MOSAIC does NOTHING to lower the cost of GA

pfarber said:
And the REAL kicker for students: cost was never the real reason for an 80% failure rate. ITS THE GARBAGE CFIs. MOSIAC did nothing to address the fact that the REAL reason people never finish training is not cash. Its GARBAGE CFIs.

No, I'm not moving the goal post. MOSAIC 1.0 didn't do squat to 'open the floodgates', neither did the laughable Recreational Pilot. See, COST was never the REAL issue. THe GARBAGE CFIs are.
Click to expand...
If cost isn’t the issue, maybe you shouldn’t have started a thread about cost.

Denying that the entire premise of your thread is relevant definitely moves the goalpost.
 
pfarber said:
Why are people not grasping the simple concept: you pay less and you get less.
Click to expand...

Also true for PP. With a Private SEL certificate, you don't get to fly IFR, you can't fly helos, you can't carry passengers or freight for money, you can't fly seaplanes,...

All those things cost extra. Why not one all-inclusive ticket that encompasses ATP privileges and ratings for all existing aircraft? It'll probably cost a couple of hundred AMUs, but why should anyone want to pay less for getting less?
 
pfarber said:
And the REAL kicker for students: cost was never the real reason for an 80% failure rate. ITS THE GARBAGE CFIs. MOSIAC did nothing to address the fact that the REAL reason people never finish training is not cash. Its GARBAGE CFIs.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif



Ah, is that your burr? Had a bad experience with a CFI? I don’t think MOSIAC was supposed to address that. It did all the things people have told you many times over already.

If you spent a bunch of money on bad training, I’m sorry. But, pull up your big girl panties and go find one that works. Or go buy a motorcycle. To quote Bruce… “Sigh”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I've run into bad CFIs, but most that I've encountered over the years have been pretty great - even the ones building hours. Not sure what any of this has to do with MOSIAC anyway? :dunno:
 
pfarber said:
And the REAL kicker for students: cost was never the real reason for an 80% failure rate. ITS THE GARBAGE CFIs. MOSIAC did nothing to address the fact that the REAL reason people never finish training is not cash. Its GARBAGE CFIs.
Click to expand...
Or they were professionals who were able to identify dangerous personality types who should not be entrusted with the lives of hundreds of people per day as they hurled them through the sky at hundreds of miles per hour…anti authority personality complexs were a disqualification last I knew…
 
In fairness, the way I read this kerfuffle, I don't think OP ever suggested it was central to MOSAIC. SP training was brought up in the context of costs, don't know who since my thread reads chopped since several are on my ignore list, and OP refuted that specific cost claim by making the aforementioned retort about 'garbage CFI' as the relevant piece of that tangent. I think that's how this got added into the MOSAIC thread, I don't think it was actually ever argued it was part of it [mosaic]. I'm open to stand corrected of course.
 
hindsight2020 said:
I don't think OP ever suggested it was central to MOSAIC. SP training was brought up in the context of costs, don't know who
Click to expand...
The title of the thread is “ MOSIAC does NOTHING to lower the cost of GA.”

A few excerpts from post #1 that bring up the context of costs…
pfarber said:
cost
Click to expand...

pfarber said:
expected lowering of costs
Click to expand...

pfarber said:
get cheaper
Click to expand...

pfarber said:
*any* cost
Click to expand...

pfarber said:
$200k+
Click to expand...

pfarber said:
$150k
Click to expand...

pfarber said:
$200k
Click to expand...

pfarber said:
How is MOSAIC gonna help the average wage earner ($60k/year) at all?
Click to expand...
 
You got that right!
And the price of planes is climbing dramatically.
The plane I passed on (last week) at $35K is now offered at $47K. Same rat chewed wing spar.
 
MauleSkinner said:
If cost isn’t the issue, maybe you shouldn’t have started a thread about cost.

Denying that the entire premise of your thread is relevant definitely moves the goalpost.
Click to expand...
My original statement still stands. MOSIAC 2 is not lowering the cost of anything. Its litterally to topic I started with.

I can't help if these threads go off on tangents.... I can't edit out all the off topic posts (which I think a thread starter should have the ability to do).

In 20 years there are about 7000 SP's issued. I'll take a good guess that less than 1000 are active flyers.

According to the FAA’s U.S. Civil Airmen Statistics (as of December 31, 2024), 241 new sport pilot certificates were issued in 2024 (FAA)
In 2024, the FAA issued 20,797 new Private Pilot (PPL) certificates.

You did know that SP didn't need a medical BEFORE 2.0, right? Now a SP can rent a 172 (more $$/hr). That lowered the cost how????

A Diamond DA20-C1 (LSA)is about 10-20kts faster and $50 less than a 172. So pay more money to go slower? Win?
 
I think you keep missing the increased availability being a cost factor. If I had to rent the closest rental sport pilot version 1 airplane to me it is a two hour drive each way, version 2 is thirty minutes so a savings of 3 hours commuting (and I do value my time so there is a direct savings in my opinion). The v1 is aeronca champ, no electrical system, swing the prop to start it (which I don’t like doing by myself with nobody in the cockpit) vs the v2 being electric start. The champs a tail dragger so requires more training for the write off, I have it, but crosswind wheel landings took me a few hours to get down pat so that is another cost that could be saved. The cruise speed of the two is a solid 30-40mph difference so more ground can be covered in the hour of rent meaning less time. This again would save me time that I value. The difference in rental price and cruise speed are close enough that they are actually almost equal in dollars per mile when paying based on the Hobbs meter. And again I think that availability has been a very large factor in the low numbers of new sport pilots you keep quoting
 
pfarber said:
I can't help if these threads go off on tangents.... I can't edit out all the off topic posts (which I think a thread starter should have the ability to do).
Click to expand...
So you want the ability to make incorrect statements and then muzzle those who disagree?

pfarber said:
In 20 years there are about 7000 SP's issued. I'll take a good guess that less than 1000 are active flyers.
Click to expand...
And neither you, nor the FAA, have any idea how many pilots with certificates that say Private, Commercial, or Airline Transport on them are flying under Sport Pilot privileges. IME that number is FAR higher than the number who actually have a sport cert.

pfarber said:
You did know that SP didn't need a medical BEFORE 2.0, right? Now a SP can rent a 172 (more $$/hr). That lowered the cost how????
Click to expand...
By drastically increasing the availability of planes one can fly, which will shorten the necessary commute to the airport. For example, if I had the need to exercise "old" Sport Pilot privileges, the closest place I can rent an LSA is 56 miles away by car, costing me at least two hours in the car plus the cost of driving the car to get there. Meanwhile, there are oodles of airplanes for rent much closer to me.

And yes, sometimes a ratty old 172 is cheaper to rent than a shiny new LSA.

pfarber said:
A Diamond DA20-C1 (LSA)is about 10-20kts faster and $50 less than a 172. So pay more money to go slower? Win?
Click to expand...
Again: A DA20 is NOT an LSA. It's a very nice airplane, though, and post-MOSAIC can now be flown by a sport pilot.
 
pfarber said:
My original statement still stands. MOSIAC 2 is not lowering the cost of anything. Its litterally to topic I started with.
Click to expand...
Are you sure you're not a politician? Keep ignoring the facts you can't refute and keep repeating the same falsehoods thinking people will eventually agree?

As an existing PP who would need an SI to get a medical, it saves me the cost of that SI.

Being to do the annual myself on my experimental saves me the cost of an A&P who knows less about the plane than I do.

And if I want to rent a plane, it means I can rent the local 152 or 172 instead of driving several hours to the nearest airport that had a pre-MOSAIC LSA for rent. That's a large cost savings right there.

As for the future when the rest of MOSAIC takes effect in a year, it's hard to say, because it hasn't happened yet... but reducing the certification cost of new designs will likely mean more new planes will come on the market. They'll almost certainly be cheaper than a new Cirrus or 172. If those new designs replace legacy aircraft, the cost of those legacy aircraft on the used market will come down.

And if the owner of a new MOSAIC SLSA chooses to convert it to ELSA, his maintenance costs will be reduced.
 
pfarber said:
You did know that SP didn't need a medical BEFORE 2.0, right? Now a SP can rent a 172 (more $$/hr). That lowered the cost how????
Click to expand...

Because you don’t need a PPL & Class 3 medical to fly it now, which reduces the cost of attaining that certification AND the risk of denial, SI, etc.
 
is this thread still going on?
 
if FAA really wanted to lower cost of GA, they would start with more DPEs. Im signing off an initial CFI and commercial pilot....local wait time is almost 2 months so they are flying almost 5 hours for rides....the CFI ride is $2500. FAA loves monopolies.
 
AlphaPilotFlyer said:
if FAA really wanted to lower cost of GA, they would start with more DPEs. Im signing off an initial CFI and commercial pilot....local wait time is almost 2 months so they are flying almost 5 hours for rides....the CFI ride is $2500. FAA loves monopolies.
Click to expand...

The DPE problem lies within the DPE's themselves. There are 935 DPE's, and 75% of test are administered by 350 of them. And of that 50% are done by about 200 DPE's.

So 37% of the DPE's administer 3/4's of all exams and 21% administer half of those.

Right now the FAA only requires a DPE to perform 5 test per year to hold the designation, so you have a bunch of people holding the designation but really don't want to use it.

So the answer is not more, the answer is requiring these guys to do the task they signed up for. If they don't want to, remove the designation and find those who will.

(I'm using 2023 numbers BTW)

But back to the original topic, the DPE issue is but a very small part of it.
 
AlphaPilotFlyer said:
if FAA really wanted to lower cost of GA, they would start with more DPEs. Im signing off an initial CFI and commercial pilot....local wait time is almost 2 months so they are flying almost 5 hours for rides....the CFI ride is $2500. FAA loves monopolies.
Click to expand...
I don't think the cost of the CFI ride is really significant enough to be germane to a discussion on the cost of GA in general. But for what it's worth, I paid way, way less than that for my initial. If I had to wait 2 months and pay $2,500 to do it locally, I wouldn't do it locally.....
 
I have heard rumors of some open cockpit airplane owners never “finishing” their sport pilot but staying on a student card (that never expires). Each spring going to get a check ride/solo sign off for six months and not fly during the six months of winter. (After six months it’s not a bad idea to have a saftey pilot anyway, and it sidesteps the DPE wait and fees..).
 
AlphaPilotFlyer said:
if FAA really wanted to lower cost of GA, they would start with more DPEs. Im signing off an initial CFI and commercial pilot....local wait time is almost 2 months so they are flying almost 5 hours for rides....the CFI ride is $2500. FAA loves monopolies.
Click to expand...
…and pilots hate to fly.
 
Lindberg said:
I don't think the cost of the CFI ride is really significant enough to be germane to a discussion on the cost of GA in general. But for what it's worth, I paid way, way less than that for my initial. If I had to wait 2 months and pay $2,500 to do it locally, I wouldn't do it locally.....
Click to expand...
The issue is more about availability than price (though they are obviously somewhat related).

When you have to wait 90-120 days for the DPE, you end up spending more time and $$$ staying current and prepped for the checkride.

Alternatively, you can go elswhere, but that generally means adding more flight time to check out with the distant CFI and rental plane, in addition to travel costs. I did my PPL checkride about 850 miles away from my primary training to get past the delay.
 
DPE issue is less of checkride cost, but time and cost required in waiting and staying current, renting a plane for 2-3 days to fly to DPE, ...not to mention repeating if one needs to repeat the ride (some applicants bring CFI with to immediately re train and sign off in hopes of re-doing ride while there. the wait times and associated costs can add 3-6 months on to students and thousands of dollars over course of most.

absolutely no reason for it, and faa has done nothing, other than allow DPEs to work outside their districts and travel.. The jet and turbo prop 142 schools have no such shortage. I know airline capts dropping their trips because they make more $ doing GA check rides.
 
AlphaPilotFlyer said:
absolutely no reason for it, and faa has done nothing, other than allow DPEs to work outside their districts and travel.. The jet and turbo prop 142 schools have no such shortage. I know airline capts dropping their trips because they make more $ doing GA check rides.
Click to expand...
yup, it's a revenue-supremacist deferrence; it's not unique to aviation. It's the same on the mx side. From a purely recreational pov, certainly a "with friends like these...." affair which grates on anyone after a while. And while publicly I don't condone it but, if you ain't cheatin you ain't tryin. corruption begets corruption.
 
AlphaPilotFlyer said:
absolutely no reason for it, and faa has done nothing, other than allow DPEs to work outside their districts and travel.. The jet and turbo prop 142 schools have no such shortage. I know airline capts dropping their trips because they make more $ doing GA check rides.
Click to expand...

The “jet and turboprop schools” don’t use DPE’s. They use TCE’s which is a different program and very limited. The 121’s use APD’s which again is a different program and again very limited.
 
TCEs are nothing more than a DPE under a certified school certificate. just restricted to that program... plenty of part 141 schools can't get a one in my area.
 
AlphaPilotFlyer said:
TCEs are nothing more than a DPE under a certified school certificate. just restricted to that program... plenty of part 141 schools can't get a one in my area.
Click to expand...

Because 141 doesn’t use TCE’s. And there’s a big difference between a DPE and a TCE program.
 
not really.... certificate holders can have self designee authority to issue certs allbeit limited to applicants within their program, such as part 135, 121, 125 operators, as well as part 141 or 142 school....maybe called by different names but all are designees to perform check rides resulting in issuance of pilot certificates....my point was only GA has the shortage
 
AlphaPilotFlyer said:
not really.... certificate holders can have self designee authority to issue certs allbeit limited to applicants within their program, such as part 135, 121, 125 operators, as well as part 141 or 142 school....maybe called by different names but all are designees to perform check rides resulting in issuance of pilot certificates....my point was only GA has the shortage
Click to expand...

And my point was DPE's, not the FAA, have created the problem. See my post where I spelled out the numbers from 2023.

Too many people with DPE letters aren't giving enough flight checks with a lot of them doing only the minimum. They need to get with the program or turn in their letter.
 
Cloudhound said:
Looks folks, y'all are pointing the fire at the wrong target.

The hobby flying interest is dead not because the cost of it, but because what the US economics has done to the average wage earner.

Loose figures, back in 1975 the median household income was ~$15k, and the cost of a brand spankin' new C172 was ~$20k, so the wage earner was earing 75% what a new airplane cost.

Compared to 2024, the median household income was ~$85k, and the cost of a brand spankin' new C172 was ~$450k, so the wage earner would need to be making ~$337k to have the same impact on his/her pocketbook the same as it would have had back in 1975.

It IS that simple.
Click to expand...
I disagree about root cause.

The Otto cycle was discovered in 1876; Ford Motor Company was able to build 14 million Model T's by 1927 -- one car (of just that one model) for every 10 US citizens, in less than 50 years.

It's been over 120 years since Kitty Hawk. I don't have to wonder what would have happened if Henry Ford had to face the "Federal Automobile Administration" -- we have the front row seat. Regulation of the machines and their use of them have effectively prevented their widespread adoption. GenAv cannot reach a critical mass so economies of scale make the costs affordable to the middle class.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top