Is General Aviation Dying in the USA?

[zaitcev]

I've done everything I can to expand GA, serving on boards, committees, as AOPA airport rep, building aviation exhibits at museums, flying Young Eagles -- if you can think of it, I've probably done it. Despite all this, GA has continued to wither before my eyes, much to my heartfelt sadness. I simply don't know what else I can personally do.

You can be a strong advocate for razing Washington D.C. to the ground. That's about the most useful thing anyone can do for GA.
-- Pete

 

[rottydaddy]

Who's going to flip a plane over by accident in VMC? I don't see that happening.

Lots of people do it every year... usually in the pattern, and sometimes when out sightseeing or spotting. Not usually to inverted, but enough that before they can decide what to do first, they're toast. Then there's turbulence, but it's fair to say that's another matter.

Accellerated stall? Well, they would have done stall and spin training under Nick's FARs, so all's good.

If "stall training" includes stalls in turns, I agree. But spin entry/recovery alone really won't teach you how to sense a stall coming on during a turn when you're looking at something on the ground (or inside the plane, sadly), or how to recover from it in time. Also, a spin is much more unlikely to happen to the average PP than an accelerated stall, followed by uncontrolled, uncoordinated rolling, dangerously close to the ground... mostly because there isn't enough altitude for the airplane to develop a healthy spin.
Unless I'm mistaken, aside from flight into IMC, loss of control following an uncoordinated stall kills more PPs than any other incident in VFR flight. Even structural failure due to loss of control is more common than "augering in". For some reason, this was not the case back when spins were part of the required syllabus. People were augering in left and right, to the point that the Feds felt compelled to cut spins.

It seems odd... I had to beg my CFI to show me a spin back in the late 90s, and it wasn't a big deal for me to recover. But I guess it's easy for instructor and student- or a newly-minted PP who is pretty sure they remember how to do it- to screw that up.


And to get back on-topic, I'll say it again... money is what always kept airplanes in the air, and that is simply becoming more the case, for all the reasons mentioned above by others.

 

[wabower]

Those numbers make a lot more sense than the first batch.

They do look odd.
Elsewhere at faa.gov, there's a download that shows far fewer certificates issued than is listed in that post upthread. Here's
what I found (sorry for the formatting):

new issuances of student pilot certificates (estimated numbers, it says):
2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000
54,876 61,194 66,953 61,448 53,576 59,202 58,842 65,421 61,897 58,042

new issuances of private pilot certificates:
2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000
19,893 19,052 20,299 20,217 20,889 23,031 23,866 28,659 25,372 27,223


Here's where I found it:
http://www.faa.gov/data_research/aviation_data_statistics/civil_airmen_statistics/2009/

 

[Jay Honeck]

You can be a strong advocate for razing Washington D.C. to the ground. That's about the most useful thing anyone can do for GA.
-- Pete

Anyone who knows me will attest that I've got that part covered...

 

[DavidWhite]

I was at a cancer benefit walk tonight (Relay for life) and I had someone ask me "How did you get in?" I answered "Well, I took a 45 degree entry for a left downwind on runway 17" She looked confused. She actually was asking "how I got in a team"

My head is in the clouds, what can I say?

 

[dmccormack]

1. A Generational Shift.
.....
Those guys were a different breed. They were the Great Depression generation that had grown up and done well, but never lost the joy and wonder that (a) they had lived through the war, and (b) they were lucky enough to be able to fly. They truly appreciated the freedom that GA allowed them, and looked askance at a lot of the ironclad rules and regulations that we kowtow to today.

These guys worked incredibly hard in aviation, provided amazing customer service (does anyone else remember flipping up a flap on their hangar door when they needed fuel, and finding their plane fully fueled next time they were at the airport?), and were generous to a fault.
......

They also had the GI Bill. Many thousands received free (yes $0) flight training through the commercial. That generations was also joiners -- various fraternal societies such as Shriners, odd Fellows, Elks, Rotary, and the like flourished during that time. The Recreational was not as diverse, either. Anyone riding Jet Skis in 1965? Quads? Trike motorcycles? Playing video games?

2. The Next Generation Fumbled the Ball
The next generation -- Baby Boomers -- picked up the mantle, but have not carried it as far, or as well. This generation -- my generation -- a much more privileged, self-serving lot, bought the old planes and FBOs, but were unable to make a go of it, despite there being far more of us than there were of the previous generation. We can argue long and hard about why this is, but the fact is that the old system didn't work in new hands.
............

I still find it shocking to land at airports that were thriving when I first learned to fly, only to find the FBO doors locked. No A&Ps, no more cute desk clerks -- sometimes not even a way to get into the bathroom. When you CAN get inside, the magazines are often years old, with the '60s era naugahyde furniture left in exactly the configuration the WWII guys placed them in. It's almost creepy, like going in your parents house after they have died.

The "old system" has a hard time keeping up without government supplements. Sure, the FAA doles out cash, but to infrastructure, not operators. Remember "free flight instruction?"

The frequency of suits increased. Few states recognize "hold harmless" agreements, only 4 (or so) recognize contributory negligence, and the manufacturers are no longer standing behind products >30 years old due to GARA (legal professionals please correct). So each owner must bear the full liability burden.

3. Active Pilots versus Certificated Pilots.
There are far fewer pilots flying. There are plenty of us still on the books, but the number of pilots who actually get in their planes and fly somewhere other than the pattern is down -- way down -- from the early 2000s.

One hour flight at 10 GPH * $5.50/gal = $55.00 OK, an hour in the pattern or local fits my schedule and budget.

But a 4 hour round trip just to "fly somewhere?" Now you're costing real money (factor in maintenance and it is likely prohibitive).

Notice the only folks still flying frequently have the activity supplemented somehow?

 

[AcroBoy]

Jay's comments really hit the point. The traffic count at our towered airport is way down. The flight school on the field is trying to sell anything and everything to generate cash flow. My Baron, never a cheap plane to fly, sits even more. It is hard to justify spending $800 for a few hours of tooling around and going nowhere fast. Average yearly maintenance is around 3-5K, I could buy something like a shotgun (my son is learning trap shooting), and it will last for generations instead of a few hours.

I think GA in the states will be like in Europe, either for the extremely well off business user, or very rich hobby flyer. The increasing expenses will drive everyone else away.

The LSA concept has become ridiculous-like over 125K to buy a new cub? The existing fleet is aging, new aircraft are priced out of the range of most people, LSA is an overpriced joke, and it is only the advances in avionics that has any attention and interest. Despite these advances, how many people are going to a 30K Garmin suite in their plane that has now depreciated 50% and costs double an hour to operate?

We need to realize that GA is going to be only for a very few people at the top of the economic ladder.

 

[ClimbnSink]

Only partly true, the mini-bonanza LSAs are big money but there are plenty of cheap options. No one wants the cheap options. Here is one:http://www.poweredparaglider.com/
Watch the derision.

Jay's comments really hit the point. The traffic count at our towered airport is way down. The flight school on the field is trying to sell anything and everything to generate cash flow. My Baron, never a cheap plane to fly, sits even more. It is hard to justify spending $800 for a few hours of tooling around and going nowhere fast. Average yearly maintenance is around 3-5K, I could buy something like a shotgun (my son is learning trap shooting), and it will last for generations instead of a few hours.

I think GA in the states will be like in Europe, either for the extremely well off business user, or very rich hobby flyer. The increasing expenses will drive everyone else away.

The LSA concept has become ridiculous-like over 125K to buy a new cub? The existing fleet is aging, new aircraft are priced out of the range of most people, LSA is an overpriced joke, and it is only the advances in avionics that has any attention and interest. Despite these advances, how many people are going to a 30K Garmin suite in their plane that has now depreciated 50% and costs double an hour to operate?

We need to realize that GA is going to be only for a very few people at the top of the economic ladder.

 

[dmccormack]

The LSA concept has become ridiculous-like over 125K to buy a new cub? The existing fleet is aging, new aircraft are priced out of the range of most people, LSA is an overpriced joke, and it is only the advances in avionics that has any attention and interest. Despite these advances, how many people are going to a 30K Garmin suite in their plane that has now depreciated 50% and costs double an hour to operate?

We need to realize that GA is going to be only for a very few people at the top of the economic ladder.

Really? There are plenty of nicely restored Chiefs and Champs running 20-30k right now.

 

[wabower]

There are quite a few 1940 Ford Coupes of the same vintage driving around on nice days as well. Not sure it means much as a market segment or evidence of a sustainable element.

Really? There are plenty of nicely restored Chiefs and Champs running 20-30k right now.

 

[AcroBoy]

Really? There are plenty of nicely restored Chiefs and Champs running 20-30k right now.

And how many people are getting signed off in tail draggers, how many people want to buy and maintain a 50 year old tube and fabric plane, and how many mechanics these days can actually do a decent repair or inspection on one? Does the average person these days know or want to know about corrosion, spar damage, maintaining fabric, timing mags, engine compression, cleaning plugs., etc? Do they learn about it in school, hear about it from their friends, or see it on TV or the internet? Flying is becoming more and more of a niche hobby that is far removed from the mainstream.

There will always be a small group of people who fly these planes, but more people will want to buy a new Cirrus and pay at C-150 prices. How many people and families in their early thirties would look at a Champ or Luscombe, with crazed windshields, faded and cracking paint, rusted gear legs, and think they would want to own and maintain one, when all of the emphasis from marketing is on new, high tech, speed, and luxury? Sure, for some of us it is a labor of love to spend a weekend washing and waxing a plane, pulling the plugs, etc, but that breed is going away.

Until the gap between accessibility and cost are narrowed, the GA market will continue to decline.

 

[John Baker]

If it wasn't for lawyers and politicians, GA would be thriving.

Actually, so would a whole lot of other things in our economy.

John

 

[steingar]

Really? There are plenty of nicely restored Chiefs and Champs running 20-30k right now.

Nothing like an airplane that can put you upside down just for a recover.


It is genuinely scary how few airplanes are flying now versus even the early aughts. I agree with many of the posters that cost is a huge issue. However, that cost comes from a complex set of variables. Our litigious culture is one, to be certain, and aircraft and parts can be expensive because of it. If you look at factory making cars or bikes, you see lots of robots. If you look at one making airplanes, you see people. The cost of skilled labor has risen sharply in this country, and airplanes are all made by hand.

Energy prices are finally on the rise, and likely to stay that way indefinitely. Aircraft are energy intensive, for their manufacture, maintenance, and operation. No getting around it, except perhaps gliders and ultralights run for recreational purposes, which is probably all we'll be left with by the time I've hit my AK-hood.

Its sad for me to see it go, but sadder still to think of all the folks who will never have the opportunities I've had.

 

[wabower]

A bit simplistic, don't you think, John?

If it wasn't for lawyers and politicians, GA would be thriving.

Actually, so would a whole lot of other things in our economy.

John

 

[dmccormack]

Nothing like an airplane that can put you upside down just for a recover.

Well, Professor Obvious -- ANY airplane can put you "upside down" -- talk to folks with various ADs, or who throw a rod, or strike a prop, or a thousand other reasons.

One advantage older Chiefs, Champs, Cubs, Taylorcraft and the like is the owner manufactured provision coupled with simpler parts and less exotic materials.

 

[dmccormack]

And how many people are getting signed off in tail draggers, how many people want to buy and maintain a 50 year old tube and fabric plane, and how many mechanics these days can actually do a decent repair or inspection on one? Does the average person these days know or want to know about corrosion, spar damage, maintaining fabric, timing mags, engine compression, cleaning plugs., etc? Do they learn about it in school, hear about it from their friends, or see it on TV or the internet? Flying is becoming more and more of a niche hobby that is far removed from the mainstream.

There will always be a small group of people who fly these planes, but more people will want to buy a new Cirrus and pay at C-150 prices. How many people and families in their early thirties would look at a Champ or Luscombe, with crazed windshields, faded and cracking paint, rusted gear legs, and think they would want to own and maintain one, when all of the emphasis from marketing is on new, high tech, speed, and luxury? Sure, for some of us it is a labor of love to spend a weekend washing and waxing a plane, pulling the plugs, etc, but that breed is going away.

Until the gap between accessibility and cost are narrowed, the GA market will continue to decline.

The lack of maintenance support is an issue across the board, but it is true that A&Ps with actual fabric experience are rare.

The relative cost of airplanes hasn't changed all that much as proven in a variety of threads on this board.

 

[John Baker]

A bit simplistic, don't you think, John?

I know, I apologize, I was in a hurry. So far, I think Jay's explanation of how things are in GA was about the best. The world war II crowd had a "lets get it done" philosophy.

Everyone else since, has had a "lets get the money now, screw tomorrow" philosophy.

John

 

[dmccormack]

I know, I apologize, I was in a hurry. So far, I think Jay's explanation of how things are in GA was about the best. The world war II crowd had a "lets get it done" philosophy.

Everyone else since, has had a "lets get the money now, screw tomorrow" philosophy.

John

Oh, puh-leeze...

 

[Jay Honeck]

I know, I apologize, I was in a hurry. So far, I think Jay's explanation of how things are in GA was about the best. The world war II crowd had a "lets get it done" philosophy.

Everyone else since, has had a "lets get the money now, screw tomorrow" philosophy.

John

Ah, the old "I got mine, now eff you!" attitude. It pervades our everyday existence, almost like it's in the water.

You see it everywhere, now. Check out the looters in Tuscaloosa. Check out the government workers in Wisconsin. Check out the union workers in Detroit. Check out Donald Trump. All with the same "I've got mine, and we will all be dead before this blows up" attitude that has (IMHO) crippled our nation. It seems to be "Damn the actuaries -- full speed ahead!" at every turn.

I don't know how the WWII generation managed to instill this "Every man for himself!" attitude in its offspring, but it's a rare day when I see people (on a macro scale) doing the right thing because it's right. Thankfully, at the personal micro level, it's still possible to shun that sort, and surround yourself with good folks.

Whether this has anything to do with the decline of GA is hard to say. It certainly hasn't helped, that's for sure.

 

[airbornejohnny]

Even without the cost barrier, video games are more appealing to the newer generations. Personally I'm more comfortable with the older crowd probably because of how I was raised with values many of my peers have discarded or ignored.
People are just flat out lazy these days. They don't welcome challenges like those before us did, and could care less about helping out the next person if doing so does no personal benefit. Sad, but true. Times are changing everywhere, heck even the Army has let some standards either lax or go because applicants were too fat or too old. Even the G.I. Bill is different now.
I'd bet my lunch those who will still want to fly despite all of this will end up invigorating light/ultralight aircraft, mainly because they're "cheaper."
Either way we slice it, GA is certainly changing before us. HOW it changes is what will determine its overall fate.

 

[Art VanDelay]

Even without the cost barrier, video games are more appealing to the newer generations. Personally I'm more comfortable with the older crowd probably because of how I was raised with values many of my peers have discarded or ignored.
People are just flat out lazy these days. They don't welcome challenges like those before us did, and could care less about helping out the next person if doing so does no personal benefit. Sad, but true. Times are changing everywhere, heck even the Army has let some standards either lax or go because applicants were too fat or too old. Even the G.I. Bill is different now.
I'd bet my lunch those who will still want to fly despite all of this will end up invigorating light/ultralight aircraft, mainly because they're "cheaper."
Either way we slice it, GA is certainly changing before us. HOW it changes is what will determine its overall fate.

+10 !!!

How do we compete with XBox and Wii ???? Especially in this current instant gratification, intense sense of entitlement generation ??

 

[denverpilot]

Notice the only folks still flying frequently have the activity supplemented somehow?

I was with you until this statement but it's just not true. I see people at the airport every weekend who aren't supplemented. They're flying. There's just not a lot of them.

They're not buying new cars, they're living in smaller reasonably sized houses or townhouses, they have set foot inside a mall in years, they often don't even carry a cell phone, and certainly not a smartphone unless they wrote it off as a business expense, if you ask them about most TV shows they say, "Is that on Cable?", they've got a sack lunch in their pickup truck and a Coke, and they're doing as much of their own maintenance as the law will allow. And they probably are wearing jeans and a beat up t-shirt or flannel. They're probably flying a Champ or a Cub or something that burns less than 10 GPH, too. Often they built it themselves too.

There are ways to fly your butt off on a tight budget.

One of my secrets is "deferred maintenance" of my back lawn and gardens that are dead. And neighbors who are often similarly uninterested in theirs. Front looks pretty good though.

 

[ClimbnSink]

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. The next generation of pilots haven't shown up yet and pilots are already badmouthing them. Gee I wonder why more people don't want to hang out with us

+10 !!!

How do we compete with XBox and Wii ???? Especially in this current instant gratification, intense sense of entitlement generation ??

 

[Tarheel Pilot]

I was with you until this statement but it's just not true. I see people at the airport every weekend who aren't supplemented. They're flying. There's just not a lot of them.

They're not buying new cars, they're living in smaller reasonably sized houses or townhouses, they have set foot inside a mall in years, they often don't even carry a cell phone, and certainly not a smartphone unless they wrote it off as a business expense, if you ask them about most TV shows they say, "Is that on Cable?", they've got a sack lunch in their pickup truck and a Coke, and they're doing as much of their own maintenance as the law will allow. And they probably are wearing jeans and a beat up t-shirt or flannel. They're probably flying a Champ or a Cub or something that burns less than 10 GPH, too. Often they built it themselves too.

There are ways to fly your butt off on a tight budget.

One of my secrets is "deferred maintenance" of my back lawn and gardens that are dead. And neighbors who are often similarly uninterested in theirs. Front looks pretty good though.

To be honest, Cable TV and Malls are pretty outdated and obsolete. You can find better things on Netflix, and online shopping. I live in a small house mainly because I don't see the point in the big houses that everyone wants to buy.

I also have plans to build an E-AB aircraft with a non-certified engine in it, non-certified avionics so that I can (like you said) do as much of my own maintenance as I can.

It doesn't hurt that I have my own business on my property, so I don't have to worry about filling up my car as often.

Honestly, I think it all comes down to priorities, some people want to spend thousands of dollars buying the latest and greatest, in houses, electronics, etc.

My philosophy is, keep using it until you can't use it anymore. That's why I live in a house built in 1950, why my TV is from the year 2006 (same as my computer), my car is from 2004, and both my video camera and regular camera is from mid 2000s.

The money I save on not buying the latest and greatest goes towards my recreational flying.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. The next generation of pilots haven't shown up yet and pilots are already badmouthing them. Gee I wonder why more people don't want to hang out with us

I'd have to agree with this, I am 27 years old and while there are some people who want instant gratification, I don't see it as a generation wide problem. I mean let's be honest, every generation had people who wanted instant gratification, even the WW II generation.

Just like every generation, there are good people, and there are bad people, there are people who are more than willing to help out their fellow man, and there are people who has the "I got mine, screw everyone else" mentality.

I don't think the "I got mine, screw everyone else" and "Instant gratification" crowd having as much an impact on GA as 100LL prices and insurance rates does.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

do you believe that general aviation in the United States is dying?

Sadly, yes - To the point where I'm reluctant to buy an airplane for fear that by the time I want to sell it, there won't be anyone left to buy it except for at a tiny fraction of what I paid.

The answer: Make it easier to get a Pilot Certificate.

Financially, sure.

1. Take away some of stupid requirements like steep turns and turns about a point.

How are those "stupid"? Neither of them is particularly difficult, they both lead to understanding of other aspects of flying that are important, and eliminating them would not make any significant difference in the length or cost of training.

2. Reintroduce spins.

Which are significantly harder (and scarier!) than steep turns and turns around a point.

3. Remove anything from the Private Pilot PTS that doesn't involve the basic requirements for getting from point A to point B safely.

Do you spin on ALL your cross countries?

4. Not many private pilots are going to be doing photo shoots, or aerobatics, or even towing, so leave any of that stuff off the private, and leave it for the commercial ticket.

Uhhh... Nothing about photo shoots, aerobatics, or towing were covered during my private training...

The commercial ticket is too easy to obtain, the private is too hard. Even it up a little and may err on the side of making the private too easy. That would boost our completion rate.

And our accident rate, and our insurance rates... Which would lead to higher costs and fewer new pilots.

1. Stop telling pilots that a private pilot is worthless unless he has an instrument rating.

I've never heard any PILOTS saying that... I get the "are you instrument rated?" question from as many non-pilots as pilots.

However, often people talk about the value of GA for travel. It's fine for travel if you don't mind getting stuck somewhere. If you're on a schedule, you'd best have alternative means of getting home on time. The IR simply makes that much easier, though it doesn't keep it from happening entirely.

2. Talk about aviation everywhere you can, in the hopes that someone gets hooked and tries it.

Oh, I do. With the exception of listeners to my podcast, I can't say that I know of anyone who has learned to fly as a result of it. As far as those who listened to the podcast and that got them going, I don't think I'm doing anything other than preaching to the choir - I think most of those people would have become pilots eventually. If they didn't already have an interest in flying, they wouldn't have been listening to my podcast in the first place. So, I don't think I can take credit for anyone learning to fly.

Doesn't stop me from trying, though. As soon as finals are over, I'm taking two fellow engineering students who are interested in aviation for a fun-flight day - We're going to go to the weekly fly-in Friday lunch at 68C (The place with "Built for the love of flying" on the hangar and a rain-or-shine lunch gathering every week except OSH week), then we'll fly to OSH and go to the EAA museum, then we'll fly to SBM for dinner at the best on-field restaurant in the state before heading home. Hopefully they'll learn to fly - But I won't take credit for them either if they do - One was already thinking about flying before I met him, the other one is actually designing an airplane for fun and I've shown him lots of different airplane designs that do things he wants his plane to be able to do.

3. Become a mentor.

I'd love to - Where's the mentees?

1st problem the majority of flight schools run **** poor miserable operations. That is our fault GA pilots treat the public worse than the TSA treats the public. Don't believe me, leave the leather jacket, aopa cap, and big watch at home and drive to an airport where no one knows you- then try and have a pleasant inspiring conversation with someone, anyone.

Amen. Part of the problem is that people who start FBO's do it because they love flying, not because they love customer service.

When I fly, I am expected to practically memorize the entire FAR...that is a bit ridiculous.

Not really. You need to know what the rules are - You don't need to memorize the FAR's. People call me a "walking FAR/AIM" sometimes, but the simple fact is that I know what most of the rules *mean*, not exactly what they say. I frequently go looking at them when I have a question as to an exact meaning.

BTW, a member of my club just got an IPC. The CFI had a FAR/AIM that was tattered, marked up like crazy etc... With no airline or military flying, he had 38,000 hours and 25,000+ dual given; the FAR/AIM was a 2011. He clearly doesn't have it memorized, but I'll bet he knows the rules...

And frankly, the most important rule is: "Don't be dumb."

Every statistic I've seen tends to support this 'misconception'.

Small airplanes are just as safe as airliners. It's small-plane PILOTS who tend to screw up the statistics. See "Don't be dumb," above.

I invited a CFI to talk to a group of potential pilots. He decided to tell a 'funny' story that started off: 'Let me tell you how I almost died today...'
I wandered into an FBO that tries to do a lot of flight training and charter flying. They were watching "World's worst Plane Crashes" on the TV in the main lobby. I suggested that maybe it would be better for business if they picked a different show.

I really wish people would think a little harder about how they look to others... And this also fits in with the idea of FBO's being pretty dumb at business.

Flying is definitely expensive, but then it always (proportionally) has been.

Not as bad as it is now. A while back, I took the price of a brand-new 182 from the 1970's and adjusted it for inflation - It came out to about $115,000. The actual price of a brand-new 182 these days is about $380,000. Sure, you've always had to be "above average" in terms of income to own an airplane, but now it's ridiculous. I know a lot of pilots who would LOVE to fly more, even at current gas prices, but there's no way they can afford an airplane that they can haul their family around in, so they don't fly nearly as much as they otherwise would.

From where I sit, cost is what keeps people out.

IMO, this is the #1 factor - And a lot of different things contribute to it.

Yeah I think GA is about dead in the US. Im using the benchmark that GA is already dead in the UK/Europe. If we can't agree on the latter then we'll never agree the US GA could be in trouble.

The difference is - Was GA ever truly alive in the UK and elsewhere in Europe? And by that I mean the segment of GA I think we're really talking about here - Active ASEL pilots using GA for recreation and leisure transportation. Seems like the glider community is much more active over there, but that's not what I want to do with most of my GA flying.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. The next generation of pilots haven't shown up yet and pilots are already badmouthing them. Gee I wonder why more people don't want to hang out with us

Yep. s5:

 

[Everskyward]

A while back, I took the price of a brand-new 182 from the 1970's and adjusted it for inflation - It came out to about $115,000. The actual price of a brand-new 182 these days is about $380,000. Sure, you've always had to be "above average" in terms of income to own an airplane, but now it's ridiculous. I know a lot of pilots who would LOVE to fly more, even at current gas prices, but there's no way they can afford an airplane that they can haul their family around in, so they don't fly nearly as much as they otherwise would.

So here's a hypothetical question. How much do you think a person should/would want to spend on an airplane as a percentage of yearly income? If you make $100,000/year would it be reasonable to buy a $100,000 airplane? I know this depends on a whole lot of other things such as assets and investments, as well as expenses, but take an "average" person. How much do you think they would be willing to spend?

 

[airbornejohnny]

I don't know whether to laugh or cry. The next generation of pilots haven't shown up yet and pilots are already badmouthing them. Gee I wonder why more people don't want to hang out with us

I know what you mean, and perhaps my observation is too generalised/prejudiced, but in my past occupation as a school bus driver, high school kids were the best behaved, and normally if they weren't staring out the window, they were messin with their cellphones texting or playing games. Now I work on a farm, and the kids who are to inheret the farm, all of 6 or 7 years younger than me (I'm 31), sham out of the manual labor work involved in working land. Lazy lazy lazy. LOTS of people out here (Jersey) give their kids cars/SUV's that cost more than I make in a year, and many of them get twisted around trees and telephone poles (I see that on our vol. fire dept all the time) and its obvious why: they lack consideration/appreciation for what they get.
Sure, out of this group there are plenty of others who have a functioning give-a-damn, and given motivation to EARN their wings, they certainly will, and when I'm licensed to fly more than a T-10D (that'd be a parachute) I will be the last person to scare away potential safe pilots. I just don't see it jiving with most kids' lifestyles around my area, which at least for aviation around here is potentially hazardous to GA survival.

 

[airbornejohnny]

How much do you think they would be willing to spend?

Depends how often the person plans to fly. If not very often, this "average" joe/jane you speak of may think renting is the way to go . Then again, lots of folks ARE buying McMansions thatd comfortably accomodate a small town and cost to heat and cool probably about that of a skyscraper...

 

[Everskyward]

Depends how often the person plans to fly. If not very often, this "average" joe/jane you speak of may think renting is the way to go . Then again, lots of folks ARE buying McMansions thatd comfortably accomodate a small town and cost to heat and cool probably about that of a skyscraper...

I know there are a lot of "it depends" but Kent made the statement that $380,000 was too much but $115,000 was more reasonable. Truthfully I've never thought about how much is "reasonable" to spend on something like an airplane as a percentage of income but I'm interested in seeing what other people think.

 

[Challenged]

My very quick and dirty research yields the following:

• Median salary in 1960 was $5,600.
• A new Cessna 150 in 1960: $6,995.
• Median salary in 2010 was $39,336.

From those statistics, why don't we have any $49,000 two seaters in 2011? To me, that would be a reasonable cost.

 

[zaitcev]

BTW, car people are waking up recently to the fact that 20-something just aren't interested in cars. GA has it rougher than cars, but they are hurting a lot too. People were ricing up previous gen Civics in my town, but nobody bothers with Fit, which IMHO would be an excellent platform for tinkering. The riceboy culture is dead everywhere except its ancestral homeland of LA. And why? Predictably, Xbox and iPhone are blamed.

 

[denverpilot]

I'm curious about this too. I'll throw a number out and see what sticks...

Do you spend more or less than 10% of gross income (before taxes) on aviation?

Or alternatively, since taxes are awful... 10% of net income?

Maybe percentages aren't a good way to do this unless it was a percentage of "discretionary" income?

But one person's discretion cuts into another's "required" lifestyle. Ha. Hmm.

 

[ClimbnSink]

I don't think it is electronics that are causing the youth to lose their love affair with cars. I'd guess two things. 1. For whatever reason girls aren't impressed by cars hence guys care less. 2. There is so much hassle for teenagers to drive, special teen driver texting laws, special classes, curfews, stupid insurance rates, predatory ticketing, kids getting caught with alcohol and a car compared to alcohol and being a pedestrian is big big trouble.
It is the same regulatory crap that keeps people from flying. No matter how well meaning rules are a killjoy.

BTW, car people are waking up recently to the fact that 20-something just aren't interested in cars. GA has it rougher than cars, but they are hurting a lot too. People were ricing up previous gen Civics in my town, but nobody bothers with Fit, which IMHO would be an excellent platform for tinkering. The riceboy culture is dead everywhere except its ancestral homeland of LA. And why? Predictably, Xbox and iPhone are blamed.

 

[SkyHog]

How are those "stupid"? Neither of them is particularly difficult, they both lead to understanding of other aspects of flying that are important, and eliminating them would not make any significant difference in the length or cost of training.

I disagree. Steep turns are not hard, but keeping within 100 feet and 10 degrees is a little on the "perfection" side for what a private pilot needs to do. Perhaps showing that the plane will want to continue the bank and moving on to the next topic is all that needs to be done.

Same with turns about a point. Show that winds affect it and move on. No need to demonstrate a constant arc...

Which are significantly harder (and scarier!) than steep turns and turns around a point.



Do you spin on ALL your cross countries?

No. But, stall/spins happen a lot. Much more frequently than being asked to S-Turn on final for spacing. Also, losing 150 feet during a steep turn isn't going to kill anyone. Not being able to recover from a spin will.

Uhhh... Nothing about photo shoots, aerobatics, or towing were covered during my private training...

Why else would any private pilot be required to do turns around a point than for photo shoots. It certainly isn't to navigate to their $100 hamburger.

And our accident rate, and our insurance rates... Which would lead to higher costs and fewer new pilots.

Accident rate: yes. Insurance rates: No. Same reason as the healthcare debate. More pilots, more spread, lower rates. As for the accident rate? Well, naturally, the more pilots you have, the more accidents you will have. Look at driving. There are probably hundreds of fatal accidents every day. The reason people aren't screaming "GET THESE DANGEROUS CARS OFF THE ROADS!" is because everyone drives. Imagine if everyone flew....wouldn't be so foreign to them anymore.

I've never heard any PILOTS saying that... I get the "are you instrument rated?" question from as many non-pilots as pilots.

Really? You've never heard "You shouldn't fly at night unless you're instrument rated?" "Don't fly over the top if you're not instrument rated." "You're crazy to attempt a cross country trip without an IR."

That just makes a student think "Why the hell should I waste time with the PPC if I won't get any utility.

In reality, its perfectly safe, and natural as well, to fly in all of those conditions without the IR. And cutting those flights from your repertoire only limits the usefulness of GA even more.

However, often people talk about the value of GA for travel. It's fine for travel if you don't mind getting stuck somewhere. If you're on a schedule, you'd best have alternative means of getting home on time. The IR simply makes that much easier, though it doesn't keep it from happening entirely.

I've really only been stuck once because I didn't have my IR. It was for the grand-reopening of 6Y9. Other than that, its been a few hours, or at most, a day or waiting. Still usually beats the hell out of driving time-wise.

Oh, I do. With the exception of listeners to my podcast, I can't say that I know of anyone who has learned to fly as a result of it. As far as those who listened to the podcast and that got them going, I don't think I'm doing anything other than preaching to the choir - I think most of those people would have become pilots eventually. If they didn't already have an interest in flying, they wouldn't have been listening to my podcast in the first place. So, I don't think I can take credit for anyone learning to fly.

Doesn't stop me from trying, though. As soon as finals are over, I'm taking two fellow engineering students who are interested in aviation for a fun-flight day - We're going to go to the weekly fly-in Friday lunch at 68C (The place with "Built for the love of flying" on the hangar and a rain-or-shine lunch gathering every week except OSH week), then we'll fly to OSH and go to the EAA museum, then we'll fly to SBM for dinner at the best on-field restaurant in the state before heading home. Hopefully they'll learn to fly - But I won't take credit for them either if they do - One was already thinking about flying before I met him, the other one is actually designing an airplane for fun and I've shown him lots of different airplane designs that do things he wants his plane to be able to do.

Excellent! Now, if we could just get people at the airport to stop being jerks. That's what I meant more than us, since everyone here probably does their part here. But the bull**** security measures that aren't even being forced upon FBOs doesn't help. Requiring flight plans for every flight, requiring a list of passengers, not allowing visitors to come check out the ramp, these are all things that are off-putting for a potential new pilot. The giant 1-800-GA-SECURE signs?

Hell, even KFFA has a giant sign right by the ramp that says that they don't want non-pilots on the ramp. Of all places, why would we not want the ramp to be part of the "action?" What a perfect place to take someone up for their first flight.

I'd love to - Where's the mentees?

http://projectpilot.aopa.org/projectpilot

Not really. You need to know what the rules are - You don't need to memorize the FAR's. People call me a "walking FAR/AIM" sometimes, but the simple fact is that I know what most of the rules *mean*, not exactly what they say. I frequently go looking at them when I have a question as to an exact meaning.

BTW, a member of my club just got an IPC. The CFI had a FAR/AIM that was tattered, marked up like crazy etc... With no airline or military flying, he had 38,000 hours and 25,000+ dual given; the FAR/AIM was a 2011. He clearly doesn't have it memorized, but I'll bet he knows the rules...

And frankly, the most important rule is: "Don't be dumb."

Take basic VFR Flight instruments as an example. Why the hell does a VFR flight require anything more than a tachometer, an oil pressure gauge, and some sort of fuel level indicator? Moreover, why the hell does an inop instrument ground a perfectly good airplane?

Why do we really need a FAR that says that we are required to follow all rules unless we determine that we don't need to follow them?

Why are the FARs written so cryptically? Think about the first time you read them....they weren't natural. We have all gotten good at reading them, but why are they written the way they are? Why not the following, for example, for 91.3 (compare and contrast):

Sec. 91.3

Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.
(b) In an in-flight emergency requiring immediate action, the pilot in command may deviate from any rule of this part to the extent required to meet that emergency.
(c) Each pilot in command who deviates from a rule under paragraph (b) of this section shall, upon the request of the Administrator, send a written report of that deviation to the Administrator.

Instead of:

The pilot in command of an aircraft is responsible for operating the aircraft safely, and is entrusted with the decision-making power to ensure such safety. If the pilot must deviate from any published rules for safety reasons, he may be asked to submit a written report to the Administrator.

Or 91.13:

Sec. 91.13 — Careless or reckless operation.

(a) Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.
(b) Aircraft operations other than for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft, other than for the purpose of air navigation, on any part of the surface of an airport used by aircraft for air commerce (including areas used by those aircraft for receiving or discharging persons or cargo), in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.

Instead of:

It is unlawful for any pilot to recklessly put anyone at unnecessary risk by flying his aircraft in an unsafe manner. This rule also applies to non-flying pilots operating an aircraft on the ground at an airport.

See what I mean?

 

[flyingcheesehead]

So here's a hypothetical question. How much do you think a person should/would want to spend on an airplane as a percentage of yearly income? If you make $100,000/year would it be reasonable to buy a $100,000 airplane? I know this depends on a whole lot of other things such as assets and investments, as well as expenses, but take an "average" person. How much do you think they would be willing to spend?

Well, $115,000 is a lot more "average" than $380,000. What $115,000 buys you today is a base-model LSA from a non-brand-name manufacturer without most of the bells and whistles people want. It just won't work for a pilot with a wife and a couple of kids - That's what the 182 is for.

I'm also not suggesting that there's a huge number of people who have the means to go out and buy a 182 for themselves - Then or now. However, the number of people who could was certainly larger then. For the rest of us who are renters, club members, or co-owners, we've still gotta pay that plane off somehow. So, the rental rates are much higher (Over $60/hr difference between the one brand-new 182 I've ever rented, and what I was paying in my club at the time), which affects people's ability to afford to fly them.

So, "average" person who's a renter, and "above-average" (income, that is ) person who wants to own - Both of them are getting a lot less for their money than they used to.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I'm curious about this too. I'll throw a number out and see what sticks...

Do you spend more or less than 10% of gross income (before taxes) on aviation?

Easily. I probably spend 20%, maybe even 25%. Ah, the advantages of being single and childless.

Maybe percentages aren't a good way to do this unless it was a percentage of "discretionary" income?

I don't see how that's relevant. Flying money isn't "discretionary."

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I disagree. Steep turns are not hard, but keeping within 100 feet and 10 degrees is a little on the "perfection" side for what a private pilot needs to do.

Really? I don't think so at all. In fact, if you can't keep a plane within 100 feet on a steep turn after your first 10 hours of flying, you suck. IMO, steep turns are one of the easiest (and most fun) maneuvers.

Perhaps showing that the plane will want to continue the bank and moving on to the next topic is all that needs to be done.

The steep turn is a VERY useful maneuver - Both in terms of being able to use it in the event of an emergency (and knowing what's going to happen) as well as really showing what an increased load factor does and what it feels like. Overbanking tendency is only a very small thing, IMO.

Same with turns about a point. Show that winds affect it and move on. No need to demonstrate a constant arc...

If you can't demonstrate a relatively constant arc, you don't know how winds affect it. Besides, there is no standard for "constant arc" in the PTS - Merely that you maintain altitude within ±100 feet and airspeed ±10 knots. Piece of cake. It's the simplest of the three Private Pilot ground reference maneuvers, IMO. No rolling in and out of turns or going in the opposite direction - Simply go around a circle, with the steepest bank when you have the most direct tailwind. And again, if you can't pay attention to keeping your altitude within limits AND where the wind's coming from, you're not ready for a whole lot of other things that are necessary for flying. It's a building block.

No. But, stall/spins happen a lot. Much more frequently than being asked to S-Turn on final for spacing. Also, losing 150 feet during a steep turn isn't going to kill anyone. Not being able to recover from a spin will.

But you said you were trying to make it easier to get a Private certificate, when you actually made it harder, and scarier.

Why else would any private pilot be required to do turns around a point than for photo shoots. It certainly isn't to navigate to their $100 hamburger.

To show that they understand how groundspeed affects turning radius (hello, tailwind on base leading to the textbook final turn that results in a fatal stall-spin accident?) and can hold their altitude while simultaneously paying attention to something else.

Accident rate: yes. Insurance rates: No. Same reason as the healthcare debate. More pilots, more spread, lower rates. As for the accident rate? Well, naturally, the more pilots you have, the more accidents you will have.

No, insurance rates will go up - I don't mean that there will only be a higher *number* of accidents, if you make the private too easy to get there will be a higher *percentage* of accidents, which means that your insurance rates will be higher despite the higher number of pilots.

Really? You've never heard "You shouldn't fly at night unless you're instrument rated?" "Don't fly over the top if you're not instrument rated." "You're crazy to attempt a cross country trip without an IR."

Oh, I've heard them. I've also sought out further opinions. I've done all three of the above prior to being instrument rated: Plenty of night flying, one trip over the top of a solid undercast with CAVU at departure and destination (hell, it was safer than a scud run!), and going as far as from Wisconsin to the Gulf coast.

That said, those statements aren't coming from nowhere. IMO, some of the things you learn during instrument training make night flying a LOT safer, even if it's VFR. Terrain isn't lit, after all! So, following obstacle departure procedures, for example, would give a huge increase in safety for night flying. Do you need to be instrument RATED? No. But, as a CFI, I intend to show my students how to use them. I also intend to discuss the things they need to do to minimize risk on long cross-country flights as VFR pilots. Unfortunately, the three things you mention are things that just aren't really covered by 99% of primary flight training operations. They're all things that can be done safely VFR, but there's more to consider than your average freshly minted private pilot is going to know, and that's why those statements you've quoted are made.

And cutting those flights from your repertoire only limits the usefulness of GA even more.

Agreed 100%.

I've really only been stuck once because I didn't have my IR. It was for the grand-reopening of 6Y9. Other than that, its been a few hours, or at most, a day or waiting. Still usually beats the hell out of driving time-wise.

Or canceling your entire weekend's plans as you did recently. But, the more you "have to" be home for work on Monday, the more risk is involved, and the more useful the IR is.

Take basic VFR Flight instruments as an example. Why the hell does a VFR flight require anything more than a tachometer, an oil pressure gauge, and some sort of fuel level indicator? Moreover, why the hell does an inop instrument ground a perfectly good airplane?

Well, an altimeter would be pretty handy. Even VFR, if you're above 3,000 feet AGL you're required to maintain the proper VFR cruising altitude. Kinda hard to do without an altimeter. You also need to maintain proper clearance from buildings, clouds, yadda yadda yadda.

What you see as basic VFR flight instruments in the FAR's is just about exactly what you'll see in the panel of a stock J-3 Cub. Hardly what I'd call over-instrumented!

Why do we really need a FAR that says that we are required to follow all rules unless we determine that we don't need to follow them?

I kinda like that one. Some people are overly reliant on rules (you'll find some of them here ) and without the rule that says it's OK to break the rules in an emergency, those people will often follow the rules right to the smoking hole in the ground.

It also makes it quite clear whose butt is on the line, and that they cannot blame ATC or anyone else.

Why are the FARs written so cryptically? Think about the first time you read them....they weren't natural. We have all gotten good at reading them, but why are they written the way they are? Why not the following, for example, for 91.3 (compare and contrast):

Smart FAR's - You may be on to something there! I like it!

Have you read the FAR's for Sport Pilots? They're written in a completely different manner, almost like a FAQ file. So maybe the FAA is finally getting it too...

 

[Doggtyred]

Steep turns are a maneuver that requires skill integration. It's a perfect demonstrator for "putting it all together".

 

[Bob Noel]

I'm curious about this too. I'll throw a number out and see what sticks...

Do you spend more or less than 10% of gross income (before taxes) on aviation?

Or alternatively, since taxes are awful... 10% of net income?

In effect, my budget for flying is a bit more than 10% of my gross income. Sometimes it's less, sometimes it's more.

Never have been married my financial obligations are a bit simplier than other people's situation.

 

[ajstoner21]

why the hell does an inop instrument ground a perfectly good airplane?

An inop instrument could be a sign of deeper trouble. Do you really want to be in the air, when you realize there is a huge electrical problem because of some rodent that causes a fire?

Are you familiar with "required equipment"? There are legal and safe ways to fly with inop equipment....



And for the record.... if your standards for a private pilot start getting implemented, i'm never flying again because i would no longer feel safe. There are enough idiots flying. we dont need any more.