LightSpeed's "Why fewer new GA pilots" poll results...

[jmaynard]

Sport Pilot is a joke. Its to pacify us into being OK with just flying around the patch and not using GA for transportation.

It's possible to do real transportation as a sport pilot just as it is as a private without an instrument ticket. There are limitations, but it's not that restrictive, as long as you can fit into an LSA's useful load.

 

[tonycondon]

Ercoupes are definitely on my short list. I don't like having a gas tank in my lap, but that's about the only thing I really don't like about them, if I can find one with rudder pedals.

why do you insist on rudder pedals?

 

[colohan]

$10K to learn to fly? thats well above average in my experience.

I see from your map that you live in the central US. In either the SF Bay Area or Boston (I trained in both locations) that is well within the norm. My private cost me about $12k.

Chris

 

[flyingcheesehead]

I see from your map that you live in the central US. In either the SF Bay Area or Boston (I trained in both locations) that is well within the norm. My private cost me about $12k.

Yes, but those are high-cost-of-living places, where salaries are generally higher as well.

How many hours did it take you? I got my Private for less than $3500 6 years ago.

 

[gprellwitz]

Yes, but those are high-cost-of-living places, where salaries are generally higher as well.

How many hours did it take you? I got my Private for less than $3500 6 years ago.

Yeah, but you also did it in about the bare minimum number of hours. My cost was closer to the $10K number than the $3.5K.

 

[Ghery]

Yeah, but you also did it in about the bare minimum number of hours. My cost was closer to the $10K number than the $3.5K.

About 60 hours in the log when I got home from the checkride. $4707 before heading home from the ride between aircraft and CFI. This was in 2001. Of course, our club is a less expensive way to fly, and that figure does not count monthly dues paid during the 8 months or so I was learning to fly. So, add maybe another $400 to that figure. It also does not count all the stuff you buy and the DPE's fee.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Yeah, but you also did it in about the bare minimum number of hours. My cost was closer to the $10K number than the $3.5K.

Yes... But I'm nothing special in terms of innate ability. It was all desire. (Engineering school helped too. ) I drank up as much aviation knowledge as I could on the ground long before I started actually flying. I read about others' lessons and then chair-flew them myself. By the time I got in the airplane, there really weren't any surprises. Anyone can do that - But most people don't like "ground school," and that costs them a LOT of money.

I also did a lot of shopping around to find an FBO with reasonable rates and policies, and I ended up moving closer to them as well. When I started there, a high-time 172N could be had for $69/hr and the CFI cost $30/hr. Same place is now charging $79 and $33, respectively. Still using the same plane that I soloed in and did my checkride in, too, and it has produced a LOT of pilots.

BTW, that $3.5K included all of the "stuff". I used an old bag from school for my "flight bag," bought a cheap headset on eBay ($55), etc... It wasn't until after I had the PP-ASEL that I started REALLY blowing money on aviation!

 

[CT Arrow]

Yes, but those are high-cost-of-living places, where salaries are generally higher as well.

How many hours did it take you? I got my Private for less than $3500 6 years ago.

Kent, your simply not the norm!

National average still hovers around 73+/- hours for completion of the PVT-SEL.

$125 per hour (average) for CFI and AP X 73 hours = $9125 before any of the other junk neeed: Books, headset, ground,,,

Yea, it 10K $$$$$$

 

[ClimbnSink]

First, unfriendliness, both from businesses and their employees and other pilots. Wait you say pilots are friendly. Try this: leave the leather jacket/AOPA hat at home and drive to an airport you've never been to- engage in pleasant conversation without letting on that you are a pilot. Second, the utility is nowhere near what is promised. Renting just about destroys what little utility there is. Third, While lots of people can afford it, once you know how to fly it isn't that interesting to drone around after scheduling, waiting, getting through a gate, etc. Affordability is the wrong measure, perceived value is better. Same as paying ten bucks for a good burger. Burger was fine, but overpaying takes away from the enjoyment. While it may cost the restaurant ten bucks to make a profit on a burger, doesn't matter the perception of value takes away from the experience. Better customer service would probably overcome some of this, but I've yet to see good, consistent customer service in Aviation.

 

[Anthony]

It's possible to do real transportation as a sport pilot just as it is as a private without an instrument ticket. There are limitations, but it's not that restrictive, as long as you can fit into an LSA's useful load.

Its possible to do it in a Balloon too, but how practical is it? People usually need to carry stuff and its nice to go faster than Sport Pilot allows to actually get somewhere prior to old age.

 

[jmaynard]

People usually need to carry stuff

I can carry stuff for a week if I'm solo; my roommate and I can carry stuff for a weekend.

and its nice to go faster than Sport Pilot allows to actually get somewhere prior to old age.

My LSA flies faster than a 172 (by not a lot, but it's still in that class). Lots of folks use 172s and Warriors and Archers for travel.

 

[Anthony]

I can carry stuff for a week if I'm solo; my roommate and I can carry stuff for a weekend.


My LSA flies faster than a 172 (by not a lot, but it's still in that class). Lots of folks use 172s and Warriors and Archers for travel.

In my experience, that is not typical. Most LSA's fly at Ercoupe speeds and when you're used to retract speeds, that just doesn't cut it for many.

Not saying an LSA can not be useful, they are just prohibitevly restrictive compared to GA planes designed for transportation. Why tie one hand around your back while trying to get from point A to point B? Because the government says so?

 

[Everskyward]

I can carry stuff for a week if I'm solo; my roommate and I can carry stuff for a weekend.

My LSA flies faster than a 172 (by not a lot, but it's still in that class). Lots of folks use 172s and Warriors and Archers for travel.

We've had this debate before and I agree with Jay. An airplane like his would be nice for someone who mostly travels alone or occasionally with one other person. His plane isn't that restrictive either as long as you have more than a Sport Pilot certificate.

 

[Henning]

Impractical seems to be missing as well. The way GA is set up, it is not a very practical thing.

 

[jmaynard]

Not saying an LSA can not be useful, they are just prohibitevly restrictive compared to GA planes designed for transportation.

You mean 172s and Warriors aren't designed for transportation?

My point is that you're lumping all LSAs into one class, when they come in all different capabilities. Treat them as airplanes, and look at them as individuals. Don't write them all off based on the capabilities of some.

Why tie one hand around your back while trying to get from point A to point B? Because the government says so?

Well, they do write the rules. For some of us, the choice is LSA or nothing. I'm saying that choice isn't as restrictive as you make it out to be.

 

[Henning]

It's possible to do real transportation as a sport pilot just as it is as a private without an instrument ticket. There are limitations, but it's not that restrictive, as long as you can fit into an LSA's useful load.

That's not very practical either, even with an instrument rating.

 

[Henning]

why do you insist on rudder pedals?

???? Seems to me the proper question is "Why on God's Green Earth would you compromise on the gas tank in your lap?"

 

[Henning]

Well, they do write the rules. For some of us, the choice is LSA or nothing. I'm saying that choice isn't as restrictive as you make it out to be.

Not really, for many the choice is "Ignore the rules". Lots of people out there flying with no medical or an Airman's Certificate of any type.

 

[Henning]

My LSA flies faster than a 172 (by not a lot, but it's still in that class). Lots of folks use 172s and Warriors and Archers for travel.

Lots of people trade up out of them if they travel much as well....Once you start getting used to 3 miles a minute plus, it's tough to go down below 2 again when you're travelling places. Folks doing so in a 172 or PA-28... can also penetrate a layer of clouds going to and from which can save them days on a trip rather than hours (though this is a SP restriction rather than an LSA restriction). To me it's simple, for $140k, I could have the nicest Lancair 360 there is and be travelling nearly twice the speed of the fastest of the LSAs. I don't see LSA as giving my greatest $$$ value.

 

[Henning]

Yes... But I'm nothing special in terms of innate ability. It was all desire. (Engineering school helped too. )

Yeah, it meant there was no girl taking up your time and money.....

 

[TangoWhiskey]

Kent, your simply not the norm!

National average still hovers around 73+/- hours for completion of the PVT-SEL.

$125 per hour (average) for CFI and AP X 73 hours = $9125 before any of the other junk neeed: Books, headset, ground,,,

Yea, it 10K $$$$$$

I think a large part of that (averaging 73+/- to complete the PP-ASEL) is when people only take their lessons every once in a while, when they can afford it.

My personal experience is that when folks save the money first, then go put $4000 down on account at the flight school (taking advantage of the block rate to save even more!), and schedule 3-4 flights/wk, they typically earn their certificate near the low end of the hours scale (less than 50).

 

[Henning]

First, unfriendliness, both from businesses and their employees and other pilots. Wait you say pilots are friendly. Try this: leave the leather jacket/AOPA hat at home and drive to an airport you've never been to- engage in pleasant conversation without letting on that you are a pilot. Second, the utility is nowhere near what is promised. Renting just about destroys what little utility there is. Third, While lots of people can afford it, once you know how to fly it isn't that interesting to drone around after scheduling, waiting, getting through a gate, etc. Affordability is the wrong measure, perceived value is better. Same as paying ten bucks for a good burger. Burger was fine, but overpaying takes away from the enjoyment. While it may cost the restaurant ten bucks to make a profit on a burger, doesn't matter the perception of value takes away from the experience. Better customer service would probably overcome some of this, but I've yet to see good, consistent customer service in Aviation.

Amen brother... There are only a few situations where GA adds a perceived value out outside of "I like it", and that is the value added that sells most of us even tough it adds layers of cost and complication besides those directly attributable to flying, such as ground transportation at the other end. Unless you work at an airport, commuting by airplane requires maintaining an extra car at the other end as well typically. The costs of maintaining a Certified GA plane also is of a low perceived value when you have to pay $120 for a switch that you can buy identical (less a stamping) from the same manufacturer for $4 from an electrical supply house.

 

[Everskyward]

Impractical seems to be missing as well. The way GA is set up, it is not a very practical thing.

But for most people here it's a hobby. It's not necessarily supposed to be practical. If you want practical you are looking at quite a bit of expense for the airplane and the training. Motorcycles, speedboats, etc, these are not practical either. I think many people take the "I like it" aspect and then try to justify it economically to their friends and to themselves. What's wrong with just saying, "I like it and this is how I'm going to spend my discretionary money"? I think one of the worst things we can do is make it sound cheap and easy because it's not. That sets people up for disappointment when the learn the reality.

 

[bullwinkle]

why do you insist on rudder pedals?

I don't insist per se, I just prefer them. I guess I'm conventional that way. There is clearly nothing wrong with the flying qualities of the Ercoupe with no pedals. I'd be willing to try one without pedals and see how it felt.

.

 

[bullwinkle]

???? Seems to me the proper question is "Why on God's Green Earth would you compromise on the gas tank in your lap?"

That really is the better question. I'm still researching it to see how big a hazard it is. I might decide to just wait a while until I can afford something better, even if it means not flying for a while.

Anybody with good info on the dangers of the Ercoupe's fuel system other than "It's fine!" or "It's a deathtrap!" please PM me.

 

[tonycondon]

I don't insist per se, I just prefer them. I guess I'm conventional that way. There is clearly nothing wrong with the flying qualities of the Ercoupe with no pedals. I'd be willing to try one without pedals and see how it felt.

.

i checked a guy out in a rudder pedal coupe once. they were just annoying and got in the way when you wanted to stretch out your legs. i didn't find them very effective for making crosswind landings either. we tried it a few times but then we just landed in the crab the way that the ercoupe was designed, and that worked a lot better.

 

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

Impractical seems to be missing as well. The way GA is set up, it is not a very practical thing.

Neither are Yachts (of all people, Henning...)

Neither are Harleys.

Neither are classic cars (I was talking to a guy last weekend who bought a 68? Z-28 for "under $30K" - but it needed work).

Neither are model trains.

The difference is in the marketing - people try to sell G.A. as "transportation" not just a s'load of fun hobby.

 

[bullwinkle]

i checked a guy out in a rudder pedal coupe once. they were just annoying and got in the way when you wanted to stretch out your legs. i didn't find them very effective for making crosswind landings either. we tried it a few times but then we just landed in the crab the way that the ercoupe was designed, and that worked a lot better.

Good to know, thanks!

 

[Henning]

That really is the better question. I'm still researching it to see how big a hazard it is. I might decide to just wait a while until I can afford something better, even if it means not flying for a while.

Anybody with good info on the dangers of the Ercoupe's fuel system other than "It's fine!" or "It's a deathtrap!" please PM me.

It's conceptually incorrect. Fuel should not be in a position where a leak will cause you to get soaked in fuel. Next silliest thing would be to run the fuel lines in contact with electric wires. There are some things you just don't do. Fuel in the cabin is a "special circumstances" thing. If the tank is a fuel cell rated against rupture to a 100g impact, and it was in a secondary container that directed any leaking fuel directly out of the airplane without chancing contact with persons or anything behind the panel, I may accept that. For long ferry flights, I have accepted fuel tanks/bladders inside the cabin, but that's temporary, and monetarily compensated for the risk, i.e. I'm being paid to take that chance.

 

[Henning]

Neither are Yachts (of all people, Henning...)

Neither are Harleys.

Neither are classic cars (I was talking to a guy last weekend who bought a 68? Z-28 for "under $30K" - but it needed work).

Neither are model trains.

The difference is in the marketing - people try to sell G.A. as "transportation" not just a s'load of fun hobby.

Are you kidding? Yachts are very practical. You can take your home, car, a few motorcycles, water toys and your helicopter with you. You don't even have to pack your toothbrush since it'll be in your head when you get there along with your favorite wine at the correct temperature. There are few more practical ways to travel. Most all are faster, and few are more expensive, but hardly anything beats them for practical.

Thing is, not everyone views flying as fun. Most people are luke warm on the idea of flying at best, and most people don't trust their own abilities enough to be a pilot.

 

[steingar]

And airplanes are not entirely impractical, not even LSAs. By the time you get done with all the fixed costs its cheaper to fly jets, but they don't go everywhere and are a pain. My Cherokee has taken me to numerous cool places I would have never visited without.

 

[Bob Noel]

It's interesting to see claims that GA isn't practical for transportation. That must be something Angel Flight have somehow overlooked. I haven't done any flights,
but have pickedup/dropped off a number of Angel Flight patients. Sometimes
the airplane is a sweet twin (with de-ice), but most of the time the airplane used
was a 172/182 or cherokee.

 

[ClimbnSink]

It's interesting to see claims that GA isn't practical for transportation. That must be something Angel Flight have somehow overlooked. I haven't done any flights,
but have pickedup/dropped off a number of Angel Flight patients. Sometimes
the airplane is a sweet twin (with de-ice), but most of the time the airplane used
was a 172/182 or cherokee.

Right. We all have a third party organizing volunteer ground transportation at both ends of our GA trips. Whatever makes people happy but I'd guess angel flight is much more of feel good charity than a does good charity. Add up the service provided by the organisation(other than volunteers feelings) vs value provided and I bet it's a big time loser. Volunteer drivers and a commuter plane ticket would win every time.

 

[SkyHog]

I just flew to Las Vegas, NV. Took me between 3 and 4 hours, one way, that's approximately $500, and only so much because I rented an airplane. Had I driven, it would have taken approximately 11 hours at a cost around $200 for gas, and thats with a car I own. Had I rented it would have been a lot more.

Had I flown commercially, it would have taken me about 3 hours with the security lines and checking baggage and whatnot and cost me approximately $350 dollars.

That's a pretty impressive comparison. Its faster to fly GA than to drive and possibly only about 30 minutes slower than flying commercially.

It costs about double to fly than to drive, but only about 1/3 more than flying commercial.

Whether I'd flown commercially or flown GA, I was still out a ride in Las Vegas either way, so driving wins that convenience. But by flying instead of driving, I essentially got 2 extra days in Vegas.

I think this is a no brainer.

 

[ScottM]

I just flew to Las Vegas, NV. Took me between 3 and 4 hours, one way, that's approximately $500, and only so much because I rented an airplane. Had I driven, it would have taken approximately 11 hours at a cost around $200 for gas, and thats with a car I own. Had I rented it would have been a lot more.

Had I flown commercially, it would have taken me about 3 hours with the security lines and checking baggage and whatnot and cost me approximately $350 dollars.

That's a pretty impressive comparison. Its faster to fly GA than to drive and possibly only about 30 minutes slower than flying commercially.

It costs about double to fly than to drive, but only about 1/3 more than flying commercial.

Whether I'd flown commercially or flown GA, I was still out a ride in Las Vegas either way, so driving wins that convenience. But by flying instead of driving, I essentially got 2 extra days in Vegas.

I think this is a no brainer.

i used my plane once for work. It was a KC meeting and taking the silver death tube just did not seem fun. I made it door to door to my meeting in just under 4 hours. The guys that went commercial were at 5 hours door to door. My cost was just under $600 while the commercial guys were at $250. Close enough for me. I was way less stressed and left when I needed to so I got to spend more time at home.

 

[tdager]

No way! Harleys break so much and motorcycle mechanics are so expensive that they must cost way more than your average 172!

I will not get into the Harley debate...but if someone is into MOTORCYCLING and riding a Honda or Yamaha...well they can buy a fully kitted sport-tourer for less than 15K and spend almost NOTHING riding/maintaining.

Hell we just got into SCUBA. Once the initial capital expense is done, and other than the occasional do-dad, you can dive pretty cheaply. Now traveling to get somewhere to dive can add up, but that is international travel, a fun past-time in and of itself.

Golf? Sure it CAN be expensive, if one is buying top-of-the-line and golfing at the Country Club. Otherwise not so bad for a decent afternoon of fun (well to some, boring to me).

Hiking, camping, are not all that expensive either.

Sorry folks but while flying may have always been "expensive" it has more competition today than ever before from more affordable pursuits.

 

[tdager]

Amen brother... There are only a few situations where GA adds a perceived value out outside of "I like it", and that is the value added that sells most of us even tough it adds layers of cost and complication besides those directly attributable to flying, such as ground transportation at the other end. Unless you work at an airport, commuting by airplane requires maintaining an extra car at the other end as well typically. The costs of maintaining a Certified GA plane also is of a low perceived value when you have to pay $120 for a switch that you can buy identical (less a stamping) from the same manufacturer for $4 from an electrical supply house.

Wow...now you have hit on something Henning!

I try to plan all sorts of cool trips somewhere in our plane, even just day trips, and the BIGGEST freaking hurdle is the transportation on the other end. Sure we can get a ratty FBO car for an hour or two, but what about a nice whole day? Now you get to add $50-$75+ for a car rental! Or you can taxi...which has gotten stupidly expensive now as well.

THAT is my biggest hurdle so far. Not going places, but getting around once I am freaking there without it costing me an arm and a leg!

 

[flyingcheesehead]

First, unfriendliness, both from businesses and their employees and other pilots. Wait you say pilots are friendly. Try this: leave the leather jacket/AOPA hat at home and drive to an airport you've never been to- engage in pleasant conversation without letting on that you are a pilot. Second, the utility is nowhere near what is promised. Renting just about destroys what little utility there is. Third, While lots of people can afford it, once you know how to fly it isn't that interesting to drone around after scheduling, waiting, getting through a gate, etc. Affordability is the wrong measure, perceived value is better. Same as paying ten bucks for a good burger. Burger was fine, but overpaying takes away from the enjoyment. While it may cost the restaurant ten bucks to make a profit on a burger, doesn't matter the perception of value takes away from the experience. Better customer service would probably overcome some of this, but I've yet to see good, consistent customer service in Aviation.

DingDingDing! We have a winner!!!

Now, go and buy yourself an FBO, now!

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Yeah, it meant there was no girl taking up your time and money.....

Actually, there were quite a few girls in engineering school, and I also played in the band to be sure there was an ample supply of girls from the music school too.

I miss school!

 

[jesse]

Had I flown commercially, it would have taken me about 3 hours with the security lines and checking baggage and whatnot and cost me approximately $350 dollars.

Does that $350 include the cost of your girlfriend? When comparing GA to airlines it generally equals out if you have several people.

Some flights I look at would cost about $1500. If you owned and had a family of four it would basically make more sense to fly GA. 4 * $4-$500 for a ticket adds up fast.

For one person GA makes a lot of sense if it is a few hour flight. The price gets "sort of" close to the airlines.