Pessimist view of GA

"Most people really don't want to drive. They would rather just ride and have a cocktail while they look out the window. Once they find out the limitations and the cost of flying GA, there is little to no use for it for them. Probably 1 in 50 are actually truly interested in the actual piloting aspects and want to drive themselves."

And that is only one of the issues among many others, but it is an insurmountable one.

Cheers
 
What if the cost of commercial flying went way up? If it cost you half as much to fly GA as compared to flying commercial I think that would make a huge impact on GA.
 
wildb said:
What if the cost of commercial flying went way up? If it cost you half as much to fly GA as compared to flying commercial I think that would make a huge impact on GA.
Click to expand...

They don't really compete. GA pilots just justify the expense and hassle by comparison.
 
wildb said:
What if the cost of commercial flying went way up? If it cost you half as much to fly GA as compared to flying commercial I think that would make a huge impact on GA.
Click to expand...

That would be an artificial cost if it happened. It's always cheaper to move larger quantities of stuff or people in a single vehicle.

John
 
Phoenix said:
They don't really compete. GA pilots just justify the expense and hassle by comparison.
Click to expand...

Outside the major city pairs, they do. In fact, many trips are only really practical by GA. One can drive, of course, but it is tedious.
 
Paul Hamilton said:
Outside the major city pairs, they do. In fact, many trips are only really practical by GA. One can drive, of course, but it is tedious.
Click to expand...

Only in pilots minds. I know that is what Flying mag sells, and the justification we use when writing checks, but I doubt many pilots actually start to try and beat the airlines. Airlines are moving emotional support turkeys, the monkey make it yet?
 
Fences!! I hate all the g*d d*mn fences around most airports. This has been mentioned several times in this thread, but getting rid of those would do much to help make GA more accessible.

It's all about perception!

They do very little increase security. Two recent examples:

1) Million dollar biz jets tagged by graffiti at Van Nuys.

2) I was at a class D airport recently and needed to get two cars through the fence to the airplane parking area. Even though I had never been to that airport before, didn't know anybody, and wasn't even dressed all that well, all I needed to do was ask the old timer sitting on the bench outside the FBO for the code for the gate. He happily gave it to me and I was in.
 
Last edited:
Phoenix said:
Only in pilots minds. I know that is what Flying mag sells, and the justification we use when writing checks, but I doubt many pilots actually start to try and beat the airlines. Airlines are moving emotional support turkeys, the monkey make it yet?
Click to expand...
Not just in my mind, but in my life. I started flying and bought an airplane thirty years ago so I could visit my parents in Connecticut and my girlfriend in Kansas. Not everyone's work and life revolve around major metropolitan areas.

In some ways, airline deregulation was bad for GA, as fares got low. In other ways, it was good, because service to smaller communities vanished.
 
Phoenix said:
Only in pilots minds. I know that is what Flying mag sells, and the justification we use when writing checks, but I doubt many pilots actually start to try and beat the airlines. Airlines are moving emotional support turkeys, the monkey make it yet?
Click to expand...

Sometimes, sometimes, the opportunity costs justify it. If you live away from a major hub and your time has value.

I've spent a fair amount of time trying to figure out making this work for myself. I live in the Orlando, Florida area. KMCO (Orlando International) is a major hub. I can fly to, say Washington DC, nearly every hour on any day of the week. With any advance notice at all, it'll cost $200-$300. No way I can touch that in a small plane. On the other hand, we travel to Ft. Benning in Columbus GA. I can drive (6 hours). I can fly to Atlanta and rent a car, still around 6 hours. I can fly to Columbus in a 172 in just under 3 hours. In a faster GA plane, I save more time. But it costs more than commercial and I need the rental either way. Another example for me: Huntsville AL. There are very few direct flights and the others go through Charlotte or Atlanta. Flying myself can save an overnight stay plus travel time. So I save a pretty big chunk of time.

So, as I say, sometimes, if your time is worth a lot, it can pay off. But the circumstances are rare. It's never, ever, in my experience been cheaper than airline tickets.

John
 
Phoenix said:
They don't really compete. GA pilots just justify the expense and hassle by comparison.
Click to expand...

Paul Hamilton said:
Outside the major city pairs, they do. In fact, many trips are only really practical by GA. One can drive, of course, but it is tedious.
Click to expand...

And see, there. You justified the expense just like he said you would. :yes:;)

It's true. Pilots justify the expense all the time. To non pilots it's crazy.
 
RalphInCA said:
Fences!! I hate all the g*d d*mn fences around most airports. This has been mentioned several times in this thread, but getting rid of those would do much to help make GA more accessible.

It's all about perception!

They do very little increase security. Two recent examples:

1) Million dollar biz jets tagged by graffiti at Van Nuys.

2) I was at a class D airport recently and needed to get two cars through the fence to the airplane parking area. Even though I had never been to that airport before, didn't know anybody, and wasn't even dressed all that well, all I needed to do was ask the old timer sitting on the bench outside the FBO for the code for the gate. He happily gave it to me and I was in.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I have to disagree with you. I like the fences just fine. Can you imagine what those Jets at Van Nuys would look like every singe day! Here's a hint-

Graffiti%20truck.jpg


With our flimsy locks and fragile airplanes, I personally don't want anyone and everyone to have total access to them. The fences are there for very practical reasons. If you don't like fences at the airport, stay out in the country. Some don't have any fences and if they do, they are more of a perimeter marker than security device.
 
The airport I learned to fly at back in the 70s (Oakland) had a fence and I never thought twice about it. I also never hung out at small airports when I was a kid, and had never been close to a small GA airplane until my first lesson.
 
Paul Hamilton said:
Not just in my mind, but in my life. I started flying and bought an airplane thirty years ago so I could visit my parents in Connecticut and my girlfriend in Kansas. Not everyone's work and life revolve around major metropolitan areas.

In some ways, airline deregulation was bad for GA, as fares got low. In other ways, it was good, because service to smaller communities vanished.
Click to expand...

And what would you have done if you were not allowed to fly? The point is, there are alternatives and or changes in lifestyle. Most Americans would say you are crazy to spend on a plane just t go see your mom, or have a girlfriend in another state.

However, you have the money, flight is available to you, so why not? It's a luxury. It's the same reasoning that corporate executives use with their jets.
 
Sure fences and security make sense in more urban areas. With crime etc...

The only thing the 8' tall fences with barbed wire do at KTTA is make the wild turkeys get some excercise when entering/leaving the airport grounds. I know those lazy birds would rather walk.
 
Everskyward said:
The airport I learned to fly at back in the 70s (Oakland) had a fence and I never thought twice about it. I also never hung out at small airports when I was a kid, and had never been close to a small GA airplane until my first lesson.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I didn't grow up in the country so fences around airports seemed natural too me. When I learned to fly (also at Oakland but in the late '90s) I thought nothing of the fences. I could see why they were there.

However, I will say that what got me started on the idea of flying was I was visiting my best friend in Camarillo and we ate at the airport cafe there. After our lunch, my friend says- "Let's go over and look at the planes." I couldn't believe it was legal for just anybody to pass through the little gate at the restaurant and walk amongst the planes tied down! I kept asking him, "Are you sure we can do this??"

He ate there all the time and had also gone on one intro flight. This was back when AOPA was running the "Be a Pilot" campaign and you could get these subsidized intro flights cheap, for like $40. He told me what he had learned about getting your license and we vowed to get our licenses together.

I went home, went to KOAK, passed through the fence and got that AOPA $40 ride. The rest is history. My best friend never went back. I personally think that AOPA program was pretty good, but I guess some flight schools hated it because they lost money on the deal.
 
Shepherd said:
Some other questions you might want to ask yourself:
POA is a pretty big group of pilots/people. Where are the FAA reps, the Cessna people, the Lycoming people? The magazine people?
I used to be a pretty good scientist, and the science discussions I take part in are FILLED with pretty much everyone that matters in those fields. From the guys in the labs to the manufacturers making the equipment. I report a problem or announce a new programming tweak, and in hours everyone in the industry knows about it and is talking about it. See any of that going on here?
Click to expand...

That, my friend, is an excellent point, and one I simply had never thought of or noticed.

Where are the industry reps in this group? If you're here, step forward and be recognized. If you're not here, publicly -- WHY NOT?
 
dell30rb said:
Sure fences and security make sense in more urban areas. With crime etc...

The only thing the 8' tall fences with barbed wire do at KTTA is make the wild turkeys get some excercise when entering/leaving the airport grounds. I know those lazy birds would rather walk.
Click to expand...

I don't know, I'm now at Byron, C83 which seems like it's way out in the sticks in farm country and we still have hangar break ins and theft here. Now we have cameras too.
 
Jay Honeck said:
That, my friend, is an excellent point, and one I simply had never thought of or noticed.

Where are the industry reps in this group? If you're here, step forward and be recognized. If you're not here, publicly -- WHY NOT?
Click to expand...

Have you ever been on a web forum where a factory representative actually participates? I have and it's not pretty. They get harangued and harassed until they leave. Imagine if you were a guy at Lycoming and everybody here knew it. You would get chewed out every time somebody's engine croaked. Constantly told- "What you oughta do is..." and "Why can't you just...?" Your PM box would be crammed full every day with people asking favors or advice.

Probably most importantly, factory employees probably take on liability if they say much about the company they work for in a public forum. People would ask all kinds of questions you couldn't answer. People would ask for advice that could put personal liability on you if you gave them advice, or opinion. Remember, just because they're pilots doesn't mean they aren't ready to lawyer up if things don't go their way. Worst of all you could say one wrong thing and lose your job.

No, I don't blame the factory guys one bit for avoiding places like this.
 
Undoubtedly, there are people out there who could make use of GA, but who are not. I still think it goes back to two groups, people who love the sensation of flight, and people who like flying that also have a need or want to travel regionally and often. For example, I live in the Atlanta area. If I had a vacation home in Hilton Head (SC) or Destin (FL) and wanted to go there often, an airplane would be a very nice thing to have, as the drive to either is annoying. But, if you have to look for people who own a vacation home and can afford an airplane, that's a pretty small group, then add to that the desire to fly the plane yourself, that's even fewer.

When I was a young man, I had the opportunity to fly my father's Skyhawk. Since I didn't have anywhere to go, all I did was to fly locally, and after a while, I stopped altogether, because I got bored with it. When I came back to aviation, I started hang gliding because I wanted more of a sensation of flight, which hang gliding provided brilliantly. I finally stopped hang gliding because I couldn't fly often enough to maintain proficiency, from the combination of flaky weather and my time constraints.

Going back to the statistics, the number of newly issued student pilot and private + sport certificates has declined by 10-15% over the last 10 years. The number of commercial certs has increased by 10%, and the number of ATPs has climbed more than 50%. I suspect a higher percentage of the new private cert holders are on their way to an aviation career than were 10 years ago, but there were still more than 18,000 new private + sport pilots in 2014. I suspect most of the shrinkage is in that large group of 50-69 year old pilots, who were mostly part of the aviation boom in the 80's, and who are now starting to age out of flying, so maybe the private pilot population will stabilize in the not too distant future.
 
Dav8or said:
Have you ever been on a web forum where a factory representative actually participates? I have and it's not pretty. They get harangued and harassed until they leave. Imagine if you were a guy at Lycoming and everybody here knew it. You would get chewed out every time somebody's engine croaked. Constantly told- "What you oughta do is..." and "Why can't you just...?" Your PM box would be crammed full every day with people asking favors or advice.

Probably most importantly, factory employees probably take on liability if they say much about the company they work for in a public forum. People would ask all kinds of questions you couldn't answer. People would ask for advice that could put personal liability on you if you gave them advice, or opinion. Remember, just because they're pilots doesn't mean they aren't ready to lawyer up if things don't go their way. Worst of all you could say one wrong thing and lose your job.

No, I don't blame the factory guys one bit for avoiding places like this.
Click to expand...

Is that what happens when the AOPA person (T Haines?) pops in?

My recollection is that plenty of people dump on AOPA, but didn't see much directed at the AOPA person specifically.
 
Bob Noel said:
Is that what happens when the AOPA person (T Haines?) pops in?

My recollection is that plenty of people dump on AOPA, but didn't see much directed at the AOPA person specifically.
Click to expand...

Does AOPA manufacture airplanes, or airplane components? I don't think so. That is the difference.
 
An older gent and myself had this conversation a few months ago. He told me aviation is dying because of the people involved in aviation. He said years ago if you needed something, other aviators came together and solved the problem. They did not want anything for doing this. It was done for the love of aviation. Today if you need this help you must grease ones palm first.

He told me he got his PP certificate for almost nothing. The CFI training him did it for the love of aviation and not because the man was trying to raise his family off this training or the money made from this training. He said today this same certificate would cost thousands. This is the problem with Aviation. No aviator is out to help the other aviator.

I have to agree with him

Tony
 
1600vw said:
An older gent and myself had this conversation a few months ago. He told me aviation is dying because of the people involved in aviation. He said years ago if you needed something, other aviators came together and solved the problem. They did not want anything for doing this. It was done for the love of aviation. Today if you need this help you must grease ones palm first.

He told me he got his PP certificate for almost nothing. The CFI training him did it for the love of aviation and not because the man was trying to raise his family off this training or the money made from this training. He said today this same certificate would cost thousands. This is the problem with Aviation. No aviator is out to help the other aviator.

I have to agree with him

Tony
Click to expand...


so your solution is for the CFI to provide training for free?
 
1600vw said:
An older gent and myself had this conversation a few months ago. He told me aviation is dying because of the people involved in aviation. He said years ago if you needed something, other aviators came together and solved the problem. They did not want anything for doing this. It was done for the love of aviation. Today if you need this help you must grease ones palm first.

He told me he got his PP certificate for almost nothing. The CFI training him did it for the love of aviation and not because the man was trying to raise his family off this training or the money made from this training. He said today this same certificate would cost thousands. This is the problem with Aviation. No aviator is out to help the other aviator.

I have to agree with him

Tony
Click to expand...

Aviators helping aviators is alive and well.

The acronym is EAA.

As far as free flight instruction, the one example given was an anomaly then and would be an anomaly now. Really poor example of how things have changed.
 
Imagine if you will when you got your drivers license to drive your family car. Not a CDL. To get this drivers license you had to pay thousands of dollars. How many would be driving today? It cost me nothing for my training to drive a car. Not one penny. Why because we all love to drive.

How about learning to ride a bike. How many would have learned if the person helping you said. You really want me to help you for free?

To fly a J3 cub, what is wrong with someone helping and not charging for this training? This was how it was done years past. But today its...so you think a cfi should train you for free?...Really.

I ask like the older gent asked..When did aviators stop helping other aviators fly for fun?

Tony
 
1600vw said:
Imagine if you will when you got your drivers license to drive your family car. Not a CDL. To get this drivers license you had to pay thousands of dollars. How many would be driving today? It cost me nothing for my training to drive a car. Not one penny. Why because we all love to drive.

How about learning to ride a bike. How many would have learned if the person helping you said. You really want me to help you for free?

To fly a J3 cub, what is wrong with someone helping and not charging for this training? This was how it was done years past. But today its...so you think a cfi should train you for free?...Really.

I ask like the older gent asked..When did aviators stop helping other aviators fly for fun?

Tony
Click to expand...

That still happens with glider ops. Of course with gliders, you pay in a different way, by being out at the field and helping others on the ground and building "sweat equity".

There are also so youth programs where instruction is free. Also, CAP instructors don't charge other CAP members.

Thing is, flying is still incredibly expensive even if the CFI was free.

In powered aircraft, 60 hours of flight time + ground time is a significant time commitment for an instructor to provide gratis. I don't think that was sustainable back in the old days (if it really existed then), and it certainly isn't now.
 
1600vw said:
An older gent and myself had this conversation a few months ago. He told me aviation is dying because of the people involved in aviation. He said years ago if you needed something, other aviators came together and solved the problem. They did not want anything for doing this. It was done for the love of aviation. Today if you need this help you must grease ones palm first.

He told me he got his PP certificate for almost nothing. The CFI training him did it for the love of aviation and not because the man was trying to raise his family off this training or the money made from this training. He said today this same certificate would cost thousands. This is the problem with Aviation. No aviator is out to help the other aviator.

I have to agree with him

Tony
Click to expand...


Bah. I've had plenty of help and given plenty of help to other aviators on the ramp.

I wouldn't expect any CFI to teach for free though, ever. I have seen CFIs give "secret" discounts to kids or other folks in fiscally difficult situations, however. That's their call.

If your friend has attracted folks who aren't friendly or helpful, he should check into that. Something went wrong somewhere because good people still abound in aviation.
 
So with my pessimism, let me offer a little optimism...

I could be way off, but I think the "passenger-carrying drone" is the future. I know there's a thread out there about this, but I feel this is germaine to this thread and the future of GA.

I can fold it up, keep it in my garage. I don't need a runway. If I don't use it for a few months, it doesn't rot, its seals don't leak... I just charge it up and go. Yes I'm oversimplifying, but just stick with me please.

I don't need to know how to be a pilot; show me where the "pull chute" lever is (which would normally deploy automatically, the lever is for emergencies), I input a destination, watch the cool takeoff, the view for a while, then I read a good book, maybe surf the web on my tablet or phone.

People with general aviation airplanes will be the old classic aviation, like old cars. Less safe, fuel-burning, old-school heavy metal things. Nerds who have to talk fancy and know a bunch of technical stuff to make their aircraft be able to fly. Who has time for that? Answer: Don't nobody got time for that.

Passenger drone? Great views, easy to fly, fun, safe, practical. Actually appealing to the public.

Get ready! GA won't die, but it may change forms drastically.
 
StevieTimes said:
So with my pessimism, let me offer a little optimism...

I could be way off, but I think the "passenger-carrying drone" is the future. I know there's a thread out there about this, but I feel this is germaine to this thread and the future of GA.

I can fold it up, keep it in my garage. I don't need a runway. If I don't use it for a few months, it doesn't rot, its seals don't leak... I just charge it up and go. Yes I'm oversimplifying, but just stick with me please.

I don't need to know how to be a pilot; show me where the "pull chute" lever is (which would normally deploy automatically, the lever is for emergencies), I input a destination, watch the cool takeoff, the view for a while, then I read a good book, maybe surf the web on my tablet or phone.

People with general aviation airplanes will be the old classic aviation, like old cars. Less safe, fuel-burning, old-school heavy metal things. Nerds who have to talk fancy and know a bunch of technical stuff to make their aircraft be able to fly. Who has time for that? Answer: Don't nobody got time for that.

Passenger drone? Great views, easy to fly, fun, safe, practical. Actually appealing to the public.

Get ready! GA won't die, but it may change forms drastically.
Click to expand...

We have drones you can ride in right now. They are called helicopters. If it is just about autonomous self flying, I'm sure a traditional helicopter could be rigged and programed to fly by itself.

I'm with you on the electric flight concept, but your drone will need some serious batteries as this type of flight is about as inefficient as it gets. You might be able to pull it out of your garage and go for a spin, but you won't be going very far.

Then there is the neighbors and airspace regulation. Very few neighborhoods are going to tolerate people taking off in their driveways and flying over their houses and if this new aviation does become super popular, how are they going to regulate and make sense of the chaos in the skies over urban areas? My guess is, you will still have to take your man drone to a designated area (you know, like an airport) to use it and will still have to follow the rules of the NAS.

Then there is the safety side. Electric motors should improve the safety of flight somewhat, but there will still be risks. My understanding of the typical quad copter, or drone is, that if it loses one motor, or prop, it pretty much tumbles completely out of control and if for some reason power is lost to all motors, it tumbles completely out of control. The only thing that would make this craft "safe" to fly in, would be a parachute system like the Cirrus has. At least a helicopter can autorotate and a airplane can glide.

I totally agree with you that one day when technology allows, electric flight will revitalize GA, but I disagree in the vehicle. Airplanes will always be able to fly higher, faster and farther. Helicopters will always have the advantage of autorotate. There will be a place for these man drones, but I see them occupying a space similar to ultralights today. A niche hobby.

BTW, the ultralight aircraft of today is almost the vehicle you desire. It folds up and goes in the garage, is dirt cheap to buy and the take off and landing rolls are so short, it's almost vertical flight. Switch one of those to electric and we will make them 10x or safer and if it just about autonomous flight and being a passenger, autopilots can be rigged to anything, there just hasn't been anyone that serious about letting George fly the whole flight start to finish to get the engineering done.
 
Dav8or said:
Have you ever been on a web forum where a factory representative actually participates? I have and it's not pretty. They get harangued and harassed until they leave. Imagine if you were a guy at Lycoming and everybody here knew it. You would get chewed out every time somebody's engine croaked. Constantly told- "What you oughta do is..." and "Why can't you just...?" Your PM box would be crammed full every day with people asking favors or advice.

Probably most importantly, factory employees probably take on liability if they say much about the company they work for in a public forum. People would ask all kinds of questions you couldn't answer. People would ask for advice that could put personal liability on you if you gave them advice, or opinion. Remember, just because they're pilots doesn't mean they aren't ready to lawyer up if things don't go their way. Worst of all you could say one wrong thing and lose your job.

No, I don't blame the factory guys one bit for avoiding places like this.
Click to expand...
And THAT is what "moderators" are supposed to do.

Unfortunately, the non-profit POA model doesn't allow for moderators to perform such an active role. Over on VAF I have seen factory reps (specifically, in my case, GRT Avionics reps were very helpful), and if anyone gets rude or out of hand, they are gone.

The vaunted nonprofit aspect of POA is great for many things. This isn't one of them.
 
A friend, who got his Private Pilot, but doesn't fly anymore, said the other day, that it isn't just the money, it is the commitment. Flying airplanes requires a lot of commitment. I think that a lot of people just don't have the time or the commitment that it take.
 
1600vw said:
And here is the problem......
Click to expand...

seems more of a problem that people think it must be dirt simple so that no training is needed (which is hopelessly naive)

or possibly people think training should be for free (which takes a special kind of chutzpah)
 
Maxmosbey said:
A friend, who got his Private Pilot, but doesn't fly anymore, said the other day, that it isn't just the money, it is the commitment. Flying airplanes requires a lot of commitment. I think that a lot of people just don't have the time or the commitment that it take.
Click to expand...

This is 100% true and once you actually own a plane, the commitments get even greater.

As soon as I got my PPL, I was already working on my IR and as soon as I had my IR I then flew every flight everywhere IFR for the most part. I did that for six years. In the end the constant nagging currency requirements for IFR flight combined with BFRs and medicals almost made me quit flying altogether. I fly for fun only and it wasn't fun anymore.

Once you earn your IR, you really do feel like you are then a grade higher pilot. You are then a complete pilot. When I contemplated letting my IR currency go, it really felt like I was moving backward and it was depressing, but it came down either fly VFR, or quit altogether. I chose VFR and haven't really regretted it at all. I haven't filed IFR in just coming up on ten years and now I live where we have 300+ days of VFR flying weather.

I do miss from time to time the fun of an approach well flown though the clouds, or skimming along just at the top of a stratus layer, or bopping in and out of white puffy cumulous and the freedom to come and go when there is just a dumb marine layer stopping you, but the rest of the headaches, forget about it. There may come a day when I will join your friend when the headaches of currency and airplane ownership make it not fun anymore. However, I'm more likely to just step down to ultralight flying rather than quit altogether.
 
Bob Noel said:
seems more of a problem that people think it must be dirt simple so that no training is needed (which is hopelessly naive)

or possibly people think training should be for free (which takes a special kind of chutzpah)
Click to expand...

Yes. Basically people would like it to be like owning a boat, or a motorcycle and it's not. There are good reasons it's not, but still people would like it to be so.

Ultralight flying is almost like owning a boat, or motorcycle, but the equipment is so terrible and you can only enjoy it by yourself. I think a revamp of the ultralight regs might actually help GA a bit.
 
Way back in the day I remember my instructor for my private telling me that he had switched from pleasure to the career route because he could not justify the expense of flying for pleasure. I think I followed using his reasoning. Sometimes I wonder if I would have continued flying had I gone on a different career path. I doubt it, especially in the beginning, since nothing I was interested in was especially lucrative as a career.
 
It all changed when people stopped flying for fun and started flying for a commute. Back in the day I am speaking, like the older gent mentioned, folks flew to get up into the air in their J3 or similar airplane for the fun of flying. Today everyone needs retracts, 100+ speeds with multi seats.

My comment about aviators helping others is for this type of person. One who flies for the fun of it. Not someone looking to fly a tin can full of people around to different places. It's about bare roots style flying. What happened to the bare roots fly for fun flying? If you do not fly for fun and you view flying as anything but fun, you are part of the problem. Flying is not about fun anymore. Its about money and a commute. Really sad, I believe anyway. For I do find flying fun, even if I am just flying above my home.
 
Soaring community is still like that. It takes a village to launch a sailplane and the only reason to do so is for fun.
 
1600vw said:
It all changed when people stopped flying for fun and started flying for a commute. Back in the day I am speaking, like the older gent mentioned, folks flew to get up into the air in their J3 or similar airplane for the fun of flying. Today everyone needs retracts, 100+ speeds with multi seats.

My comment about aviators helping others is for this type of person. One who flies for the fun of it. Not someone looking to fly a tin can full of people around to different places. It's about bare roots style flying. What happened to the bare roots fly for fun flying? If you do not fly for fun and you view flying as anything but fun, you are part of the problem. Flying is not about fun anymore. Its about money and a commute. Really sad, I believe anyway. For I do find flying fun, even if I am just flying above my home.
Click to expand...

People have always flown for transportation and we still have a good amount of GA (I'd wager not that different from the past) flying for fun, heck look at all the carbon cub and other cub clone, Zenith, etc, sales

Not many folks are buying those STOL planes to cover lots of ground.

Nothing wrong with wanting over 100kts and a few extra seats, my 185 amphib has a few seats and I cruise over 100kts and thats ones of the most enjoyable planes I've flown, lots more fun to be had when you can bring some friends and or camping toys out. I learned how to fly in a 7AC and the 185 is waaaay more fun, just as much stick and rudder, actually more rudder with 300hp

Heck taking people up in those extra seats sometimes plants the "I might want to be a pilot" seed in people, can't says that's not good :D
 
Last edited:
1600vw said:
It all changed when people stopped flying for fun and started flying for a commute. Back in the day I am speaking, like the older gent mentioned, folks flew to get up into the air in their J3 or similar airplane for the fun of flying. Today everyone needs retracts, 100+ speeds with multi seats.

My comment about aviators helping others is for this type of person. One who flies for the fun of it. Not someone looking to fly a tin can full of people around to different places. It's about bare roots style flying. What happened to the bare roots fly for fun flying? If you do not fly for fun and you view flying as anything but fun, you are part of the problem. Flying is not about fun anymore. Its about money and a commute. Really sad, I believe anyway. For I do find flying fun, even if I am just flying above my home.
Click to expand...

That kind of community and kind of flying still exists. Part 103 Ultralights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top