up with the ATC demands.
I hear ya on the physical arguments of her mishandling of the aircraft under stress, but you're deflecting I'm afraid, as that has nothing to do with flying. That was a decision making error. Do you insist on looking for your dropped cell phone while driving on the highway, or do you curse and keep driving the car until you can stop and allow yourself the opportunity to look for the phone without colliding with others or lose directional control of the car? If you do the latter, then you have no credible position to demand envelope protection in flying where none of the kind exists for a car in the same driver decision circumstance, and cars have enough economies of scale to actually make that kind of envelope protection a more closer reality mind you.
That lady got overwhelmed by ATC and stopped flying the airplane. Yes, she was struggling with crosswinds and vertical descent planning on her own right (that means she was recent, but was sucking hind teet that day, it happens to the best of them). But that's not what killed her. Now, I happen to hold the relatively unpopular opinion that ATC and Southwest pilots (aka the profit motive) in their home drone were bullies in this exchange and contributed to the culling of this limping gazelle for lack of a better term. But that doesn't take away from the fact that you don't keep looking for your cell phone while going 70mph down the highway, at the expense of controlling the car, especially when the primary job for scanning and collision avoidance is the driver and not some pipe dream automation device.
In the case of an airplane, that means fly the heck away from Hobby and into one of the plethora of uncontrolled fields with virtually zero traffic, land and collect your thoughts. But that's also a failing of our PPL training that erroneously inculcates new pilots to internalize ATC as a "supervisor" agency, and us pilots as subordinates who do not possess the legal ability to push back on them without having our licenses compromised. It's a terrible trend led by CFI time builders who just want to make it to a regional airline without their certificate number being associated with an investigation of anyone in their "downline" (yes downline, like the MLM ponzi scheme CFI time building is treated as by these regional aspirants). I digress.
So with all due respect, if the Hobby accident keeps you up at night, just don't go looking for that dropped cell phone while going down the highway. Your concern for safety on this front at least, becomes moot. But let's not be hypocrites here. If you demand that kind of envelope protection in flying, then you must have the same envelope protection in your own driving. Does your car have that autonomy to override your buffoonery while driving? If not, then you're unfairly poking shots at GA in order to fit your safety narrative. Nothing wrong with not wanting to incur the risk, but own it, don't deflect it to a technology argument.
The cost of everything has outpaced wages over the decades. Since 1980. There is zero disputing that.
wanttaja
En-Route
Actually, I believe the Vietnam era GI Bill required the participant obtain a Private ticket on their own, first, then could be used for higher ratings. Don't know about the WWII and Korea programs.
Ron Wanttaja
Eric Stoltz
Line Up and Wait
I can tell by some of the more colorful responses my initial post was a little simplistic!
My actual situation was I seriously took a look at getting a Cirrus SR20 and learning to fly.
I commute 300 miles round trip every week for my work. I live in the Midwest where weather is always a factor.
I was evaluating a GA aircraft as a possible transportation option - not just for recreation.
I am an engineer. I was drawn to the Cirrus because it appeared to be a modern aircraft with modern avionics.
However, per my nature, I thoroughly researched the possibility. I reviewed every flight incident for the Cirrus SR20 & 22 to see if all those safety claims translated to better outcomes.
I was surprised, with such a modern plane, how many fatal accidents were still occurring in the pattern during decent flight conditions.
A few really caught my eye. One was a naval aviator who crashed just doing a base turn in decent weather.
The second was the female pilot that crashed her SR20 trying to land in Houston. You probably know the details.
She had two missed approaches at a busy airport with 737's landing all around her. In that situation, I imagine she was pretty stressed. She was going to Houston to visit a relative in the hospital who had cancer. That really hit home for me. I lost my brother to cancer last year. On the third attempt, she power on stalls the aircraft. She dipped the wing and tried to retract the flaps about 10-15 knots too soon. Killed everyone on board.
She had done everything outlined in the plan - she had the proper training - had recent time in aircraft - was flying a well maintained plane - it was decent weather. Under stress, which is pretty common in my life, she simply made a mistake and it killed her and the family members on board. I accept I could have easily made the same mistake under those stressful conditions.
As an engineer, with such a modern aircraft, it frustrated me the machine itself could not have done more in that situation. The avionics knew the airspeed, the altitude, the pitch angle, and everything else about the current flight envelope. However, it allowed her to retract the flaps well below proper airspeed and power stall. I know many will simply "blame the pilot" for a basic mistake. Blame the lack of training, the ATC that were not great, etc. However, I see that accident as a failure for the GA manufacturing community as well.
Competent pilots, in good weather, during routine pattern procedures, should not crash a modern airplane IMO. That should be the standard for the engineering. That is just the engineering side of me talking. The tech should be better than that. Can tech prevent all accidents? Of course not. However, it seams to me, after reviewing these accidents, it is still not preventing some very preventable accidents either.
I personally am not above a simple mistake in the pattern due to stress, etc. I could see myself in that female pilot. Frankly, her "sin" to me was very minor. Under stress, she simply tried to turn and retract the flaps a little too early. Should that be a fatal mistake? Is that an acceptable engineering standard? It turned me off getting a PPL.
This was just my opinion. I certainly respect there are different ones out there!
Just to add another perspective, and to follow up on @hindsight2020, I have to keep aware of the human element in all my flying. Professionally and personally, my safety begins before getting in the car to go to the airport. No matter what anyone says, flying has very little good analog to anything else. There is a reason why Threat and Error Management TEM has been introduced, dare I say, engineered into aviation. Engineers will never be able to get around the human element. Sorry to say that, but the most powerful computers can never out do the mush sack at the top of the spine. Without commenting on prior accidents and incidents, I can safely conclude that the errors I make even before getting the plane to the end of the runway can be eye opening. I have certainly turned the plane around and decided to call it a day before even committing aviation. I have even stopped pulling the airplane out of the hangar because I realized that I'm just not up to flying that moment! (Nearly ripped my wingtip offn the plane on the side of the barn!)
Threats not addressed cause errors, which can lead to "undesired aircraft states." And we all have had a few UASs. How we mitigate these threats before they become errors is worthy of a PhD thesis or 3, and have. Suffice it to say, training, checklists, procedures, preflight thinking, being present, understanding one's own limits, knowing full well the limits of the airplane, the list can go on ad nauseam.
For some simple examples: I know I am a decent IFR pilot, I get trained to be. I'm lucky to fly a 737 with another vastly trained pilot in a very safe, redundant world. Big however, we still make mistakes, errors, from external threats and hopefully very few internal threats (leave home at home). Just getting the cargo loaded, W&B correct, fuel correct, FMC loaded correctly, weather and them freakin' NOTAMs all sorted out, MX issues addressed, all are very real threats that we have copious procedures to make sure we can even get the damned engines started on time. Then theres the taxi to the end of a runway someplace way over there crossing 4 other runways in use. Now, if we've made it that far, holy smokes let's fly! But wait, there's special departure procedures that differ from the normal DP if an engine goes on strike, wake turbulence from the guy in front of us, pressure to push up the throttles from ATC (usually crew induced)...wait, why aren't the autothrottles engaging? Why isn't the flight director up? Where's the heading bug? Did we set the right altitude? V1Rotate! Where are my pants?
But threats and errors can be mitigated along the way. Anyone can read the previous paragraph and see how dynamic getting offn the ground can be. A billion threats and a billion +1 mitigations. Sometimes, we even get the airplane to the place it is supposed to go - on the same day!
This all is relatable 100% to GA. And, again, it all starts before leaving home for the hangar. For example, I know I can fly in the clouds in a 737, and I know my Sierra will too. However, I know I am not safe to fly in the clouds in my Sierra. Why? Because the threats are too big. I am only trained to fly 737s in the clouds. If I got training, developed procedures for single pilot IFR with a delinquent autopilot, replaced some gyros... Yes, maybe the Sierra in the clouds would be safer than right now. I know my Sierra has capabilities greater than I am willing to test right now, too. And this is all the feakin' key right there if you ask me. TEM.
It is up to the mush sack on the top of the spine to know when to bug out, divert, increase automation, decrease automation, land ASAP, not take off, etc. Without the mush sack on the top of the spine being present and actively flying, the airplane is just a drone. And look at them there accident rates. TEM.
The threats are real, the errors happen, and the resolve to keep it greasy side down is always there. Hopefully, threats are acknowledged, errors are mitigated, and I'll never have to test my resolve to keep it flying. Regardless of the tech in the cockpit, and the engineering of the plane, the mush sack on the top of the spine will still be the saving grace in times of need, if it is up to the task.
This is why I don't fly into KSEA with my Sierra, until I go get the stamp for my WA State Airports Passport. And when I do go there, it'll be with another pilot after a good brief, and at the time suggested by ATC. TEM. I've moved plenty of metal there with another professionally trained, competent pilot next to me, and it is still a mess sometimes.
Looking at flying from a pure engineer's standpoint is (in my opinion only!) short changing the capabilities of flying. Aviating is definitely an art backed up with science and a heavy dose of TEM. With the correct mindset from the moment that one decides to commit aviation, it is a very very rewarding and safe endeavor. It is a reliable form of transportation when the TEM works! Go buy your SR20 and get flying!
There, the thread is back on topic with my last sentence.
Kenny Phillips
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 5,634
- Display Name
Display name:
Kenny Phillips
When you wrote "everything" you immediately rendered your statement false. Computing power ... much cheaper now.
Yawn.
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 7,000
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
I'd give up telecommunications, personal computers and the internet at this point for more affordable housing, education and health care in exchange. In. a. heartbeat. Tons o' disposable income baby, and a higher quality of life. Amazon Prime and proliferation of touchscreen consumer interfaces is not that central to my happiness and prosperity. Housing and healthcare costs otoh, do get in the way of my pursuit of happiness. I don't need electronic Aspen potato to fly upside down either, hell judging by the trutrak thread it might actually be a hazard to my health!!!
I don't need electronic Aspen potato to fly upside down either, hell judging by the trutrak thread it might actually be a hazard to my health!!! 
Zeldman
Touchdown! Greaser!
I can't afford my own personal plane. That is why I had to take up flying for a living....
Eric Stoltz
Line Up and Wait
You too, huh?
hawk25u
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2016
- Messages
- 134
- Display Name
Display name:
Jim
The Vietnam GI bill did say you had to get the Private on your own wallet. I can't remember what the reimbursement was for the rest they did cover a lot of my training for Comm, IFR, CFI & CFII on SEL & MEL. Some years ago someone asked me what my training cost me I told them 3 Purple Hearts.
MBDiagMan
Final Approach
Jut curious. If you don’t mind sharing, what is your age?
51
I appreciate all the responses. There is clearly a passion for flying in this group. Good to see really.
I think my input has risen to a level never intended.
However, it does give me a glimpse into the GA pilot community.
Interesting group to say the least!
Andrew M House
Filing Flight Plan
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2019
- Messages
- 14
- Display Name
Display name:
OrionAC
I've been working on a license for more years than I care to count and because of the cost associated with training and life getting in the way, rental costs are rediculous mostly becuase the plane is $350k for a new 172 and fuel is in $4-5 a gallon range for avgas. I've talked with many who just can't make a case fiancially for private aviation. Gone are the days when you could rent the plane for $60-80 an hour wet, now you are looking at $150+ wet then add your instructor time on that you are looking at $200 an hour. Light Sport was supposed to fix the high cost of birds instead the average LSA costs over $100k. I love flying and I've done well for myself but the cost benefit analysis just doesn't add up even though I can beat the airlines to most destinations that aren't across the nation with a much better flying experience. We need a disruption in the cost model of private aviation. I'm working on that but I can't go it alone, pilots are going to need to step up and innovate not just in the small things but in the big ones too. I've run the numbers and I can make a new 2 seater that can carry two real size humans full fuel (250 lbs ea) for $58000 and the company can remain profitable. It falls in the LSA rules because part 23 currently is killing the price of new planes, the only companys making truely new models of aircraft are the jet manufacturers because they can break up the R&D and Certification costs over the higher volume they are producing and the additional expense is negligable when you are looking at a $10m+ price tag.
I believe we can make a difference if we as pilots decide to and we can reverse the trend of declining pilots but the numbers have to make sense otherwise very few people will get involved. From 1964 to 1979 the aviation industry sold 14000 prop planes a year today it's barely getting above 1000. The average cost of a new plane in durring that time was $61k. The cost adjusted price for a cessna 150 today should be about $70k new. The best you can do on a new LSA is the P92 Eaglet at $75k but you will be hard pressed to fit two americans in the bird with full fuel.
I really want to see thousands of new pilots entering the aviation world because it solves many of the woes facing the industry with more minds working on the problem, more dollars flowing into the industry and with a greater interest we may be able to move things in a much better direction. PM me if you want to now more about my business, other wise I'll be chimming in here and there to hopefully spur pilots on to innovating and getting us out of this rut.
Juliet Hotel
En-Route
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2018
- Messages
- 2,634
- Display Name
Display name:
Juliet Hotel
I don't want to derail the conversation too much but I think you're glossing over a very important factor here. She did not simply make a mistake that killed her. She made several mistakes. She missed two approaches to runways that were much longer than required for a plane of that weight. She was confused about what the controller wanted her to do and she was clearly behind the plane. An accident is rarely the result of a single mistake. There is usually a chain of mistakes and that accident is a perfect example of that. She was frazzled and behind the plane and it seems like she knew it. She had ample opportunity to tell the controller thanks but no thanks and go land someplace else and get her bearings together.
Knowing that accidents are a chain of failures and learning to recognize those failures and take action to stop them when necessary is what keeps most of us alive. If the pilot of that Cirrus failed at anything, she failed at that IMO.
I get where you're coming from in thinking that in this day and age the plane should be equipped with systems that will prevent a pilot from doing things that could cause a stall/spin or loss of control. But you're an engineer so I'm sure I don't have to tell you about design complexity and failure modes involved in designing and building a system that would be bulletproof enough to be safe. Every Boeing 373-800 in the world is grounded right now because engineers tried to build just such a system and a failure mode caused two planes to crash. If they can't get it right on a 100 million dollar jet, what makes you think they'll pull it off on a GA piston single?
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 5,502
- Display Name
Display name:
GeorgeC
Huckster79
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2018
- Messages
- 2,395
- Display Name
Display name:
Huckster79
I agree here too...
I was out at the airport the other day, it was beautiful and yet only two hangers had open doors. The typical two too...
I was recently “elected” President of the local aviation association, at that moment a bit against my will. But I was tinkering in hanger that day and got thinking there are things we could do different to help. I think maybe offering a few free intro flights in a drawing at the local community night and even just being there, sitting up a stand to talk with folks that it can be done and even by the average joe...
For those that are hangered there already I thought maybe we could do more to promote community, start doing hot dogs on the grill every other Saturday by the wash station inviting everyone actively, not just posting a note on the bulletin board that only the same few hanger rats are ever see it... Heck I’m there anyway, and just see where it goes. Maybe trying to get an email list of the local pilots and just share “hey wanna go to lunch anyone?”
Idk just thoughts at moment...
Where could I get college gals in bikinis for a plane wash event.... hmmm